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

Determining forward / reverse with torpedo tubes- gun equivalent?

14 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

724
[0456]
[0456]
Members
2,809 posts
7,992 battles

I'm gradually putting on some big boy pants and moving away from some common yet vigorously contested mods- specifically navigator (angle on bow) and whatever the one is that shows whether a target is going forward, standing still or backwards (red light green light?) 

Anyway I know that ships equipped with torpedo tubes don't benefit from the  mods at all since you can just quickly switch to torpedoes to get a sense of which direction a target is going... even more accurately than red / green. 

But for ships that don't have torpedoes... shouldn't they get an equivalent indication? From head on smoke is an impossible indicator and at a distance bow waves / wakes is negligible.

And this isn't just a BB buff thing since there are BBs that have torpedo tubes... but also from the perspective of CA / CLs that don't  have torpedoes. 

Opinion only but I do think that people with guns only should have an indicator. Not an aimpoint but at least an equivalent to the information of forward, reverse, stationary available to those with torpedoes. I say this knowing, of course, there's a mod for this and maybe I'll just keep using it- but they recently added the "aim point" on the map and maybe there's some justification to consider this as well.  

Thoughts? 

Edited by _ENO_
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KWA]
Members
118 posts
7,874 battles

The main indicator I use is the smoke funnel and putting myself in their shoes to predict what they are going to do by the time my shells hit.. As long as fires aren't hiding the smoke stack it is fairly reliable on most targets. I run the game on vanilla, minus enabling replays primarily so that I dont get used to using mods and being hampered when I dont have them. Just my thoughts.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45
[PLPT]
Members
147 posts
8,437 battles

The navigator mod is a cheat, in my opinion, as was the map indicator mod before it, again my opinion.

I'm very much against dumbing down the game.

  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
216
[4HIM]
Beta Testers
1,012 posts
9,200 battles

Target is head on and you can't tell direction?  Shoot a salvo at bow (aim at it)....hit target, then he's moving forward or stopped.   Over and he's really moving forward fast.  Short then he's backing.   Its really NOT that hard!!  I agree with post above...dumbing down the game will result in only dumb people playing...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
469
[QNA]
[QNA]
Members
1,838 posts
5,881 battles

The scope already already follows targets. Having it have a grey line like torpedoes is  just aim assist and that is what I consider cheating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
159
[AWP]
Members
780 posts
2,955 battles

Bow on, look at the distance to the ship... by knowing the ship speed, your speed, and the distance you can make a reasonable guess as to direction and speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,214
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
21,196 posts
3,871 battles
30 minutes ago, Zairinzan said:

The navigator mod is a cheat, in my opinion, as was the map indicator mod before it, again my opinion.

I'm very much against dumbing down the game.

I'd like to know how giving the player more information to make informed decisions with is "dumbing down" the game.

 

And I'd like to know how presenting information the game already gives you, just in a different way, is unfair.

 

And I'd like to know how a mod that the developers themselves said they liked and are adding to the game (or have already added to the game) is a cheat.

 

Then again I'm getting the impression you think using torpedoes or fires or other mechanics that are part of the game is also cheating.

44 minutes ago, _ENO_ said:

I'm gradually putting on some big boy pants and moving away from some common yet vigorously contested mods- specifically navigator (angle on bow) and whatever the one is that shows whether a target is going forward, standing still or backwards (red light green light?) 

Anyway I know that ships equipped with torpedo tubes don't benefit from the  mods at all since you can just quickly switch to torpedoes to get a sense of which direction a target is going... even more accurately than red / green. 

But for ships that don't have torpedoes... shouldn't they get an equivalent indication? From head on smoke is an impossible indicator and at a distance bow waves / wakes is negligible.

And this isn't just a BB buff thing since there are BBs that have torpedo tubes... but also from the perspective of CA / CLs that don't  have torpedoes. 

Opinion only but I do think that people with guns only should have an indicator. Not an aimpoint but at least an equivalent to the information of forward, reverse, stationary available to those with torpedoes. I say this knowing, of course, there's a mod for this and maybe I'll just keep using it- but they recently added the "aim point" on the map and maybe there's some justification to consider this as well.  

Thoughts? 

The usual method is to look at funnel smoke, which doesn't always render due to a long-standing graphical bug especially at longer ranges.

 

There's a mod called Running Lights that uses the simple Red/Green indicators to denote Forward or Reverse, and this is not a "cheat", it's a workaround for a known glitch and also WG-dev endorsed.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
270
[HCH]
Beta Testers
858 posts
7,176 battles

Funnel smoke is a dead horse at this point.

My tricks of determining forward/backward movement:

  • Use any and all landmarks such as islands, sinking ships, cap circle buoys, etc... to determine the direction and speed.
  • Sometimes, you can see the wake of the ship, easy indicator. If the target is head on, a wake can help determine direction. If you can see the wake trailing away from the ship while head on, he's going backwards. If all you see is the water splashing from his bow and very little of the wake, he's heading to you.
  • If the target is under fire from allies, use the shells, shell and bomb splashes, and even torpedo trails as you would the land marks mentioned in the first point.
  • If you have the time/don't have a direct line of sight, you can use the mini-map. Just watch the target's icon on the map, and compare it's position to your own icon's position. This method takes some time for info to become apparent as it takes large travel distances for appreciable changes to be visible on the mini map.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45
[PLPT]
Members
147 posts
8,437 battles
40 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

I'd like to know how giving the player more information to make informed decisions with is "dumbing down" the game.

 

And I'd like to know how presenting information the game already gives you, just in a different way, is unfair.

 

And I'd like to know how a mod that the developers themselves said they liked and are adding to the game (or have already added to the game) is a cheat.

 

Then again I'm getting the impression you think using torpedoes or fires or other mechanics that are part of the game is also cheating.

The usual method is to look at funnel smoke, which doesn't always render due to a long-standing graphical bug especially at longer ranges.

 

There's a mod called Running Lights that uses the simple Red/Green indicators to denote Forward or Reverse, and this is not a "cheat", it's a workaround for a known glitch and also WG-dev endorsed.

I clearly denoted that they were cheats, in my opinion only. I'm well aware that Wargaming allows them to be used.

You posted in a public forum asking for the public's thoughts. I gave you mine. If that's difficult for you to handle, don't ask. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
724
[0456]
[0456]
Members
2,809 posts
7,992 battles
1 hour ago, Zairinzan said:

You posted in a public forum asking for the public's thoughts. I gave you mine. If that's difficult for you to handle, don't ask. 

Pretty sure I was the one who was asking for the public's thoughts. How about you go ahead and pull in some of that attitude. 

2 hours ago, Morpheous said:

Target is head on and you can't tell direction?  Shoot a salvo at bow (aim at it)....hit target, then he's moving forward or stopped.   Over and he's really moving forward fast.  Short then he's backing.   Its really NOT that hard!!  I agree with post above...dumbing down the game will result in only dumb people playing...

And when the cycle time from aiming, shooting, shell flight time, splash is 10-15 seconds a lot can happen. Meanwhile if I have torpedoes I can do it in a split second and stand a better chance of hitting on the first shot.

2 hours ago, Vangm94 said:

The scope already already follows targets. Having it have a grey line like torpedoes is  just aim assist and that is what I consider cheating.

Not looking for an aim point or "line"- just a more practical reference. If you're aiming at a target the wrong way then following it with your scope automatically is putting you no further ahead. 

 

Edited by _ENO_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,015
[ABDA]
Beta Testers
16,019 posts
11,539 battles
3 hours ago, Zairinzan said:

I clearly denoted that they were cheats, in my opinion only. I'm well aware that Wargaming allows them to be used.

You posted in a public forum asking for the public's thoughts. I gave you mine. If that's difficult for you to handle, don't ask. 

I don't think the word cheat means what you think it means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
270
[HCH]
Beta Testers
858 posts
7,176 battles
5 hours ago, Zairinzan said:

The navigator mod is a cheat, in my opinion, as was the map indicator mod before it, again my opinion.

I'm very much against dumbing down the game.

If anything, the Navigator Mod actually makes the game more complex, due to how it is a prerequisite for one to know auto-bounce mechanics to use it properly. If you put some brand new player with this mod, he'd have no idea how to put the mod to use, thus would perform no better than his equally green peers.

Now, by the definition, it can be viewed as a cheat, but one should also consider how it is accessible to every player in existence, completely free of charge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45
[PLPT]
Members
147 posts
8,437 battles

I lable them "cheats", because at one time, these were mods. You aren't using them dishonestly of course, as you say, they are included in the mod pack approved by Wargaming.

Most of the newer players are likely ignorant to their existence however, available or not. In that regard, it is an unfair advantage. I just prefer the vanilla game as it evens the playing field.

Both mods make the game easier, not more complex. You can easily estimate autobounce.

To Eno, I'm not sure you're comprehending. YOU made a post asking the  "thoughts" of the community regarding your idea.

I responded that I oppose your idea. I'm attacking your idea, not you, or anyone else directly. You are not cheaters. 

I just view these two mods as dumbing down the game. 

My opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
724
[0456]
[0456]
Members
2,809 posts
7,992 battles
15 hours ago, Zairinzan said:

To Eno, I'm not sure you're comprehending. YOU made a post asking the  "thoughts" of the community regarding your idea.

I responded that I oppose your idea. I'm attacking your idea, not you, or anyone else directly. 

I just view these two mods as dumbing down the game. 

My opinion. 

You were literally responding to someone else dude- you quoted someone else. I hadn't even responded yet. 

Anyway, I digress. 

Edited by _ENO_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×