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

ST, Adjustment Firing mechanics

32 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

562
[BUOY]
Members
1,426 posts
17,273 battles

Looks interesting conceptually is all I can say.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,100
[KWF]
Members
6,572 posts
7,191 battles

So let's say I play a Kleber that's constantly spotted and firing, or a Kitakaze, or Friesland, or Smaland. 

What stops me from keeping my hand glued to the fire button and activating constantly the buffs? 

In my opinion "Limit Break" style mechanics don't have much of a place. Still, could be interesting in Arms Race to make things even more ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
293 posts
4,598 battles

I'm not going to rule it out right off, and it would benefit me, but  would this create a even greater gap between skilled and unskilled players?

Interested to see it tested at any rate!:cap_like:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36,360
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
26,075 posts
22,336 battles
3 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

What stops me from keeping my hand glued to the fire button and activating constantly the buffs?

  1. You have to be locked on to something
  2. You'd be visible while shooting unless in a smoke cloud and even then you'd be drawing a lot of attention holding down the fire button
  3. The way I read it it's a temporary buff with an appropriate cooldown, wouldn't you want to time the buff for when you can take advantage of it?

Personally I think it's an interesting attempt to encourage more action and discourage camping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,012
[WOLFG]
Members
13,270 posts
12,537 battles

This could be a boon to gunboat destroyers.

And maybe not much to the line split US fatbotes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
68
[BGA]
Members
103 posts
19,254 battles

I like the idea but I fear this will be the biggest benefit to better players.  Better players that don't miss will get this buff constantly while newer players will not get it as often.  It will just create a bigger gap between skilled players and newer players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,100
[KWF]
Members
6,572 posts
7,191 battles
8 minutes ago, Lert said:
  1. You have to be locked on to something
  2. You'd be visible while shooting unless in a smoke cloud and even then you'd be drawing a lot of attention holding down the fire button
  3. The way I read it it's a temporary buff with an appropriate cooldown, wouldn't you want to time the buff for when you can take advantage of it?

Personally I think it's an interesting attempt to encourage more action and discourage camping.

I was mainly thinking of Kleber and the RU open water gunbotes to be honest. Friesland and the rest face some restrictions, but also have the DPM to bear. 

Question is, does a gunboat DD farming you from 14-15km with nigh impunity need any more help? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36,360
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
26,075 posts
22,336 battles
4 minutes ago, warheart1992 said:

Question is, does a gunboat DD farming you from 14-15km with nigh impunity need any more help? 

But I thought gunboating DDs were made irrelevant now with the CV rework - at least, that's the narrative that keeps getting pushed here.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,350
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
4,587 posts

sounds gimmicky...   we don't need gimmicks...  if it was something like every 3rd shot you get a 10% improved dispersion or something ... maybe...

too much automation behind targetting and hits as it is...

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
570
[KMS]
[KMS]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
3,852 posts
12,996 battles
6 minutes ago, Lert said:

But I thought gunboating DDs were made irrelevant now with the CV rework - at least, that's the narrative that keeps getting pushed here.

If CV players want to focus on the dd.. 90% just want damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,100
[KWF]
Members
6,572 posts
7,191 battles
14 minutes ago, Lert said:

But I thought gunboating DDs were made irrelevant now with the CV rework - at least, that's the narrative that keeps getting pushed here.

To be honest I don't think open water gunboats were in a better spot in years. Same for many torpedo focused DDs.

A no concealment,  rudder build with Fearless Brawler and the Main Battery skill is pretty darn strong. And now with the planned removal of the concealment penalty it gets even better. Add to that the weakening of CAs and you practically can occupy a CL spot in a DD.

When it comes to this playstyle I kinda accept my fate; it's pretty toxic so call it one of the risks of the profession.

Edited by warheart1992

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,790
[WOLF8]
Members
8,203 posts
6,785 battles

If we're gonna implement a limit break style temporary boost (reminds me the ye old fighting games, like Street Fighters, lol), then can we get a set of different boosts that we can choose from, depends on the ship? It'd be nice to pick one, based on an individual ship or a captain build. I say at the equipment menu, at the port. Just saying... lel. :Smile_hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,127 posts
19 minutes ago, Lert said:

But I thought gunboating DDs were made irrelevant now with the CV rework - at least, that's the narrative that keeps getting pushed here.

tier 10 plenty of invisible dds spamming and there are not alot of cvs (ranked battles) havent played randoms since ranked came out  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,277
[SIM]
Members
5,899 posts
9,387 battles

Sounds like a desperate attempt to correct gameplay that has been negatively impacted by previous changes. A better solution would be to repeal the prior negative changes, instead of piling on new ones. 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36,360
[HINON]
Alpha Tester
26,075 posts
22,336 battles
14 minutes ago, FairWindsFollowingSeas said:

This reminds me of Guitar Hero, where if you hit enough notes in sequence you can "activate star power" or something

There's been mechanics in games to reward good play for ages, like in call of duty or battlefield games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,466
[-K-]
[-K-]
Members
5,935 posts
23,008 battles

This seems like a solution in search of a problem. What's the goal here?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,350
[DRFTR]
Beta Testers
4,587 posts

yup... that's the next question... why?

 

what is the end game of this development?  what does someone expect the outcome of this addition to be? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
795 posts
10,280 battles

It's an interesting concept and may be worthy of testing, but I already see a flaw with the way the mechanics work:

It will probably encourage some bad play.

Why?

1) Ships must remain "locked on" to target to get bonuses.

2) In a match, players are locked on and firing at enemy BB or cruiser, trying to build up their progress bar to get the bonus.

3) Enemy DD is spotted close by.

4) Players ignore spotted DD, who they should be switching targets to, because they don't want to reset the bar and lose the potential bonus.

 

Probably an unintended consequence, but definitely not a good one.

It's similar to the Deadeye effect, players trying to activate a bonus are encouraged to make bad decisions(camping back of map far from caps in the case of Deadeye) in order to get it.

 

 

Edited by Dr_Powderfinger
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,824
[PVE]
Members
8,821 posts
25,144 battles

Dang it...brain farting on the name of the guy (Euro named him in his video on the subject) that discovered the "In Air" aiming "bug" (<---the fact it is a bug is a quote from @Hapa_Fodder from Euro's thread about it)...

Will we be seeing any patch notes declaring this aim assist "bug" has been removed before this new buff to those that "aim properly" goes into effect.

Seems that "bug" should be removed before this new feature is even tested...shouldn't it?

Otherwise this just sounds like a buff to an exploit.

Note: To those that missed Euro's video (or the original video from the other guy) it's only an exploit against those that are camped at a stand still or straightline at slow speed basically...but those targets can be used to buff it up ("it" being whatever actual buff they decide to apply..."main battery reload speed" only being an example in the article) before sending an enhanced volley at a more challenging target. (This may be a moot point if the target lock need to remain on the same ship to stay active...not sure if that is the case or if it just stays active as long as you keep getting hits each volley into licked on targets (like the hit indicator counter in game already that keeps calculating no matter how many targets you switch to).

Enough on that...now to my thoughts on this subject if that exploit wasn't in the game:

_____________________________

(Next part ninja'd by @Dr_Powderfinger...that avatar..Yikes 😬😳 :-)

I can see a similar problem as the Deadeye issue in terms of promoting poor play in the potential for noobs to get into big trouble trying to keep this buff active when they should be trying to go dark...

Example: The Wooster tucked safely behind an island w/the buff active that gets broadside flanked by a BB & rather than trying to go dark (smart gameplay) just keeps on firing...the worst part for the noob is not realizing that staying spotted is gonna give that BB the chance to activate the boost also eventually as it will be able to keep shooting at the noob to charge it up.

Interested in the "time" between volleys to keep it active...will it vary based on main battery reload per each individual ship's ammo reload or will it be some flat time rate that buffs fast firing ships & is worthless to slow reload ships...assuming the former (hopefully) so it's not just a nerf to BBs... I'm not a complaining BB main btw (or a BB main at all)...this is just in the interest of fair play in general.

1 hour ago, frankfletcher_1 said:

:cap_hmm:

Also I would suggest this also working for secondaries

No please...

As much as 2ndaries we're "balanced/unbalanced (depending on your viewpoint...but not the subject of this thread so let's not derail here guys)" due to the skill rework...2ndaries are an AI controlled mechanic & RNG should never be the determining factor for mechanic buffs based on the skill to properly aim as 1 person shouldn't get a buff while brawling that the other person isn't getting based on nothing more that RNG saying "yes" to 1 & "no" to the other.

BTW...per the wiki... ".7km from the target" is the "distance" used to calculate potential damage & I do believe will be the "distance" referred to in this instance also. (On an unrelated note...to those that get those bad dispersion volleys where the shells just "splash all around" the target...I do believe [but only a hypothesis...no insider knowledge] that those near misses do supply XP to the ships that fired...the hypothesis being that any ammo (shells/torps/or plane ordinance) that results in potential damage to the target (which results in XP for the target) also results in XP for the firing ship...again...just a hypothesis..but I do believe that is the case).

Not sure if that ".7km" is a radius from center mass (the conning tower where detection is determined) or in an ovoid shape from any edge point on the ship (IOW extending our further from center mass bow & stern & being less from center mass port & starboard).

Dang...was just about to post this & got ninja'd on a point.

Edited by IfYouSeeKhaos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
98
[1813]
Members
405 posts
15,089 battles

We need to see a simulation of what this will look like in a actuall game 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,068
[SHOOT]
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
4,347 posts
13,086 battles
4 hours ago, SkaerKrow said:

Sounds like a desperate attempt to correct gameplay that has been negatively impacted by previous changes. A better solution would be to repeal the prior negative changes, instead of piling on new ones. 

+1: Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×