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

Reworking Damage Control Revisited

13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
127 posts
1,190 battles

Hi everyone.  I found this post from over the summer and thought it was worth a revisit.  By no means am I criticizing the current damage control.  I just think that some changes could add a new dimension of strategy to the game where as currently, only a press of the R key exists.  I've included the original post and one amendment of my own at the bottom.  Please reply with your thoughts; I'm most interested to hear your opinions on this idea.  

 

Quote

 

Just batting around ideas related to the Damage Control Party consumable. It's so simple that it might even be detrimental, in its current state. So here's an idea I've tossed around off and on since CBT:

 

Convert Damage Control to an internal reload multi-use system and standardize it across all ship types, balanced by the available crews as well as a much shorter cooldown for each crew based on ship class. Hitting R in this case dispatches one of your crews to address one issue, which can simply be auto-assigned on priority (Flooding > Fire > Engine > Rudder > Guns > Launchers) or else determined by a brief "fix this!" wheel that pops up when you hold R down (not strictly necessary though).

 

One party resolves one problem, then goes on cooldown. Based on turret reloads, though, only that one damage control party actually goes down. You still have the other ones available per your ship's size category.

 

Examples, though keep in mind numbers are merely theoretical...

 

-- Destroyers -- 2 crews -- 45 second reload

-- Cruisers -- 3 crews -- 55 second reload

-- Carriers -- 3 crews -- 65 second reload

-- Battleships -- 4 crews -- 65 second reload

 

Each crew has its own reload time, much like a gun turret. So you hit DC, a crew solves one problem and goes on cooldown, but you still have additional crews to commit. So if you have 2 fires, a flood, and a damaged gun turret, it will take a total of 4 uses to repair all of it. Per above, the crews should prioritize the flooding and fires as these are, naturally, the most immediate dangers to the ship's survival.

 

All credit goes to original poster AraAragami (IronWolfV also claimed some credit for posting about this previously) 

 

As I mentioned at the top, I would like to propose one amendment to AraAragami's idea.  I think it would be interesting if damage control crew reduced the time of fire/flooding/repairing modules/etc rather than just fixing it immediately.  Moreover, I think it would be most interesting if you could stack crew to increase the speed of the repair but in a manner consistent with economies of scale.  Thus, if a fire were to rage for 45 seconds, one crewman assigned to put it out would cut the time by 33%, a second by 50% and a third by 60%.  Then once the task was complete the crew would go to cool down.  These numbers of course would need to be adjusted through testing and balancing

 

Overall, I think cool down could be nation dependent as could perhaps available damage control crew.  These changes to the game could provide a new way for nations to be balanced.  

 

Thanks for reading! 

Edited by CAPT_BAIUS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,541
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,866 posts
5,255 battles

Too much additional complexity for not enough payoff.

 

With your approach you're still just hitting an R key and waiting for a cool down.  But you're adding additional player load in terms of the selection wheel, and additional information load in terms of multiple cool downs.

 

There may be a way to make DC a more interesting/engaging system.  But this ain't it.  I say nay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
127 posts
1,190 battles

What if the R bottom opened a panel where all the damage control functions were hot keyed.  You pressed R and then 1 to assign someone to flooding, 2 to assign someone to fire, 3 to fix steering, etc.  It wouldn't take you more than half a second to do it that way.  Pressing alt now already tells you the time left to rectify fire/flooding.  To me it doesn't seem like tracking damage in this manner would alter the way damage is currently displayed in any significant manner.  

Edited by CAPT_BAIUS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,785
[SALVO]
Members
17,035 posts
17,659 battles

Still too complex.  Leave well enough alone.  There are more important things for them to work on that need actual fixing, or new stuff that needs to be added.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
148
[PLPTE]
Members
493 posts
6,886 battles

I would like to see the DC modified so you can pre-use it to avoid effects, like lost modules, fires, flooding  (would be seen as another DD nerf...), detonations, etc...

 

Basically, if you are not suffering from any effects, you can hit DC to get a 0.5 sec invulnerability from effects, then the DC goes on a brief cooldown, say 1/4 of normal duration (or whatever is balanced).

 

In other words, a 0.5 sec effect will only reward skilled players that are paying attention and can time it's use well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
379
[PROJX]
Members
968 posts
15,696 battles

Hey Capt_Baius! - I applaud you and AraAragami in fleshing out a proposal re: how damage control could be changed to provide more control to this game mechanic.

I am, however, pretty much in agreement w/ Dreadnaught that adding this complexity compared to benefits to gameplay are not very compelling for the following reason:

 

WOWS is actually an Arcade style game, not really a simulator.   To illustrate what I mean, take examples from tank games or air combat games that have an arcade mode and realistic battle mode - there's less to manage in an arcade style game and the way things like damage, heal, etc. work in these games are not "true to life".  The complexity of managing detailed systems is more akin to simulator games as is the realisms of actual scale and not having a nice name/status bar that points out where your enemies are.

 

What WG has done w/ WOWS and what I feel are its great features since its release is:

  • Provide as simple an interface as possible to provide  compelling gameplay (focus more on playing your ship than managing it's systems) - The current dam con model is "is it broken badly enough that I have to fix it or do I wait since I could take more damage and if I fix it now I could die if I get hit again" is a nice simple distillation of a player's reaction to any damage that you could receive and your reaction to it.
  • Introduce core mechanics that behave fairly consistently. In this I mean the tools the player has to work with, allowing for variations to performance characteristics that provide uniqueness to ship types & classes that challenge the players skill (e.g. gun, torp, smoke, concealment, etc).  This to me is what makes playing different national lines or ship types compelling in this game.
  • Provide compelling strategic and tactical options thru use of multi-tiered MM (don't hate - I actually like the challenge of having to play a ship a tier or two higher than me), Map layouts and game modes (tho, Domination is probably hands down the most compelling and least problematic) that keep player interest and provide infinite replayability.

 

Micromanaging your damage control system doesn't seem to add compelling value to me based on the above, would add more UI clutter (i.e. like your torp/gun cooldowns, you'd now have to have a display for each dam con subsystem) and would detract from the strategic/tactical focus of gameplay.

 

Edited by hangglide42

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[TARFU]
Members
879 posts
5,915 battles

Never bring gameplay ideas up, everyone will just nitpick and say it's too complicated/won't work etc.

 

 

They act as if this game is perfect in it's current form, lol!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
127 posts
1,190 battles

I see your point hangglide42.  Yet, I wish some sort of compromise could be reached so that damage control could become a greater part of the strategy of playing the game without overburdening a player with micromanaging all aspects of ship function.  

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
[SYN]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
4,493 battles

Many of us had toyed around with that idea. I still think it would be an amazing change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
220
Beta Testers
1,158 posts
5,295 battles

Wait so the idea is to give out a more flexible DC ability and then give it an even lower cool down than the premium versions?  Yeah, I am sure BBs would love this.  Being able to put out 4 fires every 65 seconds sounds like a winning idea to me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
127 posts
1,190 battles

Bril01 the times listed by AraAragami were hypothetical.  Of course if a drastic change to how the game played were to be implemented the change would be balanced so that it did not benefit only battleships.  Moreover, if you read my suggestion below his, you'd know I suggested that the ability decrease the time it takes to put out the fire rather than the current situation where fires are put out immediately.  Thus a reworked damaged control would not make battleships less vulnerable to fires 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
220
Beta Testers
1,158 posts
5,295 battles

Yeah, I didn't read the change you suggested.  I just remember reading the original idea and thinking it was OP.  Your suggestion would probably make things to complicated, it is interesting but this would also have to apply to add things DC fixed and I am not sure many people would enjoy either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
127 posts
1,190 battles

From reading most of the comments, I've noticed people think the original post is either too complicated or that introducing the suggested changes would clutter the screen too much. 

 

Regarding complicated I didn't imagine there would be more than four ways to assign crew to damage control.  Thus, the function of the R key would only be split four different ways.  These splits can be given to the number keys 6,7,8,9:

  1. Fight Fire (6)
  2. Control Flooding (7)
  3. Fix Engines and or Steering (8)
  4. Repair disabled armaments (9)

Thus, if you wanted to assign someone to fight the fire all you would have to do is press 6.  If you pressed it twice you could assign 2 people and the rate of eliminating the fire would be increased.  

 

Some people have said this modified DC would clutter the screen or that the indicators would be too complicated to keep track of.  Yet pressing alt will already tell you how long fire or flooding will last.  I believe it also tells you module incapacitations.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only additional icons needed on the display to implement this modified damage control would be the cool downs for damage control crewman.  Simple hot keys can be used to manage which problems crew fix and the indicators to monitor fire/flooding already exist and can be brought up and minimized with one click.    

Edited by CAPT_BAIUS

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.

×