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

Should Fire be a Major Source of Damage

138 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

7,293
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
25,197 posts
13,798 battles

The title says it all. My personal thoughts have become that it should be more of a debuff, reduced rates of fire, increased detectability beyond the current increase, decreased dispersion for ships firing at the burning ship, and other things like that. This would make HE the go to grinding wheel damage for when AP just isn't performing. What are your thoughts on this?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,857
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,304 posts
4,693 battles

That would break the game.  Battleships would become nigh unkillable to anything not another battleship or armed with torpedoes.

 

This would require massive nerfs to battleships as a result.

 

This would make matches take stupidly long.

 

This would require rebalancing to everything.

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
670
[OSO]
Members
3,788 posts

I agree that fire does not do enough on the damage count.  I believe if I'm not mistaken I think I can actually get more damage from a single flood than I can by fire.  Fire does way more damage in reality if you look at it.  If it spreads on a ship especially to the powder room well you're basically screwed.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,716
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
17,533 posts
12,810 battles
43 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The title says it all. My personal thoughts have become that it should be more of a debuff, reduced rates of fire, increased detectability beyond the current increase, decreased dispersion for ships firing at the burning ship, and other things like that. This would make HE the go to grinding wheel damage for when AP just isn't performing. What are your thoughts on this?

I've been saying this since beta.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,337
[--K--]
[--K--]
Members
4,208 posts
19,205 battles

Actually I think they should reduce the chances of causing a fire not so much fire damage across the board

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,302 posts
10,644 battles

Trying to kill a Yamato with Gearing guns without getting fires is like trying to chip away at a glacier with an icepick.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,857
[ARS]
Beta Testers
4,304 posts
4,693 battles
5 minutes ago, silverdahc said:

Actually I think they should reduce the chances of causing a fire not so much fire damage across the board

Then they would need to increase the damage done by fire to compensate, possibly massively increase it if it became rare enough that DC was almost always up when a fire is lit.

 

EDIT:

 

And rebalance all of the anti-fire skills.  If fires are rare, a skill that primarily sells itself by reducing the number of fire locations from 4 to 3, well, for 4 points that'd be garbage if it is rare to have even two fires.

Edited by Helstrem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,293
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
25,197 posts
13,798 battles
6 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

That would break the game.  Battleships would become nigh unkillable to anything not another battleship or armed with torpedoes.

 

This would require massive nerfs to battleships as a result.

 

This would make matches take stupidly long.

 

This would require rebalancing to everything.

He would have to become a more steady damage dealer than it is now. The reason I am bringing this up is the RN BB's with their napalm throwers.

5 minutes ago, Gavorche said:

Trying to kill a Yamato with Gearing guns without getting fires is like trying to chip away at a glacier with an icepick.

That is a problem but fire needs a rework or actually the fire fighting needs a rework. As it is now you put the fires out and then the fire fighting crews then go on a union mandated break.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,371
[WOLF7]
Members
12,489 posts
52 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The title says it all. My personal thoughts have become that it should be more of a debuff, reduced rates of fire, increased detectability beyond the current increase, decreased dispersion for ships firing at the burning ship, and other things like that. This would make HE the go to grinding wheel damage for when AP just isn't performing. What are your thoughts on this?

 

You're ignoring the basic reason that HE does so much damage.....most players have no idea how to use AP.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,271 posts
3,749 battles
1 minute ago, BrushWolf said:

fire fighting crews then go on a union mandated break.

Technically, they are always doing an excellent job, since your magazines aren't detonating from fires :Smile_teethhappy:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,293
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
25,197 posts
13,798 battles
1 minute ago, awiggin said:

 

You're ignoring the basic reason that HE does so much damage.....most players have no idea how to use AP.....

That is very true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,842 posts
8,733 battles

Word to all. Have any of you guys served in the Navy? We are trained to fight fires constantly. The fires are realistic.,believe me.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
841 posts
4,880 battles

My personal opinion (expressed many times) is that fires should be rare, and HE should be used instead to damage/destroy modules or when AP proves ineffective. HE = High Explosive not Incendiary. If that means re-working how AP works to keep things balanced, or changing the damage numbers for HE - so be it. But using HE as fictional shells of napalm has to go.

 

@ Ghostdog1355 Yes, fires are real. Yes, fires do happen. But not the way this game does them.

Edited by FleetAdmiral_Assassin
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,293
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
25,197 posts
13,798 battles
13 minutes ago, Ghostdog1355 said:

Word to all. Have any of you guys served in the Navy? We are trained to fight fires constantly. The fires are realistic.,believe me.

They are and they are not. The damage from fire is probably about right although the real damage from fire is from things like ready secondary ammo cooking off but the fire fighting is extremely unrealistic even for what is really an arcade game being all or nothing.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,259
Members
2,992 posts
5,204 battles

Sure, make fire a debuff, make all non-citadel hits overpens, and make flooding a buff while we're at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,882
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
7,348 posts
10,909 battles

in a way it already is, its called being in a RN BB and the enemy damacons one fire *looks at Conq with 63% fire chance on the 457s*

Edited by tcbaker777
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
191 posts
40 battles

The readdition of skillway has just flip the whole T10 balance once more completely, with the Des Monies for example being from immune to CV strikes, changed to very vulnerable to Midway in an instant. This is all the result of a single item called AP bombs. If we were to touch even more core existing things, such as fire chance and fire damage, the balance could go even further more broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,926
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,815 posts
11,212 battles
1 hour ago, 0crazy8s0 said:

I agree that fire does not do enough on the damage count.  I believe if I'm not mistaken I think I can actually get more damage from a single flood than I can by fire.  Fire does way more damage in reality if you look at it.  If it spreads on a ship especially to the powder room well you're basically screwed.

 

Simply put - Bull. 1 flood, which is the max that can effect a ship (even if you get multiple ribbons) is 34.7% of HP with all anti flood duration things equipped, 60% with none. 1 of the max 4 fires, does little to DD's and cruisers at a 9% of HP per fire with no counters, but still does 18% to BB's and 24% to Carriers while also making it they can't attack, and is far easier  to spam and start than the floods in the first place. The minimum a BB or CV will take, with all the stuff to counter the fires, is 31% to BB's, 41% to CV's to CV's that were made easier to set fire too. The Max 4 fires with no counters, 72% of HP and 96% of HP. And remember, CV's can only mitigate so much because they basically have mandatory skills to take while getting shut down by the fires. Only DD's/Cruisers is it a thing where worst case is 36% of HP loss.

 

Depending on the definition, to the topic question, "Should it be a major source of damage?" that depends exactly how you mean it. If you mean "Should it be the primary source of damage for some ships?" I will say yes, it should, case in point a properly balanced USN CV with AS using HE dive bombers should be doing most of it's damage by lighting ships on fire, barring hitting the DD's and some cruisers that are more likely to take the more direct damage from the hits. If by that question you actually mean "Should it deal as much damage as it does?" - absolutely not. It should not be as easy as it is to kill ships by fire in this game as it currently is, flat out. Fire is too damned effective, part ofwhy people at times aren't bothering with AP.

 

Fire needs a damage nerf to BB's and CV's, if that means it debuffs the other classes (CV's are already debuffed enough by it and everything else thank you very little), I especially support reducing their fire rates or taking it away altogether just like what CV's have to endure if they take the 3 point skill that borderlines on useless or don't. Let's see how THEY like it since many of them when we get agitated at our inability to launch planes to defend ourselves have said "durr, CV can't launch planes when on fire in reality, deal". I'd damn near put money on the instant it shows in the notes they'll whine and there'll be nothing but "change it back that we can fire properly" threads by the weeks end if it went through.

 

TL;DR or TL;DC - As the primary means  by which some ships inflict damage - yes it should be a major source of damage, should it deal as much damage as it currently does, namely to BB's and CV's because I think it's been reduced far enough on DD/cruisers - no, it should not in that way be a major source of damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,926
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
4,815 posts
11,212 battles
12 minutes ago, CCloak said:

The readdition of skillway has just flip the whole T10 balance once more completely, with the Des Monies for example being from immune to CV strikes, changed to very vulnerable to Midway in an instant. This is all the result of a single item called AP bombs. If we were to touch even more core existing things, such as fire chance and fire damage, the balance could go even further more broken.

 

The only way a Des should be struggling against Midway is if because CV's have been next to extinct for about a year they have 0 AA additions to the ship, don't have DF AA, and don't focus fire, which, I'm not going to lose sleep over if they are struggling. But against the DB's with DF AA they should have a minimum of 40% chance to down a plane every second (focus fire or BFT), and a max of 71% against the group he's focusing, plus the accuracy debuff. And the Tier 8 TBM's max out at 2K health roughly, so the down chance against them built should be 80 or 90+.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,873
[KSC]
Clan Supertest Coordinator
5,042 posts
7,683 battles
47 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

It should not be as easy as it is to kill ships by fire in this game as it currently is, flat out.

I don't follow you.  It is extremely difficult to kill ships just with fire in this game. Cruisers and DDs only burn for 30 seconds, or as little as 18 if they are running flags and captains skills.  I can promise you, if you are spamming HE at one, it is going to die from the raw HE damage long before the fires take their toll.

 

As far as BBs are concerned?  Well in some ways they are more vulnerable to fires....but it is certainly not "easy" to kill a BB with fire.  A single fire only does light damage that can all be healed back.  A double fire is more serious, but still non fatal.  It takes time for the fires to overwhelm the BB's damage con and repair party, and it takes more time for the fires to run their course and actually burn the BB down.  In practice, a lone cruiser or gun boating DD is not capable of killing a half decently driven BB in a timely manner with just HE spam.  

 

 BBs can be killed incredibly quickly when under focus fire from multiple ships, but then we'd need to change your question to, "should multiple HE spamming cruisers/DDs be able to quickly burn down a focus fired BB?"

Edited by yashma
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,850
[90TH]
[90TH]
Alpha Tester
7,168 posts
3,967 battles

Damage by source has been released more than once and it always shows fire doing about 19% of the total damage in game. That is no where near as bad as it is made out to be.

 

AP still does the best damage hit for hit, but many players simply don't use it right.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
8,843 posts
7,637 battles
2 minutes ago, Madwolf05 said:

Damage by source has been released more than once and it always shows fire doing about 19% of the total damage in game. That is no where near as bad as it is made out to be.

 

AP still does the best damage hit for hit, but many players simply don't use it right.

^ this, and the fact that fires are 100% healable... wonder if the OP knows you don't have to put out a single fire every time its set....

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×