Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
twitch133

If detonation stays, This needs to be in game too.

227 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
2,614 posts
3,590 battles

I just had a brilliant idea for a new fun and engaging feature. If detonation stays, this must be included in game, it would not be that hard to add.

 

 

Open breach events. They happened in real life, I want them in game. Similar to what happened to Iowa and Salem. Where propellant ignited with the breach open, killing the gun crew, destroying the turret and almost detonating the propellant magazine.

 

Every time a reload cycle initiates, either the first load that happens after the game starts, or every time you fire a turret. An RNG roll takes place. If that RNG roll hits, the gun blows up, destroying the turret outright. It also starts a timer, say 45 seconds. If you do not use DCP within that window to "flood the magazine" it detonates, destroying your ship.

 

My arguments in favor of this are the same as the pro Detonation crowd.

- It will happen rarely, so it should be a non issue for you.

- There will be a flag to prevent it from happening.

- MBM1 will reduce the risk of it happening.

- It happened in real life, this is a game based on real life.

- It will add a bit of historical flair to this game.

- Randomness is fun.

- If you think it is a stupid idea, tell that to the 47 men killed in turret 2 on Iowa.

 

 

Spoiler

Maybe, just maybe, after reading this, you can see how asinine the arguments in favor of Detonation are? Seeing as I am literally parroting the arguments back at you, in favor of a new mechanic that would be just as random, frustrating and idiotic.

 

Edited by twitch133
  • Cool 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,163
[5BS]
Banned
8,864 posts

I still argue Torpedo detonations should be added. Nearly half of all IJN Combat Vessels sunk to gunfire had a torpedo detonation as a contributory event. That's more than statistically significant, it's a 'feature' present in those ships and should be present in any O2 based Torpedo boats.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,312
[USCC2]
Members
5,167 posts
23 minutes ago, twitch133 said:

I just had a brilliant idea for a new fun and engaging feature. If detonation stays, this must be included in game, it would not be that hard to add.

 

 

Open breach events. They happened in real life, I want them in game. Similar to what happened to Iowa and Salem. Where propellant ignited with the breach open, killing the gun crew, destroying the turret and almost detonating the propellant magazine.

 

Every time a reload cycle initiates, either the first load that happens after the game starts, or every time you fire a turret. An RNG roll takes place. If that RNG roll hits, the gun blows up, destroying the turret outright. It also starts a timer, say 45 seconds. If you do not use DCP within that window to "flood the magazine" it detonates, destroying your ship.

 

My arguments in favor of this are the same as the pro Detonation crowd.

- It will happen rarely, so it should be a non issue for you.

- There will be a flag to prevent it from happening.

- MBM1 will reduce the risk of it happening.

- It happened in real life, this is a game based on real life.

- It will add a bit of historical flair to this game.

- Randomness is fun.

- If you think it is a stupid idea, tell that to the 47 men killed in turret 2 on Iowa.

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Maybe, just maybe, after reading this, you can see how asinine the arguments in favor of Detonation are? Seeing as I am literally parroting the arguments back at you, in favor of a new mechanic that would be just as random, frustrating and idiotic.

 

Thank you for your thoughts. I'm sure WG will take your suggestion with the credibility it deserves. :Smile_honoring:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,614 posts
3,590 battles
Just now, _WaveRider_ said:

Thank you for your thoughts. I'm sure WG will take your suggestion with the credibility it deserves. :Smile_honoring:

 

It deserves every bit the credibility that the pro-detonation arguments get. After all... The arguments are identical. Like I said, I am literally parroting them back at the detonation supporters, verbatim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,747 posts
3,622 battles

Your salty AF, those detonations really must have touched you in a bad way. I don't mean in a Kodak moment kind of touched, but more in a "alone with creepy Uncle Billy" kind of touch

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,312
[USCC2]
Members
5,167 posts
5 minutes ago, twitch133 said:

 

It deserves every bit the credibility that the pro-detonation arguments get. After all... The arguments are identical. Like I said, I am literally parroting them back at the detonation supporters, verbatim.

And like I said, if WG believes another mechanic such as the current detonation one is required - I'm sure they will put it in.

It won't bother me in game in the slightest - I guess the constant crying on the forums will get more tiresome but hey, win some lose some.

 

Edit: Oh, and as not everything in the game is 100% accurate, does your logic also stand for not 'real life' stuff? I'd love to see some spaceships flying around....and sea monsters!

Edited by _WaveRider_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,614 posts
3,590 battles
1 minute ago, Psycodiver said:

Your salty AF, those detonations really must have touched you in a bad way. I don't mean in a Kodak moment kind of touched, but more in a "alone with creepy Uncle Billy" kind of touch

 

*You're. 

 

If you are going to insult me, do it right.... lol.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,312
[USCC2]
Members
5,167 posts
2 minutes ago, twitch133 said:

 

*You're. 

 

If you are going to insult me, do it right.... lol.

Most can see what he meant....and most can see that you are throwing a tantrum.

 

Edit: Again lol

Edited by _WaveRider_
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,614 posts
3,590 battles
2 minutes ago, _WaveRider_ said:

Most can see what he meant....and most can see that you are throwing a tantrum.

 

Nope... Not a tantrum.... It is a legitimate request. Every bit as legitimate as detonation stick around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,747 posts
3,622 battles
1 minute ago, twitch133 said:

 

*You're. 

 

If you are going to insult me, do it right.... lol.

 

Lol that's your best retort, lord I can see why you would get so salty over something proven to be super rare and can be even more rare by taking the right precautions (ie module and flags). 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,614 posts
3,590 battles
Just now, Psycodiver said:

 

Lol that's your best retort, lord I can see why you would get so salty over something proven to be super rare and can be even more rare by taking the right precautions (ie module and flags). 

 

So, would you get salty over your turret blowing up if they put my idea in game? Even though it might happen to you 15 times over 2000 games, and there would be flags and modules to prevent or stop it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,148
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
8,947 posts
7,885 battles
30 minutes ago, twitch133 said:

-snip-

I would actually not mind suck a mechanic, though with the gun must've taken damage before (kind of like how it works in WT, if your breach or Barrel got damaged and you fire you risk an Explosion inside the tank. Makes sense).

 

But there is one Little Detail that you missed out, and that is how Detonations happen and how These internal exposions would happen. A Detonation happens after you have taken damage (yes, even module damage is damage). This internal Explosion you suggested in a rather sarcastic way however follows something that you have to do in order to Play the game, or even just being in the game. You can Play a match, have Impact on it, sunk ships and so forth without taking a single Point of damage. Japanese Destroyers can do that for example. But can you Play a match without loading into it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
6,739 posts
8,124 battles
15 minutes ago, _WaveRider_ said:

Thank you for your thoughts. I'm sure WG will take your suggestion with the credibility it deserves. :Smile_honoring:

If wargaming accepts those arguments in favor of detonation then they are 100% valid here. I support this thread. Anyone who calls OP salty is an overgrown manchild who is unwilling to have the truth revealed to them in the form of satire. 

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,312
[USCC2]
Members
5,167 posts
4 hours ago, twitch133 said:

 

Nope... Not a tantrum.... It is a legitimate request. Every bit as legitimate as detonation stick around.

If detonation stays, this must be included in game.

I am literally parroting them back at the detonation supporters.

 

Yes, telling WG what they must do and then explaining you are doing this to try and prove someone else wrong? Sounds like someone needs a time out on the bottom step. :Smile_smile: If you have a suggestion why not just make it with all your supporting evidence, no 'must do this' demands and no trying to get back at someone?

 

For me, I believe your suggestions are valid ones if WG ever believe another mechanic such as detonation is required in game. Or they could just raise the % chance of dets?

Edited by _WaveRider_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,614 posts
3,590 battles
1 minute ago, SireneRacker said:

I would actually not mind suck a mechanic, though with the gun must've taken damage before (kind of like how it works in WT, if your breach or Barrel got damaged and you fire you risk an Explosion inside the tank. Makes sense).

 

But there is one Little Detail that you missed out, and that is how Detonations happen and how These internal exposions would happen. A Detonation happens after you have taken damage (yes, even module damage is damage). This internal Explosion you suggested in a rather sarcastic way however follows something that you have to do in order to Play the game, or even just being in the game. You can Play a match, have Impact on it, sunk ships and so forth without taking a single Point of damage. Japanese Destroyers can do that for example. But can you Play a match without loading into it?

 

Nope, that is not how it worked in history. The center gun on Iowa's #2 turret blew up during the loading cycle for the first shell they loaded. So, in essence, your turret would have blown up right at the beginning of the game.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,880
[HINON]
Modder, Privateers
6,798 posts
4,837 battles
34 minutes ago, twitch133 said:

My arguments in favor of this are the same as the pro Detonation crowd.

- It will happen rarely, so it should be a non issue for you.

- There will be a flag to prevent it from happening.

- MBM1 will reduce the risk of it happening.

- It happened in real life, this is a game based on real life.

- It will add a bit of historical flair to this game.

- Randomness is fun.

- If you think it is a stupid idea, tell that to the 47 men killed in turret 2 on Iowa.

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Maybe, just maybe, after reading this, you can see how asinine the arguments in favor of Detonation are? Seeing as I am literally parroting the arguments back at you, in favor of a new mechanic that would be just as random, frustrating and idiotic.

 

See. Giving an asinine response, to something you think asinine, is pretty hilarious.

 

While I would bring up that yes, breech failures and detonations are both realistic, I don't go so far to bring people lives into this. Hood detonated, yes. But that is the ship, not the sailors. The sailors lost was a tragedy, as was those from the explosions on Iowa and it's Newport News, not Salem.

 

However, the moment you start bringing them into an argument, to just make a point, a very silly point too, is where I lose you. "If you think this is a stupid idea, tell that to the 47 men killed". That lost credibility from you to me. I don't care how you think about detonations in a game, when you start dragging in sailors deaths into your petty argument, is where I stop.

 

Good day.

Fair winds and following seas captains. :Smile_honoring:

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,614 posts
3,590 battles
1 minute ago, _WaveRider_ said:

If detonation stays, this must be included in game.

I am literally parroting them back at the detonation supporters.

 

Yes, telling WG what they must do and then explaining you are doing this to try and prove someone else wrong? Sounds like someone needs a time out on the bottom step. :Smile_smile: If you have a suggestion why not just make it with all your supporting evidence, no 'must do this' demands and no trying to get back at someone?

 

For me, I believe your suggestions is a valid one if WG ever believe another mechanic such as detonation is required in game. Or they could just raise the % chance of dets?

 

This is logic 101. Not a tantrum.

 

If the argument is true in support of detonations, it MUST be true here. You cannot pick and chose where it is true just because you like the fancy little explosion you get when somebody detonates you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,312
[USCC2]
Members
5,167 posts
2 minutes ago, Raptor_alcor said:

If wargaming accepts those arguments in favor of detonation then they are 100% valid here. I support this thread. Anyone who calls OP salty is an overgrown manchild who is unwilling to have the truth revealed to them in the form of satire. 

lol, only just read this. Very funny, thank you. +1:Smile_honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,148
[WG-CC]
Privateers, Members
8,947 posts
7,885 battles
1 minute ago, twitch133 said:

Nope, that is not how it worked in history. The center gun on Iowa's #2 turret blew up during the loading cycle for the first shell they loaded. So, in essence, your turret would have blown up right at the beginning of the game.

Yes, and that's exactly what my second paragraph is about.

A Detonation removes you after you have taken damage. This breech Explosion would remove you after you have loaded in (or have fired the gun). One, while still being controversial, is somewhat reasonable to be put into a game, to an extend. The other one, is plain stupid for the one who Plays the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,312
[USCC2]
Members
5,167 posts
Just now, twitch133 said:

 

This is logic 101. Not a tantrum.

 

If the argument is true in support of detonations, it MUST be true here. You cannot pick and chose where it is true just because you like the fancy little explosion you get when somebody detonates you.

Of course you can pick and choose - that is exactly what WG does.

They choose to have dets - they have not chosen to have your new suggestion; give it time, you never know.

 

Apologies if it truly isn't a tantrum, but someone who confesses to hate dets - then asking for another mechanic they describe as being identical, sounds like they are cutting of their nose to spite their face (or throwing a tantrum).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,614 posts
3,590 battles
4 minutes ago, Raptor_alcor said:

If wargaming accepts those arguments in favor of detonation then they are 100% valid here. I support this thread. Anyone who calls OP salty is an overgrown manchild who is unwilling to have the truth revealed to them in the form of satire. 

 

Oh, I am satly, not going to deny that. When people parrot these asinine arguments in favor of keeping the mechanic in the game that made me satly, it gets me even saltier.

 

2 minutes ago, Doomlock said:

See. Giving an asinine response, to something you think asinine, is pretty hilarious.

 

While I would bring up that yes, breech failures and detonations are both realistic, I don't go so far to bring people lives into this. Hood detonated, yes. But that is the ship, not the sailors. The sailors lost was a tragedy, as was those from the explosions on Iowa and it's Newport News, not Salem.

 

However, the moment you start bringing them into an argument, to just make a point, a very silly point too, is where I lose you. "If you think this is a stupid idea, tell that to the 47 men killed". That lost credibility from you to me. I don't care how you think about detonations in a game, when you start dragging in sailors deaths into your petty argument, is where I stop.

 

Good day.

Fair winds and following seas captains. :Smile_honoring:

 

Tell that to the players that have use the "tell that to the men on Hood" line to me?

 

I cannot count how many times I have gotten that line. "Oh, its just a game, don't be salty about it." "Well, if it is just a game, you would not mind removing it. After all, it is a game, not a history book" "Tell that to the men that went down with Hood, you inconsiderate jerk!!!!!!"

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,614 posts
3,590 battles
1 minute ago, SireneRacker said:

Yes, and that's exactly what my second paragraph is about.

A Detonation removes you after you have taken damage. This breech Explosion would remove you after you have loaded in (or have fired the gun). One, while still being controversial, is somewhat reasonable to be put into a game, to an extend. The other one, is plain stupid for the one who Plays the game.

 

I have been detonated 5 times in a row from full health, with 1 shell hitting me. So, this argument holds no weight with me. There would be no effective difference between the two.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×