Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Redwing6

The Mikasa's 2ndaries...

31 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

334
[ERN]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
1,019 posts
1,419 battles

A while ago, I'd heard that WG was going to make the Mikasa's secondaries more usable. Has there been any other news on that front?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,502
[HINON]
Supertester
18,943 posts
12,460 battles

Where did you hear that? Because WG never announced such a thing to my knowledge.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
211
[VIKES]
[VIKES]
Members
540 posts
11,869 battles

Not sure that buff is needed.  The Mikasa's secondaries are JUST as good as the Imperator Nikolai's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
334
[ERN]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
1,019 posts
1,419 battles
1 hour ago, Lert said:

Where did you hear that? Because WG never announced such a thing to my knowledge.

on a live stream...in a discussion of whether they were going to make secondaries able to be aimed like main batteries. I might well have misunderstood as my Russian is not particularly good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,502
[HINON]
Supertester
18,943 posts
12,460 battles
2 minutes ago, Redwing6 said:

on a live stream...in a discussion of whether they were going to make secondaries able to be aimed like main batteries.

Do you remember how it was phrased? Like, "We're definitely going to buff Mikasa's secondaries" or more like "Eh, we might look at them if needed, maybe"? The first is a promise, the second is an off-hand remark that promises nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
334
[ERN]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
1,019 posts
1,419 battles
2 minutes ago, Lert said:

Do you remember how it was phrased? Like, "We're definitely going to buff Mikasa's secondaries" or more like "Eh, we might look at them if needed, maybe"? The first is a promise, the second is an off-hand remark that promises nothing.

More likely the 2nd. They were talking about how difficult it would be to implement aimable 2ndaries, and someone asked if they were going to "buff Mikasa's to make them more effective, like they were at Tsushima".  The Tsushima comment set off one of the developers, he was pretty angry. it was right after they introduced the Mikasa and people weren't happy with it on the RU server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,502
[HINON]
Supertester
18,943 posts
12,460 battles
1 minute ago, Redwing6 said:

More likely the 2nd. They were talking about how difficult it would be to implement aimable 2ndaries, and someone asked if they were going to "buff Mikasa's to make them more effective, like they were at Tsushima". 

Not really an announcement or promise, then - more like a remark to end a discussion and move on to the next subject.

Mind you, I would love Mikasa's secondaries to be buffed, but I'm not holding out much hope. WG has shown to care more about high tier balance and premiums than low tier, and Mikasa is a 'failed experiment' of sorts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
334
[ERN]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
1,019 posts
1,419 battles
2 minutes ago, Lert said:

Not really an announcement or promise, then - more like a remark to end a discussion and move on to the next subject.

Mind you, I would love Mikasa's secondaries to be buffed, but I'm not holding out much hope. WG has shown to care more about high tier balance and premiums than low tier, and Mikasa is a 'failed experiment' of sorts.

I agree. I had hoped that something might come from that discussion, but...it's been a while and I don't follow the development of this game as much as I did  during Alpha/Beta/Early release, hence my post above. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,196
[GWG]
[GWG]
Members
5,335 posts
9,424 battles

This would be nice, especially on ships like the Iowa or Baltimore.  1=HE, 2=AP, 3=Torps, 4=Secondaries.

That would make mince-meat out of any destroyers that get too close.

Edited by AVR_Project

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,502
[HINON]
Supertester
18,943 posts
12,460 battles
Just now, AVR_Project said:

That would make mince-meat out of any destroyers that get too close.

Which is why they won't want to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,041
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,169 posts
8,785 battles
1 hour ago, nagasakee said:

Not sure that buff is needed.  The Mikasa's secondaries are JUST as good as the Imperator Nikolai's.

The Nikolai nor any other BB does not live and die by their secondaries, they can still be useful to their team even when they do not get into secondary range.

 

7 minutes ago, Lert said:

Which is why they won't want to do it.

The problem now is only the co-op bots are stupid enough to close to Mikasa secondary range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
211
[VIKES]
[VIKES]
Members
540 posts
11,869 battles
24 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The Nikolai nor any other BB does not live and die by their secondaries, they can still be useful to their team even when they do not get into secondary range.

 

The problem now is only the co-op bots are stupid enough to close to Mikasa secondary range.

My first post was meant as a joke :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,041
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,169 posts
8,785 battles
12 minutes ago, nagasakee said:

My first post was meant as a joke :)

:Smile_facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,883 posts
1,365 battles

Id love secondaries buffed across the board.  Keep Germans the longest range, most accurate and hardest hitting, but the other lines and tiers, bump secondary range across the board atleast 1km base range at all tiers, on every ship, and a moderate boost in base acc.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
507
[WOLFD]
[WOLFD]
Beta Testers
4,950 posts
1,487 battles
3 hours ago, Lert said:

Where did you hear that? Because WG never announced such a thing to my knowledge.

 

They've in fact come out and said the exact opposite recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
322
[TF_34]
[TF_34]
Members
936 posts
6,351 battles

They really do need about 1km more range. You've got to get to point blank for them to be effective, and anyone with a brain knows to simply turn tail and outrun you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
599
[RKLES]
[RKLES]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,325 posts
11,458 battles
1 hour ago, Lert said:

Which is why they won't want to do it.

Already a feature from day 1 in WOWS Blitz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,502
[HINON]
Supertester
18,943 posts
12,460 battles
2 minutes ago, dEsTurbed1 said:

Already a feature from day 1 in WOWS Blitz.

And ....... Your point being? Different game, different balance, different goals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,585
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,298 battles

Here's a suggestion, though it'd probably be more pertinent for low tier, pre-dreadnoughts and armored cruisers.  On those P-DN's and AC's, they usually had 2 different sizes of main guns.  The largest ones were in the fore and aft turrets, like on the Mikasa.  And the next largest ones were either in single mounts or in wing turrets.  And then there were often smaller guns that were their true secondaries.  

What I would suggest is treating the "smaller sized main guns" not as secondaries but as "secondary main guns" or SMGs. They wouldn't be fired at the same time as the largest main guns, but could be linked to another key, like torpedoes are tied to the '3' key on ships mounting torps.  For argument's sake, let's assume that all of these P-DNs and ACs that mounted these SMGs did not mount torpedoes.  SO, then link these guns to the '3' key.  And have them always track the aim of your true main guns, so that if you switch from main guns to the SMGs, they'd already (probably) be on target.  But if you chose to change targets for them, you could.  And you'd aim and fire these SMGs same as normal main guns.   What ammo would they use?  It could go a couple different ways.  One, always assume HE (pretty self explanatory).  Or two, they have the same ammo type loaded as the real main guns.  This might get tricky if you're in the middle of an ammo type change/reload of the main guns, since it might cause your SMG's to reload when you wanted to use them most.  Also, given that at these very low tiers, HE was a more commonly used shell in that era (I think, could be wrong), always assuming HE could be a simpler option for the players and the programmers.

This idea would give those early pre-dreadnoughts and armored cruisers a way to make use of their very large "secondary guns" without having them be denigrated to near useless secondary status.  At the same time, their true small caliber secondaries would remain as secondaries.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,041
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,169 posts
8,785 battles
2 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Here's a suggestion, though it'd probably be more pertinent for low tier, pre-dreadnoughts and armored cruisers.  On those P-DN's and AC's, they usually had 2 different sizes of main guns.  The largest ones were in the fore and aft turrets, like on the Mikasa.  And the next largest ones were either in single mounts or in wing turrets.  And then there were often smaller guns that were their true secondaries.  

What I would suggest is treating the "smaller sized main guns" not as secondaries but as "secondary main guns" or SMGs. They wouldn't be fired at the same time as the largest main guns, but could be linked to another key, like torpedoes are tied to the '3' key on ships mounting torps.  For argument's sake, let's assume that all of these P-DNs and ACs that mounted these SMGs did not mount torpedoes.  SO, then link these guns to the '3' key.  And have them always track the aim of your true main guns, so that if you switch from main guns to the SMGs, they'd already (probably) be on target.  But if you chose to change targets for them, you could.  And you'd aim and fire these SMGs same as normal main guns.   What ammo would they use?  It could go a couple different ways.  One, always assume HE (pretty self explanatory).  Or two, they have the same ammo type loaded as the real main guns.  This might get tricky if you're in the middle of an ammo type change/reload of the main guns, since it might cause your SMG's to reload when you wanted to use them most.  Also, given that at these very low tiers, HE was a more commonly used shell in that era (I think, could be wrong), always assuming HE could be a simpler option for the players and the programmers.

This idea would give those early pre-dreadnoughts and armored cruisers a way to make use of their very large "secondary guns" without having them be denigrated to near useless secondary status.  At the same time, their true small caliber secondaries would remain as secondaries.

 

Even on those that did have two main caliber guns they relied heavily on their secondaries for firepower so to make these really interesting pre-Dreadnought era ships playable they really need to have a secondary range that they can use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,585
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,298 battles
Just now, BrushWolf said:

Even on those that did have two main caliber guns they relied heavily on their secondaries for firepower so to make these really interesting pre-Dreadnought era ships playable they really need to have a secondary range that they can use.

Well, at least for the "secondary main guns", it should go without saying that they'd need a full gun range,  rather than a nerfed range cuz, ya know, secondaries.  For example, if the true main guns were 12" with a range of 12 km, and the ship mounted 9" SMG's, those SMG's should probably have a range around 9-10 km.  Not outstanding, but certainly better than the lame "ya know, secondaries" secondary range.

And if these P-DNs and ACs got full use of their mains and SMGs, I wouldn't feel so bad about the real secondaries having "normal" (for WoWS) secondary range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,041
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
15,169 posts
8,785 battles
1 minute ago, Crucis said:

Well, at least for the "secondary main guns", it should go without saying that they'd need a full gun range,  rather than a nerfed range cuz, ya know, secondaries.  For example, if the true main guns were 12" with a range of 12 km, and the ship mounted 9" SMG's, those SMG's should probably have a range around 9-10 km.  Not outstanding, but certainly better than the lame "ya know, secondaries" secondary range.

And if these P-DNs and ACs got full use of their mains and SMGs, I wouldn't feel so bad about the real secondaries having "normal" (for WoWS) secondary range.

Oh, I agree 100% on those being smaller but still main guns being under the players control. I would just automatically add them into any shot within their range with nothing for the player to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,585
[SALVO]
Members
16,618 posts
17,298 battles
40 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Oh, I agree 100% on those being smaller but still main guns being under the players control. I would just automatically add them into any shot within their range with nothing for the player to do.

That could be done too, but I think that players might like the ability to control them separately, so that, for argument's sake, if there was a target in range of the 12" guns but not of the 9" guns, while there were other targets in range of both, the player might choose to engage the enemy at slightly longer range with his 12" guns while engaging a closer target with his 9" guns.

I'm not sure which would require more programming, since as you describe it, I can see both situations requiring some degree of new programming.  I just kind of like the idea of putting the "secondary main guns" in the "3 key" torpedo slot for use solution, since it lets you use the SMG's as a second set of main guns, just with slightly less range and damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
322
[TF_34]
[TF_34]
Members
936 posts
6,351 battles
59 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

Oh, I agree 100% on those being smaller but still main guns being under the players control. I would just automatically add them into any shot within their range with nothing for the player to do.

With a ship like Mikasa the secondaries could be placed on the "3" button like torpedoes. While the main battery is reloading you hit 3 and can manually fire the secondary armament. Of course at that tier I believe doing so would make Mikasa wicked OP, as most players wouldn't bother firing her god awful primary guns at all. I swear a smoothbore cannon is more accurate than those main guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×