Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Bianchi4Me

“...only accurate rifles are interesting.”

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
180 posts
2,725 battles

Colonel Townsend Whelen was a hunter, firearms expert, cartridge developer, and author.  Also responsible for a frequently used and frequently over-used quote: "...only accurate rifles are interesting" that you'll see popping up over and over again in firearms literature.  Personally, I find a lot of guns interesting that aren't great shakes for accuracy, but what I have trouble dealing with are warships that are essentially random shell generators.

Nothing makes me drop a ship quicker than lining up a nice broadside shot on somebody that just came out from behind an island 7 km away, and having 2 shots go over, 2 shots go under, 2 shots splash forward of the target and two shots splash aft.  Obviously, early tier BBs are the worst offenders here. Maybe the whole idea is to make you frustrated that you out-planned and out-positioned the enemy and still came up with zip, nada, nothing to show for it, so that you will quickly buy your way into the next tiers.  Net result for me was to just avoid researching other BB lines and focus on other types.  Just curious if other folks are frustrated by the extremely random nature of accuracy in these ships, or is it just part of the nostalgic charm of the dreadnought era?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
300 posts
1,625 battles

Maybe wargaming could introduce a "Guaranteed True Shell" mechanic whereby a battleship will always have one shell go exactly to aim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,721
[_-_]
Members
1,636 posts
16 minutes ago, Bianchi4Me said:

Colonel Townsend Whelen was a hunter, firearms expert, cartridge developer, and author.  Also responsible for a frequently used and frequently over-used quote: "...only accurate rifles are interesting" that you'll see popping up over and over again in firearms literature.  Personally, I find a lot of guns interesting that aren't great shakes for accuracy, but what I have trouble dealing with are warships that are essentially random shell generators.

Nothing makes me drop a ship quicker than lining up a nice broadside shot on somebody that just came out from behind an island 7 km away, and having 2 shots go over, 2 shots go under, 2 shots splash forward of the target and two shots splash aft.  Obviously, early tier BBs are the worst offenders here. Maybe the whole idea is to make you frustrated that you out-planned and out-positioned the enemy and still came up with zip, nada, nothing to show for it, so that you will quickly buy your way into the next tiers.  Net result for me was to just avoid researching other BB lines and focus on other types.  Just curious if other folks are frustrated by the extremely random nature of accuracy in these ships, or is it just part of the nostalgic charm of the dreadnought era?  

Seeing as how this is an arcade shooter and not an accurate simulation,  the hit rates for all guns are artificially high. Be grateful for that. :Smile_Default:

Also, you seem to be experiencing your first Epiphany with our resident deity, RNGsus. Even Russian cruiser "rail guns" are subject to the whims of computer dice rolls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,455
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
6,100 posts
10,331 battles

Someone has clearly never fired a 20 gauge sawed-off.

People see me bleeding from my fingernails, but they still line up to shoot it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,283
Alpha Tester
5,644 posts
2,706 battles
54 minutes ago, Meeso_Thorny said:

Maybe wargaming could introduce a "Guaranteed True Shell" mechanic whereby a battleship will always have one shell go exactly to aim.

Just so long as you don't have to pay for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,175 posts
14,736 battles

 

While it's true that dispersion is a fickle thing.....how many times have you fired at a target 20k away, had one shell hit it and get a Citadel? it almost feels dirty.:cap_wander:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,676
[OO7]
Members
2,229 posts
10,069 battles

Still trying to work out the mental math that the OP seems to have worked out to perfection where he thinks a rifle and guns on a battleship, floating on a liquid footing no less, are supposed to share similar accuracy at wildly different ranges.

Why am I not able to solve this problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,502 posts
10 battles
2 hours ago, Bianchi4Me said:

Colonel Townsend Whelen was a hunter, firearms expert, cartridge developer, and author.  Also responsible for a frequently used and frequently over-used quote: "...only accurate rifles are interesting" that you'll see popping up over and over again in firearms literature.  Personally, I find a lot of guns interesting that aren't great shakes for accuracy, but what I have trouble dealing with are warships that are essentially random shell generators.

Nothing makes me drop a ship quicker than lining up a nice broadside shot on somebody that just came out from behind an island 7 km away, and having 2 shots go over, 2 shots go under, 2 shots splash forward of the target and two shots splash aft.  Obviously, early tier BBs are the worst offenders here. Maybe the whole idea is to make you frustrated that you out-planned and out-positioned the enemy and still came up with zip, nada, nothing to show for it, so that you will quickly buy your way into the next tiers.  Net result for me was to just avoid researching other BB lines and focus on other types.  Just curious if other folks are frustrated by the extremely random nature of accuracy in these ships, or is it just part of the nostalgic charm of the dreadnought era?  

What you describes is exactly how it happened in real life. There were so many factors that could effect individual guns accuracy. If one barrel is slightly more worn than its neighbor than accuracy is going to suffer. If the powder in one gun is a couple of degrees cooler than the other accuracy is going to suffer. There is a reason the broadside position was the preferred position. Fire as many guns as you can and hope one shell hits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
307
[-S-R-]
Beta Testers
531 posts
3,115 battles

The issue is I think more one of the meta than accuracy per se.  Brawling ships just aren't able to use their strengths in most battles right now.  The low cal HE spam in the last few updates has become even worse, meaning that you'll often just get burned down for trying.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
180 posts
2,725 battles
51 minutes ago, VGLance said:

Still trying to work out the mental math that the OP seems to have worked out to perfection where he thinks a rifle and guns on a battleship, floating on a liquid footing no less, are supposed to share similar accuracy at wildly different ranges.

Why am I not able to solve this problem?

Well, first off, I never stated that I expected BB artillery to behave like firing a small arm, or anything, vaguely, remotely like that?  So please go on fabricating imaginary statements and then arguing with yourself about them, if that entertains you.

38 minutes ago, UssIowaSailor said:

What you describes is exactly how it happened in real life. There were so many factors that could effect individual guns accuracy. If one barrel is slightly more worn than its neighbor than accuracy is going to suffer. If the powder in one gun is a couple of degrees cooler than the other accuracy is going to suffer. There is a reason the broadside position was the preferred position. Fire as many guns as you can and hope one shell hits.

 

The "realism" argument fails spectacularly here, because the dispersion applied to low-tier BBs versus smaller ships is the exact opposite of what you'd see in the real world.  You really think a BB going 20 knots in a straight line, using director firing and spotting, is somehow more affected by it's"liquid" environment than a WWI DD gunner standing on an open deck firing over iron sights with the ship heeled over in the middle of a screaming 40+ knot turn?  Shell velocities on the US 12" gun used on South Carolina are basically the same compared to the 4"-5" guns used on DDs of that era, the South Carolina has much better fire direction and spotting capabilities, and is a MUCH more stable gun platform in any kind of heavy weather... yet even when WASDing like a madman I can get first-shot hits much more consistently in a CA/DD than I can in "Sloth" Carolina.  There IS a reason South Carolina's shells spray out randomly to the point that I can just ignore them, sail my DD up to handshake distance, and then toss the torps directly onto her deck as I go, but it's not due to "realism". It's because Wargaming is playing rock, paper, scissors, with the ship types and creating unrealistic vulnerabilities to diversify the ships types.  Which is totally their right since it's their game, but it's also my right as a customer to express my frustration with how they've gone about it.. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×