Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
soko99

Flooding Damage

13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

68
[APOC]
Members
229 posts
7,291 battles

Thank you WG.. I am so glad my flooding damage is so much better now.. 

I mean.. I did a full 8k damage in 3 separate floods and it only took 6 torp hits to even get them!!!  That is just SOO much better than before.  Great job.. keep up the good work!!!

Edited by soko99
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,931
[TBW]
Members
6,956 posts
12,885 battles

One flood does less damage but you can get two floods on a ship now. A single flood is less dangerous now and if you don't get a second flood most ship will have finished the cooldown on the damage control party. I actually think I like it though. BBs may be more likely to let a flood go for a while now, especially if there are a lot of HE slingers around.

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,480
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
9,327 posts
15,768 battles
Just now, Sovereigndawg said:

One flood does less damage but you can get two floods on a ship now.

Which, amazingly, still does less damage. Which is what happens when you nerf something by 75%. If you like it, cool, because most players don't, unless they are playing BBs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,931
[TBW]
Members
6,956 posts
12,885 battles
Just now, Umikami said:

Which, amazingly, still does less damage. Which is what happens when you nerf something by 75%. If you like it, cool, because most players don't, unless they are playing BBs.

I play both DDs and BBs and flooding was a bit ridiculous, they may have over did it but they can always adjust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
10,261 posts
4,594 battles

So.... a whopping 746 from floods. Out of 8 floods. Out of 15 torp hits.

The result of that drunken math is as follows..:

53% of my torp hits resulted in a flood. Each flood resulted in an average of 93.25 damage.

Mind you, this wasn't auto-repair co-op.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
68
[APOC]
Members
229 posts
7,291 battles
15 hours ago, J30_Reinhardt said:

So.... a whopping 746 from floods. Out of 8 floods. Out of 15 torp hits.

The result of that drunken math is as follows..:

53% of my torp hits resulted in a flood. Each flood resulted in an average of 93.25 damage.

Mind you, this wasn't auto-repair co-op.

Super glad they fixed that pesky flooding problem.. I mean look at all that damage my floods racked up.. 

 

shot-19.03.02_17.17.56-0325.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,480
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
9,327 posts
15,768 battles
18 hours ago, Sovereigndawg said:

I play both DDs and BBs and flooding was a bit ridiculous, they may have over did it but they can always adjust.

Sure, what's another three years? Flooding was a bit severe, I'll grant you that, but as usual WoW tweaked it delicately with a sledgehammer. If there were two things I would wish for the Devs for the new year it would be restraint and the usefulness of taking baby steps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
10,261 posts
4,594 battles
4 hours ago, Umikami said:

Sure, what's another three years? Flooding was a bit severe, I'll grant you that, but as usual WoW tweaked it delicately with a sledgehammer. If there were two things I would wish for the Devs for the new year it would be restraint and the usefulness of taking baby steps.

....have you seen how big Russian babies are? Them some large steps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,480
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
9,327 posts
15,768 battles
1 hour ago, J30_Reinhardt said:

....have you seen how big Russian babies are? Them some large steps.

I just wish they wouldn't step on those ships so hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
991
[USCC2]
Members
4,405 posts

IMO flooding was never adjusted due to DDs - DDs have the worst damage and have done so for years now. So it doesn't really seem logical (:Smile_smile:I know WG), to nerf a ship that does not hit with the weapon more than 10% of the time, can have up to half the Alpha damage removed by torpedo armour, and then has to roll RNG to see if it floods. The chance even for a BB driver to make a stupid mistake twice is very low (I know if a set of torps hits me in a BB I wake up anyway - but I have to say getting hit by torps just really doesn't happen! It really doesn't. They are always the lowest damage I sustain in my BB during a battle if I get any damage from them at all) 

The nerf was probably based on the fear WG had that BBs would suffer from CV hits more - but then when they were hitting everyone and the community went nuts we went into the spiral of nerfs that first made the DDs the main target (way to go WG - lowest survival for years remember) and then when even they conceded it was bad - they just nerfed the CV again.

 

This will get a lot of hate from CV players I know, but I wish the planes represented a % of the ships HP. You make the CV powerful, you slow the planes down a little (whether it be the reload or flight time), but make their Alpha strike potent against BBs. Come on, if any ship type can take a little more damage it can be the one that has the best survival, the best damage and the best rewards! Make the CVs what the community wouldn't allow the DD to be - a proper BB counter.

But at the same time it is doing damage - it will be losing planes and taking damage. Therefore you get the CV being as powerful as it should be, but better at engaging the larger target. You make them suffer HP loss as they make others suffer and make them have to think more strategically as the match moves along (and I'm not saying CV drivers don't think, IMO it was the hardest ship to control before the change). :Smile_honoring:

It is a thought, it will not be liked by CVs because of the damage to the CV ship via the damage to the planes. It will not be liked by the BB players because they will have something that can Alpha strike them hard and they won't have the 5 mins notice a normal torp takes once seen to get to them. This in effect is a guided torp. Down votes incoming aside, it will never happen because to make it so we are talking about damaging BBs - the stats reflect WGs stance on that.

Edited by _WaveRider_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
68
[APOC]
Members
229 posts
7,291 battles
7 hours ago, _WaveRider_ said:

IMO flooding was never adjusted due to DDs - DDs have the worst damage and have done so for years now. So it doesn't really seem logical (:Smile_smile:I know WG), to nerf a ship that does not hit with the weapon more than 10% of the time, can have up to half the Alpha damage removed by torpedo armour, and then has to roll RNG to see if it floods. The chance even for a BB driver to make a stupid mistake twice is very low (I know if a set of torps hits me in a BB I wake up anyway - but I have to say getting hit by torps just really doesn't happen! It really doesn't. They are always the lowest damage I sustain in my BB during a battle if I get any damage from them at all) 

The nerf was probably based on the fear WG had that BBs would suffer from CV hits more - but then when they were hitting everyone and the community went nuts we went into the spiral of nerfs that first made the DDs the main target (way to go WG - lowest survival for years remember) and then when even they conceded it was bad - they just nerfed the CV again.

 

This will get a lot of hate from CV players I know, but I wish the planes represented a % of the ships HP. You make the CV powerful, you slow the planes down a little (whether it be the reload or flight time), but make their Alpha strike potent against BBs. Come on, if any ship type can take a little more damage it can be the one that has the best survival, the best damage and the best rewards! Make the CVs what the community wouldn't allow the DD to be - a proper BB counter.

But at the same time it is doing damage - it will be losing planes and taking damage. Therefore you get the CV being as powerful as it should be, but better at engaging the larger target. You make them suffer HP loss as they make others suffer and make them have to think more strategically as the match moves along (and I'm not saying CV drivers don't think, IMO it was the hardest ship to control before the change). :Smile_honoring:

It is a thought, it will not be liked by CVs because of the damage to the CV ship via the damage to the planes. It will not be liked by the BB players because they will have something that can Alpha strike them hard and they won't have the 5 mins notice a normal torp takes once seen to get to them. This in effect is a guided torp. Down votes incoming aside, it will never happen because to make it so we are talking about damaging BBs - the stats reflect WGs stance on that.

Kind of like this idea.. But would need CVs to have at least double the HP and increase the damage dealt by DD AA across the class. (anything without DFAA in a DD is just crapand the only reason a CV doesn't sink you is cause they don't want to waste the time, even after the spotting changes since I fly over you, spot you.  turn around.. start the attack run at your predicted locations and do it enough times I can hit you over and over or at least have you spotted for the rest of the team, which was the case with old CV vs DD play)

 

When I play my BB, I don't often get killed by torps. The only time is when there's still 2-3 enemy DDs left and I am alone on a side of the map fighting something else that is NOT a DD, thus worrying about the ship more so than the enemy torps.  Usually those cases I'm outgunned and the torps are just a quicker way of ending me. I do find it ridiculous at how easy IJN torps are to dodge (unless you get the torp reloads and all tubes fired at you) but that is just ridiculous to need 20+ torps to get 2-3 hits in to be able to sink a ship.  Meanwhile I ususally make the poor DD suffer as even AP still will [edited] em up bad to taking off at least 1/2 the life if not more.

 

I have not experienced much CV play, was on the receiving end in a mushashi, where a lexington just danced all over me as my AA was crap, watched the same lexi obliterate a Missouri as well. Not bad for a CV with -1 tier going up against a competent AA BB.  On the other hand, since the change I only have the Ranger and I find her to be useless against anything and everything. I mean torp hits into a BB will net me 2-3k damage per hit. While I only drop 2 at most (and even close range drop means maybe 1 will hit). That is if I am lucky enough to get into a game with lower or same tier BBs and not a higher tier BB because then I'm decimated during the attack run anyways.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22
[1NJS]
Members
79 posts
5,418 battles
On 3/2/2019 at 10:54 AM, Sovereigndawg said:

I play both DDs and BBs and flooding was a bit ridiculous, they may have over did it but they can always adjust.

in about 3 or 4 years maybe

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.

×