Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
frontflip2cool

Possible Solution to the Worcester, Kitakaze, and Harugumo

107 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

9
[-AH-]
Members
38 posts
3,131 battles

So I know several of you players out there are tired of the horrible and annoying AF ships called the Worcester, Kitakaze, and Harugumo.

And here is a possible solution to those ships that would also make the game more interesting for high RoF ships of all types. How about introducing cool down timer for the guns of high RoF ships. So how it works is if they keep firing their guns repeatedly for an extended period a warning pops up saying to stop shooting because they are heating up too much and if a player ignores it and continues to fire that the gun(s) completed get knocked out due to the barrels basically melting down. Also you can't use your damage control party to make the cool down faster was also discussed among me and several others in the Offical Unoffical WG NA Discord.

Let me know your thoughts on this and if you think it should be implemented. And before you going to look at my WoWs profile I will say this right now flat out that I don't own the Worcester, Kitakaze, or Harugumo. So those that say I have no right to suggest such thing because I don't own the ships can just leave this post and go somewhere else.

Thanks and happy sailing

Edited by frontflip2cool
Forgot to add one thing.
  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 23
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
170
[TARFU]
Members
879 posts
5,915 battles

That'd be nice, but you'd probably have to boost the HE alpha a little bit... or fire chance. Those ships aren't as easy as it seems to play. They can be deleted extremely quickly.... You just need to prevent them from having your a** for breakfast. Sometimes you just can't though... Like near the end of a losing game when they come out from the woodwork and farm you incessantly because they don't have anything to fear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
411
[2CUTE]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,259 posts
3,852 battles

I like the idea myself. Heavens knows after repeated firing on their main battery, the paint was known to melt off the barrels on Fletcher class DDs. Then you would need a consumable to allow for a long period of rapid firing followed by a time when reload is doubled but consistent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,155
[PVE]
Members
9,556 posts
7,456 battles
4 minutes ago, Belyy_Klyk said:

So why wouldn’t you do this with all ships? 

:Smile_great:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
87
[-THOR]
Members
583 posts
3,228 battles
Just now, Satsuki_DD said:

I have a better solution.  It involves shooting back at them :)...

yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,722
[TBW]
Members
6,398 posts
12,011 battles
6 minutes ago, Satsuki_DD said:

I have a better solution.  It involves shooting back at them :)...

and teamwork, They don't shoot so much, when they are spotted. Ask your DDs or CVs for help. Then don't neglect to shoot them.

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9
[-AH-]
Members
38 posts
3,131 battles
8 minutes ago, Sledgehammer427 said:

I like the idea myself. Heavens knows after repeated firing on their main battery, the paint was known to melt off the barrels on Fletcher class DDs. Then you would need a consumable to allow for a long period of rapid firing followed by a time when reload is doubled but consistent.

 

8 minutes ago, Belyy_Klyk said:

So why wouldn’t you do this with all ships? 

The Worcester class of light cruisers in real life during WW2 actually had the risk of their main gun barrels melting if they shot them continually for a long enough time and adding this to the game would  add another level of depth and something new to master that isn't a tech tree of ships.

  • Bad 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
843
[SBS]
Members
2,461 posts
2,253 battles

I understand the frustration.  The thing is these ships didn't accidentally slip through testing as super HE spammer.  It was by design.  WG has been forced to address the BB overpopulation, and this is one of the ways they are doing it.  Burn down the BBs and get them back in the queue as fast as possible, ideally in another ships type with less HP for shorter matches.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9
[-AH-]
Members
38 posts
3,131 battles
3 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

I understand the frustration.  The thing is these ships didn't accidentally slip through testing as super HE spammer.  It was by design.  WG has been forced to address the BB overpopulation, and this is one of the ways they are doing it.  Burn down the BBs and get them back in the queue as fast as possible, ideally in another ships type with less HP for shorter matches.

I get where you are coming from but the huge amount of battleships in the game over everything else is their own doing with the introduction of the Royal Navy and Fench battleships in the same year. So even though they think those ships are helping the game they are more hurting it if anything. Reason they hurt the game is that everyone sees them in the opposing team and make the game a sniper fest of who can hit who the hardest at MAXIMUM range because no one wants to push caps or anything like that. Introducing the mechanic I have suggested is one way to restore some balance and make games more fun and engaging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,155
[PVE]
Members
9,556 posts
7,456 battles
5 minutes ago, frontflip2cool said:

I get where you are coming from but the huge amount of battleships in the game over everything else is their own doing with the introduction of the Royal Navy and Fench battleships in the same year. So even though they think those ships are helping the game they are more hurting it if anything. Reason they hurt the game is that everyone sees them in the opposing team and make the game a sniper fest of who can hit who the hardest at MAXIMUM range because no one wants to push caps or anything like that. Introducing the mechanic I have suggested is one way to restore some balance and make games more fun and engaging.

I'm not everyone when I play PvP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9
[-AH-]
Members
38 posts
3,131 battles
1 minute ago, Kizarvexis said:

I'm not everyone when I play PvP.

I was just making an overall general consensus based off of my own games. So if you do your own thing and it works good for you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
160
[AWP]
Members
782 posts
3,007 battles
14 minutes ago, frontflip2cool said:

 

The Worcester class of light cruisers in real life during WW2 actually had the risk of their main gun barrels melting if they shot them continually for a long enough time and adding this to the game would  add another level of depth and something new to master that isn't a tech tree of ships.

So because one ship’s main armaments had “x” happen in real life they should have “x” happen in game? That argument doesn’t work. If you are going to penalize high rate of fire ships in game with rate of fire, all should be. If they want to alter damage saturation, fire chance, alpha, go for it. But forcing a cooldown only on certain ships is just a bad idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,195
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,579 posts
8,995 battles
23 minutes ago, Satsuki_DD said:

I have a better solution.  It involves shooting back at them :)...

An excellent suggestion but when they are sitting behind a rock and are not detected that is often impossible because the rock will eat the shells that would hit if they were detected.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,155
[PVE]
Members
9,556 posts
7,456 battles
1 minute ago, frontflip2cool said:

I was just making an overall general consensus based off of my own games. So if you do your own thing and it works good for you

Just be careful saying that everyone does this or that. Or the player base likes this or that. There is a wide diversity in the game and player base which is what is great about this game.

 

1 minute ago, Belyy_Klyk said:

So because one ship’s main armaments had “x” happen in real life they should have “x” happen in game? That argument doesn’t work. If you are going to penalize high rate of fire ships in game with rate of fire, all should be. If they want to alter damage saturation, fire chance, alpha, go for it. But forcing a cooldown only on certain ships is just a bad idea.

:Smile_great::Smile_honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
843
[SBS]
Members
2,461 posts
2,253 battles
Just now, frontflip2cool said:

I get where you are coming from but the huge amount of battleships in the game over everything else is their own doing with the introduction of the Royal Navy and Fench battleships in the same year. So even though they think those ships are helping the game they are more hurting it if anything. Reason they hurt the game is that everyone sees them in the opposing team and make the game a sniper fest of who can hit who the hardest at MAXIMUM range because no one wants to push caps or anything like that. Introducing the mechanic I have suggested is one way to restore some balance and make games more fun and engaging.

They give with one hand "Royal Navy and French battleships in the same year" and then they take with the other "Worcester, Kitakaze, and Harugumo".  

WG has tried everything they can think of to get players to be more aggressive.  Stealthy BBs and cruisers, nerfing smoke, removing OWSF, radar, hydro you name it, they've tried it.  Their solution is to make every ship new more and more lethal to end matches faster.  What do you think HE spam, IFHE, radar, AP bombs, torpedo reload booster, and now the new main battery reload booster, are about?  Answer, to get you back into the queue faster.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
411
[2CUTE]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,259 posts
3,852 battles
3 minutes ago, Belyy_Klyk said:

So because one ship’s main armaments had “x” happen in real life they should have “x” happen in game? That argument doesn’t work. If you are going to penalize high rate of fire ships in game with rate of fire, all should be. If they want to alter damage saturation, fire chance, alpha, go for it. But forcing a cooldown only on certain ships is just a bad idea.

much like Torpedo Reload Booster? or Main Battery Reload booster coming to a Baguette near you? Or (almost) all DDs and the french getting a speed boost? 
Now, I agree, this is an arcade game, why does it need to be historical in certain ways? But, top tiers are getting flooded with DPM monsters and honestly, its becoming harder to find the will to play 8-10 anymore. A change may be required, and I'm all ears for suggestions. 

(What always got me, as an aside, is why, when Minotaur was testing, did WG decide to remove HE from the cruisers, because Mino was a terror and a firebug, then go ahead and not long after release Worcester, which has HE and is even worse of a firebug and a terror, sans smoke and torpedoes?)

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
764
[ARS]
Beta Testers
2,236 posts
1,820 battles
30 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

I understand the frustration.  The thing is these ships didn't accidentally slip through testing as super HE spammer.  It was by design.  WG has been forced to address the BB overpopulation, and this is one of the ways they are doing it.  Burn down the BBs and get them back in the queue as fast as possible, ideally in another ships type with less HP for shorter matches.

What BB overpopulation?  I keep hearing about it, but other than when a new BB line launches, BBs are about tied for first.  This game is currently dominated by BBs and DDs.  The problem is cruiser underpopulation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
873
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,442 posts
8,088 battles

Anyone saying you have no right to an opinion or suggest things cause you don't on a ship is a fool, as you simply represent the other side of the coin - the person who has to face it. However, owning the ship makes a huge difference in being able to see why it is the way it is, and make better suggestions and get why things are that way or find that in truth hey are situational. Seen a good number of people just on the CV end who ranted about CV's and all and changes they thought should happen, then when they tried the class went "I take it all back". 

 

Doesn't matter what game it is, high RoF is always hard to balance. The biggest issue here is summed up in 4 letters - IFHE. If one of these is melting ships without it that aren't DD's, I'm impressed. I have the tier 8 IJN gunboat DD and I know what kind of monster that ship is. Only thing that has kept my average damage low on that is the cruiser mobility getting me hit with torps early in the match. Lost track of the 60, 70, 80k games I've had just with the guns. The issue is there is no defense against HE and IFHE that can go through armour other than to not be there. Combined with fires on BB's and CV's that never had their HP loss adjusted for the increased consistent damage, it's just a nightmare because at best, you can heal back 16.8% of HP for most ships, assuming you have one, and a single fire is between 10.4 and 18% HP on a BB, worse for a CV, and only half of the auto pen damage can be healed back. When your throwing 200 rounds every minute, at 400 damage (unless saturated), that adds up quick, specifically, 80000 damage. 1/3rd of that assuming that is the best the ship can hit and pen with is still over 26000 damage, and at best you can heal back 13k of it. Albeit that'd require 2 heals, unless you have UK "zombie mode" heals. And that's without starting a fire.

 

All his was setup and balanced when high RoF ships had to either use AP on weak spots/superstructure or use HE on the superstructure and hope for fires there, or on areas that weren't thin enough for HE to pen. I can already sense the neg votes coming - but at some point I think we have to re-examine the concept that ships with 152 mm and lower guns can't pen certain levels of armour with HE rounds. It's one thing if they are broadside eating 200 AP rounds every minute that are penning, it's another when your talking bow on and every HE round that hits pretty much auto pens regardless of angle. Or maybe IFHE needs a real drawback that while maybe it's a better angle than AP, there is still a certain angle where the shell bounces. but as someone that owns ships like Akizuki and Atlanta, this is a bit insane what they can do. 

 

In the meantime, throw HE back- they tend to be weak against it.

Edited by WanderingGhost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
358
[CUTER]
[CUTER]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,619 posts
8,871 battles
13 minutes ago, Sledgehammer427 said:

much like Torpedo Reload Booster? or Main Battery Reload booster coming to a Baguette near you? Or (almost) all DDs and the french getting a speed boost? 
Now, I agree, this is an arcade game, why does it need to be historical in certain ways? But, top tiers are getting flooded with DPM monsters and honestly, its becoming harder to find the will to play 8-10 anymore. A change may be required, and I'm all ears for suggestions. 

(What always got me, as an aside, is why, when Minotaur was testing, did WG decide to remove HE from the cruisers, because Mino was a terror and a firebug, then go ahead and not long after release Worcester, which has HE and is even worse of a firebug and a terror, sans smoke and torpedoes?)

Yes but the RNCL line had smoke that made the HE spam hard to deal with the USN CL line dosnt have its own smoke.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
160
[AWP]
Members
782 posts
3,007 battles
16 minutes ago, Sledgehammer427 said:

much like Torpedo Reload Booster? or Main Battery Reload booster coming to a Baguette near you? Or (almost) all DDs and the french getting a speed boost? 
Now, I agree, this is an arcade game, why does it need to be historical in certain ways? But, top tiers are getting flooded with DPM monsters and honestly, its becoming harder to find the will to play 8-10 anymore. A change may be required, and I'm all ears for suggestions. 

(What always got me, as an aside, is why, when Minotaur was testing, did WG decide to remove HE from the cruisers, because Mino was a terror and a firebug, then go ahead and not long after release Worcester, which has HE and is even worse of a firebug and a terror, sans smoke and torpedoes?)

So you’re saying that since some ships get a boost that it will justify giving some ships a cooldown? So a consumable is comparable to saying “hey you fired too many shells, you must wait to fire more.” That is a horrible approach to any kind of justification.

Having a ship with that good of stealth AND smoke so HE would be overpowered.

Edited by Belyy_Klyk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,311 posts
501 battles
57 minutes ago, HorrorRoach said:

That'd be nice, but you'd probably have to boost the HE alpha a little bit... or fire chance. Those ships aren't as easy as it seems to play. They can be deleted extremely quickly.... You just need to prevent them from having your a** for breakfast. Sometimes you just can't though... Like near the end of a losing game when they come out from the woodwork and farm you incessantly because they don't have anything to fear.

wait BOOST the fire chance of a WORCESTER???

O0fR6Nn.gif

Edited by neptunes_wrath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
634
[WOLF1]
[WOLF1]
Members
2,827 posts
1,327 battles
44 minutes ago, frontflip2cool said:

The Worcester class of light cruisers in real life during WW2 actually had the risk of their main gun barrels melting if they shot them continually for a long enough time and adding this to the game would  add another level of depth and something new to master that isn't a tech tree of ships.

Actually, the Worcester class never saw WWII, since it was launched in 1947, and first saw service in June 1948.

She did see service off Inchon, and on from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
402
[WOLF5]
Members
1,536 posts
2,123 battles

If you add rapid fire guns overheating, then you have to add the first few salvos from BBs behaving differently because of cold barrels. This would reduce early deletion of other ships, a improvement for cruisers.:Smile_hiding:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×