YukonHunter

So, the 'Smoke nerf' - or, "How WG Once Again Misses The Point"

  • You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.

145 posts in this topic

Reading through the patch notes as currently presented results in the following hilarity

Quote

Changes to Smoke Mechanics

Firing when hidden from a cloud of smoke is a mainstay tactic of destroyers and light cruisers equipped with Smoke Generator. It wasn't intended for in-game use by heavy cruisers and battleships and promoted overly passive, distant play when a battleship, or heavy cruiser coordinated strikes and smoke with a friendly destroyer.

In Ranked Battles especially, we noticed players preferred passive play and and either set their smokescreens too early or tried to wait their enemies out. We took your feedback into account, and started working on smoke mechanics. We're aware this is a core game mechanic and approached it diligently. After many tests, we'd like you to test the new smokescreen mechanics, which are unlikely to influence performance of the ships equipped with Smoke Generators, and balanced according to this consumable. The change should only affect close and medium-range battles.

Currently, a ship firing from within a smokescreen was totally invisible and could be detected only in the range of assured acquisition (2km standard, 3km if a Target Acquisition System Modification 1 was mounted,)  and by Surveillance Radar or Hydroacoustic Search.

With the new mechanic, a ship that fires her main caliber guns is easier to spot or detect by enemy ships, while aircraft still cannot detect her. Her new detectability parameter depend on her class and main battery caliber. The average detectability range is 2.5km for destroyers,5.9km for cruisers, and 13.6km for battleships, and the ships can be detected over 20 seconds from firing.

You can view the 2km range of assured acquisition and detectability after a main battery shot in the ship's  characteristics in Port, and by pressing H or mousing over your HP indicator in battle.

Check the Update Notes for each ship's detectability range after they fire from a smokescreen!

 

Once again, WG entirely misses the point of how game breaking of a mechanic smoke currently is - sure, they hear the players complaining (legitimately) about it, but instead of fixing the problem, they take the option that, what else? Shafts BB drivers the hardest.  The one other thing that BBs find DDs useful for and you gotta strip that wayway, duncha?

Slick move WG. Real slick. Which programmer/etc came up with this idea? I have a plank for him/her/them (all about equality, though I cant see women being this daft)  to walk off of.

Let me make this real simple n easy for you WG, since clearly someone up there is having significant trouble understanding the concept of smoke.  If a ship is fully immersed in smoke, and ''tech aids" such as radar, sonar etc are not available, then the ship in that smoke is not visible to those outside, and like wise that same ship in the smoke can NOT SEE OUT OF THE SMOKE.  

This is not a difficult concept to grasp, one that could readily be duplicated in any real world test.  Obviously, Radar/Sonar would neutralize any benefit of smoke - which, considering how idiotically underutilized radar seems to be in this game (what, every BB from tier 5 on up forgets to mount/turn on their radar when they come in to battle? Gimme a slaggin break), it is just amazing that they are choosing to be this daft.

No, Wait, Im wrong on that part. It is not amazing at all - WG has consistently proven since beta they want to have DDs to be 'king of the lake' regardless of how unrealistic it is.

Cmon WG, you people are way better than this. What say we get with the program?

Edit - brilliant typo x 3 bonzo.  What I get for typing after a 300 mile drive twice in 2 days.

Edited by YukonHunter

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooooh no not a small quality of life change against the most popular ship ij the game.

 

Stahp.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Shaft BBs the hardest"

 

WG recently introduced BBs with concealment rivaling cruisers and HE that can citadel ships with a fire chance upwards of 63%

 

sigh....

 

 

It should be obvious that the biggest guns in the game lose the most concealment

A 16in rifle should not maintain the same level of concealment as a 128mm gun. I know this is an arcade game but come on.

 

I find it hard to believe that you play this game if you're seriously giving WG flak for nerfing BBs...

Edited by Combined_Fleet_HQ

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone needs to brush up on their understanding of game mechanics........


2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those who think that ships should not be able to see out of smoke, even if an enemy ship is detected by another ship, don't understand how WWII-era artillery worked. I served in a unit that used WWII-era artillery. In fact, many of our shells were dated 1945. Very rarely did we ever actually see what we were shooting at, this was the job of the forward observer, who was either on the ground or in a helicopter.


2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without smoke, most RN CLs and few DDs are viable since need a means to escape or avoid detection.

 

However, CAs and BBs were abusing it. It needs to be corrected.


4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As often repeated, yes WG missed the point. No your point misses it by a planetwide margin.

 

Proper fix to smoke mechanics (or in general, vision mechanics) would have been to nerf gun performance. No not in smoke. In general.

 

The entire reason why people are complaining is because gun scaling has always been the root problem to all complaints in this game (barring carrier related complaints.) Vision mechanics, in this case smoke, does not change appreciably from tiers 1-10 yet nobody cares much about vision in the lower half.

 

Nobody cares about who is in smoke in lower tiers exactly because most ships do not have the effective range (long, high DPS range.) Or really, any range at all.

 

South Carolina or Tenryu in smoke? Whoop dee doo, it's not like they can nuke you until 6km and broadside anyways.


4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WG did miss the point, but it's not the one you're making.

What's really wrong is that ships should be at their safest when they are moving, but currently they are only safe when they are unseen.


6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, YukonHunter said:

WG has consistently proven since beta they want to have DDs to be 'king of the lake' regardless of how unrealistic it is.

giphy.gif

 

I'd put something here about how destroyers and cruisers were the real work force of most navies, and battleships were generally kept back from the front lines due to fear of losing them in battle, but you've proven in the past how beyond reason you are. So I'll just laugh hysterically as you whine about a much needed power balance to your favorite class. :cap_haloween:

Edited by GhostSwordsman

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GhostSwordsman said:

giphy.gif

 

I'd put something here about how destroyers and cruisers were the real work force of most navies, and battleships were generally kept back from the front lines due to fear of losing them in battle, but you've proven in the past how beyond reason you are. So I'll just laugh hysterically as you whine about a much needed power balance to your favorite class. :cap_haloween:

You DO realize the whole reason DDs are so popular is because they are cheap, yes?


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, it's only 13.6km?

That's low enough to one shot cruisers still.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Flashtirade said:

WG did miss the point, but it's not the one you're making.

What's really wrong is that ships should be at their safest when they are moving, but currently they are only safe when they are unseen.

 

Which again, goes back to the fact that what's causing this is primarily gun firepower.

 

Unseen really isn't that big of an advantage in lower tiers precisely because ships don't have high alpha strike/ DPS potential at concealment ranges.

 

Oh well I got lit in Furutaka, not like the Omaha that lit me at 11km can output massive punishment at this range, the Kongo at 14km is not necessarily accurate enough with just its four front turrets, and the enemy Furutaka and New York at 16km aren't even in range yet.

 

At tier 7 and up? Those four (tier 7 counterparts) would wreck you if the Omaha (in this case Pensacola) lit you at the same 11km. 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, YukonHunter said:

You DO realize the whole reason DDs are so popular is because they are cheap, yes?

Yes they are cheap. To operate 1 BB you could operate 30 destroyers. Which meant they were easy to replace and expendable, and put into more risky situations. BBs cost a lot of money and resources, and often were not used in battle because so much was invested in them it was felt they could not be risked.

 

Or if you are Japan with limited fuel supplies, you kept Yamato in port. 

 

Many nations could not afford cruisers or battleships but had destroyers.  Thailand, Korea, Poland come to mind

 

So yes they are cheap, but they did most of the fighting. Jutland, Suraigo Strait, any other BB v BB engagements in the past century +?


1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well they could fix smoke by only allowing you to shoot at ships you could personally see. Very realistic but not sure how fun it would be.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, YukonHunter said:

You DO realize the whole reason DDs are so popular is because they are cheap, yes?

 

If you were talking about the real ships, yes you're right! If you're talking about in game, no you're dead wrong. Yes, cruisers, BBs, and Carriers do cost more, but I seriously doubt that's the main reason for someone to be willing to grind up a full line of destroyers. The reason people like DDs is their gameplay; they're sneaky, they're fast, they're dangerous, and they're an adrenaline rush. At least that's why I play them.


2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, EricKilla said:

 

If you were talking about the real ships, yes you're right! If you're talking about in game, no you're dead wrong. Yes, cruisers, BBs, and Carriers do cost more, but I seriously doubt that's the main reason for someone to be willing to grind up a full line of destroyers. The reason people like DDs is their gameplay; they're sneaky, they're fast, they're dangerous, and they're an adrenaline rush. At least that's why I play them.

 

I tried playing BBs, I really did. Not my cup of tea. 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Destroyer_Suzukaze said:

 

I tried playing BBs, I really did. Not my cup of tea. 

I like both. BBs are nice and calming, calculating and strategic.

DDs are for when I want to go crazy and wreck stuff.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, EricKilla said:

I like both. BBs are nice and calming, calculating and strategic.

DDs are for when I want to go crazy and wreck stuff.

Honestly, my attention wanders waiting 25-30 seconds to reload.  They didn't diagnose AD when I was a kid - wasn't a thing then, but I wonder sometimes


2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Battleships don't need cloaking devices, they have heals. Having the benefits of both while also throwing around the biggest shells in the game was excessive. The smoke change is a good one, I'm not sure why you're chapped about it.


2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The smoke change is a lot better than you are making it appear to be. 


Picture this: Yamato, Gearing, Gearing division. That Yamato can be perma smoked with no repercussions. Now, the Yamato will be spotted, and not be a floating invisible fortress.


3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, YukonHunter said:

Slick move WG. Real slick.

Ya know, I've sat at my computer and read your posts for quite a while now.

All about how BB's are so put upon and how every change in this game does nothing but put a crimp in their game.

And now there is a REAL nerf, that will REALLY affect BB's ...

couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of guys; enjoy all you got coming.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What everyone seems to be seriously missing here is that WG has just nerfed the heck out of the Kutuzov, Perth, and RN cruisers with smoke...  Not to mention the Flint.


2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.