Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
EvilJade

Torpedo Plane Exploit. Why you get lots of torps you cannot dodge!

72 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
2,314 posts
8,114 battles

The amount and skill of the majority of bootlesheepers is supremely astounding. So much so that they eclipse the true BB captains. It's no wonder BBs get a bad rep.

 

Seeing that the supreme bootlesheepers are exponentially a lot, it's no wonder there's a massive conflagration of CV and manual torpedo threads. 

 

I can start a conflagration thread against bottlesheepers but that'll just be adding more fuel to the ongoing thermonuclear conflagration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
2,314 posts
8,114 battles

 

To be honest Halken i agree with you completely, you hardly do as much damage in the Bogue as i do in an Omaha or New York yet no one is calling the Omaha or New York OP....

 

In saying that i do still think their balance is broken, more in a psychological way than any other, people think they take more damage from a CV than they actually do because it all happens at once, one torpedo salvo can ruin a day and all that.

I still say planes need to do half the damage they currently do as well as having twice as many planes to play with.

Keep the current balance while making CV a weapon of attrition rather than a 1 hit wonder. 

 

 

 

"...psychological way..." meaning "perceived helplessness" against CVs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
771 posts
1,818 battles

The amount and skill of the majority of bootlesheepers is supremely astounding. So much so that they eclipse the true BB captains. It's no wonder BBs get a bad rep.

 

Seeing that the supreme bootlesheepers are exponentially a lot, it's no wonder there's a massive conflagration of CV and manual torpedo threads. 

 

I can start a conflagration thread against bottlesheepers but that'll just be adding more fuel to the ongoing thermonuclear conflagration.

 

Honestly idk why anyone ever complains about battleships, their only problems come from not having all the modules unlocked, only time they are ever under powered and that is only because their stock hulls have no AA, once they are upgraded no BB is really in a bad place unless it is fighting a more powerful BB.

In saying that brains do help at some point, I look at BB's like i look at Tiger tanks in world of tanks.

The first tank 90% of people get is that damned tiger tank and most of them play it horridly so it has a reputation of being a bad tank. 

Edited by Fear_the_Reaper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
771 posts
1,818 battles

 

"...psychological way..." meaning "perceived helplessness" against CVs?

 

Pretty much yes, that is where 90% of CV whining comes from, If CV did less damage more often at least 50% of the whining about them being OP would stop in my opinion. The other 40% would just find something else to complain about if im honest. cant please everyone. 
Edited by Fear_the_Reaper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
2,314 posts
8,114 battles

 

Pretty much yes, that is where 90% of CV whining comes from, If CV did less damage more often at least 50% of the whining about them being OP would stop in my opinion. The other 40% would just find something else to complain about if im honest. cant please everyone. 

 

As a learning CV captain, going against other CVs still scares me as well. Regardless of tier and nationality since ANY fail strike on their CV is bound to haunt you for the rest of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
771 posts
1,818 battles

 

As a learning CV captain, going against other CVs still scares me as well. Regardless of tier and nationality since ANY fail strike on their CV is bound to haunt you for the rest of the game.

 

That too if anything i would say CV are currently under powered because of how reliant they are on RNG, another reason why more plane squadrons would be beneficial. 

If i am completely honest i see CV as being worth maybe half of what other ships are simply because you can not rely on them to do damage to your targets because of RNG where as it is quite safe to rely on say the Cleveland sailing beside you to fire at targets you call out and he will do some reliable damage to them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
2,314 posts
8,114 battles

 

In saying that brains do help at some point, I look at BB's like i look at Tiger tanks in world of tanks.

 

 

"... at some point..." doesn't cut it IMO since WoWs is a 3D battle space compounded with physics compared to WoT which is 2D.

 

WoWs is 3D since you have the sea on the X Y axes and the aerial element on the Z axis. 

 

Not only that, you have to take inertia to consideration. The larger the mass and/or the higher the velocity of the ship, the more force and conversely, time for you to overcome that inertia. This is evident in either coming to a complete stop and/or doing a hard port or starboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
2,314 posts
8,114 battles

 

That too if anything i would say CV are currently under powered because of how reliant they are on RNG, another reason why more plane squadrons would be beneficial. 

If i am completely honest i see CV as being worth maybe half of what other ships are simply because you can not rely on them to do damage to your targets because of RNG where as it is quite safe to rely on say the Cleveland sailing beside you to fire at targets you call out and he will do some reliable damage to them

 

CV reliant on RNG? I think it's more of MM influenced.

 

Knowing how vodka-influenced MM is, you get that kind of self-explained MM.

 

The thing about CV is that they're jack-of-all-trades, luck influenced and victim of drunk MM.

 

Other ships can still excel in close quarter defence but CV is like an archer in RTS games. Does damage over time and at range but in CQB, they just (self censorship)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
773 posts
796 battles

 

Another personal "CV fanboi" insult checked! guess how many more to go before...

 

[content removed]

 

General Insults. Content removed, user warned.

~Noppers

Edited by Noppers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
771 posts
1,818 battles

 

"... at some point..." doesn't cut it IMO since WoWs is a 3D battle space compounded with physics compared to WoT which is 2D.

 

WoWs is 3D since you have the sea on the X Y axes and the aerial element on the Z axis. 

 

Not only that, you have to take inertia to consideration. The larger the mass and/or the higher the velocity of the ship, the more force and conversely, time for you to overcome that inertia. This is evident in either coming to a complete stop and/or doing a hard port or starboard.

 

Best way i can give you an explanation for it is not everyone has good hand eye co-ordination and not everyone is good at critical thinking, playing a BB is like playing a game of chess, a decision you made 5-10 minutes ago can get you killed. 

The average chess player only thinks 3 moves ahead, I am sure the same could be said for the average MMo player. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,152
[BLUMR]
Moderator
4,163 posts
1,924 battles

[content removed]

 

Lets keep personal attacks out of the discussion.

 

Quote updated

~Noppers

Edited by Noppers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,150 posts
486 battles

Expect to see a lot of stat denial regarding any particular ship or class being OP.

 

We saw TONS of it in WoT over the Type 59 at release despite the FACT that it met every single statistical measure of being OP (before anyone says anything stupid, note the qualifier 'at release' when its preferential MM and ability to bounce shots from guns up to and including the 128mm on the Ferdi AND there being no prem ammo for CR made it truly absurd by any measure, not least when compared with players' performances in similar tier/classes; bear in mind it also fought tier 5 vehicles, too).

 

People will claim something is OP if they don't know how to deal with it OR if there are measures to back up that claim.

 

People will deny something is OP when there isn't evidence, there is and they don't understand it, or they know it is but they play the hell out of it and thus don't want to risk it being nerfed or acknowledge the particular OP thing is inflating their performances.

 

Internet gaming is full of such behaviour. WoT was, and I imagine WoWS will be, too, if there's anything that can be demonstrated as being OP by valid statistical measures.

 

I suppose the 'good' news is WG should work such things out. The bad news it can take them literally YEARS to address some OP things; think the KV-1s platoons that could get 80% win rates or higher in platoons where they kept promising to change it and they did...more than 2 YEARS after saying they would, LOL.

Edited by Steeltrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
2,314 posts
8,114 battles

 

Best way i can give you an explanation for it is not everyone has good hand eye co-ordination and not everyone is good at critical thinking, playing a BB is like playing a game of chess, a decision you made 5-10 minutes ago can get you killed. 

The average chess player only thinks 3 moves ahead, I am sure the same could be said for the average MMo player. 

 

Naval battle is indeed a game of chess.

 

Another game that I play that's equally punishing would be Star Wars Armada. It's basically WoWs using Star Wars ships and you play it on the table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
92
[A-SKY]
Alpha Tester
1,063 posts
772 battles

Sadly I don't really see playing carriers as inflating my win rate or such, in fact I lost a good 16% off my win rate slogging my way up to lexington.

 

already had that 2.2 kill rate when i was having fun in my Kuma and Omaha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
773 posts
796 battles

 

Lets keep personal attacks out of the discussion.

 

He asked, i answered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9
[VEU]
Beta Tester
77 posts
15,647 battles

Forget about the non issue of  stats , my main issue is with the 'Realism' of this torp exploit.We are trying to represent navel combat at some level.

Else lets have special ammo that shoot through islands or maybe we could have energy shields or mortar equip ships, the sky the limit.

Aircraft do not turn on a dime !!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
174
[AMPOL]
Beta Tester
1,625 posts
16,580 battles

and torp bombers shouldn't be able to drop torps 1m from an island either cuz that is really annoying me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
6,605 posts
2,889 battles

and torp bombers shouldn't be able to drop torps 1m from an Hill either cuz that is really annoying me

 

Fixed for you a little

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
2,150 posts
486 battles

Forget about the non issue of  stats , my main issue is with the 'Realism' of this torp exploit.We are trying to represent navel combat at some level.

Else lets have special ammo that shoot through islands or maybe we could have energy shields or mortar equip ships, the sky the limit.

Aircraft do not turn on a dime !!

 

 

You can't bring 'realism' into it as there is so much about the game that isn't remotely real it becomes silly to introduce it selectively (I'm not saying you're silly, just the idea of selective realism is).

 

Nothing wrong with that; it's an arcade shooter, much as WoT has devolved to CoD in famous (and sometimes made up) tank shapes.

 

The devs presumably are going to balance based on relative damage performance etc etc. The mechanic of how torp bombers deliver torps is part of that, but I doubt anything will be done about it other than amendments if it is determined to the devs' satisfaction that they are over-performing at certain/all tiers (and, no, I'm not saying they are, I'm merely suggesting what questions the devs might ask).

 

Cheers

Edited by Steeltrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
70 posts
890 battles

The stats DO show the complete dominance of the CV in the list of Top 1000 players.

(followed by CA - then followed far behind by BB and DD trailing off)

Anyone can play a BB or DD badly (like me) but if you want to play well you really need to play the CV or maybe the CA.

The Top are not dominating because they play a lot either.

This is a good example (and you just cannot get new player stats like these with a BB)

Name withheld to protect the innocent

DXeOWws.jpg

 

PS: I am happy to play badly as BB anyway, that is what I like. I just think of CV as evil aliens invading our planet with superior weapons that they drop right next to my boat and that arm instantly and kill me. It's all good.

Edited by zzzzYeti
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
4 posts
963 battles

I do not play CV as it is not my style of gameplay. But was a good arty player in WOT. 

 

I think personally to make it fair for all ships that the manual torp drop to be removed or pushed back further to where they can be released, as atm good players can launch their  torps from such a close range they become active 50m from the ship and from all angles. 

Also Xp is so high for a ship sitting in the back corner doing most of the damage without the chance of getting shot back at. ( Same as arty in Wot but they made it harder to hit targets and less xp then everyone else). 

Just my own opinion but the aa is not that effective even with the cruiser bonus when some higher tier Carriers have 70 or more planes.

I'm not sure what the cost price are but making plane losses more costly might make CV players pick there targets more harder. 

Something needs to be done i think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×