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

Chaff? No. Please... No. (discussion)

332 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,897
[BRZKR]
WoWS Community Contributors
1,596 posts
5,483 battles

A little discussion about how a chaff consumable should not be introduced, and why players should try better to adapt to the game instead of making the game adapt to them.

 

 

  • Cool 18
  • Funny 2
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,219
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
22,703 posts
3,895 battles

Nobody asked for or wanted Chaff. This is WG's solution to problems players have with radar, rather than WG doing anything to fix the actual problems that are repeatedly brought up.

 

Though I love the whole "Just adapt" line. Because a certain group of players hasn't been forced to do that nearly every patch for the past 2 years and there is no way they would be getting sick of being the only group expected to do so.

  • Cool 23
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 7
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,746
[INTEL]
Members
7,119 posts
29,307 battles

Chaff? Haven't heard much about it, but no.

The only radar nerf that would work, and is needed, is to stop going through islands. Radar should be LOS.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,547
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
6,270 posts
10,751 battles
4 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

Nobody asked for or wanted Chaff. This is WG's solution to problems players have with radar, rather than WG doing anything to fix the actual problems that are repeatedly brought up.

 

Though I love the whole "Just adapt" line. Because a certain group of players hasn't been forced to do that nearly every patch for the past 2 years and there is no way they would be getting sick of being the only group expected to do so.

Exactly correct. There has been plenty of reasonable discussion about what can be done to address the problems with radar WITHOUT requiring new consumables. 

WG just refuses to admit that an idea didn’t work and simply roll things back. 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35
[AK-47]
Members
206 posts
4,248 battles

I agree, not really playing DDs but I do think it is better to make the game requires player been somewhat skilled. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,306
[INTEL]
Members
10,024 posts
28,166 battles
16 hours ago, NoZoupForYou said:

A little discussion about how a chaff consumable should not be introduced, and why players should try better to adapt to the game instead of making the game adapt to them.

 

 

Just adapt? Really Zoup. Did you just now discover this debate? Are you just trolling for clicks?

Lotta respect lost with that. 

 

 

  • Cool 9
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 2
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
565 posts
168 battles
14 minutes ago, NoZoupForYou said:

A little discussion about how a chaff consumable should not be introduced, and why players should try better to adapt to the game instead of making the game adapt to them.

 

 

You mean how players should have adapted to OWSF?

People making fallacious statements is one thing, making a video out of your own ignorance is comedy gold.

Radar is a hard counter, the only one in the game, and DDs were the lowest performing ship type before and after Radar... and still are.
The logical and intelligent changes would always be to buff the lowest performing archetype, not add more counters to it.

Lot of that lacking here and at Wargaming.

Edited by Sbane12
  • Cool 10
  • Boring 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,223
[ARGSY]
Members
10,759 posts
7,031 battles
6 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

This is WG's solution to problems players have with radar,

Have you actually watched the video? Because I seem to recall Zoup saying that chaff has never been anything more than a rumour, that it remains no more than a rumour, and the point of this vid is that it should stay that way.

SO WHY THE FREAKING HECK ARE SOME PEOPLE FLIPPING OUT (ONE WAY OR ANOTHER) AS IF IT IS SET IN STONE TO APPEAR IN THE NEXT PATCH??? :Smile_izmena:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
565 posts
168 battles
2 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

Have you actually watched the video? Because I seem to recall Zoup saying that chaff has never been anything more than a rumour, that it remains no more than a rumour, and the point of this vid is that it should stay that way.

SO WHY THE FREAKING HECK ARE SOME PEOPLE FLIPPING OUT (ONE WAY OR ANOTHER) AS IF IT IS SET IN STONE TO APPEAR IN THE NEXT PATCH??? :Smile_izmena:

Where did anyone claim it is set in stone or going to appear in the next patch? or even the one after that?

This is exactly what happens when you try to white knight benightment. You get Straw Mans and Hyperbole

Edited by Sbane12
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,821
[NSF]
Beta Testers
5,231 posts
7,960 battles

A counter to the counters counter counter-counter.

Also the first responses in here are absolutely hilarious, as per usual when it comes to quite literally anything mentioning radar on the forum.

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,223
[ARGSY]
Members
10,759 posts
7,031 battles
1 minute ago, Sbane12 said:

Where did anyone claim it is set in stone or going to appear in the next patch? or even the one after that?

This is exactly what happens when you try to white knight benightment. You get Straw Mans and Hyperbole

Somebody complained that chaff was WG's solution to radar, but with chaff remaining a rumour that simply isn't so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,219
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
22,703 posts
3,895 battles
6 minutes ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

Have you actually watched the video? Because I seem to recall Zoup saying that chaff has never been anything more than a rumour, that it remains no more than a rumour, and the point of this vid is that it should stay that way.

SO WHY THE FREAKING HECK ARE SOME PEOPLE FLIPPING OUT (ONE WAY OR ANOTHER) AS IF IT IS SET IN STONE TO APPEAR IN THE NEXT PATCH??? :Smile_izmena:

No because I browse forums while at work and do not have the luxury of watching youtube while on the clock.

 

If it is just a rumor, than it should stay a rumor. It's a stupid idea that doesn't solve anything.

 

Heaven forbid I have the belief that a CC would make a video about something meaningful, rather than what is apparently just trolling to stirr the pot for easy clicks.

Edited by KiyoSenkan
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
565 posts
168 battles
7 minutes ago, Big_Spud said:

A counter to the counters counter counter-counter.

Also the first responses in here are absolutely hilarious, as per usual when it comes to quite literally anything mentioning radar on the forum.

Well I am pretty sure that most DD players or players actually interested in objective balance never asked for a radar countering consumable. That is because we know not only does it equate to putting a Band-Aid on a sliced carotid artery, but it is further contradiction to Rock-Paper-Scissors.

What we really want is a removal of the double-standards, a removal of the subjective dev favoritism in balancing.
They really refuse to make DDs actually good at something, even in their own balance model, like countering BBs.
If you want to have a hard counter, it sucks, its skill void, but still plausible. However, then you have to give an equally powerful BB hard counter to DDs. That is how balance works, that is how the RPS model works. It is a circle.
If it is okay for Radar to ignore a fundamental game environment rule set like LoS, then so should other things, like the lowest performing weapon type.. torps.

it takes 5 minutes max to make Radar adhere to LoS rules. It takes far far far longer to create a new consumable that makes DDs immune to assured acquisition (what Radar buffs) completely. That is actually quite complex.

Edited by Sbane12
  • Cool 4
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,628
[AHOY_]
Beta Testers
6,786 posts
3,937 battles

Ah yes, the Chaff consumable that WG said was in low-priority testing, and would have shared slots with Smoke.

I'm kind of surprised it's being brought up again out of the blue; sometime after the Q&A mentioning it had already passed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,613
[HYDRO]
Members
2,996 posts
4,596 battles

I agree with 99% of what you say Zoup, same as with all this chaff nonsense. Same with adapting. But there is a big factor when it comes to this issue to which you cannot adapt. RNG.

When one team has 2-3 radars and the opposing has 0, how do you think a DD should react? Won't you be starting from a handicap vs the red DD that can have support on demand? This is not just about a level playing field when it comes to cruisers, it also upsets the balance between DDs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,170
[TBW]
Members
7,527 posts
13,808 battles

I want a Romulan cloaking device, chaff is stupid compared to a Romulan cloaking device.

How about Hyperspace like in asteroids.

Edited by Sovereigndawg
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
565 posts
168 battles
1 minute ago, warheart1992 said:

I agree with 99% of what you say Zoup, same as with all this chaff nonsense. Same with adapting. But there is a big factor when it comes to this issue to which you cannot adapt. RNG.

When one team has 2-3 radars and the opposing has 0, how do you think a DD should react? Won't you be starting from a handicap vs the red DD that can have support on demand? This is not just about a level playing field when it comes to cruisers, it also upsets the balance between DDs.

1.) The "L2P" / "Adapt" is not a coherent counter-argument, nor even a sensible response at all to documented, and proven balance issues. If it was even remotely a sensible one, there would never be balance changes in games, as it is up to the players to change how they play as the far easier answer. What said response is, as is the expectation in this regard, nothing more than fallacious.

2.) As for one side having more Radars then the other, and how it effects Win Rate. Whilst it has been proven by multiple users on here and reddit with LARGE sample sizes that having more Radar on one team DOES affect win rates retrospectively... WG and their white knights will just claim otherwise without anything to back it up.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,821
[NSF]
Beta Testers
5,231 posts
7,960 battles

 

Quote

Well I am pretty sure that most DD players or players actually interested in objective balance never asked for a radar countering consumable. That is because we know not only does it equate to putting a Band-Aid on a sliced carotid artery, but it is further contradiction to Rock-Paper-Scissors.

What we really want is a removal of the double-standards, a removal of the subjective dev favoritism in balancing.
They really refuse to make DDs actually good at something, even in their own balance model, like countering BBs.
If you want to have a hard counter, it sucks, its skill void, but still plausible. However, then you have to give an equally powerful BB hard counter to DDs. That is how balance works, that is how the RPS model works. It is a circle.

 

I really don’t care what the baDDies or baBBies or literally any other extremely partisan player subgroup wants balance wise though, it’s just funny watching the same ten or so people constantly get bent out of shape while having the same endless arguments like a video set on repeat. Seriously, these threads read like somebody left an entire server of chat bots running for too long.

 

But I’ll bow out now and let the pro and anti-skub people ree at each other for another 24 hours before the next thread mentioning the anathema of the week is created.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,547
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
6,270 posts
10,751 battles
Just now, Sovereigndawg said:

I want a Romulan cloaking device, chaff is stupid compared to a Romulan cloaking device.

The Klingon ones come with better warranty. More durable too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
454
[TDD]
Members
1,095 posts
8,787 battles
2 minutes ago, HazardDrake said:

The Klingon ones come with better warranty. More durable too. 

and the advanced ones have the ability to cloak while still in combat

I'll take that for my dd please

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
483
[HELLS]
Members
2,100 posts
20,015 battles

Are you serious?? Fix radar seeing through islands, or remove it completely. Hydro does not see through land, so the mechanic is fixable. Spoofing, jamming and e-warfare  should not be part of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,511
[CRMSN]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
5,907 posts
4,173 battles
1 minute ago, GrandAdmiral_2016 said:

Are you serious?? Fix radar seeing through islands, or remove it completely. Hydro does not see through land, so the mechanic is fixable. Spoofing, jamming and e-warfare  should not be part of the game.

It sucks because EWAR was  very much a thing in WW2. 

 

Radar jamming both air born and surface ship was very much a constant tool being used. All ships Destroyers and larger had the ability to jam aircraft and ships while also sporting Chaff rounds vs band type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,547
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
6,270 posts
10,751 battles
1 minute ago, GrandAdmiral_2016 said:

Are you serious?? Fix radar seeing through islands, or remove it completely. Hydro does not see through land, so the mechanic is fixable. Spoofing, jamming and e-warfare  should not be part of the game.

Hydro does see through land, but hydro is not a problem for a couple reasons. 

1. Sound can go around corners. 

2. Hydro is short range. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,032
Members
4,724 posts
8,104 battles
2 minutes ago, GrandAdmiral_2016 said:

Are you serious?? Fix radar seeing through islands, or remove it completely. Hydro does not see through land, so the mechanic is fixable. Spoofing, jamming and e-warfare  should not be part of the game.

Yup.  Solution is so simple. No seeing thru islands. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×