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

Gun bloom times revisited

33 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

6,799
[SYN]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
4,420 battles

Ok certain elements of the community seem to think I have it out for DDs and I want them nerfed. No..I don't. But certain mechanics like OWSF(Open Water Stealth Fire) were just broken in the extreme. I mean he'll Zao had a 4km window. Even my Des Moines set up had around a 1.5km window. That's just asinine. So taking it away was a good idea. However. WG gave nothing back. And I still to this day think it was a BAD call. Many(including myself) thought that gun bloom times which is standard across all types at 20 seconds should of been adjusted based on gun size to give smaller ships a chance and a small edge in evasion of other ships. Here's more or less what I had in mind.

These are for gun calibers

139mm and below: 10 seconds

140-180: 13-15 seconds

181-210: 15-18 seconds

283: 20 seconds

284-350: 22 seconds

351-381:24 seconds

382-410 26 seconds

411 and up 28-30 seconds

 

So yes this is a buff to smaller ships and a nerf to bigger ones. Yes BBs there should be a cost for bigger guns. I feel this is fair.

 

Edit: By no means are these numbers set in stone in my mind except the 10 second for 139mm and below. Rest hey fiddle to find the right balance.

Edited by IronWolfV
  • Cool 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,497
Beta Testers
6,868 posts
4,189 battles

Something like this is a good idea I think.  Especially with the release of RN BBs, they have stupid short detection range and tend to blink in and out even with firing their guns as fast as they can.

 

DDs need to be able to use their guns a little more freely.  20 seconds is forever for a DD to be spotted.  There isn't a lot of change in the cruiser range which is fine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
[SYN]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
4,420 battles
3 minutes ago, Grizley said:

Something like this is a good idea I think.  Especially with the release of RN BBs, they have stupid short detection range and tend to blink in and out even with firing their guns as fast as they can.

 

DDs need to be able to use their guns a little more freely.  20 seconds is forever for a DD to be spotted.  There isn't a lot of change in the cruiser range which is fine. 

Added benefit to my Atlanta. Don't think I've gone completely altruistic.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
485
[SOV]
Beta Testers
1,485 posts
5,426 battles

Should have been done when they first made the changes. 

 

Also, Atlanta with an 10sec window would be most welcome. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,497
Beta Testers
6,868 posts
4,189 battles
Just now, IronWolfV said:

Added benefit to my Atlanta. Don't think I've gone completely altruistic.

 

 

That's fine, it can use a small defensive boost like this anyway.  It has really no impact when it's played to full advantage behind an island and raining shells down the other side.  It's only a benefit when there is something that can spot it and that usually is shortly followed by several dozen BB shells and a quick return to port.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
[SYN]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
4,420 battles
1 minute ago, Brohk said:

Should have been done when they first made the changes. 

 

Also, Atlanta with an 10sec window would be most welcome. 

 

Just now, Grizley said:

 

 

That's fine, it can use a small defensive boost like this anyway.  It has really no impact when it's played to full advantage behind an island and raining shells down the other side.  It's only a benefit when there is something that can spot it and that usually is shortly followed by several dozen BB shells and a quick return to port.

Amen to both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,615
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
6,708 posts
11,323 battles
2 minutes ago, IronWolfV said:

Added benefit to my Atlanta. Don't think I've gone completely altruistic.

 

It is probably beyond the capability of the engine, but detection bloom should be based on not just gun caliber but number of guns.  A Fletcher firing one gun is should have a different result that a full salvo from say.... an Atlanta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
955 posts
3,281 battles
13 minutes ago, IronWolfV said:

Ok certain elements of the community seem to think I have it out for DDs and I want them nerfed. No..I don't. But certain mechanics like OWSF(Open Water Stealth Fire) were just broken in the extreme. I mean he'll Zao had a 4km window. Even my Des Moines set up had around a 1.5km window. That's just asinine. So taking it away was a good idea. However. WG gave nothing back. And I still to this day think it was a BAD call. Many(including myself) thought that gun bloom times which is standard across all types at 20 seconds should of been adjusted based on gun size to give smaller ships a chance and a small edge in evasion of other ships. Here's more or less what I had in mind.

These are for gun calibers

139mm and below: 10 seconds

140-180: 13-15 seconds

181-210: 15-18 seconds

283: 20 seconds

284-350: 22 seconds

351-381:24 seconds

382-410 26 seconds

411 and up 28-30 seconds

 

So yes this is a buff to smaller ships and a nerf to bigger ones. Yes BBs there should be a cost for bigger guns. I feel this is fair.

 

I have no idea why this wasn't implemented in the first place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
[SYN]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
4,420 battles
1 minute ago, Kapitan_Wuff said:

 

It is probably beyond the capability of the engine, but detection bloom should be based on not just gun caliber but number of guns.  A Fletcher firing one gun is should have a different result that a full salvo from say.... an Atlanta.

Maybe but I doubt they could do that. Why I say just on caliber. That's probably within the game engine's ability to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
485
[SOV]
Beta Testers
1,485 posts
5,426 battles
1 minute ago, Kapitan_Wuff said:

 

It is probably beyond the capability of the engine, but detection bloom should be based on not just gun caliber but number of guns.  A Fletcher firing one gun is should have a different result that a full salvo from say.... an Atlanta.

 

Ship size could also be taken into account because there are a few oddballs (Atlanta, Graf Spee, etc.). You'd probably have to use displacement and come up with an equation, which is a little more complicated than basing it solely on caliber. Would anyone really object to a small Atlanta buff though? I know I wouldn't.  :Smile_hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
[SYN]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
4,420 battles
2 minutes ago, Brohk said:

 

Ship size could also be taken into account because there are a few oddballs (Atlanta, Graf Spee, etc.). You'd probably have to use displacement and come up with an equation, which is a little more complicated than basing it solely on caliber. Would anyone really object to a small Atlanta buff though? I know I wouldn't.  :Smile_hiding:

Object to an Atlanta buff?

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
741
[NG-NL]
Members
4,954 posts
8,094 battles

ATL could use love, but maybe wiser to make that change when it's offered again in premium shop. Marketing gimmick, and after the GZ mess, they should watch for that opportunity.

 

DDs are fine now except the IJN. Undo the torp nerfs to that line and they're balanced. Heck, go a step farther, and start only IJN DDs in match with their torps already loaded.

 

Seeing how many DDs run stealth builds (I build mine for harassing and torp reload) and have their get-out-of-jail card, 20 seconds of being spotted is balanced. It's better especially at high tiers where the sheer stealth gets out of hand sometimes unless a CV around to balance it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
87
[LANCE]
Members
291 posts
3,091 battles

Wouldn't it just be simpler to adjust via class? Not all players play as often or have the capacity to remember all the specific stats. Different times for different gun caliber kinda over complicates it. An example would be :

 

DD = 10 sec

CL/CA = 15 sec

BB = 20 sec (as current)

 

Perhaps there could be a split between light and heavy cruisers as stated above, an example is the Atlanta has DD caliber guns.

 

i'm not for dumbing down the game but having to much complexity adds development time as well as adding a lot more a player has to try and remember.

 

From what I've heard/read this would be similar to proposed changes to the firing from smoke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
[SYN]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
4,420 battles
1 minute ago, OgreMkV said:

Did you post this in Pigeon of War's feedback / ideas thread? 

I have no idea. Might have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,022
[OPG]
Members
3,883 posts
5,476 battles

I support these changes.  Maybe play around with a few individual numbers here and there.  For example Soviet DDs should get an increased bloom time, say 15 seconds, and maybe USN BBs could have the trait of getting to keep the reduced 20 second bloom time and so on....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39
[TF-64]
Members
364 posts
12,583 battles

Another option that was proposed before and I kinda like as a possible alternative, is instead of 20 sec at Max bloom, stagger it down. Say every 5 sec drop it down 25% of bloom or 20% every 4 sec. I do kinda like you idea of based on gun calibre more but this might be simpler to do and would still be an improvement over what we have. 

Edited by Slightlyaskewed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,732 posts
5,464 battles

I'll be honest. I only think that DD and BB bloom times need to change. DDs should have a bloom time in the 12-13 second range. This would prevent 'blinking' in and out of detection, something WG used as an excuse to not change bloom times with 0.6.3(there are a few IJN DDs, and maybe a few others with larger guns, that have reloads close to 10 seconds and could easily just slow their RoF to take advantage of this 'blinking').

All BBs should have their bloom time increased to 30 seconds. It largely wasn't a problem before, because most BBs couldn't take advantage of the 'blinking' effect from bloom time, even with a concealment build, unless they were firing from beyond 16/17km with a spotter up. Most of the time, they were too close to the enemy or a DD was close enough to keep them spotted while their guns cycled.

RN BBs have exacerbated the problem with their lower concealment. On multiple occasion's I've had them drop into concealment and lost tracking on them, simply because their reload time is 30 seconds when the bloom time remains at 20 seconds. I very much dislike this as it's exactly what WG said they wanted to avoid when they refused to change bloom times with the removal of OWSF in 0.6.3. To me, it's just looking like a double standard at this point to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
842
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,370 posts
7,948 battles

I'm going to disagree on your 10 second time only because I actually think it should be closer to 5-8 seconds, with exceptions like Atlanta.

 

Then again, I'd go more general, having BB's have a general range of 20-25 seconds spotted after firing, exceptions would be a ship like Scharn that has an unusually small gun for a BB maybe at 18 seconds, cruisers would be 12-15/16 seconds with exceptions like Atlanta at 10, DD's between 5-8 seconds, anything with an unusually large gun having a higher time. An example would be to me, most of the IJN DD's would be lets say 5 seconds, they are supposed to be the stealthiest and as I recall most/all have the shortest gun ranges at tier. 6 seconds would be it if 5 is too low. A ship like Shinonome, having an extra twin turret, maybe has an extra second spotted time to IJN counterparts. The more gunship oriented lines, as I recall having a bit more range and usually more guns, have a slightly longer spotted time aside from just the fact that they aren't supposed to be as stealthy anyway and actually have RoF. But that's just my take and opinion.

 

But I think most agree, other than some die hard "BB's must rule the seas" types, can agree that cruisers and especially DD's should have a lower gun bloom time. This should have happened with the invisifire changes but well, I think I've made my view of the job Wargaming has done the last year or so clear enough that while I have no warnings, actions or sanctions against my account I'm not allowed to post in the area with direct feedback to pigeon since the update to the forum. Because I believe I may have been a little too blunt in there on an occasion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,011
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,019 posts
11,538 battles

I truly dislike this idea.  DD's are hard enough to hit when they get detected, having them vanish again much sooner?  No thanks.  I'd prefer some other solution.  As a cruiser main, while decreased gun-bloom helps me, I don't think that annoying, disappearing ships is good for the game.

Edited by crzyhawk
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,819
Members
5,574 posts
7,121 battles
13 minutes ago, crzyhawk said:

I truly dislike this idea.  DD's are hard enough to hit when they get detected, having them vanish again much sooner?  No thanks.  I'd prefer some other solution.  As a cruiser main, while decreased gun-bloom helps me, I don't think that annoying, disappearing ships is good for the game.

Would you be on board with something like this, if Cruisers got better armor, or lower citadels?

A trade off like that worth it?

Just curious is all. :Smile_honoring:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,011
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,019 posts
11,538 battles
9 minutes ago, Wulfgarn said:

Would you be on board with something like this, if Cruisers got better armor, or lower citadels?

A trade off like that worth it?

Just curious is all. :Smile_honoring:

No.  While I certainly want those things for my cruisers, it would be dishonest of me intellectually to say that fixing cruisers is worth adding things that are undoubtedly going to annoy players .  I'd rather decrease the damage DD's take somehow rather than make them vanish quicker.  For the record, I don't feel like BB players not being able to stroke their ego by deleting cruisers is "annoying".  If you want to talk fires fires and more fires, there's a discussion, but taking away their ego builder?  Naw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
371
Members
2,274 posts
7,311 battles

IMO removal of OWSF was a good thing, but 20 secs reload for all ships isnt.

 

It should be higher for large guns and lower for smaller guns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,497
Beta Testers
6,868 posts
4,189 battles
5 hours ago, Reymu said:

ATL could use love, but maybe wiser to make that change when it's offered again in premium shop. Marketing gimmick, and after the GZ mess, they should watch for that opportunity.

 

DDs are fine now except the IJN. Undo the torp nerfs to that line and they're balanced. Heck, go a step farther, and start only IJN DDs in match with their torps already loaded.

 

Seeing how many DDs run stealth builds (I build mine for harassing and torp reload) and have their get-out-of-jail card, 20 seconds of being spotted is balanced. It's better especially at high tiers where the sheer stealth gets out of hand sometimes unless a CV around to balance it.

 

This isn't really true.  20 seconds is a huge penalty for using guns, especially for a stealth gunboat.  Mostly the Americans before the Fletcher, but even Fletcher and Gearing pay in torpedo effectiveness for guns they rarely get to use.

 

One thing to consider, change the bloom times to be universal drop detection times.  Once a ship is no longer directly detected they stay spotted and the vanish timer starts, after it expires then the ship vanishes.  The exception to this might be radar, that only detects while it's active.   There is less blinking in and out across the board, and a DD that goes from 5.8 to 5.9km doesn't vanish immediately, they stay spotted for 10 seconds or whatever the DD vanish time is.

 

The penalty of being visible could use a little equalizing across ships that use their guns and ships that don't.  Right now using guns in a DD is just too risky.  Even in a Gearing you're generally better off guns quiet and spotting for the team than you are hiding behind an island and firing.  And don't even consider firing a DD gun from open water in anything but the most ideal situations, ie. you're behind the last enemy ship and it has the turrets going the wrong way.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
608
[NMKJT]
Members
2,676 posts

The devs have said they don't want ships constantly blinking in and out., which is why it is a flat 20 seconds. 

 

I too think damage/damage mitigation is the way to go

  • Cool 1

Share this post


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×