Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
101kicker

cyclone underwhelming

19 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
13 posts
1,789 battles

The cyclone is pretty with its poor visibility and amazing rain. However i wish their where more features like ships taking nose dives in the water or even just a little waves coming over the bow.59a4b605c676e_download(2).jpg.cede0ac304adb938fa85ec6f5abbace9.jpgdownload.jpg.1e6835b859d730fa8faa3eaa636ab088.jpg59a4b6018ab94_download(1).jpg.8c614c6011bd70fdec41a9f9b3e33d87.jpg

 

Even though this would be cool it would take to long to model,and to costly but,it still would be a cool addition.:cap_popcorn:

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,613
[SALVO]
Members
16,720 posts
17,308 battles

I wish that the poor visibility was more intense.  It's kind of boring when what you seen on the screen really isn't all that foggy, and heavy rainy, and it doesn't feel like you're in a heavy storm, waves and plunging ships' bows aside.  I'd like to see the real visibility on screen get really bad, to the point where you can't see crap beyond the allowed 8 or so km.  This includes not being able to see terrain either.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
386
[SAA]
Members
820 posts
26,845 battles

Cyclones suck!  You might as well have an announcement as a cyclone hits

"Now hear this!  Hostilities will now stop in till the weather improves.  Thank you."

Of all the things that shuts down a good back and forth with the enemy, the cyclone is the the worst.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
360
[ARP2]
Members
1,224 posts
3,569 battles

+1 for more immersion.  I'd love to see the weather a little more violent during the cyclones.

 

Also, +1 for picture of Pennsylvania.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,613
[SALVO]
Members
16,720 posts
17,308 battles
44 minutes ago, Turbotush said:

Cyclones suck!  You might as well have an announcement as a cyclone hits

"Now hear this!  Hostilities will now stop in till the weather improves.  Thank you."

Of all the things that shuts down a good back and forth with the enemy, the cyclone is the the worst.

 

Oh good grief.  Cyclones are GREAT for the game!!!

 

They force a team to brawl more, for no other reason than you can't see anyone over brawling range.  And frankly, the game would be a little more boring without them.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,765
Members
9,872 posts
46 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Oh good grief.  Cyclones are GREAT for the game!!!

 

They force a team to brawl more, for no other reason than you can't see anyone over brawling range.  And frankly, the game would be a little more boring without them.

 

For someone with 12k battles, I'm sure any change would be good...

For the average player we see in this game? Probably not....:Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,613
[SALVO]
Members
16,720 posts
17,308 battles
17 minutes ago, awiggin said:

 

For someone with 12k battles, I'm sure any change would be good...

For the average player we see in this game? Probably not....:Smile_teethhappy:

Variety is the spice of life, as the old saying goes.  Unlike world of tanks, where maps can have incredible variety, maps in WoWS are rather limited because the "playing surface", i.e. the water, is and always will be flat.  It needs more to spice things up than WoT, though frankly, I think that adding in weather effects is generally a good thing across the board.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,749 posts
5,473 battles

Ooh, just had a thought for improving cyclones.

One, make visibility mimic real life more. Do this by making ships beyond 8km (possibly within a certain range cap still), visible, but untargetable and lacking any markings(HP, distance, ship type markers, possibly even friend/foe). Indications would still be present on the minimap. Once ships enter the 'visibility' range, they can be targeted and are identified on the screen as friend/foe, like it does now. Between 8km and, lets say 10km, ships would be rendered but present no information on screen. The minimap would show an outline(like when an ally spots a ship outside of your draw distance range), but you wouldn't be able to target the ship with 'X'. Players could still manually aim, but would have no assist from the system, such as auto tracking of the target. Anything beyond 10km is invisible to you even if spotted by an ally.

Two, if more visuals are implemented, such as heavier waves, more violent rocking, and large waves breaking over the bow, perhaps going full speed could incur a small dispersion penalty. Going 3/4 speed or less would return dispersion values to normal. This could be used to mimic the difficulty of fighting in bad weather, and would be a nice touch of immersion on top of taller, more violent seas when under the effects of a cyclone. Though this second idea isn't necessary, I think it'd be interesting to see.

Edited by GhostSwordsman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
386
[SAA]
Members
820 posts
26,845 battles
12 hours ago, Crucis said:

Oh good grief.  Cyclones are GREAT for the game!!!

 

They force a team to brawl more, for no other reason than you can't see anyone over brawling range.  And frankly, the game would be a little more boring without them.

Vis goes down to 8K, everyone stops and moops around, vis comes back up and you have to start all over.  Cyclones are an arcade gimmick that stops the flow of play right when players are all set an having a good or bad time.  Might as well have total solar eclipse next!  That would be great!  Everything goes dark for 5 min right in the middle of a battle.

No, cyclones were put in to appease all the players screaming for weather, and instead we get the "OK, lets stop the game and wait for visibility" crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,613
[SALVO]
Members
16,720 posts
17,308 battles
11 hours ago, GhostSwordsman said:

Ooh, just had a thought for improving cyclones.

One, make visibility mimic real life more. Do this by making ships beyond 8km (possibly within a certain range cap still), visible, but untargetable and lacking any markings(HP, distance, ship type markers, possibly even friend/foe). Indications would still be present on the minimap. Once ships enter the 'visibility' range, they can be targeted and are identified on the screen as friend/foe, like it does now. Between 8km and, lets say 10km, ships would be rendered but present no information on screen. The minimap would show an outline(like when an ally spots a ship outside of your draw distance range), but you wouldn't be able to target the ship with 'X'. Players could still manually aim, but would have no assist from the system, such as auto tracking of the target. Anything beyond 10km is invisible to you even if spotted by an ally.

Two, if more visuals are implemented, such as heavier waves, more violent rocking, and large waves breaking over the bow, perhaps going full speed could incur a small dispersion penalty. Going 3/4 speed or less would return dispersion values to normal. This could be used to mimic the difficulty of fighting in bad weather, and would be a nice touch of immersion on top of taller, more violent seas when under the effects of a cyclone. Though this second idea isn't necessary, I think it'd be interesting to see.

Ghost, I'm not sure that I'd like to see a system where you can see ships but not know which team they belong to.  As it is, teams have ships from many nations.  And traditionally/historically, you could recognize ships of different nations because different nations' navies tended to have different design characteristics that made them easily recognizable, such as the swept back IJN smokestacks, or the various different turret designs that different navies tended to favor. 

But when both teams can have, for example, Bismarcks, there's no way to know whose Bismarck that you see is. Look at the minimap one might say?  Well if one has enough info to identify each ship's team on the minimap, there's no logical reason that you can't do it in the HUD.

Stepping back ...

I remember that there have been times when Cyclones actually did make seeing ships (or terrain) rather difficult.  And any ship that was targetable around max range was difficult to clearly see.  And a thought I had at the time was that ships with relatively realistic camouflage were a LOT harder to see than ships using some of the bright, gaudy camos, which I thought was great.  Frankly, I found it more difficult to aim at enemy ships that were blending into the fog and heavy rain, because they were a bit hazy.  Heck, for an in-game effect, in a cyclone, I suppose that it might be possible to make the ships you see at higher ranges (around 8 km or so) kind of hazy or fuzzy, rather than clear.  This would make it more difficult to aim well, and perhaps force ships to close the range to improve their visibility and aim.

 

I don't think that you'll see rocking of the ship and reduced accuracy, because IIRC, the devs determined long ago that they felt (rightly or wrongly, BTW) that long term players wouldn't like this.  Some players don't like cyclones as they are now.  And not to be offensive, but IMO they seem to want to fight every battle in absolutely perfect conditions, which of course is hardly realistic.  OTOH, fighting in cyclones isn't really realistic either, since navies would tend to run away from such heavy weather, not seek out the enemy.  Regardless, I think that the game desperately needs all the weather effects that it can get.  Both ones that are strictly visual and don't affect game play, as well as ones which absolutely affect game play.  It needs them to increase the variety of environmental conditions, because there's only so much you can do with maps with islands.  Personally, I'd rather see maps more open (less choked by tall islands) and weather be more of the variety factor.  Some people will complain that cyclones hurt my favorite type of ship, blah blah blah.   My view is that people need to learn to adapt and take weather effects as a challenge, not the end of the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,613
[SALVO]
Members
16,720 posts
17,308 battles
10 minutes ago, Turbotush said:

Vis goes down to 8K, everyone stops and moops around, vis comes back up and you have to start all over.  Cyclones are an arcade gimmick that stops the flow of play right when players are all set an having a good or bad time.  Might as well have total solar eclipse next!  That would be great!  Everything goes dark for 5 min right in the middle of a battle.

No, cyclones were put in to appease all the players screaming for weather, and instead we get the "OK, lets stop the game and wait for visibility" crap.

This is utter nonsense.

Anyone with a couple of brain cells to  rub together knows what to do in a cyclone.  Head to a base or cap.  In standard mode, either the enemy base, or your own.  In domination mode, head for the nearest cap.  Or if there are enemy ships spotted nearby on the minimap, you can close on that sighting.  

People do NOT just stop and do nothing.  At least not the ones with functioning brains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
386
[SAA]
Members
820 posts
26,845 battles
2 minutes ago, Crucis said:

This is utter nonsense.

Anyone with a couple of brain cells to  rub together knows what to do in a cyclone.  Head to a base or cap.  In standard mode, either the enemy base, or your own.  In domination mode, head for the nearest cap.  Or if there are enemy ships spotted nearby on the minimap, you can close on that sighting.  

People do NOT just stop and do nothing.  At least not the ones with functioning brains.

Yes, you and I know what to do, but a vast majority of players that are just getting into those situations don't.  When the vis gets cut, players just start to wander, I see it most of the time.  There will be a few that will use the cyclones to a good advantage but those like I said are few in number. It's not stupidity or lack of brain cells, it's just human nature.  I hate anything that arbitrarily changes the game play.  Anything artificial that try's to tailor how we as players play to me is just a gimmick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,613
[SALVO]
Members
16,720 posts
17,308 battles
5 minutes ago, Turbotush said:

Yes, you and I know what to do, but a vast majority of players that are just getting into those situations don't.  When the vis gets cut, players just start to wander, I see it most of the time.  There will be a few that will use the cyclones to a good advantage but those like I said are few in number. It's not stupidity or lack of brain cells, it's just human nature.  I hate anything that arbitrarily changes the game play.  Anything artificial that try's to tailor how we as players play to me is just a gimmick.

It's not a gimmick to me.  It's reality.  Weather is real.  Storms are real.  Perfect weather for every frickin' battle is BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,418 posts
5,424 battles

Cyclones could be made to be a more realistic mechanic if the enemy ship could be spotted only in the zoomed in Artil mode Not in the regular view.   You would have to work to find enemy ships as they also would to find you as well. While were at it I propose that ALL ENEMY ships do not iave any ICONS/names/hp at all. Just the enemy ship profile and thats all.  Friendlies will have those still. But any ship without is your enemy.  Now that would really make it much harder to find your enemy. Concealment in Artil mode is eliminated. If you can see as far as the mountains you can surely see ANYTHING all the way to the mountain in Artil mode. Not arcady enough for you? Probably for some it may but why not make it a challenge?   

Edited by dionkraft

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,613
[SALVO]
Members
16,720 posts
17,308 battles
2 hours ago, dionkraft said:

Cyclones could be made to be a more realistic mechanic if the enemy ship could be spotted only in the zoomed in Artil mode Not in the regular view.   You would have to work to find enemy ships as they also would to find you as well. While were at it I propose that ALL ENEMY ships do not iave any ICONS/names/hp at all. Just the enemy ship profile and thats all.  Friendlies will have those still. But any ship without is your enemy.  Now that would really make it much harder to find your enemy. Concealment in Artil mode is eliminated. If you can see as far as the mountains you can surely see ANYTHING all the way to the mountain in Artil mode. Not arcady enough for you? Probably for some it may but why not make it a challenge?   

Be careful about talking about realism in the context of combat in a cyclone.  In Reality, navies would avoid cyclones, not seek to do battle in them.  In Reality, no planes would be able to fly in a cyclone, carrier based or otherwise.  In Reality, ships would be pitching and rolling so badly that gun accuracy would be beyond terrible.    

Also, I don't have the slightest idea what this "artil" mode is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,749 posts
5,473 battles
3 hours ago, Crucis said:

Ghost, I'm not sure that I'd like to see a system where you can see ships but not know which team they belong to.  As it is, teams have ships from many nations.  And traditionally/historically, you could recognize ships of different nations because different nations' navies tended to have different design characteristics that made them easily recognizable, such as the swept back IJN smokestacks, or the various different turret designs that different navies tended to favor. 

But when both teams can have, for example, Bismarcks, there's no way to know whose Bismarck that you see is. Look at the minimap one might say?  Well if one has enough info to identify each ship's team on the minimap, there's no logical reason that you can't do it in the HUD.

Stepping back ...

I remember that there have been times when Cyclones actually did make seeing ships (or terrain) rather difficult.  And any ship that was targetable around max range was difficult to clearly see.  And a thought I had at the time was that ships with relatively realistic camouflage were a LOT harder to see than ships using some of the bright, gaudy camos, which I thought was great.  Frankly, I found it more difficult to aim at enemy ships that were blending into the fog and heavy rain, because they were a bit hazy.  Heck, for an in-game effect, in a cyclone, I suppose that it might be possible to make the ships you see at higher ranges (around 8 km or so) kind of hazy or fuzzy, rather than clear.  This would make it more difficult to aim well, and perhaps force ships to close the range to improve their visibility and aim.

 

I don't think that you'll see rocking of the ship and reduced accuracy, because IIRC, the devs determined long ago that they felt (rightly or wrongly, BTW) that long term players wouldn't like this.  Some players don't like cyclones as they are now.  And not to be offensive, but IMO they seem to want to fight every battle in absolutely perfect conditions, which of course is hardly realistic.  OTOH, fighting in cyclones isn't really realistic either, since navies would tend to run away from such heavy weather, not seek out the enemy.  Regardless, I think that the game desperately needs all the weather effects that it can get.  Both ones that are strictly visual and don't affect game play, as well as ones which absolutely affect game play.  It needs them to increase the variety of environmental conditions, because there's only so much you can do with maps with islands.  Personally, I'd rather see maps more open (less choked by tall islands) and weather be more of the variety factor.  Some people will complain that cyclones hurt my favorite type of ship, blah blah blah.   My view is that people need to learn to adapt and take weather effects as a challenge, not the end of the world.

That's a fair assessment. I just wanted to toss the ideas out there since I had just thought of them, and they at least sounded like they were worth a mention.

As for the first idea though, what if no info was removed from the screen then, but ships between 8km and 10 km were visible but untargetable. Meaning that you can shoot at them, just without the dispersion bonus from the targeting system in-game or assist like target auto tracking? The idea is to try and make the hard visible/not visible window feel more realistic in a sense.

And because I feel the need to clarify/justify my second idea, the main intent was to mimic real life a bit by adding small penalties for going full ahead in a storm. With regular functionality returning if ships went 3/4 speed or slower, as to not slow gameplay too much. I do admit the second idea isn't great or well thought out, but I still wanted to throw it out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,418 posts
5,424 battles
1 hour ago, Crucis said:

Be careful about talking about realism in the context of combat in a cyclone.  In Reality, navies would avoid cyclones, not seek to do battle in them.  In Reality, no planes would be able to fly in a cyclone, carrier based or otherwise.  In Reality, ships would be pitching and rolling so badly that gun accuracy would be beyond terrible.    

Also, I don't have the slightest idea what this "artil" mode is.

Oh I agree in a true simulator or in real life the perils of what I described would be avoided but since it is not and many games have introduced weather elements I don't see why not in this game. You can go back to games like Battlefield1942 where the whole map is foggy and you have to guess where your enemy is other than the MAP and Radar to guide your guess. But the Artil mode is nothing but the ZOOMed in mode but I used the label that 

is written in the SETUP..The ZOOMed in battle mode is labled: ARTILLERY. My bad. AS for the pitching and the rocking..I see that WarThunder has implemented that and presents quite a challenge in aiming. Now their's  is pretty rocky and unstable...I would go for a more even flow than theirs.  As for the idea that in a storm the penalty of LESS accuracy is a great idea. The more severe the LESS your accuracy. Great!  

As far as idea..I think its good to put it out there..some are going to laugh and some..may get interested.  But as WOW is always a work in progresss I think some ideas will get implemented as we go if programming and WILL

is pushed forward. You know other games are going to put these ideas forth so WOW cannot just think what we have is as good as it gets.  As for idea not well thought..they are a proposal which may need further refining and finnese to get to the final version. Its a idea in progress as well.  But in any event  KEEP IT COMING !!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,613
[SALVO]
Members
16,720 posts
17,308 battles
3 hours ago, dionkraft said:

Oh I agree in a true simulator or in real life the perils of what I described would be avoided but since it is not and many games have introduced weather elements I don't see why not in this game. You can go back to games like Battlefield1942 where the whole map is foggy and you have to guess where your enemy is other than the MAP and Radar to guide your guess. But the Artil mode is nothing but the ZOOMed in mode but I used the label that 

is written in the SETUP..The ZOOMed in battle mode is labled: ARTILLERY. My bad. AS for the pitching and the rocking..I see that WarThunder has implemented that and presents quite a challenge in aiming. Now their's  is pretty rocky and unstable...I would go for a more even flow than theirs.  As for the idea that in a storm the penalty of LESS accuracy is a great idea. The more severe the LESS your accuracy. Great!  

As far as idea..I think its good to put it out there..some are going to laugh and some..may get interested.  But as WOW is always a work in progresss I think some ideas will get implemented as we go if programming and WILL

is pushed forward. You know other games are going to put these ideas forth so WOW cannot just think what we have is as good as it gets.  As for idea not well thought..they are a proposal which may need further refining and finnese to get to the final version. Its a idea in progress as well.  But in any event  KEEP IT COMING !!!!

On reduced accuracy in storms, while it doesn't bother me, I've read that the devs think that the idea would be unpopular.  But the way I look at it, how do you know until you've at least tried it on a test server.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,613
[SALVO]
Members
16,720 posts
17,308 battles
4 hours ago, GhostSwordsman said:

That's a fair assessment. I just wanted to toss the ideas out there since I had just thought of them, and they at least sounded like they were worth a mention.

As for the first idea though, what if no info was removed from the screen then, but ships between 8km and 10 km were visible but untargetable. Meaning that you can shoot at them, just without the dispersion bonus from the targeting system in-game or assist like target auto tracking? The idea is to try and make the hard visible/not visible window feel more realistic in a sense.

And because I feel the need to clarify/justify my second idea, the main intent was to mimic real life a bit by adding small penalties for going full ahead in a storm. With regular functionality returning if ships went 3/4 speed or slower, as to not slow gameplay too much. I do admit the second idea isn't great or well thought out, but I still wanted to throw it out there.

The idea of a reduced dispersion bonus (i.e. loss of the ship's targeting system) is an interesting one.

Also, the idea that reduced speed would help improve accuracy, seems interesting.  That said, this is one idea that realistically should seriously affect different types of ships more or less profoundly.  That is, the smaller the ship, the less stable a gun platform the ship is.  Thus, realistically, larger ships should be less affected by rough seas than smaller ship, which would be pitching and rolling all over the place, even at reduced speeds.  But I can hear DD players whining about that, if it was ever implemented, particularly the gunboat DDs players.

Another thing, in reality, planes shouldn't be able to fly at all in these conditions. But that wouldn't happen, since it would just make carriers completely useless.  But an alternative to this could be reduced speed on the planes, since they'd be constantly fighting heavy winds (not to mention heavy rains and low visibility).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×