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

It's very clear WoWS doesn't want ANY "tanking" in the game.

70 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,405
[FORM]
Members
2,121 posts
13,028 battles

Seems like every torp causes flooding now, even with fire prevention it's more common to have 2 and 3 catch anytime you push up. We can complain about Deadeye causing camping BBs, but the other BB styles that used to work was secondaries. Now, if you try to get your secondary ship up to do any actual tanking and support of caps you're just going to be a hot flooding mess, and fast. 

The more I look over the skill choices, the goal was simple - sink ships more easily, and make battles MUCH faster. Of course there's a reaction to the enormous increase in vulnerability, and that's to stay further away so you can dodge or if you do move up make sure you camp really tight on an island.

They've really taken a huge step backwards with what was interesting about this game for me. There's plenty of games out there to go YOLO and respawn, WoWS was one that didn't reward and encourage that... at least before 10.0

  • Cool 18
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,131
[PISD]
Members
1,818 posts
6,025 battles

Releasing the Petro, that is basically only good at tanking, kinda goes against your point.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Haha 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,011
[DEV_X]
Alpha Tester
2,671 posts
25,838 battles
9 minutes ago, TheArc said:

Seems like every torp causes flooding now, even with fire prevention it's more common to have 2 and 3 catch anytime you push up. We can complain about Deadeye causing camping BBs, but the other BB styles that used to work was secondaries. Now, if you try to get your secondary ship up to do any actual tanking and support of caps you're just going to be a hot flooding mess, and fast. 

The more I look over the skill choices, the goal was simple - sink ships more easily, and make battles MUCH faster. Of course there's a reaction to the enormous increase in vulnerability, and that's to stay further away so you can dodge or if you do move up make sure you camp really tight on an island.

They've really taken a huge step backwards with what was interesting about this game for me. There's plenty of games out there to go YOLO and respawn, WoWS was one that didn't reward and encourage that... at least before 10.0

I'm not saying you're wrong but I dont 100% agree either.

I think we've spent most of the last 5 years bow tanking. Even ships that weren't boe tanking found ways to sort of bow tank. Take Henri for example with using speed boost to throttle backward and forward in the same 500 meter line. I dont think that was ever intended, hence the later nerf and decrease in popularity. I think a meta shift was required. If everyone just wants to bow tank, go play WoTs. It works even better there.

That said, I am against these super fast matches win or lose. I'm having a harder time getting achievements, or flags, because the matches dont last long enough. Yes, I'm sure some super unicum is still getting them regularly but that's not my level of play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,979
[WORX]
Members
12,518 posts
19,734 battles
10 minutes ago, TheArc said:

Seems like every torp causes flooding now

The math behind the flood to torp hit ratio, haven't changed at all... Its still 3 torp hits to 1 flood, that is dependent on where those torps hit..

The old ratio was 2 torp hits for 1 flood...


Now if they address the fire intensity problem at high tiers... That will address your concerns directly...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,984
[SIM]
Members
5,746 posts
9,263 battles

This hasn't been my experience at all. Hopefully you've just had a run of bad luck, and battles will normalize back to the duration that we're accustomed to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,297
[WOLFG]
Members
31,987 posts
9,887 battles
18 minutes ago, Karstodes said:

Releasing the Petro, that is basically only good at tanking, kinda goes against your point.

Against Deadeye-equipped BBs, it doesn't tank for long....

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,131
[PISD]
Members
1,818 posts
6,025 battles
1 minute ago, Skpstr said:

Against Deadeye-equipped BBs, it doesn't tank for long....

even against that: it is pretty much resilient to AP bow in.

The issue is coming from the Thunderer swarm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,036
[KWF]
Members
5,588 posts
6,899 battles

Something that I don't see mentioned that often after the skill rework is how aside from open water gunboats, torpedo boats turned out to benefit quite a bit from the changes. You can go for a full on torpedo build with practically zero disadvantages as the big nerf of torpedo acceleration was removed.  Add to that the Running in Silence skill and you can hit 39kts+ on many otherwise slower torpedo DDs. So you got torps that flood more often, move faster and are fired by faster ships that can get into more advantageous positions quicker. Not saying most need a nerf, but they got definitely stronger.

It's also a reaction to the BB heavy lineups that have been running around.

Edited by warheart1992
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,297
[WOLFG]
Members
31,987 posts
9,887 battles
9 minutes ago, Karstodes said:

even against that: it is pretty much resilient to AP bow in.

The issue is coming from the Thunderer swarm.

That's the thing though, with Deadeye and a stationary Petro, I can put half a salvo down his smokestack, what do I care about which direction he"s facing?

I'm not going to get any citadels, but 2-3 pens per salvo chunks him down pretty quick.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,405
[FORM]
Members
2,121 posts
13,028 battles
30 minutes ago, Karstodes said:

Releasing the Petro, that is basically only good at tanking, kinda goes against your point.

An exception only helps prove the rule. Kinda makes my point. 

16 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

The math behind the flood to torp hit ratio, haven't changed at all... Its still 3 torp hits to 1 flood, that is dependent on where those torps hit..

The old ratio was 2 torp hits for 1 flood...

I'm not at all sure what you're referring to, but different parts of the ships were always more vulnerable than others. Add in the skill to increase floods by 30%, increased torp speed and reload... and you're going to get more floods. Flip side is the decrease in survivability skills and you get more flooding.

18 minutes ago, Skuggsja said:

I'm not saying you're wrong but I dont 100% agree either.

I think we've spent most of the last 5 years bow tanking. 

That said, I am against these super fast matches win or lose. I'm having a harder time getting achievements, or flags, because the matches dont last long enough. Yes, I'm sure some super unicum is still getting them regularly but that's not my level of play.

Just to be clear, I never said anything about "bow tanking" but tanking in general. The ability to balance damage is what I was really referring to - though obviously being bow in makes you a much smaller and harder to hit target, so that's probably the case the great majority of time, but just in general the tanking (especially of secondary ships,) isn't just bow tanking at all.

And yes, the matches seem to be decided MUCH faster now. Seeing one team down 4 or 5 ships to 1 or none seems to be a lot more common and happening a lot earlier since 10.0

8 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

Something that I don't see mentioned that often after the skill rework is how aside from open water gunboats, torpedo boats turned out to benefit quite a bit from the changes.

Bingo.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,979
[WORX]
Members
12,518 posts
19,734 battles
2 minutes ago, TheArc said:

'm not at all sure what you're referring to, but different parts of the ships were always more vulnerable than others. Add in the skill to increase floods by 30%, increased torp speed and reload... and you're going to get more floods. Flip side is the decrease in survivability skills and you get more flooding.

I am referring to the torp to flood ratio.. After the flood and torp hit nerf of 0.8.0.1-3, the current ratio haven't changed...

  • Its still 3 torp hits to get one flood.. Now if you hit the bow, you may get lucky for a 2 to 1 ratio.

I've tested the torp hit ratio for the current patch... Its still intact, its still takes 3 torp hits to get 1 flood...

Rest assured, with the change in the system back in 0.8.0.1.. I dont think will go back to how it was before (2 to 1 closer to 1 to 1 ratio).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,755
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Banned
16,985 posts
44 minutes ago, TheArc said:

Seems like every torp causes flooding now, even with fire prevention it's more common to have 2 and 3 catch anytime you push up. We can complain about Deadeye causing camping BBs, but the other BB styles that used to work was secondaries. Now, if you try to get your secondary ship up to do any actual tanking and support of caps you're just going to be a hot flooding mess, and fast. 

The more I look over the skill choices, the goal was simple - sink ships more easily, and make battles MUCH faster. Of course there's a reaction to the enormous increase in vulnerability, and that's to stay further away so you can dodge or if you do move up make sure you camp really tight on an island.

They've really taken a huge step backwards with what was interesting about this game for me. There's plenty of games out there to go YOLO and respawn, WoWS was one that didn't reward and encourage that... at least before 10.0

Attempting to make the battles faster... will usually make them slower... because players will compensate by being more careful, and more selective in when they expose themselves. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,131
[PISD]
Members
1,818 posts
6,025 battles
12 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

That's the thing though, with Deadeye and a stationary Petro, I can put half a salvo down his smokestack, what do I care about which direction he"s facing?

I'm not going to get any citadels, but 2-3 pens per salvo chunks him down pretty quick.

which is mainly superstructure damage, which saturate quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,755
[CMFRT]
[CMFRT]
Banned
16,985 posts
12 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

That's the thing though, with Deadeye and a stationary Petro, I can put half a salvo down his smokestack, what do I care about which direction he"s facing?

I'm not going to get any citadels, but 2-3 pens per salvo chunks him down pretty quick.

I've noticed as a general rule, the playerbase, or at least the active online discussion players, are way too fixated on citadels, to the point where it sometimes seems like they'd rather miss than get not-citadel hits. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
684
[-TRM-]
[-TRM-]
Members
2,277 posts

You will find that all of my DD's have the flooding skill added for one point. That 30% increase in flooding is just too juicy to pass up.

You will also find that most of my BB's either have or will have the anti torpedo protection. Ive been eating torps more than usual with thunderer and its helping already. The difference between being sunk or not.

These two skills did not exist before 10.0. And throw in the HE with the delay fuse to make sure of fires (With the fires skill as well)

In other words add skills that work without disadvantages like the old torp speed boost with the 20% decrease in range. Now you can throw that in and the torps will get there pretty quick.

Citadels, fire prevention etc no longer is revelant. Your game is over when you are sunk. Yolo the next one in the next map. After a while most of your ships are in battle in less than half a hour all of that will be resolved.

Edited by xHeavy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
390
[TIAR]
[TIAR]
Beta Testers
1,511 posts
22,071 battles
50 minutes ago, TheArc said:

Seems like every torp causes flooding now, even with fire prevention it's more common to have 2 and 3 catch anytime you push up. We can complain about Deadeye causing camping BBs, but the other BB styles that used to work was secondaries. Now, if you try to get your secondary ship up to do any actual tanking and support of caps you're just going to be a hot flooding mess, and fast. 

The more I look over the skill choices, the goal was simple - sink ships more easily, and make battles MUCH faster. Of course there's a reaction to the enormous increase in vulnerability, and that's to stay further away so you can dodge or if you do move up make sure you camp really tight on an island.

They've really taken a huge step backwards with what was interesting about this game for me. There's plenty of games out there to go YOLO and respawn, WoWS was one that didn't reward and encourage that... at least before 10.0

You did not get the whole picture, flooding avoids fires by HE spammers.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,134
[WDS]
[WDS]
Members
4,238 posts
12,097 battles
22 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

Something that I don't see mentioned that often after the skill rework is how aside from open water gunboats, torpedo boats turned out to benefit quite a bit from the changes. You can go for a full on torpedo build with practically zero disadvantages as the big nerf of torpedo acceleration was removed.  Add to that the Running in Silence skill and you can hit 39kts+ on many otherwise slower torpedo DDs. So you got torps that flood more often, move faster and are fired by faster ships that can get into more advantageous positions quicker. Not saying most need a nerf, but they got definitely stronger.

It's also a reaction to the BB heavy lineups that have been running around.

Yea this is true that's why I have been trying out Vigilance and Enhanced Anti torpedo protection on my BBs . I like Vigilance better I tend to get tunnel vision that extra spotting distance helps a player like me .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,405
[FORM]
Members
2,121 posts
13,028 battles
9 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

I am referring to the torp to flood ratio.. After the flood and torp hit nerf of 0.8.0.1-3, the current ratio haven't changed...io).

You can test it, I think you're wrong. I'd be curious if they have and would share actual server side stats, because your test sample is definitely not what I'm seeing at all. Especially with the 30% boost to flood skill. Personally I don't actually mind it all that much, I find gun boat DDs far more annoying, but I absolutely think your personal testing stats are wrong for the server as a whole

1 minute ago, barbaroja_Ar said:

You did not get the whole picture, flooding avoids fires by HE spammers.

LOL, if only! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,979
[WORX]
Members
12,518 posts
19,734 battles
2 minutes ago, TheArc said:

You can test it,

I've been testing torp ships since the patch went live... I can affirm, no change to the ratio...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
684
[-TRM-]
[-TRM-]
Members
2,277 posts
8 minutes ago, clammboy said:

Yea this is true that's why I have been trying out Vigilance and Enhanced Anti torpedo protection on my BBs . I like Vigilance better I tend to get tunnel vision that extra spotting distance helps a player like me .

It helps to toss the wasted three points on Viligence when you go by certain known unknowns.

Would bases A and B together in a particular map have torps waiting for your BB?

Yes. What to do then? Go push objective C instead. You might have a few torps but its not a problem anymore. The radar Petro or stalin is your next issue to deal with over there.

Any time a enemy DD is spotted however briefly I always reduce speed one notch for a minute and alter course two or three points for a equal amount of time. Thats enough to get rid of the random walls of torps that are already coming.

Edited by xHeavy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,132
[SALVO]
Members
6,641 posts
5,247 battles
54 minutes ago, TheArc said:

The more I look over the skill choices, the goal was simple - sink ships more easily, and make battles MUCH faster. 

In short this is the gist of it.

I kinda understand their position, "how do we kill these guys with tank builds"? Snuffing a tank build BB driven by an able player requires sustained concerted effort. The issue here is if matches are rated at 20 minutes, you will want to be around all the time it takes to see it finished. They need to assume that under "normal circumstances" the match will last the full 20 minutes, if they want shorter matches it would be better to directly shorten the match timer.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,134
[WDS]
[WDS]
Members
4,238 posts
12,097 battles
1 minute ago, xHeavy said:

It helps to toss the wasted three points on Viligence when you go by certain known unknowns.

Would bases A and B together in a particular map have torps waiting for your BB?

Yes. What to do then? Go push objective C instead. You might have a few torps but its not a problem anymore. The radar Petro or stalin is your next issue to deal with over there.

Yea but it's just not the caps there's all kinds of sneaky DDs out there even while supporting DDs in caps  . I play a lot of tier 8 ships and I'm in a lot of tier 10 games and like I said it kind of works for me because I do have tunnel vision . But I understand you point I should be thinking more about where the torp threats are and where not to go . I guess it could be the lazy way out using Vigilance but I was just tryin out different builds before it cost us real doubloons to make changes .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,297
[WOLFG]
Members
31,987 posts
9,887 battles
50 minutes ago, Karstodes said:

which is mainly superstructure damage, which saturate quickly.

All I know is that 3 back-to-back 6-8k salvos will make one retreat back around the island PDQ, and AP damage can't be fully healed.

Contrast that with not having Deadeye, and you'll never saturate the superstructure, as you'll only land 1-2 shells somewhere on the ship.

Good point though, I'll remember to switch it up, and try to start a fire after saturation occurs.

Edited by Skpstr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,297
[WOLFG]
Members
31,987 posts
9,887 battles
50 minutes ago, KilljoyCutter said:

I've noticed as a general rule, the playerbase, or at least the active online discussion players, are way too fixated on citadels, to the point where it sometimes seems like they'd rather miss than get not-citadel hits. 

 

I hear you there. So many don't seem to realise that pens are a BB's bread an butter.

I mean, watching that Flamu Deadeye video, he's dropping 25-39k salvos on ships, but only one was 2 citadels, so most of his salvos were 10-24k worth of pens and overpens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
163 posts
10,439 battles
47 minutes ago, Navalpride33 said:

I've been testing torp ships since the patch went live... I can affirm, no change to the ratio...

Your presenting your theory as though it is a well known game mechanic that is documented and widely verified.  It is not and it’s strange for you to do so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×