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

Ship Acceleration/Deceleration: Are We Driving Speedboats?

Movement Physics  

81 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Ships Take Longer to Accelerate/Decelerate?

    • Yes
      11
    • No
      70

30 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
162 posts
3,602 battles

Is anyone else bothered at the compressed rate of acceleration/deceleration in ships, especially cruisers and destroyers?

 

Very many players treat the mechanics like the "rocking tactic" in World of Tanks. Ships to ship tactics are based on the ability to predict movement over time and distance. Ships that stop and attempt "tanking" should be able to be punished -severely. 

 

Want to stop campers? Change the physics model.

 

Thoughts?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,762
Members
9,863 posts
5 minutes ago, Condor___ said:

Is anyone else bothered at the compressed rate of acceleration/deceleration in ships, especially cruisers and destroyers?

 

Very many players treat the mechanics like the "rocking tactic" in World of Tanks. Ships to ship tactics are based on the ability to predict movement over time and distance. Ships that stop and attempt "tanking" should be able to be punished -severely. 

 

Want to stop campers? Change the physics model.

 

Thoughts?

 

Welcome to the arcade?

This is not a sim, never will be a sim...who wants to spend 5 mins simply getting their ship moving....in a game?:Smile_amazed:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
272
[RUST]
Beta Testers
931 posts
10,345 battles

If you have problems punishing someone that is using this "rocking tactic," the problem isn't the mechanics, the problem is your inability to punish said player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
404
[R-F]
Members
675 posts
6,170 battles

World of Warships already features much shorter ranged combat with much more gun accuracy than realistic naval battles.

 

Giving ships realistic acceleration/deceleration would ramp up the pain even further and make people even less likely to attempt bold maneuvers.

 

Not to mention, I'm pretty sure if you gave battleships realistic acceleration they'd never reach top speed by the end of the battle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,669
[TBW]
Members
6,323 posts
11,878 battles

I have to point out that if your goal was to make a poll where everyone agrees, you have hit the nail on the head. Never in forum history has every one agreed, until now.

Edited by Sovereigndawg
  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,352
[SYN]
Members
4,525 posts
11,433 battles

I like how some people cherry pick one item out of a laundry list of blatantly unrealistic features in this game to complain about.

 

Among many other things we have health bars, magic heal and repairs, power-ups, fantasy boats, cartoon characters, and also every aspect of carrier play and how aircraft are "modeled".  Nope, it's a ship's exaggerated application of Newton's Second Law that gets the OP's goat.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Kuckoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
102
[VVV]
Members
341 posts

Well if we want to slow down game play to make it more realistic lets go all the way, one or two battles per ship per year. And lets make that one battle last a few hours in real time and end inconclusively, we don't want too much excitement do we now. Also, lets make it so you have to actually sail from port to the battle over a couple of days.

 

Also to keep people occupied with this uber realistic game mode we can have a mini game of scrubbing the deck and sharpening the anchor.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
393
[WOLF5]
Members
1,493 posts
2,046 battles

Do you drive a BB? I know it would take even longer IRL, but run into an island, have to avoid the idiot in the DD who ran across your bow, getting to your team when you spawned alone an a flank. It all takes a while, and doesn't need to take longer. EVERYTHING in this game is sped up, not just acceleration. (Also, deacceleration isn't a thing, it's just acceleration in an arbitrarily defined negative direction)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23
[WOLF4]
Members
171 posts
2,729 battles

Watch the smoke columns and gauge appropriately.  If you are sniping, yeah it might seem like an issue but so is WASD hack. If brawling you won't be rocking back and forth (usually, some may try at corner of islands or something). And once you play/experience enough of each ship, you can expect their acceleration or whatever. I don't find an issue with it; BBs take forever (and ever)>Cruisers >DDs. I think the characteristics are fair for the classes. And, to add what awiggin said, it's a sim; Shells take no longer than 12 seconds at extreme ranges to hit something. Accel/Decel is only part of the predicting movement and timing (WASD hack/smoke/concealment/shell[firing] angles/ship angling).

Edited by ZaCLoNer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
939
Members
4,448 posts
6,150 battles

Golly gee whiz BBs accelerate slow enough as it is.  That is one big reason I don't play them....I am too impatient. I have impatience issues that go back to childhood. :Smile_child:  

Edited by dmckay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15
[HYDRA]
Members
136 posts
1,161 battles

The whole game is operating at a significant degree of speed acceleration, a US standard battleship would take about 40 mins to go from one side of a map to the other in reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
423
[1IF]
Alpha Tester
4,252 posts
8,213 battles

I worked in the marine industry (ferries) and these vessels travel at around 20 knots which is in line with what people think of as a 'speed boat' speed.

I was a second officer on a ferry and I thought what I was navigating was a 'giant speedboat' (which it essentially was).

Humour could include, 'Big beats small', 'Steel beats fiberglass or wood', 'Might makes right', etc. (of course, nautical rules of the road are the real & legal determinant)

Navy ships are even more high performance vessels (Cs, DDs & CVs especially, some BBs have the slower speeds). They can speed up quickly if they want to.

Hence, OP, we are steering 'Speedboats'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,036
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,153 posts
8,766 battles

Fire up Steel Ocean if you want to see speed boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5
[DLG06]
Members
39 posts
4,101 battles

I watched the video Chieftan did concerning the Graf Spee and it hit me there may be a point to speeds based on plant type.  OK, maybe just in deceleration and driving astern (actually saw this once in a game where a cruiser did the whole thing in reverse.  Musta been a dare).  In general, a ship with a reciprocating engine (be it steam or combustion) can apply 100% of it's forward power to braking and going backwards.  To my knowledge, I can only think this would apply to Graf Spee and Texas.  I'm sure there are other reciprocating engined ships.  It should apply to them as well.  I just can't think of them.

 

The ship I was on the longest was turbine driven and did not afford the same turbine (blading) efficiency going astern as going ahead.  We could only apply 60% of our rated shaft horsepower for braking and going backwards.

 

Not sure where this gets us, but this thread has resurfaced my thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
650 posts
1,632 battles

They turn way faster in the game than they do in real life, too. 

 

It's an arcade game and it would not be fun if the ships were as ponderous as they were in reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,092 posts
8,074 battles
2 hours ago, Sovereigndawg said:

I have to point out that if your goal was to make a poll where everyone agrees, you have hit the nail on the head. Never in forum history has every one agreed, until now.

Looks like that just went straight out the window

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,669
[TBW]
Members
6,323 posts
11,878 battles
1 hour ago, FireAndHEspam said:

Looks like that just went straight out the window

I'll count 90% as a win we are dealing with people here and not animals I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,456
[-K-]
WoWS Wiki Editor, Members, Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers, Supertester, Supertest Coordinator
5,817 posts
5,348 battles

The funny part is there was already a global acceleration/deceleration nerf some time ago around the CBT era.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
162 posts
3,602 battles

Darn, I was hoping for a unanimous poll too.

 

Thank you everyone for your thoughts. I particularly enjoyed the variations of "git gud bro".

 

Yeah, I know it's an arcade game.  I do find it disappointing to watch people play it like World of Tanks, particularly stopping dead in the water, bow on or angled slightly and just bouncing shots left and right. Or hiding behind an island. 

Beyond my strident OP, I wonder if there were ways to tweak momentum mechanics so that there would be more movement and less camping.

 

One idea is to tone down acceleration/deceleration (except for the first 30 seconds so that players can get ships moving), but if you stop after that, it takes longer to start up again (exception if you run aground or a map border).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,855
[O7]
Supertester, Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
10,664 posts
7,555 battles

Reducing the maneuverability of ships sounds like a great way to further reduce the cruiser population. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×