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

WG making things unnecessarily complicated for new players.

74 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

7,129
Members
6,860 posts
15,357 battles

IFHE changes are coming next patch. So you know the one size fits all HE pen calculation that worked decently well for everything?? Gun caliber divided by 6 determines pen? (except for some German and British lines, Bayard and ijn 100mm guns) 

Now your gun will pen differently based on its tier, not necessarily its caliber. A 6 in gun at t5 will now pen differently than a 6 in gun at T10. This is would be the equivalent of saying that a 16in BB gun which can overmatch 28mm at T10 should only be able to over match 24mm at T6. It's stupid. It's complicated. It's confusing to new players. Instead of all shell penetration being the same formula, now it changes as you move up the tiers. 

This is the same company that said that their player base was too stupid to be able to use their own cv consumables so WG automated those. This is the same company that said new dd players were too awful to consider balancing dd vs cv interaction. This is the company that wouldn't even publish the pen values for your ship in the game for the longest time.

So which is it WG? Do your players have to be mathematicians with expert memories or are they stupid mindless drones? 

I understand ifhe needed balanced and I am unsure how that couldn't be done by making fire chance nerf multiplicative instead of additive. Instead they want to make the game more difficult for newer players to understand, but I guess that's par for the course, not like they've ever made tutorials for their game to help new players. 

Sufferin garbage WG... 

Edited by Ducky_shot
  • Cool 32
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,657
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
15,739 posts
5 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

IFHE changes are coming next patch. So you know the one size fits all HE pen calculation that worked decently well for everything?? Gun caliber divided by 6 determines pen? (except for some German and British lines, Bayard and ijn 100mm guns) 

Now your gun will pen differently based on its tier, not necessarily its caliber. A 6 in gun at t5 will now pen differently than a 6 in gun at T10. This is would be the equivalent of saying that a 16in BB gun which can overmatch 28mm at T10 should only be able to over match 24mm at T6. It's stupid. It's complicated. It's confusing to new players. Instead of all shell penetration being the same formula, now it changes as you move up the tiers. 

This is the same company that said that their player base was too stupid to be able to use their own cv consumables so WG automated those. This is the same company that said new dd players were too awful to consider balancing dd vs cv interaction. This is the company that wouldn't even publish the pen values for your ship in the game for the longest time.

So which is it WG? Do your players have to be mathematicians with expert memories or are they stupid mindless drones? 

I understand ifhe needed balanced and I am unsure how that couldn't be done by making fire chance nerf multiplicative instead of additive. Instead they want to make the game more difficult for newer players to understand, but I guess that's par for the course, not like they've ever made tutorials for their game to help new players. 

Sufferin garbage WG... 

The entire IFHE / HE / armor change is just another huge mistake, and another sign that this game's time is coming to an end.

Once the developers of a game start making random changes to different units to balance OTHER units, the downward spiral has started. 

(Is there a dev-thread or announce-thread stating these changes are coming next patch, where we can focus our objections?)

 

Edited by KilljoyCutter
  • Cool 4
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts
12 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

Sufferin garbage WG... 

whether or not it's working fine, Wargaming will decide to repair it, and make it worse. Examples from the last couple of years :

Spotting? dev response "Players are too stupid to understand that when a ship sails behind an island, it can't be seen, so we'll make islands transparant"

CVs? dev response "Players are too stupid to multitask , so we'll give them the same battle efficiency for less effort."

Damage over time? dev response "Players find managing floods too complicated, so we'll make them less common, and less dangerous - to battleships"

IFHE? dev response "Hold my beer"

 

edit : this is going to make being bottom tier in MM, more difficult too. And so increase noise level of whining on the forum.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,763
[SALVO]
Members
2,026 posts
6,200 battles
18 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

IFHE changes are coming next patch. So you know the one size fits all HE pen calculation that worked decently well for everything?? Gun caliber divided by 6 determines pen? (except for some German and British lines, Bayard and ijn 100mm guns) 

Now your gun will pen differently based on its tier, not necessarily its caliber. A 6 in gun at t5 will now pen differently than a 6 in gun at T10. This is would be the equivalent of saying that a 16in BB gun which can overmatch 28mm at T10 should only be able to over match 24mm at T6. It's stupid. It's complicated. It's confusing to new players. Instead of all shell penetration being the same formula, now it changes as you move up the tiers. 

This is the same company that said that their player base was too stupid to be able to use their own cv consumables so WG automated those. This is the same company that said new dd players were too awful to consider balancing dd vs cv interaction. This is the company that wouldn't even publish the pen values for your ship in the game for the longest time.

So which is it WG? Do your players have to be mathematicians with expert memories or are they stupid mindless drones? 

I understand ifhe needed balanced and I am unsure how that couldn't be done by making fire chance nerf multiplicative instead of additive. Instead they want to make the game more difficult for newer players to understand, but I guess that's par for the course, not like they've ever made tutorials for their game to help new players. 

Sufferin garbage WG... 

Add the Radar normalization from last year. Where bunch of ranges were consolidated because it was "too hard" to remember the previous ranges. 

 

 Personally I like it in general when the game gets more complicated.    However you are right,  in this case it is rather annoying  to get changes rammed through the game with the express purpose of making things easier for new players to understand .  Then this logic of making things simpler gets completely forgotten about right away.  

 

Same thing goes for the nerfing of ships.   Some ships get nerfed by sledge hammers.  Others get nerfed with jewelers hammers.  Also this happens interchangeably where they will announce a new approach to "balancing" where its slow and progressive,  then a couple  of patches later a ship will randomly get hit hard. 

 

TL:DR      WG loves to set policies then forget about them conveniently here and there.  

Edited by eviltane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,349
Members
1,605 posts
25,141 battles

Frustration levels with this game are proportional to the amount of $$ invested.

Change the pen levels, sure.... that's been the big problem, then, of course, change the model on the Shchors to include gun sights on the end of the AA guns so more russian players will finally log on.... that'll do it.

WG.... arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Edited by theLaalaa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,129
Members
6,860 posts
15,357 battles
14 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

The entire IFHE / HE / armor change is just another huge mistake, and another sign that this game's time is coming to an end.

Once the developers of a game start making random changes to different units to balance OTHER units, the downward spiral has started. 

(Is there a dev-thread or announce-thread stating these changes are coming next patch, where we can focus our objections?)

 

Now imagine the balancing nightmare that is about to ensue... 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,657
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
15,739 posts
2 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

Now imagine the balancing nightmare that is about to ensue... 

I am imagining it, that's why I've been vocally opposed to the impending debacle of HE pen and ship armor changes.

The IFHE changes are actually the least troublesome part of this, it's the near-randomization of HE pen across the lineup of ships, and the ill-advised armor changes, that should have all WOWS players worried for where the game is heading. 

WGHQ is making a GIANT mistake, and as always, they refuse to listen to the warnings. 

Edited by KilljoyCutter
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,459
[WOLFG]
Members
29,134 posts
8,345 battles
22 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

It's stupid. It's complicated. It's confusing to new players. Instead of all shell penetration being the same formula, now it changes as you move up the tiers. 

Just to clarify, your guns get different pen depending on what tier your ship is? IOW, if I have a T7, it pens the same amount, whether the target is T5 or T9?

If that's the case, I don't think it's as bad as it sounds. It's not really confusing, just tedious, as you have more values to remember. And I assume the correct value will be shown in port.

If your pen is dependent on the target's tier, then yeah, that's just ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,284
[PVE]
Members
4,277 posts
18,686 battles
12 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

The entire IFHE / HE / armor change is just another huge mistake, and another sign that this game's time is coming to an end.

Once the developers of a game start making random changes to different units to balance OTHER units, the downward spiral has started. 

(Is there a dev-thread or announce-thread stating these changes are coming next patch, where we can focus our objections?)

Actually, you are very much correct....!  Mature MMO's that realized that they can't maintain the scale and quality necessary to provide large profits, let a lone expand that scale of quality, always resort to Arcade level FFA's.....  To do that, game corporations have to "shorten engagement ranges and eliminate accuracy" beyond brawling ranges....  Then, they will tinker with the "model's the vehicles are designed around" to make them more vulnerable.  Then, they usually add mobility nerf's to the most agile of the vehicles and slow all vehicles down and then, move the spawn point to "just outside of the lessor effective ranges".........and, then, they call it a day: mission accomplished.  Then, let the gimmick and op/meta sales begin !!!!  You now have a small map, time compressed Free-for-All, young adult oriented, arcade level First-Person-Cooperative-Shooter... 

As you said:  "balance" is a key word that actually translates into "de evolution" of content to speed the games up and drawing their scope inward.......  Because, as I have said before, throughput = profit....  Quality isn't a metric because all of the players whom stayed because of quality are easily replaced with players whom "simply don't care" and just want a simple shooter where they can feel "better about their time spent"...... 

Look to history if you doubt this.  Look at Mechwarrior Online and read their forums about the Skill Tree Change (our Cruiser Line Split).  The falling apart of Faction Play (Randoms and clan battles).  The nerfing to introduce a single player mode (because the MMO part simply wasn't maintainable because of scope and costs) Solaris (Blitz)......  Then, the single player new game:  Mechwarrior 5......   A great MMO into a single player story line in less than what, 6 years or so ! 

Oh yes, history is the only test of game assumptions and look at games you know that have followed the same path this game is on.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,129
Members
6,860 posts
15,357 battles
8 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

Just to clarify, your guns get different pen depending on what tier your ship is? IOW, if I have a T7, it pens the same amount, whether the target is T5 or T9?

If that's the case, I don't think it's as bad as it sounds. It's not really confusing, just tedious, as you have more values to remember. And I assume the correct value will be shown in port.

If your pen is dependent on the target's tier, then yeah, that's just ridiculous.

Your pen calculation changes by tier. One tier might pen at 1/6 and then the tier above it by 1/5

The problem WG has is that their BB guns and armor scale by tier and most light cruisers and heavy cruisers get to their biggest guns around t5 and t6 while bbs keep getting bigger guns. So they are trying to artificially put a difference in as you go up the tiers. 

Edited by Ducky_shot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,657
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
15,739 posts
6 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

Just to clarify, your guns get different pen depending on what tier your ship is? IOW, if I have a T7, it pens the same amount, whether the target is T5 or T9?

If that's the case, I don't think it's as bad as it sounds. It's not really confusing, just tedious, as you have more values to remember. And I assume the correct value will be shown in port.

If your pen is dependent on the target's tier, then yeah, that's just ridiculous.

First, there's no real pattern to what's getting what HE pen ratio, it's entirely ship-specific based on "balance" and not the actual guns or nations.

Second, changes are being made to the armor on various ships, both increases and decreases. 

What's really going on is that the pen on HE is being turned into a giant mess to "balance" the armor on OTHER ships, and the armor on ships is being turned into a giant mess to "balance" the pen of HE and AP on OTHER ships.  

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,394
[WOLFG]
Members
9,634 posts
8,629 battles
7 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

Just to clarify, your guns get different pen depending on what tier your ship is? IOW, if I have a T7, it pens the same amount, whether the target is T5 or T9?

If that's the case, I don't think it's as bad as it sounds. It's not really confusing, just tedious, as you have more values to remember. And I assume the correct value will be shown in port.

If your pen is dependent on the target's tier, then yeah, that's just ridiculous.

Actually, it kind of does, because they are also changing armor thickness, based on tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,394
[WOLFG]
Members
9,634 posts
8,629 battles
28 minutes ago, LoveBote said:

whether or not it's working fine, Wargaming will decide to repair it, and make it worse. Examples from the last couple of years :

Spotting? dev response "Players are too stupid to understand that when a ship sails behind an island, it can't be seen, so we'll make islands transparant"

CVs? dev response "Players are too stupid to multitask , so we'll give them the same battle efficiency for less effort."

Damage over time? dev response "Players find managing floods too complicated, so we'll make them less common, and less dangerous - to battleships"

IFHE? dev response "Hold my beer"

 

edit : this is going to make being bottom tier in MM, more difficult too. And so increase noise level of whining on the forum.

Well, YOU did say the forum was getting bored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
447
[CUTER]
Members
224 posts
1,675 battles
21 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

Now imagine the balancing nightmare that is about to ensue... 

#imagine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,657
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
15,739 posts
6 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

Actually, you are very much correct....!  Mature MMO's that realized that they can't maintain the scale and quality necessary to provide large profits, let a lone expand that scale of quality, always resort to Arcade level FFA's.....  To do that, game corporations have to "shorten engagement ranges and eliminate accuracy" beyond brawling ranges....  Then, they will tinker with the "model's the vehicles are designed around" to make them more vulnerable.  Then, they usually add mobility nerf's to the most agile of the vehicles and slow all vehicles down and then, move the spawn point to "just outside of the lessor effective ranges".........and, then, they call it a day: mission accomplished.  Then, let the gimmick and op/meta sales begin !!!!  You now have a small map, time compressed Free-for-All, young adult oriented, arcade level First-Person-Cooperative-Shooter... 

As you said:  "balance" is a key word that actually translates into "de evolution" of content to speed the games up and drawing their scope inward.......  Because, as I have said before, throughput = profit....  Quality isn't a metric because all of the players whom stayed because of quality are easily replaced with players whom "simply don't care" and just want a simple shooter where they can feel "better about their time spent"...... 

Look to history if you doubt this.  Look at Mechwarrior Online and read their forums about the Skill Tree Change (our Cruiser Line Split).  The falling apart of Faction Play (Randoms and clan battles).  The nerfing to introduce a single player mode (because the MMO part simply wasn't maintainable because of scope and costs) Solaris (Blitz)......  Then, the single player new game:  Mechwarrior 5......   A great MMO into a single player story line in less than what, 6 years or so ! 

Oh yes, history is the only test of game assumptions and look at games you know that have followed the same path this game is on.......

Happened to WoW, happened to SWTOR, happened to the HBS Battletech game as soon as Paradox got their vile little hands on it, happened to the ME and DA series (Bioware), happened to a lot of other games of various sorts that I have direct experience with.

As soon as the devs start making mass changes to units/classes to "balance" OTHER units/classes, the countdown to unplayable miserable mess has started. 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,459
[WOLFG]
Members
29,134 posts
8,345 battles
5 minutes ago, DrHolmes52 said:

Actually, it kind of does, because they are also changing armor thickness, based on tier.

I'm just looking at it from the perspective of being able to memorise. As long as a given ship has the same pen, I can deal with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,078 posts
15,941 battles

WG tends to fix things that aren't broken and destroy the game in the process. That's what it's done over the past two years.

A major component of the game used to be concealment. I have dozens and dozens of ships with CE skill, camo, and concealment equipment. Thanks to WG's brilliant CV rework and ever ending radar ships, concealment is almost obsolete. Within 10 seconds of battle your BB's are spotted by planes doing mach 2 across the map. Since there is an unlimited supply of planes , they can cover and spot half the map continuously throughout the battle. 

DD's in lower tiers are doomed from the beginning of battle with 2 CVs per side as they get rocketed to death before they have a chance to do anything remotely effective. 
Give it to WG to take something good and turn it into horse doodoo. 

Edited by STINKWEED_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,789
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,345 posts
19,593 battles

To play devil’s advocate: the new rules are matthematically annoying, but simplify the in-game behavior.

CLs now take IFHE if they want to pen battleships, but can still pen CAs if they don’t (it’s currently a crap shoot whether they do or don’t across tiers). CAs now autobounce the “average” caliber BB shell of their tier off their midsections, CLs don’t.

Ships on the extremes of these categories see different behavior (e.g. Smolensk, for whom the plating + IFHE fire chance changes is a solid nerf).

I agree some weird things are going to happen around the tier transitions though. And poor Colbert.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts
17 minutes ago, DrHolmes52 said:

Well, YOU did say the forum was getting bored.

well fingers crossed, things will get busy around here.:Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,129
Members
6,860 posts
15,357 battles
7 minutes ago, Edgecase said:

To play devil’s advocate: the new rules are matthematically annoying, but simplify the in-game behavior.

CLs now take IFHE if they want to pen battleships, but can still pen CAs if they don’t (it’s currently a crap shoot whether they do or don’t across tiers). CAs now autobounce the “average” caliber BB shell of their tier off their midsections, CLs don’t.

Ships on the extremes of these categories see different behavior (e.g. Smolensk, for whom the plating + IFHE fire chance changes is a solid nerf).

I agree some weird things are going to happen around the tier transitions though. And poor Colbert.

Like I said, comes down to the progression of armor and gun size for BBs through the tiers does not translate the same for cruisers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,483
[MERCB]
[MERCB]
Members
4,381 posts
20,047 battles

WG is so back-and-forth in what they state and what they do

 Which way is the wind blowing today?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
145
[B_Y_F]
Members
528 posts
13,336 battles
1 hour ago, Ducky_shot said:

Now your gun will pen differently based on its tier, not necessarily its caliber. A 6 in gun at t5 will now pen differently than a 6 in gun at T10. This is would be the equivalent of saying that a 16in BB gun which can overmatch 28mm at T10 should only be able to over match 24mm at T6. It's stupid. It's complicated. It's confusing to new players. Instead of all shell penetration being the same formula, now it changes as you move up the tiers. 

Or you might as well just say this pen vs. Armor design philosophy is proven to be over complicated. 

Different armor values may sounds cool for model lovers, but it's just not healthy to a game. An easily verifiable fact is that most people don't have the time to memories armor layout for over 200 different vassals in a GAME. 

WG finally reached the point that they started to regret this game design so they're trying to simplify what people needed to memory for just enjoy gaming. 

My feeling is mix on this change. On one side this is the right way to make a GAME enjoyable, on the other side they contradict some core philosophy of the actual game(WOWS) which may lead to the end of THIS game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,640
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
8,666 posts
14,778 battles

Taking unremarkable ships like Shchors and saying 'now choose between being unable to pen same tier BB and some higher tier cruisers with HE, or take IFHE and enjoy being unable to pen with a 50% fire chance reduction against T8 and T9 battleships'. 

 

The two tier MM spread is pretty brutal, you'd almost want to turn IFHE off when bottom tier. 

 

Then there are the generally counter to balance changes, this patch will buff Daring and Jutland while simultaneously nerfing questionable ships like Seattle. It will generally Nerf Hindenburg, but buff Des Moines.

More 27-30mm plating is a Nerf to the 15in armed battleships, but a buff to the poor Musashi and Georgia and Thunderer, poor darlings. 

WG first postulated these changes over a year ago but have seemingly done nothing to refine them. I don't really like being a guinea pig.

Edited by mofton
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,657
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Members
15,739 posts
1 minute ago, mofton said:

Taking unremarkable ships like Shchors and saying 'now choose between being unable to pen same tier BB and some higher tier cruisers with HE, or take IFHE and enjoy being unable to pen with a 50% fire chance reduction against T8 and T9 battleships'. 

 

The two tier MM spread is pretty brutal, you'd almost want to turn IFHE off when bottom tier. 

 

Then there are the generally counter to balance changes, this patch will buff Daring and Jutland while simultaneously nerfing questionable ships like Seattle. It will generally Nerf Hindenburg, but buff Des Moines.

More 27-30mm plating is a Nerf to the 15in armed battleships, but a buff to the poor Musashi and Georgia and Thunderer, poor darlings. 

WG first postulated these changes over a year ago but have seemingly done nothing to refine them. I don't really like being a guinea pig.

Like I've been saying, it's a giant mess and a giant mistake. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORCH]
Members
594 posts
14,850 battles

Based on my first read of the new IFHE, armor, and pen changes this morning, I think I mostly agree with the OP.  After reading it once, I have very little idea how the pieces fit together.  It seems that:

HE penetration will get slightly better across the board.  Basically, HE will pen one extra millimeter.

But some ships will get more armor...and I think I read that some would actually get less?

And IFHE will change in a lot of ways.  Basically, if you take IFHE, you'll cut your fire chance % by half, but there's more to it than that.

And some of these changes are scaled to some extent across tiers, so don't always work the same way.  And will work differently on/against different ships, even in the same match.

My head's hurtin' already.

The justification I've heard repeatedly is that the current IFHE is considered mandatory for higher tier CLs, and WG wanted to increase the trade-off, to make the decision less mandatory.  The idea was to force CL players to chose between alpha and fire damage.  Personally I don't see the current situation as a problem, but I guess someone does.  Maybe it was the BB drivers, who famously (and justifiably) hate fires?  I dunno.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×