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

DD concealment needs a nerf

95 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

3,610
[WKY19]
Beta Testers
2,353 posts
15,472 battles

Yeah, I know the DD mafia is going to have a hissy fit, but DDs need their concealment nerfed. It's absurd that DDs can get within 6km of a battleship and still not be detected; would have been detected long before that if WG actually gave a damn about historical accuracy (Despite claiming, for example, that the reason DDs are the only ones that will be capable of directly engaging subs due to it being a historical role for them but also giving subs extremely high speeds compared to real life for gameplay purpose).

A DD in such a situation is not going to get spotted without radar or aircraft unless they want to get spotted and most will chose not to reveal themselves if they can avoid it.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 7
  • Boring 23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,320
[MUDDX]
Banned
8,144 posts
23,987 battles

No ship nor feature should ever be nerfed nor buffed once added to the game.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
62
[ALAG]
Members
168 posts
3,096 battles

While you're at it you could also increase BB secondaries range across the board so that DDs can't drop a salvo of torps without eating a bunch of shells even if you're not aiming at them.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Retired WoWS Community Contributors
3,498 posts
14,015 battles

I'll gladly take your historical spotting in exchange for historical main battery hit rates.  Something tells me you really arent interested in having realism in the game, you just want to see something you hate nerfed.

  • Cool 33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,072 posts
2 minutes ago, Destroyer_KuroshioKai said:

I'll gladly take your historical spotting in exchange for historical main battery hit rates.  Something tells me you really arent interested in having realism in the game, you just want to see something you hate nerfed.

Well, you'll have to go to one-shot torps, too, so that will change things...and a zillion other things I've forgotten or I'm too lazy to write out.

Just *too many things* to get rid of to make it actually historical, and a lot of those would be completely un-fun. 

(i.e. I agree with you, @Destroyer_KuroshioKai )

Edited by agm114r
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,366
[RBMK]
Beta Testers
3,806 posts
14,748 battles
22 minutes ago, Zaydin said:

Yeah, I know the DD mafia is going to have a hissy fit, but DDs need their concealment nerfed. It's absurd that DDs can get within 6km of a battleship and still not be detected; would have been detected long before that if WG actually gave a damn about historical accuracy (Despite claiming, for example, that the reason DDs are the only ones that will be capable of directly engaging subs due to it being a historical role for them but also giving subs extremely high speeds compared to real life for gameplay purpose).

A DD in such a situation is not going to get spotted without radar or aircraft unless they want to get spotted and most will chose not to reveal themselves if they can avoid it.

It does not sound like the dd mafia is going to have a hissy fit, but you most certainly seem to be, and besides my Asashio can get to 5.4 km.

Lets reduce BB accuracy if you like, just like historical values say 6 % hit rate.

Please don't use history as a way of trying to be factual, as this game is far from anything historical, other than names and what it looks like, kinda.

Edited by CriMiNaL__
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,739 posts
10,757 battles

To jump on the realism train, I think we should only allow allied ships fight with allied ships and axis ships fight with axis ships. This of course means no Russian ships :Smile_trollface:

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,366
[RBMK]
Beta Testers
3,806 posts
14,748 battles
23 minutes ago, Zaydin said:

A DD in such a situation is not going to get spotted without radar or aircraft unless they want to get spotted and most will chose not to reveal themselves if they can avoid it.

This is what makes a good DD player, especially when you have torps out and purposely fire your guns to make them turn to you, and they eat a whole salvo of torps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,037
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
9,105 posts
16,872 battles

I'll trade for 6-8 respawns per game to emulate the rough ratio of DD:BB :cap_haloween:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
104
[KMS2]
Members
809 posts
43,453 battles
31 minutes ago, Zaydin said:

Yeah, I know the DD mafia is going to have a hissy fit, but DDs need their concealment nerfed. It's absurd that DDs can get within 6km of a battleship and still not be detected; would have been detected long before that if WG actually gave a damn about historical accuracy (Despite claiming, for example, that the reason DDs are the only ones that will be capable of directly engaging subs due to it being a historical role for them but also giving subs extremely high speeds compared to real life for gameplay purpose).

A DD in such a situation is not going to get spotted without radar or aircraft unless they want to get spotted and most will chose not to reveal themselves if they can avoid it.

Then submarines will be un nerfed? And that BBs and cruisers should be stealthier and have better dispersion then DDs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,097
[WORX]
Members
14,296 posts
20,867 battles

In disguise of historical accuracy as to not to anger 1/3 of the community. I demand to have concealment nerf....

*pounders*

Ok for the sake of historical accuracy,

  • BBs shall not have unrealistic AP shell characteristic
  • BBs shall not have cruiser level shell accuracy
  • BBs shall not have accurate  secondaries from over 10km away.

In return for the return to historical terms DD concealment can't be nerfed beyond 6km.. If this is not acceptable exchange then We will conclude your argument is more about nerfing what you dont like.

 

Edited by Navalpride33
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
924
[TSF_1]
Members
3,301 posts
7,816 battles
39 minutes ago, Destroyer_KuroshioKai said:

I'll gladly take your historical spotting in exchange for historical main battery hit rates.  Something tells me you really arent interested in having realism in the game, you just want to see something you hate nerfed.

I'd actually like to try a one-off uber-historical game mode. Only real ships, abysmal accuracy, no torpedo reloads, fire is extremely deadly, tuned down planes and AA, etc. Would be fun to see how the meta would be.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Retired WoWS Community Contributors
3,498 posts
14,015 battles
7 minutes ago, pewpewpew42 said:

I'd actually like to try a one-off uber-historical game mode. Only real ships, abysmal accuracy, no torpedo reloads, fire is extremely deadly, tuned down planes and AA, etc. Would be fun to see how the meta would be.

The end result would be most players would want to be CV since they were the dominant force in a fleet.  DDs were a dime a dozen, and BBs were mostly AA escorts and due to the low MB hit rates not a reliable damage dealer till closer ranges.  In short, the game would be dead since the most popular ship types would have little impact over the game.  The games would be decided by CV strikes and preventing a CV from striking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
249
[PPNA2]
Members
533 posts
7,716 battles
3 minutes ago, 1SneakyDevil said:

Ah threads like this are always good for a chuckle, shocked no one posted the "Where Did the DD Touch You" meme.

Love that one.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,878 posts
11,515 battles
5 minutes ago, Destroyer_KuroshioKai said:

The end result would be most players would want to be CV since they were the dominant force in a fleet.  DDs were a dime a dozen, and BBs were mostly AA escorts and due to the low MB hit rates not a reliable damage dealer till closer ranges.  In short, the game would be dead since the most popular ship types would have little impact over the game.  The games would be decided by CV strikes and preventing a CV from striking.

There is some truth to this. While I find the dd concealment to be on par with a Romulan cloaking device in terms of fantasy I also understand why it exists. However, I think it is healthy from time to time to look over all the classes and ships from time to time to possibly rebalance them. Every time WG puts out a slew of ships or makes a few mechanics changes they tend to relegate some ships to port queens that see no use. I have several like the khab. 

Now sadly I dont think there is a way where you can make every ship overly viable, however, this is where player skill plays a role. The only thing I think needs real adjustment with a dd is torp reload time, not as a whole but on a few specific ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
84
Members
589 posts
2,773 battles
53 minutes ago, Pytheas said:

To jump on the realism train, I think we should only allow allied ships fight with allied ships and axis ships fight with axis ships. This of course means no Russian ships :Smile_trollface:

Actually.  . . .  

But what are we going to do with the Japanese and Italians? 

Italy was an Entente country in ww1. So was Japan. Italy also kind of switched sides in ww2. 

Also Vichy France . . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,187
[WOLF5]
Supertester
5,236 posts
4,354 battles
1 hour ago, Zaydin said:

Yeah, I know the DD mafia is going to have a hissy fit, but DDs need their concealment nerfed. It's absurd that DDs can get within 6km of a battleship and still not be detected; would have been detected long before that if WG actually gave a damn about historical accuracy (Despite claiming, for example, that the reason DDs are the only ones that will be capable of directly engaging subs due to it being a historical role for them but also giving subs extremely high speeds compared to real life for gameplay purpose).

A DD in such a situation is not going to get spotted without radar or aircraft unless they want to get spotted and most will chose not to reveal themselves if they can avoid it.

Oh the DD mafia isn't going to have a hissy fit, you're just going to go for a little drive to talk with them about your idea.

 

You say it's not historically accurate that some DDs have sub 6km concealment and you're right. Let's nerf that to realistic values. About 15km should do. Unless it's a USN warship built after 1942, then it's just perma-spotted because radar. While we're at it, let's give BBs their historical secondaries, those will be completely balanced I'm sure. Oh, better give DDs citadels too. Let's not forget to up the concealment on cruisers too, make that realistic as well. Also, a good percentage of torps are now duds, as are shells. And let's not even start on CVs....

What's that you say? BBs and CVs would be the only ships worth playing now? Huh, just like IRL, but you wanted historically accurate.

 

 

 

 

 

Why is it so hard for people to get that if this game was 100% historically accurate it would be absolute crap.

 

As a BB driver, I think the OP just needs to git gud. Those WASD keys? Try using them more than once a game. Also, that square thing obscuring the bottom right corner of your screen? It's a map. It tells you where the DDs are. Use it (user provided brain required).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,654 posts
1 hour ago, Zaydin said:

Yeah, I know the DD mafia is going to have a hissy fit

I disagree and I'm not part of the 'DD mafia' as you call it. Why are the battleships aficionados always calling for nerfs? You look so bad, that it is  not even funny... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
222
[ASRN]
Beta Testers
843 posts
7,622 battles

Look, you had a bad game, OP.  Step back. Shrug it off.  Have a beer or two. And get on with the next match.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,011
[SALVO]
Members
26,695 posts
32,031 battles
1 hour ago, Pytheas said:

Dam guys, hes got a point.

Only if he has a sharpened pencil.

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,198
[SYN]
Members
5,879 posts
13,316 battles
1 hour ago, Zaydin said:

Yeah, I know the DD mafia is going to have a hissy fit, but DDs need their concealment nerfed. It's absurd that DDs can get within 6km of a battleship and still not be detected; would have been detected long before that if WG actually gave a damn about historical accuracy (Despite claiming, for example, that the reason DDs are the only ones that will be capable of directly engaging subs due to it being a historical role for them but also giving subs extremely high speeds compared to real life for gameplay purpose).

A DD in such a situation is not going to get spotted without radar or aircraft unless they want to get spotted and most will chose not to reveal themselves if they can avoid it.

It'd be nice to check your credibility, since you're calling for a blanket nerf to an entire ship type - a type that is no doubt giving you grief.

But that isn't possible.

 

I wonder why...

 

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×