Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Jonek52

Very mixed feelings about new smoke mechanics.

17 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

9
[RNG]
Members
59 posts
8,382 battles

Around 5.4km of detectability range (after firing main guns in smoke) for Royal Navy is a joke... These cruisers rely heavily on smoke (even more that the destroyers). The smoke is their only way to survive. They do not have armor, they get citadeled with ease. People will learn very fast how to play against this weakness. Whenever the enemy team will see some British cruiser shooting from smoke they will encourage their DD buddy to sneak into this 5.4 km range (which is really not that difficult for a destroyer). After he spots the cruiser only one accurate BB salvo will be needed to take him down (not to mention that the few enemy ships may fire at him).

The smoke changes need some fix. For battleships they should remain as they are. It's a nerf for this class - and that's of course good and needed. Exactly the same when it comes to heavy cruisers, although I would still decrease spotting range in smoke for Des Moines (which is the heavy cruiser that actually relies on team play and has very poor armor) to about 7 or 6 or even 5 km (which is 8.2km now).

As I mentioned before the changes for light cruisers, especially those of Royal Navy were very unnecessary.

When it comes to destroyers - why changing them too ? 2km of detection was good. 

The light cruisers and dds already have a lot of problems with radar and hydro (which was given to too many ships in my opinion) - why nerfing them even more ?

 

Overall, I think that the nerf was only needed for battleships and heavy cruiser (except Des Moines). I kind of like the idea of smoke changes, but don't like the implementation (not sure if that's a good word) of it. The only class that is broken right now is battleship class. Why changing the whole game mechanics, when you can start just from changing one class ? 

Edited by Jonek52
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,033
[OPG]
Supertester
1,877 posts
9,970 battles

If a DD is getting within 5.4km of the smoked cruiser without being detected, then the smoke cruiser already done messed up, and would eat torps in the current game mechanics.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
144
[SF-E]
Members
354 posts
9,725 battles
27 minutes ago, SyndicatedINC said:

If a DD is getting within 5.4km of the smoked cruiser without being detected, then the smoke cruiser already done messed up, and would eat torps in the current game mechanics.  

 

Not in the least.

 

A smart RN Cruiser player will not sit in smoke fat and broadside if a DD is known to be nearby. There is no guarantee a smoked cruiser will eat tops from DD at 5k.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,020
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,128 posts
8,749 battles
1 hour ago, SyndicatedINC said:

If a DD is getting within 5.4km of the smoked cruiser without being detected, then the smoke cruiser already done messed up, and would eat torps in the current game mechanics.  

This and RN/RU cruisers almost always fire from smoke from much farther than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,731 posts
5,464 battles

Why? You realize that the stealthiest DD can only achieve a detection range of 5.4km, right? I mean, the cruiser might die if he's not paying attention, but if he is, all he needs to do is move out of the smoke and spot the DD. Or just turn on hydro.

As someone who has played Kagero, the last thing I want to do is get that close to my detection range with a cruiser in the smoke cloud. Kagero has neither the speed and maneuverability, nor the HP to survive an encounter that close with an RN cruiser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,033
[OPG]
Supertester
1,877 posts
9,970 battles
1 hour ago, _Big_Lou_ said:

 

Not in the least.

 

A smart RN Cruiser player will not sit in smoke fat and broadside if a DD is known to be nearby. There is no guarantee a smoked cruiser will eat tops from DD at 5k.

 

Absolutely there is if the DD is that close undetected, the cruiser can't help being broadside since the DD is undetected they don't know from where its torps can be coming.

 

If they do know the DD is there, then the entire equation is mute, since now only an idiot would smoke up and shoot with a DD within their smoke firing detection.

 

Played a bunch of test games on the PTS yesterday and really as far as the RN went it wasn't a big deal.  Other ships, yes it mattered, often times a LOT, but not the RN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
144
[SF-E]
Members
354 posts
9,725 battles
1 hour ago, SyndicatedINC said:

 

Absolutely there is if the DD is that close undetected, the cruiser can't help being broadside since the DD is undetected they don't know from where its torps can be coming.

 

If they do know the DD is there, then the entire equation is mute, since now only an idiot would smoke up and shoot with a DD within their smoke firing detection.

 

Played a bunch of test games on the PTS yesterday and really as far as the RN went it wasn't a big deal.  Other ships, yes it mattered, often times a LOT, but not the RN.

 

Are you suggesting that, regardless of the course being taken by the DD or CL that a smoked CL is guaranteed (guarantee defined as certain or 100% probability) to have damage done due to torpedoes from 5k?

 

As for the equation being moot, the proposed smoke changes matter quite a bit. Consider the following:

 

A low health RN CA is hunting in islands for a DD, after coming across the DD in a blind engagement at 4k (due to island cover). The RN CA smokes up bow on to the destroyer and uses hydro. Now the DD is still spotted by hydro and the CA has every chance to avoid torpedoes and kill the DD.... except for the new smoke spotting mechanic.... Now, if the CA fires, the DD will spot it and causing the CA to come under fire (likely killing it due to the stated low health situation). This CA would rely on their teammates to finish the DD. Clearly this is a different engagement before smoke changes versus after...

 

So, are you arguing that the smoke changes are moot and/or a CA in smoke is a guaranteed torpedo victim? Are you suggesting that the smoke changes will not affect the meta?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,033
[OPG]
Supertester
1,877 posts
9,970 battles
8 hours ago, _Big_Lou_ said:

Are you suggesting that, regardless of the course being taken by the DD or CL that a smoked CL is guaranteed (guarantee defined as certain or 100% probability) to have damage done due to torpedoes from 5k?

 

No, because that isn't the scenario the OP gave which prompted the comparison.  The op stated:

 

"They do not have armor, they get citadeled with ease. People will learn very fast how to play against this weakness. Whenever the enemy team will see some British cruiser shooting from smoke they will encourage their DD buddy to sneak into this 5.4 km range (which is really not that difficult for a destroyer). After he spots the cruiser only one accurate BB salvo will be needed to take him down (not to mention that the few enemy ships may fire at him)."

 

The OP did not state guaranteed 100% probability.  Just that a DD getting into 5.4km will likely trigger a BB citadel.  I am making a statement that the chance of citadel and death in this new potential mechanics scenario is about the same as currently exists for torpedo and death in the current mechanics.  That is what I am suggesting, that they are comparable.  Neither citadel nor torpedoes are going to be 100% guaranteed from range.

 

Quote

 

As for the equation being moot, the proposed smoke changes matter quite a bit. Consider the following:

 

A low health RN CA is hunting in islands for a DD, after coming across the DD in a blind engagement at 4k (due to island cover). The RN CA smokes up bow on to the destroyer and uses hydro. Now the DD is still spotted by hydro and the CA has every chance to avoid torpedoes and kill the DD.... except for the new smoke spotting mechanic.... Now, if the CA fires, the DD will spot it and causing the CA to come under fire (likely killing it due to the stated low health situation). This CA would rely on their teammates to finish the DD. Clearly this is a different engagement before smoke changes versus after...

 

So, are you arguing that the smoke changes are moot and/or a CA in smoke is a guaranteed torpedo victim? Are you suggesting that the smoke changes will not affect the meta?

 

 

In the specific example you give, yes the new mechanics would render the CL vulnerable in a way that the current mechanics do not versus all DDs, however it is not a scenario that doesn't exist today.  German DD hydro has allowed me many a time to hunt a RN smoke CL trying to hunt me in islands with the very tactic you mention.  They smoke up and pop hydro, I pop hydro, my BBs waste them.  

 

Hence the comment about it being moot, as the mechanic of being detected by proximity to another ship is changing, but not in a manner that doesn't already exist, and currently intentionally stopping and smoking up in those situations is a dumb idea that is badly punished.  It isn't that nothing changes, as the mechanic ALREADY exists in a form currently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[ECOM]
Members
44 posts
10,145 battles
17 hours ago, SyndicatedINC said:

 

Absolutely there is if the DD is that close undetected, the cruiser can't help being broadside since the DD is undetected they don't know from where its torps can be coming.

 

If they do know the DD is there, then the entire equation is mute, since now only an idiot would smoke up and shoot with a DD within their smoke firing detection.

 

Played a bunch of test games on the PTS yesterday and really as far as the RN went it wasn't a big deal.  Other ships, yes it mattered, often times a LOT, but not the RN.

The whole point of playing RN cruisers is to sit in smoke and deny caps from dds while not being detected using hydro to detect torps.....i sit in caps away from radar cruisers as much as possible. So your telling me that you don't deny caps...? what dd in their right mind would try to sneak up on a RN cruiser knowing they will get detected from hydro and their torps most likely dodged? 

 

As a dd main I would torp the smoke, but low chance of killing minos or nepts in smoke unless their potatoes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,033
[OPG]
Supertester
1,877 posts
9,970 battles
4 hours ago, BloodApostle said:

The whole point of playing RN cruisers is to sit in smoke and deny caps from dds while not being detected using hydro to detect torps.....i sit in caps away from radar cruisers as much as possible. So your telling me that you don't deny caps...? what dd in their right mind would try to sneak up on a RN cruiser knowing they will get detected from hydro and their torps most likely dodged? 

 

As a dd main I would torp the smoke, but low chance of killing minos or nepts in smoke unless their potatoes.

USS Black or the lo yang or the German DDs, pretty much anytime i am in one and know my hydro is longer ranger than theirs i sail right up to the RN CL and shot them while they can't do anything about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[ECOM]
Members
44 posts
10,145 battles
4 hours ago, SyndicatedINC said:

USS Black or the lo yang or the German DDs, pretty much anytime i am in one and know my hydro is longer ranger than theirs i sail right up to the RN CL and shot them while they can't do anything about it.

not very many people have a uss black...or lo yang. Players dont really play german dds due to Full ap damage. I dont see many german dds. that is a niche play style to add.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,033
[OPG]
Supertester
1,877 posts
9,970 battles

Absolutely true, the point that I was making is that this sort of mechanics interplay has been around, and counterplay to it is a known entity.  The change is that now the frequency is increased, thus forcing an increase in the counterplay.  The OP is basically giving an example of someone ignoring the counterplay getting killed because of it, I was simply pointing out that this can and does happen now as well, and that playing it on the test server shows it doesn't change the overall meta much for the RN CL.  

 

BBs and CAs are another story entirely though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20
[ANZAC]
Members
200 posts

I am also concerned about the smoke changes, and as with the OP I can see why it is being done with BBs, but not really with other classes.

I am also concerned with this possibly not being symmetric, so if you are outside or smoke firing at someone in smoke, do you have the increased visibility (presuming no one else has LOS to you)? If not it is going to be very silly. 

 

We will have to see how it goes, but I would prefer this to be rolled in in stages, start with BBs.

 

While smoke has been played with I have been taking Perth out and observing battle ranges, what I have been noticing is not DDs getting too close, but BBs often closing the range to within 4.5km where they would spot even in smoke. With a ship like this with a 12km or so range it is not at all unusual to be fighting quite close in as enemy heavies respond to your actions, or ships pop up around islands and basically this risks force cruisers such as Perth and British CLs to be much more passive, hugging the back of the engagement range - avoiding getting into situations where an enemy could respond by moving into 4.5km. Personally I am wondering if this is really something that is desirable, making cruisers who use smoke sit further back and play more passively?

 

I guess we will see, but it does concern me, especially since there seems little reason for it for ships other than BBs and then only in competitive play

Edited by oz_boater
typo
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
454
[LOU1]
Members
2,852 posts
7,980 battles

I was very concerned when I first heard about the planned smoke changes and was afraid it would make the game unplayable for me as a cruiser and DD main.  As more details were released about ranges, I felt better about it but was still concerned.  My experiences in the PTS laid my fears to rest, however. 

 

As a Perth driver who depends heavily on smoke, I don't really see the 5.4k as that big of a problem.  Mainly because there are already cruisers that will charge my smoke to get within their 5.3k(?) hydro range before I can delete them.  Fortunately, in the Perth, I am usually moving towards an exit.  I also watch their progress as I explain to them why it is not a good idea to charge straight into my guns and leave if they are hard headed (and alive) and start approaching detection range.  In my Leander and up, I am aimed at an exit when I pop smoke or maneuver myself into an exit position; these are both in planned situations and I wiggle around in emergency ones to get pointed the correct way.

 

In quite a few PTS battles over the last couple of days, I have not noticed anything particularly different with my cruiser and DD play - except that I tried several times in T9/10 to get within the 5.4k detection range of a smoked cruiser to light them and was reminded of why I tend to avoid that.  The cruiser generally has much bigger guns, for one thing.  I learned on the PTS that a Mino salvo at 5k or less is not a fun thing to receive (though fun to give) - a situation I would never purposefully encounter if I wasn't experimenting.  Potatoes aside, a smoked cruiser is not going to remain in smoke if they can't see out or pop smoke when a DD is known to be within torping range. Personally, I leave when my outside spotters are no longer around (dead) or moving out of the area.

 

Full disclosure: I did notice, like oz_boater, an increase in non-hydro BBs (and heavy cruisers) that would try to get within the spotting and I frequently forgot to go guns silent before that in order to escape.  When I did remember, though, it gave me a chance to leave them a few torp pillows as a welcome present.

 

I am also curious if this thread is aimed at tier 9/10 where being detected usually mean instant punishment.

Edited by ExploratorOne
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
427
[FML]
Members
1,622 posts
9,879 battles
On 9 September 2017 at 1:59 AM, Jonek52 said:

Around 5.4km of detectability range (after firing main guns in smoke) for Royal Navy is a joke... These cruisers rely heavily on smoke (even more that the destroyers). The smoke is their only way to survive. They do not have armor, they get citadeled with ease. People will learn very fast how to play against this weakness. Whenever the enemy team will see some British cruiser shooting from smoke they will encourage their DD buddy to sneak into this 5.4 km range (which is really not that difficult for a destroyer). After he spots the cruiser only one accurate BB salvo will be needed to take him down (not to mention that the few enemy ships may fire at him).

The smoke changes need some fix. For battleships they should remain as they are. It's a nerf for this class - and that's of course good and needed. Exactly the same when it comes to heavy cruisers, although I would still decrease spotting range in smoke for Des Moines (which is the heavy cruiser that actually relies on team play and has very poor armor) to about 7 or 6 or even 5 km (which is 8.2km now).

As I mentioned before the changes for light cruisers, especially those of Royal Navy were very unnecessary.

When it comes to destroyers - why changing them too ? 2km of detection was good. 

The light cruisers and dds already have a lot of problems with radar and hydro (which was given to too many ships in my opinion) - why nerfing them even more ?

 

Overall, I think that the nerf was only needed for battleships and heavy cruiser (except Des Moines). I kind of like the idea of smoke changes, but don't like the implementation (not sure if that's a good word) of it. The only class that is broken right now is battleship class. Why changing the whole game mechanics, when you can start just from changing one class ? 

 

I raised similar concerns in another thread on this forum regarding the upcoming smoke mechanic changes. In particular, I am concerned that it will re-enable a smoke version of open water stealth firing, whereby DDs and UK CLs can be shooting at eachother in smoke, but the DD is unspotted but can still spot the RN CL due to the differences in spotting range. It was described as "reverse radar". 

 

Other problems include the Belfast having a lower spotting range than either theEdinburgh OR Fiji, because an already OP ship needs to be moreOP, and the Neptune having a really long spotting range for no reason. 

 

It it is also unclear why gun bloom needs to remain at 20 seconds whilst firing in smoke. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
609
[HEROS]
Members
1,391 posts
11,810 battles

I don't like the proposed changes to the smoke mechanics.  They feel  "wrong" though they are an improvement on the game current mechanics.   

 

I rather see what I in another thread proposed which is a simple simple type of change that reflects my own history of wargaming experience.  That change would be very simple to implement.  

 

The rule would be "if line of sight enters or passes through ANY (and any means ANY) smoke in the game the target cannot be "locked" for gun fire, or torpedo release  due to the line of sight being obscured"  

 No other sighting mechanic would be changed.  Radar would still reveal players in smoke, but ONLY the "radar" equipped ship would be able to "lock" the target to deliver accurate fire.

 

Smoke would still have a very effective use as a defence from incoming fire, and as a way of masking targets in vulnerable positions or situations,., but would loose a great deal of it's effectiveness as a way to be used as an offensive tool which is where the current problem is... Eliminating the ability to use smoke as an direct offensive tool solves that problem.  It will effect all ships equally with the single caveate to this being radar equipped ships for the duration of their radar.  And only the actual radar equipped ship would be able to fire accurately at a target in smoke (which won't make life any more difficult for DD drivers then it all ready is!)

 

The benefits of this concept is it's simple, very strait forward, doesn't break anything (other then the current broken smoke meta!), is easily implemented as a code change in the game, with only one special case (Radar)..  It would force players to use smoke in the way it was used in the real world.   Hydro acoustic search could also be a allowed as an way to spot targets.. but real world sonar in the 1940's (active or passive) wasn't that precise so I'm not in favor of seeing hydro being able to allow targets in smoke to be locked up. 

 

Warlord sends.

Edited by TL_Warlord_Roff
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
3,666 posts
7,161 battles
On 9/8/2017 at 11:59 AM, Jonek52 said:

Around 5.4km of detectability range (after firing main guns in smoke) for Royal Navy is a joke... These cruisers rely heavily on smoke (even more that the destroyers). The smoke is their only way to survive. They do not have armor, they get citadeled with ease. People will learn very fast how to play against this weakness. Whenever the enemy team will see some British cruiser shooting from smoke they will encourage their DD buddy to sneak into this 5.4 km range (which is really not that difficult for a destroyer). After he spots the cruiser only one accurate BB salvo will be needed to take him down (not to mention that the few enemy ships may fire at him).

The smoke changes need some fix. For battleships they should remain as they are. It's a nerf for this class - and that's of course good and needed. Exactly the same when it comes to heavy cruisers, although I would still decrease spotting range in smoke for Des Moines (which is the heavy cruiser that actually relies on team play and has very poor armor) to about 7 or 6 or even 5 km (which is 8.2km now).

As I mentioned before the changes for light cruisers, especially those of Royal Navy were very unnecessary.

When it comes to destroyers - why changing them too ? 2km of detection was good. 

The light cruisers and dds already have a lot of problems with radar and hydro (which was given to too many ships in my opinion) - why nerfing them even more ?

 

Overall, I think that the nerf was only needed for battleships and heavy cruiser (except Des Moines). I kind of like the idea of smoke changes, but don't like the implementation (not sure if that's a good word) of it. The only class that is broken right now is battleship class. Why changing the whole game mechanics, when you can start just from changing one class ? 

Really? don't know what mixed means do you? This is all this thread is

 

wwhIoDu.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×