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

Unscientific Poll about Fire  

97 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Fire cause more damage than a Citadel?

  2. 2. Generally I am a

    • Destroyer Player
    • Cruiser Player
    • Battleship Player
    • Carrier Player
    • multi ship player but not Destroyers
    • multi ship player but not Cruisers
    • multi ship player but not Battleships
    • multi ship player but not Carriers
  3. 3. I have noticed or experienced on the ship(s) I generally play that I seem to receive more instances of fire ( 2 or more simultaneously )

    • Yes seems that way
    • No noticeable difference
  4. 4. I noticed that my repair party reset timer seems to always to be a few seconds near the expiration of the current fire.

  5. 5. Does it seem to you that Captain Skills and Signal flags have noticeable effects on fire duration or number of fires you receive?

  6. 6. Currently when there is fire on some ships the entire ship is in flames, should Fire Animations reflect the actual number of fires currently on the ship?

  7. 7. Thinking of AP damage, you can citadel, light damage or heavy damage. Should HE Fires have variable burn times?

  8. 8. Percentage to set Fire, is this a useful statistic? or Fake news?

    • FAKE NEWS I rely more on experience and info from friends or clanmates for real info.
    • It's useful but the stat by itself is not, need to look at other things like rate of fire.

46 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,089
[HINON]
WoWS Wiki Editor
6,247 posts
3,106 battles

Some points:

 

For question 6, you ask if fire animations on ships should reflect the number of fires currently set. They already do. 

Question 8 is set up with two negative answers. Add a positive where just 'yes' is an answer. 

 

In general, you want to keep the answers to questionnaires like this as simple as possible. If possible, just having 'Yes or No' answers is best. If that doesn't work, try a sliding scale from 1 to 5 or something.

Some of the questions you ask are also fairly ambiguous. Clarity is essential in questionnaires to ensure that your responses are as accurate as possible.     

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23
[WOLF4]
Members
171 posts
2,861 battles
10 minutes ago, RivertheRoyal said:

Some points:

 

For question 6, you ask if fire animations on ships should reflect the number of fires currently set. They already do. 

Question 8 is set up with two negative answers. Add a positive where just 'yes' is an answer. 

 

In general, you want to keep the answers to questionnaires like this as simple as possible. If possible, just having 'Yes or No' answers is best. If that doesn't work, try a sliding scale from 1 to 5 or something.

Some of the questions you ask are also fairly ambiguous. Clarity is essential in questionnaires to ensure that your responses are as accurate as possible.     

That's too scientific for an unscientific survey :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,572
[PSP]
Members
6,277 posts
8,908 battles

Question one is too general. Is this a single fire, burning for the maximum time? Is this all of the fires on a ship burning until they are repaired? Remember too that fire damage can be completely healed, whereas citadel damage cannot. Fires are relativey easy to start where citadels depend on luck or skill. Also, citadel and fire damage vary depending on the armament and ship types involved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,229
[GWG]
[GWG]
Members
5,409 posts
9,573 battles

Had a strange episode in 'Killer Co-Op' this morning.

An Emerald was chasing me and taking 10% chunks out of my October Revolusky with each salvo.

My main battery shells were bouncing, missing and over-penning.  I was kiting.. it was catching up with me.  It was invulnerable.

Finally, my last heal expired and it penned me down to d.e.a.d.   Then it chased down our CV and killed it too.  We lose.

And I didn't catch fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
215
[ZR]
WoWS Wiki Editor
564 posts
4,791 battles

I can't really fill out this poll because the question kinda.... suck

 

"Should Fire cause more damage than a Citadel?"

That's way too open ended of a question. Citadel from what? How many fires? A fire on what? Is it 1 full duration fire?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,370
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
21,432 posts
3,875 battles

Biased poll is biased. Not voting.

 

Fire is fine. Get good. Heaven forbid something actually be a threat to battleships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,541
[OO7]
Alpha Tester
6,742 posts
3,490 battles

Question 1 is far too general. This seems like a survey that's setup to show that fires are bad, regardless of actual opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
420
[NATO]
Beta Testers
1,774 posts
5,809 battles

Im all for a nerf to fire damage, in 'chance of', speed of damage and its ability to sink you. Anyone who has ever served on a naval vessel will say the same thing, you cannot walk around a corner without seeing a fire hose, fire extinguisher, sprinkler system (not on many WW2 ships tho), or some form of fire suppression system....not to mention the amount of fire fighting training received both prior to being stationed on a ship and while on the ship.

 

IMO fire is just another gimmick, WG applies it to simplify or speed up the match in an attempt to get it over as well as a gimmick to give cruisers a chance to be a threat to a BB....which in WW2 nothing short of a DM would have been a credible gun threat.

 

Also, Im all for a nerf to the ability of a BB to citadel a cruiser practically EVERY time the cruiser shows even a sliver of side. In my Ibuki it feels like EVERY time a Montana fires at me, I take a citadel hit. Equally, my GK does the same thing to most cruisers once I get one showing mostly broadside, although T10 cruisers seem to be significantly less likely to take a cit hit when even slightly angled.

 

I know there is a few 'seems' and 'feels like' in there, but my perception is my reality :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,912
[CNO]
[CNO]
Members
3,844 posts
13,064 battles

Question 1 is too poorly worded:  "Should Fire cause more damage than a Citadel"?

 

The answer is "no", if properly managed by a player.  The answer is "yes" if a players doesn't properly handle it.  

 

There is also the issue as to whether "cause" includes "repair." As all fire damage is repairable, it's possible to have damage equal to a citadel (and even more), that gets repaired back to nothing.  So, it "causes" more damage, but that damage is nil after repair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
103
[-V-]
Members
803 posts
3,638 battles
2 minutes ago, Soshi_Sone said:

Question 1 is too poorly worded:  "Should Fire cause more damage than a Citadel"?

 

The answer is "no", if properly managed by a player.  The answer is "yes" if a players doesn't properly handle it.  

 

There is also the issue as to whether "cause" includes "repair." As all fire damage is repairable, it's possible to have damage equal to a citadel (and even more), that gets repaired back to nothing.  So, it "causes" more damage, but that damage is nil after repair.

WTH does this even mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,370
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
21,432 posts
3,875 battles
5 minutes ago, LoneStormchaser said:

WTH does this even mean?

It means use your brain and the skills provided to manage your damage intake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
103
[-V-]
Members
803 posts
3,638 battles
1 minute ago, AraAragami said:

It means use your brain and the skills provided to manage your damage intake.

Give me a break. It's all chance. A chance you create fires. A chance you accomplish a cit. You fire shots. There's a chance you even hit the the target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,370
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
21,432 posts
3,875 battles
2 minutes ago, LoneStormchaser said:

Give me a break. It's all chance. A chance you create fires. A chance you accomplish a cit. You fire shots. There's a chance you even hit the the target.

 

Go on believing that. RNG only actually applies to two of the four things you just listed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
103
[-V-]
Members
803 posts
3,638 battles
11 minutes ago, Wowzery said:

Yes.

Wasn't you I was asking, but it did sound like what he was stating. Maybe it wasn't explained in it's fullness. But I am sure there will be a reply saying something like "War Gaming doesn't use experienced based match maker"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,176 posts
1 minute ago, LoneStormchaser said:

Wasn't you I was asking, but it did sound like what he was stating. Maybe it wasn't explained in it's fullness. But I am sure there will be a reply saying something like "War Gaming doesn't use experienced based match maker"

It was merely an answer to a question.  Some games I can't hit the broadside of the Yamato 5 km away, and the next, I could hit a Kamakaze R at max range with my eyes closed with him maneuvering. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,370
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
21,432 posts
3,875 battles
26 minutes ago, LoneStormchaser said:

Are you saying RNG is rigged?

Yes. I'm saying RNG is rigged such that it does not apply to where you place the crosshair or how much metal a shell penetrates when it hits or if a shell bounces on impact.

 

RNG only applies to dispersion and fire chances.

 

If you mean RNG is "rigged" so that you will always do poorly, that's not RNG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
103
[-V-]
Members
803 posts
3,638 battles
Just now, Wowzery said:

It was merely an answer to a question.  Some games I can't hit the broadside of the Yamato 5 km away, and the next, I could hit a Kamakaze R at max range with my eyes closed with him maneuvering. 

Go figure huh? It's like not getting any from the night before. Either WG wakes up on the good side or the wrong side of the bed in morning and the wife is still ticked off because of something that happened 2 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
103
[-V-]
Members
803 posts
3,638 battles
1 minute ago, AraAragami said:

Yes. I'm saying RNG is rigged such that it does not apply to where you place the crosshair or how much metal a shell penetrates when it hits or if a shell bounces on impact.

 

RNG only applies to dispersion and fire chances.

 

If you mean RNG is "rigged" so that you will always do poorly, that's not RNG.

So, it is rigged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,370
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
21,432 posts
3,875 battles
38 minutes ago, LoneStormchaser said:

So, it is rigged.

If you want to insert your own words and completely disregard what I posted, then I suppose it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×