Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
ALROCHA

About the slingshot exploit

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
671 posts
2,548 battles

Why not make it so planes are only invulnerable if their payload hits near a target? The potential damage is calculated by payload dropping nearby, so why not code it so if a potential damage is going to be generated, the planes get the invulnerability?

 

It's kinda easy to see if the payload will generate potential damage because if there is a target 200m around the reticle, they're almost 100% sure to receive potential damage from those planes.

 

It fixes the slingshotting into mobs and keeps the invulnerability while moving away from the target.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
370
[XXX]
Members
595 posts
1,991 battles

With consideration to how busted AA is in it's immense damage output, and how one sided it can get against most planes, specifically IJN, I would prefer the slingshot be kept until AA is actually balanced.

 

However, Slingshot is not a exploit, as it uses a system designed to stop AA destroying every last plane in a squadron before the player even regains control of the squadron. This is due to the crappy inclusion of a damage per second, which is highly unfair to the CV player.  AA interaction, for both sides, needs to be fixed.  But this o menu thing isn't the solution. However, I don't think the Moderators are relaying anything, and the proof is in the pudding. None of the sensible topics and posts are considered. Someone a month ago posted a solution to make AA more interactive by allowing damage to be for flak alone, but having specific kill zones on the sides of a ship where 100 percent of flak is at work, while having off angles where it's safer for a cv to attack from to avoid most flak.   Personally, I like it, as it would cause CV to want to use these off angles, while surface ships, even DD, would be working to put the planes in these kill zones.  

 

Of course, this is assuming the Devs even hear us.  I have a lot of reason right now to believe they don't. Not due to being russian and probably not speaking our language, but simply because what we say is not fostered up the chain of communication.  CV interaction against each other is terrible, forcing a damage race.  AA interaction is so reliant on over time damage that AA is incredibly overpowered at tier 10, and it only gets worse for a cv tiered down.  Conversely, a bottom tier ship has a tough time with fighting off a bomber attack.  This Sector mode has GOT to go. It does not work.  Instead, reward both Cv and Surface ship for turning their ship to maximize their AA, or exploiting attack angles to minimize AA.  Counterplay based off positioning to maximize or minimize AA exposure is a hell of a lot better then this sector system.

  • Cool 7
  • Meh 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
671 posts
2,548 battles
1 minute ago, Formous said:

However, Slingshot is not a exploit, as it uses a system designed to stop AA destroying every last plane in a squadron before the player even regains control of the squadron.

Just make it so constant damage still procs while flak doesn't then...the planes are still flying in the AA zone, you can't dodge flak, sure, give protection, but you wouldn't be dodging constant damage anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
370
[XXX]
Members
595 posts
1,991 battles
Just now, ALROCHA said:

Just make it so constant damage still procs while flak doesn't then...the planes are still flying in the AA zone, you can't dodge flak, sure, give protection, but you wouldn't be dodging constant damage anyway.

Constant damage is the problem from the get go.  Unavoidable damage able to stack so fast planes die just a half second after entering range. You can't even turn around and get away without losing 5 ijn craft from the Hak.  This is a problem in my eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,997
[WKY19]
Beta Testers
2,616 posts
18,586 battles

Pretty sure WG has said it's intention is to give carriers a way to try and get at least one strike on a target. Doing a slingshot drop means you are giving up two thirds or 3/4 of a squads striking power to make one run and then bolt back to the carrier, which can take time.

Though of course, if something benefits a carrier somehow, it's automatically classified as broken or an exploit.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
671 posts
2,548 battles
36 minutes ago, Zaydin said:

Pretty sure WG has said it's intention is to give carriers a way to try and get at least one strike on a target. Doing a slingshot drop means you are giving up two thirds or 3/4 of a squads striking power to make one run and then bolt back to the carrier, which can take time.

Though of course, if something benefits a carrier somehow, it's automatically classified as broken or an exploit.

I'm pretty sure this is there with you launching more planes and having them all tank the constant damage, not sacrificing strike power.

 

The point for the "invulnerability period" isn't to actually protect the planes, but the target, during test runs DBs could make a drop, turn and make a second drop without leaving the short range AA, and besides some few ships, all short range AA is pretty much ****, that are also very vulnerable to HE fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7,086 posts

"Please, Wargaming, preserve my cheat at least in partiality. I'm pretty sure I've determined a way that I can still milk this design, provided you don't do what is actually necessary and eliminate it in its entirety."

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
370
[XXX]
Members
595 posts
1,991 battles
12 minutes ago, ALROCHA said:

I'm pretty sure this is there with you launching more planes and having them all tank the constant damage, not sacrificing strike power.

 

The point for the "invulnerability period" isn't to actually protect the planes, but the target, during test runs DBs could make a drop, turn and make a second drop without leaving the short range AA, and besides some few ships, all short range AA is pretty much ****, that are also very vulnerable to HE fire.

It may shock you that attacking a ship usually results in the total loss of the entire attack wave, as well as most of the remaining wave. Thats cash and money, for some..5-8k damage?  Strikes are terrible, the damage suffered is bad, and plane recovery is most of the time non-existent, save for perhaps the RN CV, but they lack any real ability to fight armor sometimes. RN is okay, but it skirts the edge a lot on usability.  US is..okay.  What people seem to be fighting against is giving CV any real quarter.  Infinite planes is hogwash, and every plane lost really adds up that maintenance bill, More so then any other class.  A single BB shell getting a citadel will outdamage any one attack wave. Unless a Hak got lucky or used slingshot and landed a ap citadel pen. Take away slingshot, and IJn carriers will likely "Never" hit a target again, given how infuriatingly weak their craft are.  All carriers have gotten are nerfs, and for some reason, we can't get in a word edgewise without the next zealot ranting about one lie or another, such as the infinite plane thing.  It's as if so many of them never saw what a carrier could do beforehand. I wasn't the worst CV rts player, not the best, but I could make the average crybaby on the forums really have something to whine about under the old system.  Guiding in bombers is not the easiest task, and planes just randomly exploding too, sometimes before even passing the first flak cloud, makes you question just how overpowered AA can really be. Is it weak on some ships? Sure.  I consider t6 and t7 aa the most balanced, but t10 is magnitudes worse, and planes are usually barely improved between each of the two tiers.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,344 posts
3,206 battles
2 hours ago, ALROCHA said:

Why not make it so planes are only invulnerable if their payload hits near a target? The potential damage is calculated by payload dropping nearby, so why not code it so if a potential damage is going to be generated, the planes get the invulnerability?

 

It's kinda easy to see if the payload will generate potential damage because if there is a target 200m around the reticle, they're almost 100% sure to receive potential damage from those planes.

 

It fixes the slingshotting into mobs and keeps the invulnerability while moving away from the target.

WG is aware of slingshot drops, and already released a statement saying they're fine with it, and it's a quirk of intentional design. The downsides and difficulty are a fair trade for the reward of getting a single, rushed, drop though.

 

If you're playing against a CV and see them starting a drop 8-10 km away, begin taking evasive actions. It takes several seconds for the plane to do their initial drop, fly to you, then do their actual drop on you. You'll be significantly rotated and / translated by the time they get to you, and they'll have no time or space to adjust their drop. If they try to flee, your AA will shred them. Due to the nature of how AA damage is applied, the less planes in a squad the quicker they get shot down. A single attack flight will crumple quickly against even modest AA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
370
[XXX]
Members
595 posts
1,991 battles
1 minute ago, Frenotx said:

A single attack flight will crumple quickly against even modest AA.

True, and this is fine. But when you consider how the attack squadron becomes a entity after the drop, you start to see the problem with AA again. At least for the attacking flight.  They get shot down because AA damage does not split when against multiple targets.  It's a flat same number, which is funny how all the guns practically end up cloning.  They still haven't released the promised F fix for attack flights.  

 

As stated by WG, the F fix made it so that if you pressed F, planes had to hit max altitude to get immunity. However, this affected attack drops too, causing them to unjustly fly the exact height, resulting in total loss regardless of their HP at the time of the drop.  When the change to give them back a  lower height ceiling come, who knows.  Plane retrieval is poor at best in high tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,324
[MUDDX]
Banned
8,144 posts
25,356 battles

@ALROCHA the bottom line is that both the CV rework attack and targets AA defense processes are so screwed that no adjustments or fix is going to satisfy everyone.

Seeing so many complaints from both CV and non CV players is evidence enough that the rework has screwed both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
671 posts
2,548 battles
11 minutes ago, CAPTMUDDXX said:

@ALROCHA the bottom line is that both the CV rework attack and targets AA defense processes are so screwed that no adjustments or fix is going to satisfy everyone.

Seeing so many complaints from both CV and non CV players is evidence enough that the rework has screwed both.

I believe that it isn't like that, reason being that CVs are dealing the same if not lower damage than BBs while awards in the game clearly states that CVs are supposed to deal more damage than BBs.

 

The thing with AA is; it's basically HE rounds where flak are AP hitting the citadel, you don't get Citadel all the time, but when you do it's crippling, 1 flak cloud is enough to destroy an attack run, even before dropping the payload.

 

The thing though is using slingshot as exploit to advance through AA, anyone can see that this is a stupid mechanic, yes you're reducing your payload to do a strike, but at the same time you're just ignoring 4~5km worth of AA that was supposed to protect a ship against planes, slingshot exploit can easily make a trade that would've killed 6 planes for 1 drop become a trade of 3 planes for the same drop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,999
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
13,205 posts
4 hours ago, ALROCHA said:

Why not make it so planes are only invulnerable if their payload hits near a target? The potential damage is calculated by payload dropping nearby, so why not code it so if a potential damage is going to be generated, the planes get the invulnerability?

 

It's kinda easy to see if the payload will generate potential damage because if there is a target 200m around the reticle, they're almost 100% sure to receive potential damage from those planes.

 

It fixes the slingshotting into mobs and keeps the invulnerability while moving away from the target.

You play carriers at all? Cause I'm gonna tell you targets WITHIN the reticle let alone 200m will quite often be totally unharmed. This from the RN carpet bombers too. I've even seen rockets miss a ship completely. 

Second, it's not an "exploit". It is exactly the way they designed it... you know, the planes you leave behind in the flight continue flying in a straight line. They are NOT part of the attack group. 

If it helps you understand better, imagine the flight is initially flying at altitudes out of range of the AA(A). The attack flight "peels off and into the attack". The remaining planes slam their throttles to the wall and continue flying in the original flight's direction. 

It is working exactly as designed. So in response to your suggestion, I'd say no, nope and nyet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,067 posts
2,554 battles
15 minutes ago, ALROCHA said:

The thing though is using slingshot as exploit to advance through AA, anyone can see that this is a stupid mechanic, yes you're reducing your payload to do a strike, but at the same time you're just ignoring 4~5km worth of AA that was supposed to protect a ship against planes, slingshot exploit can easily make a trade that would've killed 6 planes for 1 drop become a trade of 3 planes for the same drop.

Then make a post to the WG devs, they basically said they're fine with this for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
671 posts
2,548 battles
9 minutes ago, Hurlbut said:

Then make a post to the WG devs, they basically said they're fine with this for now.

Keyword = for now

And yeah, I know they're fine with it and instead of trying to find a middle ground to players that like and don't like it they'll just go through the route: It's too much work to fix it.

10 minutes ago, Herr_Reitz said:

You play carriers at all? Cause I'm gonna tell you targets WITHIN the reticle let alone 200m will quite often be totally unharmed.

Potential damage isn't the same as damage.

Potential damage applies for every source of damage that barely missed your ships, BBs with 2m potential damage didn't "Take" 2m damage, but managed to avoid or block it.

Basically, if a plane's payload generates potential damage, the invulnerability triggers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,398
[BGA]
[BGA]
Alpha Tester
3,988 posts
31,968 battles

With the way AA works the sling shot is actually stupid to use. The continuous damage is guaranteed and the few number of planes the more likely it is that AA will target the same plane twice. Plus you sacrifice another run for the gain of not taking damage you might not take anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,344 posts
3,206 battles
6 hours ago, Formous said:

True, and this is fine. But when you consider how the attack squadron becomes a entity after the drop, you start to see the problem with AA again. At least for the attacking flight.  They get shot down because AA damage does not split when against multiple targets.  It's a flat same number, which is funny how all the guns practically end up cloning.  They still haven't released the promised F fix for attack flights.  

 

As stated by WG, the F fix made it so that if you pressed F, planes had to hit max altitude to get immunity. However, this affected attack drops too, causing them to unjustly fly the exact height, resulting in total loss regardless of their HP at the time of the drop.  When the change to give them back a  lower height ceiling come, who knows.  Plane retrieval is poor at best in high tier.

Preaching to the choir, with me. I'd prefer AA to always target the weakest plane (rather than being randomly distributed) such that the CV loses more planes on the front end, but then have flights that have dropped their bombs (and thus aren't under player control anymore) reach immunity hight extremely quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,763
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Banned
16,985 posts

All AA damage should just be a continuous aura.

Each attack run on an enemy ship should cause significant damage to the aircraft and run a real risk of losing aircraft -- it should be a tradeoff, not something that cannot be avoided with exploits and tricks. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
271
[B_Y_F]
Members
841 posts
18,800 battles

One quick problem I can think about this is what should happen if CV's targets get blamed right before the drop...... This happened a lot in DD and cruiser because people usually give up everything just try to doge planes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×