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

Bring back open water stealth firing!!!

27 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

6,600
[--K--]
Members
6,594 posts
14,361 battles

No, it isn't what you think. I'm not calling for 4km stealth firing from the Gremy, fun as that was 9when you were the Gremy).

Why are ships spotted while firing in their spotter plane window? You know, the extra range they gain between max stock firing range and the max range you gain from having your spotter plane up. In real life, spotter planes were used to fire over the curvature of the earth, so the ship would technically not be spotted while firing. So why not implement that in game? if nothing else has LOS on you in your normal stock gun bloom, why should you be spotted when firing at targest that are only able to be shot at while your spotter plane is up? 

The con to this is that you would have BB's and Cruisers staying way too far back. But I thought it was an interesting discussion point.

And yeah, I know this will probably stir up the usual grumps. "OWSF was cancer", "This is an arcade game, not a simulation", "You suck"

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
632
[CAST]
[CAST]
Members
2,535 posts
10,372 battles

I can see the thought behind this one.  It isn't the broken mechanic of OWSF.  However, is it really needed?  If you are that far out, does it really matter is someone can see you?  Only a ship that could fire that far could hit you anyway.  Chances are, they would need the spotter plane to get the extra range too.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,600
[--K--]
Members
6,594 posts
14,361 battles
Just now, Murcc said:

However, is it really needed?  

Nope...

However you could get in a spot on an island where close ships don't have spotting on you but you are able to fire at further ships and not give away your position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,151 posts
14,301 battles
7 minutes ago, Murcc said:

I can see the thought behind this one.  It isn't the broken mechanic of OWSF.  However, is it really needed?  If you are that far out, does it really matter is someone can see you?  Only a ship that could fire that far could hit you anyway.  Chances are, they would need the spotter plane to get the extra range too.  

What about murmansk thou? Or budyonny, shchors, perth, chapayev, donskoi, hindy, roon, nurnberg, konigsberg and thats not even all the cruisers that can have spotter plane. But there is always a bb that can hit them at max range

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,216
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
13,233 posts
18,432 battles
19 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

In real life,

NOT real life, GAME.

NOT real life, GAME.

NOT real life, GAME.

NOT real life, GAME.

NOT real life, GAME.

Keep saying this to yourself and, eventually, it will sink in. It's all about players who pay way too much money for expensive, electronic Battleships not to be frustrated and crying and no longer stealing Mommy's credit card to buy said ships and NOTHING about reality.

If this was about reality, BBs would not have heal, unrealistic turning and acceleration, or any kind of accuracy.

If this was about reality DDs would not have unlimited torp reloads.

If this was about reality Radar would NOT see through islands, or make ships appear on the horizon.

But you know that; you are an above average player with thousands of games played and understand the difference between real life and real greed ... er ... electronic entertainment.

Would this be true to form and historically accurate? Of course it would!

Would it add intense amounts of salt to the electronic oceans by players who were being hit by shells from ships they can not see? You know the answer to that also because you were here for the great invisifire war. And the bottom line is if it makes BB players unhappy and not want to spend money, it's out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,069
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
4,701 posts

Absolutely not.  Even though I own a Gremy.

OWSF was never supposed to be a "thing".  It was always a mistake from the beginning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,600
[--K--]
Members
6,594 posts
14,361 battles
5 minutes ago, Umikami said:

NOT real life, GAME.

NOT real life, GAME.

NOT real life, GAME.

NOT real life, GAME.

NOT real life, GAME.

Keep saying this to yourself and, eventually, it will sink in. It's all about players who pay way too much money for expensive, electronic Battleships not to be frustrated and crying and no longer stealing Mommy's credit card to buy said ships and NOTHING about reality.

If this was about reality, BBs would not have heal, unrealistic turning and acceleration, or any kind of accuracy.

If this was about reality DDs would not have unlimited torp reloads.

If this was about reality Radar would NOT see through islands, or make ships appear on the horizon.

But you know that; you are an above average player with thousands of games played and understand the difference between real life and real greed ... er ... electronic entertainment.

Would this be true to form and historically accurate? Of course it would!

Would it add intense amounts of salt to the electronic oceans by players who were being hit by shells from ships they can not see? You know the answer to that also because you were here for the great invisifire war. And the bottom line is if it makes BB players unhappy and not want to spend money, it's out.

 

35 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

And yeah, I know this will probably stir up the usual grumps. "This is an arcade game, not a simulation" 

Wow, amazingly, I predicted you would appear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,216
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
13,233 posts
18,432 battles
3 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

Wow, amazingly, I predicted you would appear.

Like I said, you're an above average player, with thousands of games, and should know better. This is like the Joker being surprised when Batman shows up halfway through the comic book; not really needing a psychic here for the prediction as the result is ... well ... obvious and everyone sees it coming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,313
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
25,237 posts
13,830 battles
24 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

Absolutely not.  Even though I own a Gremy.

OWSF was never supposed to be a "thing".  It was always a mistake from the beginning.

The OP's idea while well put wouldn't add to the game and as he even mentioned it would encourage people staying back so I say no.

It was supposed to be a thing where a very few ships could do it once the captain was leveled to 15 points. When concealment expert became available at only 10 points it now spread to many more players and ships.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,344
[OO7]
Members
4,181 posts
9,556 battles

Eh. From an ideal gameplay perspective I agree.

From the potato filled reality we live in I disagree this would be beneficial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,600
[--K--]
Members
6,594 posts
14,361 battles
17 minutes ago, ValkyrWarframe said:

Maybe for IJN DDs only, because they actually could use that.

Rofl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,650
[PSP]
[PSP]
Members
12,453 posts
1 hour ago, Umikami said:

 no longer stealing Mommy's credit card to buy said ships

You do realize that many of the players here are parents and grandparents? Quite a few are military retirees with over 20 years in. At least in the forums, middle-aged people probably outnumber the kids.

If this was about reality, BBs would not have heal, unrealistic turning and acceleration, or any kind of accuracy.

Heal represents the machine shops that battleships had. Quite a bit of damage can and was repaired at sea. Turning and acceleration are concomitant with the compression necessary for a twenty-minute match. Otherwise you would have to sit at your computer for a couple of weeks before you ever got to the battle area.

Your saying that  because something in the game isn't historically accurate that nothing in it should have historicity is a fallacious argument. If you want to play a fantastical game there are plenty available, you don't have to play WOWS.

If this was about reality DDs would not have unlimited torp reloads.

I'll give you this one, in part. However, without torp reloads many DDs would essentially be taken out of the game once they fired their torpedoes. This would leave the team woefully imbalances if the other stan had gunship DDs.

If this was about reality Radar would NOT see through islands, or make ships appear on the horizon.

It's a game mechanic. Live with it.

But you know that; you are an above average player with thousands of games played and understand the difference between real life and real greed ... er ... electronic entertainment.

Why do you think WOWS is greedy? You don't have to pay a cent to play this game. You pay for perks and convenience or to play a special ship of a type you don't want to have to grind to. It's fortunate that many wish the benefits that paying accrues though because it keeps the game viable. If paying customers get a slightly better ship with a 19-point captain, an excellent camouflage,  a full complement of signals, and premium modules, then power to them. The money they spend lets broke people like me play for free. 

 

 

Edited by Snargfargle
  • Cool 1

Share this post


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

Spotter planes are almost only used on Battleships who don't really need anymore buffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,513
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
8,499 posts
14,074 battles
44 minutes ago, ValkyrWarframe said:

Maybe for IJN DDs only, because they actually could use that.

IJN Pringlezuki confirmed?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,216
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
13,233 posts
18,432 battles
44 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

no longer stealing Mommy's credit card to buy said ships

You do realize that many of the players here are parents and grandparents? Quite a few are military retirees with over 20 years in. At least in the forums, middle-aged people probably outnumber the kids.

And I'm sure this is true; but I wonder how many of them are the ones who would be complaining about a new form of invisifire?

44 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

If this was about reality, BBs would not have heal, unrealistic turning and acceleration, or any kind of accuracy.

Heal represents the machine shops that battleships had. Quite a bit of damage can and was repaired at sea. Turning and acceleration are concomitant with the compression necessary for a twenty-minute match. Otherwise you would have to sit at your computer for a couple of weeks before you ever got to the battle area.

Machine shops did little repair during battles, and if time compression is necessary for the match to transpire within 20 minutes then shouldn't every ship get an equal boost and not just BBs?

44 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

Your saying that  because something in the game isn't historically accurate that nothing in it should have historicity is a fallacious argument. If you want to play a fantastical game there are plenty available, you don't have to play WOWS.

What I actually said was this WAS historically accurate, but would cause more grief, which I believe to be true.

44 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

If this was about reality DDs would not have unlimited torp reloads.

I'll give you this one, in part. However, without torp reloads many DDs would essentially be taken out of the game once they fired their torpedoes. This would leave the team woefully imbalances if the other stan had gunship DDs.

I would be happier, and I think the game would be more challenging and exciting, if DDs were only given one reload, but detection ranges were dropped to equal the minimum drop/arming distance of CV torps, which is 0.3K, and those silly triangles were removed from torps like they were gun shots, which don't have little telltales pointing them out for the opposition. Torp walls would cease to exist, DD players would be forced to get better and make their now limited shots count, and DDs would still be as relevant to the game as they are now, or perhaps even better. Although I will admit that IJN drivers would then have a much better argument for getting their DD guns improved.

44 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

If this was about reality Radar would NOT see through islands, or make ships appear on the horizon.

It's a game mechanic. Live with it.

It's a horrible and unrealistic bending of the laws of physics which was implemented so cruiser drivers could compete, poorly thought out and implemented in the cheapest and dirtiest programming method possible. This is seriously the king of quick and badly designed fixes, the worst I've ever seen.

44 minutes ago, Snargfargle said:

Why do you think WOWS is greedy? You don't have to pay a cent to play this game. You pay for perks and convenience or to play a special ship of a type you don't want to have to grind to. It's fortunate that many wish the benefits that paying accrues though because it keeps the game viable. If paying customers get a slightly better ship with a 19-point captain, an excellent camouflage,  a full complement of signals, and premium modules, then power to them. The money they spend lets broke people like me play for free. 

I have no issue with WoW making money, but some of the methods they use leave a lot to be desired, and miles of room for improvement. Possibly the worst is the use of gimmicks, which only causes more players to complain, and because of that we get even more gimmicks. Why re-introduce another feature of the game which has already caused issues so more players can become upset with it?

I'm not saying that this would be unfair or inaccurate; I AM saying it will cause more grief in the game; who needs that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,216
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
13,233 posts
18,432 battles
37 minutes ago, Madwolf05 said:

Spotter planes are almost only used on Battleships who don't really need anymore buffs.

Actually I would be more concerned by fire spewing cruisers (Budyonny, Shchors, Zao, etc.) whose greater rate of fire will engender complaints quicker. Few cruisers (not none, but FEW) were the target of invisifire complaints, but everyone complained about DDs being able to fire without being seen.

I do agree that BBs need no additional buffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,364
[WUDPS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,159 posts
4,944 battles
2 hours ago, Ducky_shot said:

No, it isn't what you think. I'm not calling for 4km stealth firing from the Gremy, fun as that was 9when you were the Gremy).

Why are ships spotted while firing in their spotter plane window? You know, the extra range they gain between max stock firing range and the max range you gain from having your spotter plane up. In real life, spotter planes were used to fire over the curvature of the earth, so the ship would technically not be spotted while firing. So why not implement that in game? if nothing else has LOS on you in your normal stock gun bloom, why should you be spotted when firing at targest that are only able to be shot at while your spotter plane is up? 

The con to this is that you would have BB's and Cruisers staying way too far back. But I thought it was an interesting discussion point.

And yeah, I know this will probably stir up the usual grumps. "OWSF was cancer", "This is an arcade game, not a simulation", "You suck"

tenor.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,600
[--K--]
Members
6,594 posts
14,361 battles
32 minutes ago, Umikami said:

It's a horrible and unrealistic bending of the laws of physics which was implemented so cruiser drivers could compete, poorly thought out and implemented in the cheapest and dirtiest programming method possible. This is seriously the king of quick and badly designed fixes, the worst I've ever seen.

I have 2 words for you: Ground penetrating radar. :Smile_hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,648
[AHOY_]
Beta Testers
6,823 posts
4,361 battles

Considering the majority of the overall playerbase requested the removal of OWSF (WG having listed CVs, BBs, and cruiser players as overall against OWSF), and it was also preferred over having all DDs nerfed with pre-OWSF removal KMDD visibility when firing (which WG did say would be the alternative applied to all classes), I'd say "No". There's no valid, gameplay reason to bring it back. Besides, with the addition of smoke-capable cruisers alongside the usual smoke-equipped DDs, there's plenty of potential OWSF firing points to work with; it just requires working in tandem rather than solo to keep the smokescreen up and fire away from open water stealth, so long as an unfriendly DD or CL sneaks up close enough to light up whatever ship is firing from smoke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,202 posts
3,461 battles
3 hours ago, TheDreadnought said:

Absolutely not.  Even though I own a Gremy.

OWSF was never supposed to be a "thing".  It was always a mistake from the beginning.

You dont need OWSF to burn crappers to the water. I appreciate his hyperbole though, id have loved a Gremmy that OWSF at 4km. Maybe 10.6km, but sure, we will call it 4km (probably what it does seem like to a BB driving Epsilon)

Either way if you can't make Gremmy work as it is now you're just a poor player at this point. BB can see me all it wants, they are on fire and I am not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
632
[CAST]
[CAST]
Members
2,535 posts
10,372 battles
5 hours ago, Ducky_shot said:

Nope...

However you could get in a spot on an island where close ships don't have spotting on you but you are able to fire at further ships and not give away your position.

In those cases, you should be able to take a shot at a location based on approximate distance.  You won't have a real target, but if the shot can lob over an island, you should be able to hit the area with a wide dispersion untargeted shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
632
[CAST]
[CAST]
Members
2,535 posts
10,372 battles
5 hours ago, JessieTheKitty said:

What about murmansk thou? Or budyonny, shchors, perth, chapayev, donskoi, hindy, roon, nurnberg, konigsberg and thats not even all the cruisers that can have spotter plane. But there is always a bb that can hit them at max range

I never thought about them, and I guess they are always in range.  The increase in range by using the spotter plane is still not an issue, since any firing in open water will make you visible anyway for the most part.  However, I still stand by the remark that all viable targets should be able to be hit regardless of where they are on the map, even if they are not visible.  You just won't have the accuracy of a target lock.  Basically, if you can shoot out of an area, there is probably a ship that can fire into it.  Trajectory will factor into it, so there will be instances where your position will make all the difference.  I'm guessing that the higher arc of some cruisers will allow better shots to targets hiding behind an island than BBs firing at those same ships.  If anything, I think a manual distance feature will help those medium range ships the most.  Imagine those games where a gob of BBs are camping behind an island and firing at long range targets from relative safety.  With a manual distance setting, a cruiser that knows they are there can lob shots in and push them out.  

Edited by Murcc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×