Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Tpaktop2_1

Yamato - Spotting airplane consumable, broken?

7 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

393
[TFK]
[TFK]
Alpha Tester
1,186 posts
14,407 battles

I noticed something of late with the spotting planes

Quote

 

Spotting aircraft 1

Action time 100s

Reload time 342s

Number of consumables 8

 

 

Quote

 

Spotting Aircraft 2

Action time 100s

Reload time 228s

Number of consumables 9

 

 

If spotting planes were launched all the time in the random battle match

Quote

 

Spotting uses

Spotting Aircraft  1   = 4x

Spotting Aircraft 2   = 5x

 

 

So what happens with the extra four planes not used in the match? This seems kinda wasteful in management. Shouldn't the reload times need to be lower to use up all the inventory? These numbers don't add up to me. 

So are the other 4 planes wasted for no reason. Can anyone explain why WG is supporting this setup in spotting plane usage?

 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,616
[HINON]
Supertester
20,188 posts
13,643 battles

Simple, Yamato historically carried that many planes. The Japanese weren't concerned with carrying less planes just because someone 80 years in the future thought it was a waste he couldn't use them all in a single match in an online game.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,462
[PNG]
Supertester, Beta Testers
5,777 posts
6,830 battles

Old ships used to have actual hangars for aircraft as well. Yamato having 9 aircraft made it possible to launch 4 full flights of double aircraft even with losses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
393
[TFK]
[TFK]
Alpha Tester
1,186 posts
14,407 battles
2 hours ago, Lert said:

Simple, Yamato historically carried that many planes. The Japanese weren't concerned with carrying less planes just because someone 80 years in the future thought it was a waste he couldn't use them all in a single match in an online game.

So as an arcade game should we be concern on the historical or what is practical in game play? To me the historical can take a hike. Just make the numbers of spotting planes what we can use in a match. It will keep threads like these low. People then won't expect more than what is published.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24,616
[HINON]
Supertester
20,188 posts
13,643 battles
3 minutes ago, Tpaktop2_1 said:

So as an arcade game should we be concern on the historical or what is practical in game play?

Not being able to flood the match with constant planes up is what's practical, from a gameplay balance perspective.

Honestly, if having more planes than you can use is what gets you upset enough to start a complaint thread, you might need to work on your priorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
393
[TFK]
[TFK]
Alpha Tester
1,186 posts
14,407 battles
2 hours ago, Lert said:

Not being able to flood the match with constant planes up is what's practical, from a gameplay balance perspective.

Honestly, if having more planes than you can use is what gets you upset enough to start a complaint thread, you might need to work on your priorities.

This is not a complaint thread. It's a discussion in questioning if something is labeled wrong. Your position is for continuing the error. Mine is just label what can be played in the game. The plane cooldowns stay the same BTW. It's just a difference of opinion here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,702 posts
4,322 battles
14 hours ago, Lert said:

Not being able to flood the match with constant planes up is what's practical, from a gameplay balance perspective.

Honestly, if having more planes than you can use is what gets you upset enough to start a complaint thread, you might need to work on your priorities.

I wouldn't mind an adjustment to allow near constant spotter plane coverage. Might even be a nice premium ship gimmick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×