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

Some thoughts and ideas about WOWs.

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
8 posts

Hello all,

     This is my first post on this forum though I had spent time to read quite a bit of "hot topics" in this and other servers. I am an old player from WOT and I spent a bit of time playing closed beta on NA sever ( God know why). It seems to me that WOWs system of scoring is similar if not a copy from WOT (do correct me if I'm wrong though, not a savvy in this part) and as most topics I read are about how OP CVs are, how little XP and credits one gets from downing air planes that it makes playing in support roles a very tedious affair. On the other hand, in my own experience, and as this game is still new, in most matches, I see players drive their ships all over the place and in some cases, even commit suicide by going straight at the enemy through middle channel on Two brothers in a BB. Now, as a cruiser captain, I wholeheartedly agreed with those who said that escorting capital ships is boring and fruitless (XP and credits wise).

 

      WOWs is very different from WOT. In the latter, player can still do well under overwhelming adversaries and win because of armour angling. While there is armour in WOWs and it affects the type of ammo used to gain advantage on one's opponent, HE ammo does significant damage to ships and together with additional fire damage, topedo attacks, a lone ship facing multiple enemies, who know what they are doing, is a very dead ship. So, imho, WOWs requires different play style and teamwork coupled with tactical positioning are vital to success in this game. And different ship classes have different roles to fill and contribute in order for the fleet to succeed. At the moment, it takes some sacrifice and know how to play this role well so I suggest a system similar to Mech warrior online (hopefully that game is popular enough that some of our players know it). To sum that system up, it gives credits to players who stay near his teammates and provide support fire to them. For example, speaking in WOWs term, when an enemy BB engages your BB which you are escorting and you fire at it, you will get bonus credits for being near the BB (in specific distance to your capital ship/ any ship). And I think with some coding, the devs should be able to make it so that providing AA bubble when staying near other ships would grant additional credits together with higher incentives for shooting down planes. But how about capital ships? Don't they get any bonus for doing the same things, you ask. It's a good point there. As for BBs, there should be rewards for them to target their counterparts and when in formation. It is so that BBs won't stray alone from the fleet and get targeted by CVs or DDs. Also, it would make BBs doing their proper job of killing other BBs. About CVs, I don't argue how OP they are cause I don't play BBs nor CVs enough to pass judgement. But apllied for this system and with some rumours that CVs will have more fighters in future patch, they should get extra credits while staying in formation and providing air cover over other ships with the emphasis on both tasks because as of now, I see too many of them lingering way behind the fleet or even hide in a corner like arty in WOT. And when they launch their aircraft, they have none in reserve flying around for CAP duty and get killed constantly by other CVs' bombers. I would suggest CV players giving their fleet some air cover first instead of rushing all they have to kill their opposite numbers, leaving BBs to fend for themselves and in most cases, without proper escorts. I think that's why there are so many complaints about CVs being OP.

 

         On another note, as in WOT, scouting is still vital in this game and that role falls upon the agile DDs. I have had many games where our DDs rushed off ahead the fleet, in a complete different direction to try hunting CVs thus leaving the fleet blind and constant lit up by enemy's DDs. I know that scouting is also a job for cruisers and CVs but as mentioned above, CVs rush all their planes to find other CVs and cruisers, fast and agile as they can be, I still think their proper place should be the second line scouts and near capital ships.

This is in no way a guide or from someone who is trying to teach you how to play the game. The way you play it is entirely yours to choose. I just give out my opinions and ideas on how to augment the system to fit and satisfy every player's play style.

 

Edit: Hopefully with some space between paragraphs, it will be easier to read. Thank you for your time.

Edited by RushingTurtle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
8 posts

Thank you for your kind words. I'd like to add another point from my limited knowledge about MM. I see that our current match maker is more or less a similar version of WOT. Although, it may prove to be a challenge when it gives you either in a match some tiers higher or in one with rather unbalanced team set up (5+ BBs or 2 CVs vs 1, etc...). So, is there any way to fix this problem? Maybe putting ships into team based on tonnage and tier? My ideal fleet would be 4 DDs, 2 CLs, 2 CAs, either 2 BBs and 2 CVs or 1 CVs and 3 BBs. In my opinion, it's quite flexible with that arrangement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
512 posts
308 battles

Having rules in the mm that it should never between break for balance (ie always have equal numbers of carriers on either side) is something that is entirely possible and has been suggested countless times, yet WG has done nothing. However preset team compositions would be bad for queue times, and won't happen.

Share this post


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

Having rules in the mm that it should never between break for balance (ie always have equal numbers of carriers on either side) is something that is entirely possible and has been suggested countless times, yet WG has done nothing. However preset team compositions would be bad for queue times, and won't happen.

 

They liked my summary of MM principles so much they deleted 'archived' it so it'll never be seen again.
Edited by Steeltrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
53 posts
526 battles

Problem I keep seeing is peoples in ability to think CV are the most dangerous class yet they keep going off on there own and making them self's defenceless victims.


 

And it also about the numbers. I sore a group of battle ships today had the right idea they where a Fuso Negato and a Colorado. but all those ships have bad AA so they got destroyed.


 

if you see a Cleveland stay with them. only Idiots go within 5km of a Cleveland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
100 posts
600 battles

And it also about the numbers. I sore a group of battle ships today had the right idea they where a Fuso Negato and a Colorado. but all those ships have bad AA so they got destroyed.

if you see a Cleveland stay with them. only Idiots go within 5km of a Cleveland.

 

More of a issue for Cruiser's to stay close I prefer to stay close to BB's in my Cruiser for the AA support i provide not to have them chase me around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
8 posts

I can never stress enough of air cover and AA bubbles to create a safe corridor for BBs and Cvs. It's all about looking after your own first before hurting the other side. And if in a match up with low tiered CLs, these ships can couple quite well with their team's DDs to work as a group in first line of defense. I read some guide showing the play style of Kuma, it seems like CLs when going with DDs most certainly have to deal with enemies' DDs so they should stay safe at range from their companions at about 5 km and provide "heavy fire support". Maybe with additional CLs at higher tiers in the future, we would see that kind of play. I am still wondering if the Cleveland could play like that. It seems not too flexible compared to the Omaha/Phoenix or Kuma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,923 posts
4,018 battles

I can never stress enough of air cover and AA bubbles to create a safe corridor for BBs and Cvs. It's all about looking after your own first before hurting the other side. And if in a match up with low tiered CLs, these ships can couple quite well with their team's DDs to work as a group in first line of defense. I read some guide showing the play style of Kuma, it seems like CLs when going with DDs most certainly have to deal with enemies' DDs so they should stay safe at range from their companions at about 5 km and provide "heavy fire support". Maybe with additional CLs at higher tiers in the future, we would see that kind of play. I am still wondering if the Cleveland could play like that. It seems not too flexible compared to the Omaha/Phoenix or Kuma.

Mate just to let you know this is wows not real life if you want a CL or CA to escort a BB or CV maybe you can wait until the sky drop. [FYI: In real life DD,DDE,CL,CA they all stick together as a fleet and don't break off formation from BB or CV if there Ships or Aircrafts coming but wows just way different. So you want AA suppprt learn how to dodge bomb and torps then you don't need this so called AA suppprt beside we do all know 75% of the CL and CA dont provide AA support there just break off and chase enemy shiP's or Flattops.] But sadly this is the truth fact right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
8 posts

Mate just to let you know this is wows not real life if you want a CL or CA to escort a BB or CV maybe you can wait until the sky drop. [FYI: In real life DD,DDE,CL,CA they all stick together as a fleet and don't break off formation from BB or CV if there Ships or Aircrafts coming but wows just way different. So you want AA suppprt learn how to dodge bomb and torps then you don't need this so called AA suppprt beside we do all know 75% of the CL and CA dont provide AA support there just break off and chase enemy shiP's or Flattops.] But sadly this is the truth fact right now.

 

  I suggest you read the top post. And FYI, I play cruisers most of my time on WOWs and beside being able to dodge torps and bombs, I provide my team's capital ships with AA in my Cleveland. Well, just read the first post, it will give you some ideas what we are about. Beside, I see players in other servers attack in proper formation and there's even a post about it. And, iirc, there's mention that in RU server, players stick together in most matches. Lone wolf= certain death. So it's not impossible for it to happen on this server,yea?

 

Share this post


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

You are kidding yourself if you think many people will read this, regardless of its merits, or will understand/follow it.

 

Game is already awash with depressingly stupid cowards. Stands out even more than in tanks.

 

People who can't even grasp the simple basics of Domination battles. People who will lose over and over and over rather than risk their precious paint jobs.

 

Game's a novelty, really, that looks pretty. Chances of directly impacting the result as a single player is depressingly low IF you have a team that adopts stupid/failing deployments (I love the ones who sit watching as the enemy take all the domination cap zones; they will do NOTHING to try to cap them back).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
8 posts

It might be a dead cause but as I am an optimistic person, I do believe that in 100 people who read this post, perhaps 5 or 10 would understand and try to play it the way I suggested and even better. Rome wasn't built in a day, what? Beside, if one reads carefully, the suggestion of mine is more related to having devs implement some new reward features to players who play in formation of a fleet. It should be in Suggestion but as I see that, albeit the technical aspect of the system, the proposal of using tactics and formation like this could be performed without any prospect of reward and voluntarily from players. Beside, I haven't had time to figure out in detail for my suggestion to be presentable in suggestion subforum so it is here to be discussed with all of you fellow players.

Edited by RushingTurtle

Share this post


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

One issue you'll find is the artificial constraints of sailing major fleets into cluster-fks of islands is you can't keep station.

 

Hell, BBs have a hard time keeping their guns on anything given how often terrain and planes dropping torps cause them to turn. At higher tiers as a BB you can literally spend minutes in the game having to dodge crap, not actually shoot.

 

It's all nice in theory but largely impractical. Doubly so when there are multiple languages spoken. Best you can hope for is a 3 ship div that are well suited and the members are on voice comms. And even that won't win it if your vital, top tier units are muppets doing stupid shite as is so often the case, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
8 posts

I have to agree with you about the maps. I don't mind the islands but the space between them and even the open space in some maps are quite small. I also hope that they would have limited ammunition for ships. It seems like ,with torpedoes being made from materials extracted on sea bed, DDs just spam the heck out of them without putting any serious thought. It is extremely bad especially at lower tiers for they don't even know how long their fish can run and that could be brought over to higher tier battles, not all but quite a handful. In my opinion, if every ship has a cap on their ammo, I guess it would help on proper targeting problem (i.e BBs not shooting at DDs). About language differences, if there would be better communication tool in game that has localization like in WOT, I don't think it'd be too hard to coordinate.

Share this post


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

If they put limits on ammo, BBs would be the LEAST affected. Fun fact is that nearly every BB of WWII era carried 120+ rounds PER GUN for their main armaments.

 

DD torp spam isn't really a problem. Spam can deny an area for navigation, which can be irritating, but otherwise spamming is just that i.e. firing a lot without many prospects of hitting. Torps that aren't going to hit aren't the problem.

 

No, even without torps from DDs, it's the constraints of the maps and the abysmal close range accuracy of BBs that conspire to limit them to various parts of the map.

 

Go around an island and there's a DD there? Goodbye. You'll likely miss with your main guns (assuming they're even pointing the right way) and don't expect your secondary guns to achieve anything as they can't hit DDs for crap (which is pretty funny given that's their main purpose if not DP guns).

 

If there isn't a DD there? Better hope there aren't any planes coming, as they'll pull 50Gs diving over a mountain and dropping torps right on the water's edge and you'll have little chance of dodging. IJN CAs are a risk, too, but at least those you can shoot more reliably.

 

So for all those reasons BBs tend not to want to go to large areas of the maps. And that means if the rest of the 'fleet' is to act as a group, everyone ELSE isn't going to those places either.

 

Which is fine until you get Domination mode, which throws all that out the window and turns it into a bum rush for cap zones.

 

No, there are design issues up the yin yang that conspire against 'fleet manoeuvres' even IF you can get a 'team' interested in doing them.

 

Which is why I happen to like the 'Ocean' map as it rewards true, coordinated fleet movements.

Edited by Steeltrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles

 

Which is fine until you get Domination mode, which throws all that out the window and turns it into a bum rush for cap zones.

 

I want teams that bum rush Cap Zone in Domination too!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But they are still camping Blue Line....

Share this post


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

 

I want teams that bum rush Cap Zone in Domination too!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But they are still camping Blue Line....

 

Tell me about it, lol. I did a 'rush' in my Wyoming yesterday because nobody else was doing a damn thing. Of course I got killed, so I went back to port and played something else (which also was Domination with fail cowards).

 

Funny/sad part was that I came 3rd on that team where I died in my BB. Seriously, I was one of the first to die. How [redacted] were the rest of them if they couldn't do better with another 10 minutes of play?

 

Hot Spot is a map where you'll win 90% of the time if you can get enough to YOLO the centre IMO.

Edited by Steeltrap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles

Hot Spot is a map where you'll win 90% of the time if you can get enough to YOLO the centre IMO.

 

Pretty much how you win in Hotspot Domintation :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
8 posts

If they put limits on ammo, BBs would be the LEAST affected. Fun fact is that nearly every BB of WWII era carried 120+ rounds PER GUN for their main armaments.

 

DD torp spam isn't really a problem. Spam can deny an area for navigation, which can be irritating, but otherwise spamming is just that i.e. firing a lot without many prospects of hitting. Torps that aren't going to hit aren't the problem.

 

No, even without torps from DDs, it's the constraints of the maps and the abysmal close range accuracy of BBs that conspire to limit them to various parts of the map.

 

Go around an island and there's a DD there? Goodbye. You'll likely miss with your main guns (assuming they're even pointing the right way) and don't expect your secondary guns to achieve anything as they can't hit DDs for crap (which is pretty funny given that's their main purpose if not DP guns).

 

If there isn't a DD there? Better hope there aren't any planes coming, as they'll pull 50Gs diving over a mountain and dropping torps right on the water's edge and you'll have little chance of dodging. IJN CAs are a risk, too, but at least those you can shoot more reliably.

 

So for all those reasons BBs tend not to want to go to large areas of the maps. And that means if the rest of the 'fleet' is to act as a group, everyone ELSE isn't going to those places either.

 

Which is fine until you get Domination mode, which throws all that out the window and turns it into a bum rush for cap zones.

 

No, there are design issues up the yin yang that conspire against 'fleet manoeuvres' even IF you can get a 'team' interested in doing them.

 

Which is why I happen to like the 'Ocean' map as it rewards true, coordinated fleet movements.

            It seems that the problem lies with game mode,no? Would it be better if we had different, sensible modes in stead of capping zones like we have at the moment?

 

      I read somewhere that the Iowa fully stocked can carry around 1000 rounds in real life. I guess that even with limited ammunition in game, there would still be BBs firing at DDs. How about increasing the cost of ammo? I hate to go there but hypothetically, what do you think about it? Normally, I get around 60k-100+k per average match and my repair is about 25k or a bit more. It's not much if considering the addition of ammo's prices but if coupled with my suggested system in the first post, BB players who do the right thing would get bonus rewards+ reward for damage dealt to balance out the maintenance of their ship and still have some to spare. Of course,the contrary for those who play their BBs as DD chasers. IMHO, and not infallible either, I think that having limited reserve torpedoes per destroyer/cruiser and a high price to resupply them, DDs, CLs and CAs will pay more attention and work together more. And like what I just said in BB case, the system implemented with limited ammo and a price tag for resupplying shells and torpedoes would head players more toward playing in fleet for their intended roles. Thus the agoraphobia of our "esteemed" BBs should vanish with proper fleet protection (hopefully). Historically and from the memoir of Captain Tameichi Hara, destroyers of IJN had around 16 or maybe more for later classes, it might seem too few for one DD to do any real damage or area denial tactic but how about 2 or 3 DDs working together or DDs working with a CL? They don't have to launch all their tubes at once and not all in wide spread either.

           

              Let's take an example of 2 DDs working with a CL for area denial, suppose they are all IJN ships with torpedo's range of 10 km (although I don't claim to be an expert in DDs nor in torpedo aiming, I shall try my best), ennemy's ships are spotted at 15 km out, heading left to right, DDs should be able to get in around 5.5-7 km away from them without being detected and launch their torps, depending on how many launchers they have, they should not release them all at once and have to calculate for the other ships changing course with or without detecting the fish( and also from situational awareness warning pops up/ having DDs scouting ahead) . Also those 2 DDs should spread out a bit to cover a larger area with torpedoes and ideally at different distance to targets, being one launches at 5.5 km while the other at 6.5, with the farther ship launching first. Method of launch varies and depends on the situation but how about narrow spread at long distance and wide spread at nearer (for area denying tactic, not expecting hit)? Please enlighten me in this field since most torpedo experience I get is from playing IJN cruisers in CBT and Phoenix/Omaha current (the latter from launching at perilously short range at BB as a last resort). The IJN CL's role in this scenario is restricted in providing fire support to his DDs in case they run into enemy's ones and a sort of distraction should the enemy's ships get through friendly's torp spreads. He should be able to maneuvre wildly and get their attention (or pissing them off enough) of the enemies while friendly DDs try to get on their flanks as close as they can and launch their fish. Should prioritize targets as well. My best guess for distance maintained by the CL to her consorts should be around 7-9 km and more when DDs get in commando mode to launch area denial torpedoes to achieve a degree of surprise. Closing in to comfortable distance when providing fire support in DD engagement.

Expectation of hit is low thus the restraint on number of torps launched. It works quite well in narrow straits but you know this.

 

              This is alo a method of scouting for main fleet. If, in a perfect match, the team gets 4 DDs and a number of CLs, a detachment should be made to scout the opposite direction of main fleet while the remaining DDs go ahead of it. A detachment of 2 DDs and 1 CL should be able to stop a flanking move of enemy's DDs granting the players know what they are doing. In case of it running into  the main body of the enemy, they can do the area of denial thing and ping the map to attract attention of friendly fleet for proper reinforcement, be it the whole team concentrate for major fleet action or keep current course to get straight at their base after detaching reinforcement to the scouting party.

 

               It could be hard to achieve the aforementioned play style and you may think that it depends to much on whole team to work as a group and this could never be achieved when playing pubs. I think that if not by 100%, given proper mechanics, proper communication tools, effort of players and luck, we should see it to at least 50% of effectiveness. This post of mine is not without flaws and I expect a lot of cringing and complaining from you all, so I hope that you would help in correcting me and share your opinions. 

 

              Sorry for another wall of text and perhaps some repeated ideas.

 Great article but ..... you know that most of ppls playing the game never come to forums .... :hiding:

  If only someone with better experience, idea and possesses more common sense than me who would have time and dedication to make a proper guide and that WG would put it up in their main page, I think it will attract more attention from players.

 

Edited by RushingTurtle

Share this post


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

Trouble is I think you're "over-thinking" what is a pretty simple game populated by some depressingly simple players.

 

As for increased ammo costs, not a fan.

 

Big naval guns were 'inaccurate' in the sense they were trying to hit relatively small areas (most CAs and BBs were anything from 650-900ft/200-270m long by less than 35m wide) from long ranges (as far as 20km or more).

 

The game also has dispersion (aka RNG) built in, and it needs to, but that means a "well-aimed shot" can miss for no reason other than RNG.

 

Pretty tough to make players pay more for misses when misses are coded into the game, don't you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×