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

Less RNG, more reward for accuracy

13 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
1,022 posts
3,050 battles

 My last game was rage inducing. My Giulio Cesare Salad could not hit a dam thing. 130 shells fired for 20 hits and minimal damage (I was happy to see my boat sink under a hail of HE spam). Even a stationary Sinop was immune to my shells, 5 volleys at him for 1 hit:( Makes me think, why do we need the stupid RNG/Roll of the dice system. It was used in WoT a lot and it was just dumb, line up a stationary tank and watch your shell fly over its head because RNG said 'no'. [edited] addressed this by having accuracy and shells that go where you're aiming. Nothing worse than trying to ambush a target only to watch everything miss or zero damage, then lose 15k health from a hit on your ships flag poll..

 

Maybe the BB system could take a leaf out of the artillery mode from WoT, the longer you line up a target with a smooth site, the greater the shells will go at the target. This doesn't apply to cruisers and destroyers, just the luck of the draw Battleships. 

  • Funny 2
  • Boring 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,067
[WORX]
Members
12,638 posts
19,898 battles

With the current armor plating on some ships ??? No.

This will be abused, it will also affect diversity of ships in battle... Not to mention it will increase the already mundane gaming experience..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,822
[1984]
Members
4,482 posts
21,506 battles
4 hours ago, LunchCutter said:

 My last game was rage inducing. My Giulio Cesare Salad could not hit a dam thing. 130 shells fired for 20 hits and minimal damage (I was happy to see my boat sink under a hail of HE spam). Even a stationary Sinop was immune to my shells, 5 volleys at him for 1 hit:( Makes me think, why do we need the stupid RNG/Roll of the dice system. It was used in WoT a lot and it was just dumb, line up a stationary tank and watch your shell fly over its head because RNG said 'no'. W@rthund3r addressed this by having accuracy and shells that go where you're aiming. Nothing worse than trying to ambush a target only to watch everything miss or zero damage, then lose 15k health from a hit on your ships flag poll..

 

Maybe the BB system could take a leaf out of the artillery mode from WoT, the longer you line up a target with a smooth site, the greater the shells will go at the target. This doesn't apply to cruisers and destroyers, just the luck of the draw Battleships. 

Games would be over in a couple of minutes or else people would hide in back for fear of being deleted.

i saw flam fill in the blank playing the game which will lead to your thread being locked. It was boring as [edited]. No one was doing anything, they were all just sitting still waiting for the first person to move, and when said person inevitably did, he was instantly deleted. Sorry not wasting my time with that, might as well play sims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
318
[BIER]
Members
463 posts
7,417 battles
5 hours ago, LunchCutter said:

 My last game was rage inducing. My Giulio Cesare Salad could not hit a dam thing. 130 shells fired for 20 hits and minimal damage (I was happy to see my boat sink under a hail of HE spam). Even a stationary Sinop was immune to my shells, 5 volleys at him for 1 hit:( Makes me think, why do we need the stupid RNG/Roll of the dice system. It was used in WoT a lot and it was just dumb, line up a stationary tank and watch your shell fly over its head because RNG said 'no'. [edited] addressed this by having accuracy and shells that go where you're aiming. Nothing worse than trying to ambush a target only to watch everything miss or zero damage, then lose 15k health from a hit on your ships flag poll..

 

Maybe the BB system could take a leaf out of the artillery mode from WoT, the longer you line up a target with a smooth site, the greater the shells will go at the target. This doesn't apply to cruisers and destroyers, just the luck of the draw Battleships. 

From a game perspective, the problem isn't really RNG in Hit Determination, it's complexity in DAMAGE assessment.

Given the incredibly massive difference in per-hit damage by different caliber guns, it's really not OK to have accuracy between the various classes be too close. In particular, having BB main gun accuracy above 20% really would make the game completely unplayable, as literally EVERYTHING would die from single broadsides regularly.

Rather, the problem is the FAR too complicated shell penetration and armor layout mechanics. While RNG for hit determination does play some roll, it's relatively easy to get a consistent number of hits (over multiple volleys) against the same target.  That is, if I shoot 10 volleys, I'll almost always hit (say) 6 out of 10 at a stationary broadside, 4 out of 10 at a moving broadside, and 1 out of 10 at a end-on target. Individual salvos may vary a little, but you'll get regression to the mean quickly.

The problem is that there is ZERO consistency at all in terms of damage that my consistent aim causes.   So while I can consistently hit 60% at a stationary target, you get massive variation in damage caused. Because the RNG of the shells runs smack into the over-engineered armor/penetration mechanisms. 

The real truth is that ships should only have very simple armor layouts, and really only have 3 or 4 total "different" places to hit.  So that you can realistically expect that a shell that hits the appropriate place will almost always cause a certain kind of damage.

Instead, we get crap like the French BB armor layout.  Take a look at the Lyon - now look at all the nooks, crannies, shot traps, and multi-layered armor possibilities.  All of which massively effect the actual damage your shell causes.

 

The short of this is this:  improving "accuracy" (meaning shell hits) will do nothing for the game.  Simplifying the armor models DRASTICALLY will, as will moving from the kind of "all or nothing" penetration mechanics will as well. 

But that's never going to happen. If for no other reason than it would require WG to admit it made a design mistake. Which is something they have NEVER done.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,324
[CNO]
[CNO]
Members
6,335 posts
19,344 battles
7 hours ago, LunchCutter said:

 My Giulio Cesare...

...is the best T5 in the game!  Seriously, this ship is a beast at tier. 

As for the SINOP engagement, if you reduced dispersion equally, with equally competent players, Cesare is going to lose that fight...it will just lose it faster than now.  Cesare might be OP at T5, but it's not so OP that it can readily down T7 when those T7s are captained by competent players. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,373
[WOLFG]
Members
32,259 posts
9,988 battles
3 hours ago, LAnybody said:

From a game perspective, the problem isn't really RNG in Hit Determination, it's complexity in DAMAGE assessment.

Given the incredibly massive difference in per-hit damage by different caliber guns, it's really not OK to have accuracy between the various classes be too close. In particular, having BB main gun accuracy above 20% really would make the game completely unplayable, as literally EVERYTHING would die from single broadsides.

I don't know of anybody off-hand that has 20% or less BB accuracy. Most are around 25%, and some even 30% or better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
329
[TRU]
Members
729 posts
21,301 battles
8 hours ago, LunchCutter said:

 My last game was rage inducing. My Giulio Cesare Salad could not hit a dam thing. 130 shells fired for 20 hits and minimal damage (I was happy to see my boat sink under a hail of HE spam). Even a stationary Sinop was immune to my shells, 5 volleys at him for 1 hit:( Makes me think, why do we need the stupid RNG/Roll of the dice system. It was used in WoT a lot and it was just dumb, line up a stationary tank and watch your shell fly over its head because RNG said 'no'. [edited] addressed this by having accuracy and shells that go where you're aiming. Nothing worse than trying to ambush a target only to watch everything miss or zero damage, then lose 15k health from a hit on your ships flag poll..

 

Maybe the BB system could take a leaf out of the artillery mode from WoT, the longer you line up a target with a smooth site, the greater the shells will go at the target. This doesn't apply to cruisers and destroyers, just the luck of the draw Battleships. 

Normally I would disagree.  But playing the GC it seems to have a huge variety in citadel hits versus overpens.  I usually get uptiered in it, which is totally fine.  I had a leander at 12k going broadside.  Hit 5 shells for 3200 or something strange.   Literally right after, an Aoba did the same thing and just about the same thing happened.  There was an enemy Mahan that threw a couple HE rounds at me before smoking up and only one hit - and naturally it caused a fire.  I know this is just anecdotal but your OP struck a chord.  I'm just glad I had a Scharnhorst to fight at range versus a Sinop.

Fortune did reverse itself though when I was high tier and fired at a bow on Danae from about 15k out.  Full health, just deleted.  

I withdraw my original complaint upon introspection :cap_rambo:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,110
[PVE]
Members
5,087 posts
22,484 battles
4 hours ago, LAnybody said:

From a game perspective, the problem isn't really RNG in Hit Determination, it's complexity in DAMAGE assessment.

Given the incredibly massive difference in per-hit damage by different caliber guns, it's really not OK to have accuracy between the various classes be too close. In particular, having BB main gun accuracy above 20% really would make the game completely unplayable, as literally EVERYTHING would die from single broadsides regularly.

Rather, the problem is the FAR too complicated shell penetration and armor layout mechanics. While RNG for hit determination does play some roll, it's relatively easy to get a consistent number of hits (over multiple volleys) against the same target.  That is, if I shoot 10 volleys, I'll almost always hit (say) 6 out of 10 at a stationary broadside, 4 out of 10 at a moving broadside, and 1 out of 10 at a end-on target. Individual salvos may vary a little, but you'll get regression to the mean quickly.

The problem is that there is ZERO consistency at all in terms of damage that my consistent aim causes.   So while I can consistently hit 60% at a stationary target, you get massive variation in damage caused. Because the RNG of the shells runs smack into the over-engineered armor/penetration mechanisms. 

The real truth is that ships should only have very simple armor layouts, and really only have 3 or 4 total "different" places to hit.  So that you can realistically expect that a shell that hits the appropriate place will almost always cause a certain kind of damage.

Instead, we get crap like the French BB armor layout.  Take a look at the Lyon - now look at all the nooks, crannies, shot traps, and multi-layered armor possibilities.  All of which massively effect the actual damage your shell causes.

 

The short of this is this:  improving "accuracy" (meaning shell hits) will do nothing for the game.  Simplifying the armor models DRASTICALLY will, as will moving from the kind of "all or nothing" penetration mechanics will as well. 

But that's never going to happen. If for no other reason than it would require WG to admit it made a design mistake. Which is something they have NEVER done.

And what you said above defeats the entire purpose of what our host has done and will continue to do: eliminate long range accuracy !  Once you can't shoot accurately at distances, they game speeds up and that, is the shooting arcade standard.   Then, when there is no long range capabilities, they will degrade the hit boxes and models so that short range engagements will speed up even more........   Then, let the e-Sales MT spending begin because we are now a simplified arcade shooter............and MT are the rule to temporarily improve your capabilities....   It's time for Naval Artillery to be introduced or some "Golden"  consumables...>!@

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
674 posts
5,358 battles

RNG needs to be toned down for sure, its olmost criminal how i can shoot twice the 12 guns of my GK at a broad side light cruiser from 9KM:

the first row does only 3k dmg becouse  half missed and the other half somehow manage to bounce, get eaten by some module or simply overpen

the second row goes to the citadel and delete the ship with a couple hits

 

consistency? whats that

   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
318
[BIER]
Members
463 posts
7,417 battles
14 hours ago, Skpstr said:

I don't know of anybody off-hand that has 20% or less BB accuracy. Most are around 25%, and some even 30% or better.

You are correct - I looked it up, and the average of all player's BB main gun accuracy is in the high 20s.

But the point was not about the exact percentage, the point was to say that improving the number of hits (which was the Topic Question) above what it is now will NOT solve the problem, because it's adjusting the wrong parameter.

The problem is not that RNG makes hitting the target a problem, it's the almost random assignment of damage for each hit, which seems to completely ignore any skill or aiming ability.   That is, it's not the RNG in the ability to HIT a ship that's causing problems, it's the RNG in the Damage assessment that seems to completely overwhelm any effect skill has.

And this is caused by the over-complex armor models and obscure armor penetration mechanics.  

For a video game (and WOWS absolutely is a video game, not a simulator), consistency across short sample sizes is a key factor to player satisfaction. "I do X, and get Y as an outcome" is an ABSOLUTE requirement to not piss off your players.  A little bit of non-determinism is good, but WOWS has far, far, far too much "noise" in the system, which leads to severe problems with player satisfaction due to wildly different outcomes from repeating (to the player) identical procedures.   This is due to the stupid levels of over-complexity of the basic game mechanics.  Which would be appropriate in a simulator. But are wildly inappropriate in a video game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,373
[WOLFG]
Members
32,259 posts
9,988 battles
10 hours ago, LAnybody said:

The problem is not that RNG makes hitting the target a problem, it's the almost random assignment of damage for each hit, which seems to completely ignore any skill or aiming ability.   That is, it's not the RNG in the ability to HIT a ship that's causing problems, it's the RNG in the Damage assessment that seems to completely overwhelm any effect skill has.

That's because of the general misconception that the skill in this game is hitting your target, and it isn't.

The skill is in positioning your ship to maximise your chances of hitting effectively, while minimising that of your opponent. 

Being able to hit a target is one of the most basic skills in this game, second only to maneuvering your ship.

It's like an FPS with sawed-off shotguns. Skilled players won't be counting on being better shots, and dueling opponents at 100', they'll be looking to get up close and hit their opponent from behind.

IOW, when you fire at 15+km, nobody should expect devastating hits. But you do it anyway, because you they're possible, and if not, decent hits are likely.

If things were more consistent, the meta would shift drastically, with gun range being the most important ship stat, followed by speed, and kiting would become the primary engagement method.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
4,298 posts
7,238 battles
On 3/31/2020 at 1:13 AM, LunchCutter said:

 My last game was rage inducing. My Giulio Cesare Salad could not hit a dam thing. 130 shells fired for 20 hits and minimal damage (I was happy to see my boat sink under a hail of HE spam). Even a stationary Sinop was immune to my shells, 5 volleys at him for 1 hit:( Makes me think, why do we need the stupid RNG/Roll of the dice system. It was used in WoT a lot and it was just dumb, line up a stationary tank and watch your shell fly over its head because RNG said 'no'. [edited] addressed this by having accuracy and shells that go where you're aiming. Nothing worse than trying to ambush a target only to watch everything miss or zero damage, then lose 15k health from a hit on your ships flag poll..

 

Maybe the BB system could take a leaf out of the artillery mode from WoT, the longer you line up a target with a smooth site, the greater the shells will go at the target. This doesn't apply to cruisers and destroyers, just the luck of the draw Battleships. 

If you can't hit the enemy in a 10-gun ship with a 1.9 sigma, you may have to face the reality that the problem isn't RNG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47
[-V1-]
Beta Testers
299 posts
8,818 battles
On 3/31/2020 at 1:50 AM, monpetitloup said:

Games would be over in a couple of minutes or else people would hide in back for fear of being deleted.

i saw flam fill in the blank playing the game which will lead to your thread being locked. It was boring as [edited]. No one was doing anything, they were all just sitting still waiting for the first person to move, and when said person inevitably did, he was instantly deleted. Sorry not wasting my time with that, might as well play sims.

can you pm me the games name i'm curious. must investigate for science

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×