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

NEED SHIPS STATS TO BE REALISTIC (NO NERF and/or BUFF)

11 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
131 posts
12,087 battles

Stop buffing and nerfing ships. Use their real life stats (or proposed stats) and dont be nerfing because they are too powerful - thats why they were built in the first place. All ships have their own weakness and buff depending how they are played. Its best to either make the ships the way they were meant to be or create a new battle format where ships use their real stats and not nerfed or buffed below/above real life stats.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 2
  • Haha 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,594
[PVE]
Members
10,587 posts
31,028 battles

Why exactly do you need that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,413
[BGA]
Alpha Tester
4,001 posts
32,441 battles
Just now, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

Why exactly do you need that?

I would guess his favorite historical ship doesnt perform as well as he feels it should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,119
[SOUP]
Members
9,368 posts

145.gif

Pffff, this guy~   Do you have any idea how ABYSMAL this game would be if it were a completely realistic naval simulator?  Do you have any inkling of how complicated the variables are for even the most simple aspects of gunnery and armour schemes?  How bout ships being able to hide... like... at all. Smokescreens would now only work in a line directly behind ships, so you'd have to turn to make any use of them. Radar now would have infinite range, and ships would be seen from across the whole map even without radar. Elements like engines and steering now are almost impossible to fix, you take a hit to the rudder, game over. Engine hit? Game over.
Oh, and everything in the game would have to be slowed down, by a LOT. Time in WoWS is actually compressed and everything is rescaled to allow for a fun and engaging game experience, if everything were realistic, you'd be lucky to land a shot once per dozen volleys. Oh, and you'd have to range your target by firing at it a few times too.
What I'm getting from this is that a ship you love had a nerf.   It happens.  But this IS NOT A HISTORICAL GAME. But let's say for a moment the game IS 100% historically accurate. Well then I bloody well hope you LOVE carrier gameplay, cause planes are all that people would use~!

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,206
[CVA16]
Members
8,550 posts
26,057 battles

You realize most of the stats in game are WG derived/adjusted for "balans'. 

So many of the ships now are "back of a napkin" or WG fantasies the "real life" stats mean nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
416
[WOLF5]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
1,533 posts

nerf paper, scissors are fine.

signed rock

 

 

proposed stats?  hahah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,272
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
28,913 posts
15,585 battles
1 hour ago, MaddogGT said:

Stop buffing and nerfing ships. Use their real life stats (or proposed stats) and dont be nerfing because they are too powerful - thats why they were built in the first place. All ships have their own weakness and buff depending how they are played. Its best to either make the ships the way they were meant to be or create a new battle format where ships use their real stats and not nerfed or buffed below/above real life stats.

If this was a simulation or even a semi-simulation game you would have a point but this is arcade where balance is key.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,198
[WOLF5]
Supertester
5,240 posts
4,507 battles

OK, let's start with historical acceleration and turning rate values. Congratulations, every game is now a draw because the timer expired before anyone got up to speed.

You think CVs are OP? Too bad, because they were even more OP IRL.

Like playing DDs? Forget it, concealment isn't a thing anymore and the BB secondaries took you out 10km beyond torp range.

 

Yeah, WG made adjustments to IRL stats for very good reason.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,431
[WPORT]
Members
19,353 posts
21,800 battles
2 hours ago, MaddogGT said:

Stop buffing and nerfing ships. Use their real life stats (or proposed stats) and dont be nerfing because they are too powerful - thats why they were built in the first place. All ships have their own weakness and buff depending how they are played. Its best to either make the ships the way they were meant to be or create a new battle format where ships use their real stats and not nerfed or buffed below/above real life stats.

I like your sentiment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,745
[HINON]
[HINON]
Members
9,831 posts
16,869 battles
2 hours ago, MaddogGT said:

Stop buffing and nerfing ships. Use their real life stats (or proposed stats) and dont be nerfing because they are too powerful - thats why they were built in the first place. All ships have their own weakness and buff depending how they are played. Its best to either make the ships the way they were meant to be or create a new battle format where ships use their real stats and not nerfed or buffed below/above real life stats.

ok, if we're going to go simulator then this is going to be the norm for ships

  1. DDs, save for some IJN, wont have infinite reloads on torpedoes as only a select few, again, mostly IJN carried a second reload of torps
  2. Radar and Hydro wont see through islands
  3. BBs will be insanely inaccurate as they were IRL with only a shell or 2 landing maybe every 3 or 5 salvoes
  4. CVs would never be seen as they wouldnt even be on the map as CVs werent meant to be in range of a gun battle, they also wouldnt have plane factories on board
  5. a good amount of the ships in game would not exist in the game as they're either plans that never left the blueprint stage or complete fiction by WG

now, knowing all this, do you still want realism here? or are you one of those people that only want realism in the areas where it suits you?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
482 posts
9,739 battles
1 hour ago, tcbaker777 said:

ok, if we're going to go simulator then this is going to be the norm for ships

  1. DDs, save for some IJN, wont have infinite reloads on torpedoes as only a select few, again, mostly IJN carried a second reload of torps
  2. Radar and Hydro wont see through islands
  3. BBs will be insanely inaccurate as they were IRL with only a shell or 2 landing maybe every 3 or 5 salvoes
  4. CVs would never be seen as they wouldnt even be on the map as CVs werent meant to be in range of a gun battle, they also wouldnt have plane factories on board
  5. a good amount of the ships in game would not exist in the game as they're either plans that never left the blueprint stage or complete fiction by WG

now, knowing all this, do you still want realism here? or are you one of those people that only want realism in the areas where it suits you?

 

I say this with all honesty and seriousness, none of what you mentioned would bother me, even the CV stuff (even though i don't play CV's), i have no problem with imbalance, it doesn't bother me even when it works against me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×