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

Let's talk about Fire

43 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

11,293
[SALVO]
Members
16,448 posts
10,185 battles

Let me start saying I'm a huge fan of fire damage mechanics, for me it is the great equalizer, the free for all tool that lets my undertiered, underdog, weakling ship to compete and even best a stronger, more powerful ship. I've always thought fire damage fulfills a really important role in keeping the game balanced and enjoyable, after all no matter how bad the odds are, you could always depend on DoT doing a %based damage to HP... the greater the HP pool, the greater the damage.

In all the time I've played this game, I never gave fire damage a second thought... Enter Grand Battle mode, there we have those 2 juggernauts of the sea, ships so big and powerful they could change the outcome of any battle they fight... but they die (or more precisely burn) exactly as fast an easy as a lower tiered BB. It was very anticlimatic for me... I could burn them all just the same way. They weren't scary beasts, no imposing colossus needing a titanic effort to wear them down, just plain old BBQ meat for the roaster.

It all made me think about %based DoT... I like it, it is necessary for balance and fair play but I can't help feeling it steals some awe factor from capital ships. When I play an undertiered HE based ship, it makes no real difference to me the tier of the enemy BB, they will burn all the same, they represent a similar level of threat if they are my own tier or 2 tiers higher. Yes I know there's an intrinsic fire resistance value that scales up with tiers but IMO it is fairly meaningless in the face of the whole RNG system. In short: Big ships are not as scary as they should be because DoT is %based. Is it a necessary "evil"? Could it be done differently while still preserving options for counterplay?

Let's talk

  • Cool 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,270
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,132 posts
30,890 battles

Is it really a problem when Battleships are still consistently the better damage dealers through the tiers?  It only gets closer in Tier X via Cruisers Henri IV, Venezia, Goliath, but the real gun damage dealers in Tier X are still Battleships.

 

Do Battleships really need that much more help now?  I don't think so.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Cool 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Boring 1
  • Meh 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,344
[NG-NL]
Members
7,138 posts
12,574 battles

Just add RNG chance that HE shells, upon hitting a section that's burning, will boost the fire's duration.

That or undo the flooding nerfs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,293
[SALVO]
Members
16,448 posts
10,185 battles
38 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Do Battleships really need that much more help now?  I don't think so.

I don't think they need help. It is about they not really scaling as a threat in terms of endurance. HP and armor are becoming less relevant as balancing factors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,167
[PVE]
Members
8,775 posts
2 hours ago, ArIskandir said:

Let's talk

I'm not entirely sure how to respond.  I'll start by saying, I actually think WG did a really good job with the fire mechanic as far as game balance is concerned.  There is only one problem, it doesn't feel good to be on the receiving end.  I'm not sure there is a good solution to that problem, especially if the solution interferes with the balance aspects.

2 hours ago, ArIskandir said:

It all made me think about %based DoT... I like it, it is necessary for balance and fair play but I can't help feeling it steals some awe factor from capital ships.

I could ramble on about the misunderstanding of the tank archetype that BBs are in this game, but no one wants to read that.  The bottom line, BBs are supposed to be a punching bag, by design.  That is what you sign up for when you choose to play a tank archetype.  Yeah, I know just saying that will piss a lot people off, and that just proves my point about a strong disconnect so many players seem to have about this archetype.  I don't know how to brand BBs as the big bad ships that everyone wants to play, and still convey that you aren't really meant to be any better than the players in other ships.  This expectation problem only gets worse with super battleships.

I guess this was just my long winded way of saying we don't have a balance problem, we have a feelz and expectation problem.  Generally, I like to think about the problem and come up with solutions.  I've got nothing for this one.

Edited by Slimeball91
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,167
[PVE]
Members
8,775 posts
1 minute ago, ArIskandir said:

I don't think they need help. It is about they not really scaling as a threat in terms of endurance. HP and armor are becoming less relevant as balancing factors.

And so is concealment, and speed, and maneuverability.  It's almost like WG doesn't like defensive counterbalance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,270
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,132 posts
30,890 battles
3 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

I don't think they need help. It is about they not really scaling as a threat in terms of endurance. HP and armor are becoming less relevant as balancing factors.

HP and armor irrelevant?

There are Mid Tier Cruisers' armor belts that can get Overmatched and Citadeled by 203mm AP / SAP.

The vast majority of Cruisers and Destroyers, especially the latter, have no access to Repair Party. 

Is it still a thing where DDs are often the first ship types dead for both teams?  I recall this happening a lot within the first few minutes of contact between teams.  Either all DDs are dead or most are dead within minutes.

 

Allow me to use Gneisenau as an example.  I think everybody agrees that with her 6 guns, she's one of the most unreliable Battleships, at least in terms of gunnery, that we have past Tier V?  But what she does have in spades is BB HP, BB Armor, and standard Repair Party access (ALL BBs have RP access).  Gneisenau's staying power lets her hang around and deal damage... To the point that she eclipses all the Cruisers in her own Tier VII as Damage Dealer, many by a significant margin.  The Battleship that can't hit anything survives long enough to deal more damage than the likes of Fiji, Schors, 15 gun Helena / Boise / Nueve di Julio, Myoko, Algerie, etc.

 

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,293
[SALVO]
Members
16,448 posts
10,185 battles
3 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

Generally, I like to think about the problem and come up with solutions.  I've got nothing for this one.

Maybe because it isn't really a problem... It is more an observation. Those big bad armored Juggernauts die as easily as their smaller, lower tiered brethren. My gut feeling is they shouldn't but beyond that I can't really say anything else.

8 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

And so is concealment, and speed, and maneuverability.  It's almost like WG doesn't like defensive counterbalance.

I understand concealment, but why do you think speed and maneuverability are being phased out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,167
[PVE]
Members
8,775 posts
4 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

Maybe because it isn't really a problem...

Expectations that are not being met are a problem, so is a feeling of a poor gaming experiences.  If fire is doing that for players then its a problem, just not a balance problem.

7 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

I understand concealment, but why do you think speed and maneuverability are being phased out?

You can't outrun planes.  Until more recently, you couldn't even dodge their attacks.  You still can't outrun or juke their spotting though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,293
[SALVO]
Members
16,448 posts
10,185 battles
10 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

HP and armor irrelevant?

Let's say I'm playing an Omaha or something like that.

Let's say I go against a NY, I put a couple fires on it, it DCPs then I put a couple more permafires. Rinse and repeat.

Let's say I go against a Gneisenau. Exactly the same recipe, it will die roughly as fast as the NY. HP and armor become irrelevant.

Is it harder to take down the superior ship? Not in a really significant way... That's my observation. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
6,667 posts
29 minutes ago, Slimeball91 said:

I'm not entirely sure how to respond.  I'll start by saying, I actually think WG did a really good job with the fire mechanic as far as game balance is concerned.  There is only one problem, it doesn't feel good to be on the receiving end.  I'm not sure there is a good solution to that problem, especially if the solution interferes with the balance aspects.

Well, there are always mechanics where it doesn't feel good to be on the receiving end.  I think it's perfectly fine for the cruisers that are most likely to get devstruck by BBs are also the most likely ships to burn a BB down.  It works out.  I'm sure the cruisers who are on the receiving end of citadels from across the map from a BB they never saw 'feel good' about it.  

So, yeah, sympathy is in the dictionary between a couple words.   And HE mechanics are not the only place it "doesn't feel good" to one type or another, but that's PvP between multiple ship types.  It's going to happen, because the game, in the end, is all about sinking the other side's ship, somehow, someway, whether you're delivering the ordnance yourself, or you're spotting for those who are.

EDIT: In the Omaha example by @ArIskandir,in an Omaha, burning down that BB is also flirting with death, more so in this case than a DD usually is.  Omaha has a citadel and just enough armor to fuse the AP, unlike DDs that are completely protected from those shells past overpen status.

 

Edited by Kesh_Lives

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,872 posts

Personally, the discussion goes a bit beyond fire damage mechanics in directly affects balancing other interactions and types - in particular cruisers - as well. Here are my thoughts on this:

Ships like cruisers or DDs need a weapon against BBs, and direct AP or HE pen isn't it. Torpedoes work great for those who have it, but not every ship does have them nor are they really reliable enough. Fire damage being percentage based makes sense, it is an easy and readily understandable mechanic and it equalizes the AP mechanics that favor BBs very well. However, the latter is exactly the reason this stops working in some cases, in particular at T10.

  • Setting fires is RNG based, favoring high ROF even with lower fire chance as this averages out RNG and gives you basically the expected "fires-per-minute". You can basically count on setting fires when you shoot for 30s at a BB with HE spam, unless you are in an IJN gunboat with IFHE or something else with abysmal fire chance. However, BB AP on the timescale of 30s is hit-or-miss; in most cases you can't rely on it. Citadels can be overpenned and dispersion on most BBs makes the result of a salvo unpredictable. Yes, you might delete that HE spammer, or maybe you do so little damage you might as well have healed them.
  • At lower tiers, the ROF and fire chance of most cruisers compared to their survivability is pretty low (exceptions exist) and every cruiser gets overmatched by anything most of the time. Relative DPM is usually lower too, so BBs have more time to deal with cruisers. BBs even with bad dispersion can fire two or three salvos before being burned down completely instead of the one or two, simply because they are not set on fire again immediately upon DCP cooldown.

From grinding the RU BBs and some cruisers lately, I would argue that BBs should have better dispersion at close range, worse at long range (a bit like RU BBs had at some point) at the expense of them being more vulnerable on their broadsides to BB AP in general. Then, give more cruisers the ability to angle somewhat against BB AP so that surviving BB AP volleys is not an exercise in praying to RNGeesus for overpens and misses, but related to dodging and armor knowledge or concealment management.

I know these are more general changes, but I sometimes feel there is just too much reliance on RNG to balance stuff in this game, where you can have perfect aim on a volley but dispersion says no. Or you know you made a bad shot but somehow that one shell that goes off to Narnia finds a citadel anyway. Similar, I always feel dirty when that single volley from my DD I fire in passing on a BB sets a perma-fire for 18% of their health.

Yes, random events and "fate" sometimes played a huge role in historical events, but they should not do so in a game of wits and strategy between different human players.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,445
[WG]
Administrator, WG Staff
6,604 posts
16,522 battles
1 hour ago, ArIskandir said:

Let me start saying I'm a huge fan of fire damage mechanics, for me it is the great equalizer, the free for all tool that lets my undertiered, underdog, weakling ship to compete and even best a stronger, more powerful ship. I've always thought fire damage fulfills a really important role in keeping the game balanced and enjoyable, after all no matter how bad the odds are, you could always depend on DoT doing a %based damage to HP... the greater the HP pool, the greater the damage.

In all the time I've played this game, I never gave fire damage a second thought... Enter Grand Battle mode, there we have those 2 juggernauts of the sea, ships so big and powerful they could change the outcome of any battle they fight... but they die (or more precisely burn) exactly as fast an easy as a lower tiered BB. It was very anticlimatic for me... I could burn them all just the same way. They weren't scary beasts, no imposing colossus needing a titanic effort to wear them down, just plain old BBQ meat for the roaster.

It all made me think about %based DoT... I like it, it is necessary for balance and fair play but I can't help feeling it steals some awe factor from capital ships. When I play an undertiered HE based ship, it makes no real difference to me the tier of the enemy BB, they will burn all the same, they represent a similar level of threat if they are my own tier or 2 tiers higher. Yes I know there's an intrinsic fire resistance value that scales up with tiers but IMO it is fairly meaningless in the face of the whole RNG system. In short: Big ships are not as scary as they should be because DoT is %based. Is it a necessary "evil"? Could it be done differently while still preserving options for counterplay?

Let's talk

Did this a while ago when folks were complaining about HE spammers.  In short, small shells make small fires that can be upgraded through continued shell spam.  Big shells start at medium and big fires so the HE shell choice feels appropriately impactful

Raw Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7rf1UrXI00

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17,270
[WOLF5]
[WOLF5]
Members
38,132 posts
30,890 battles

A fantastic example where Battleship staying power helps out in damage dealing is non other than Tier VII Gneisenau.  If someone whines about Gneisenau not being able to hit s*t, I don't refute them, because they're right.  However, she does have German BB staying power as compensation, coupled with good speed for the tier as a BB.  Those defensive abilities allow her to hang around the battle longer to deal more damage than all Tech Tree Cruisers of her own tier.  Only 2 Premium Cruisers within her tier turn in a similar Damage Average performance, one of them (Belfast) was considered OP and pulled years ago.

 

Why am I comparing Cruiser and Battleship Damage Averages?  Because the two types, outside a few Utility Ships (i.e. Radar Cruisers) are almost all focused on damage dealing.

EU Server Stats (a very large server, far bigger than NA) for the week of 06-26-2021.

Damage Average

BB Gneisenau - 40.2k Dmg Avg - Some of the worst Battleship gunnery you'll ever see Tier V and beyond.

 

CL Fiji - 36.5k - An excellent ship of the RNCL Line, some would even say she's the true highlight ship of the line, not X Minotaur.

CL Schors - 34.4k - The Russian 152mm gun is excellent in long range combat and Schors has 12 of them.  However, her armor is nonexistent, and she is a rather large target with a big Citadel.  IOW, typical Russian Cruiser.

CL Helena - 32.2k - 152mm x FIFTEEN main battery.  Still does less damage than unreliable Gneisenau.

CA New Orleans - 30.6

CA Surrey - 36.8k

CA Zara - 37.2k - Some people say that she is supposed to be where the ITA CA Line is "supposed" to start getting good.  Still worse than unreliable Gneisenau.

CA Myoko 32.9k - Personally consider Myoko and her many clones, to be a very good Cruiser.  Still worse than unreliable Gneisenau.

CA Yorck 30.4k - 210mm guns with high HE Pen capability that can even cut through 50mm armor.

CA Algerie 34.7k - Good French HE + Engine Boost.  An open water threat.

 

Do remember that Premium Ships don't have to worry about Stock Module grinds, captain retraining like tech tree ships do, so their numbers are inflated.

Premium CL Belfast - 49.4k - Good performance from this HE + Smoke spammer... but she got pulled long ago for being OP.

Premium CL Abruzzi - 30.1k

Premium CL Lazo - 35.2k

Premium CA Gorizia - 40.8k

Premium CL Munchen - 33.8k

Premium CL Atlanta - 30.2k

Premium CL Flint - 34.9k

Premium CL Boise - 36.6k - 152mm x15 main battery again.  Even with inflated Premium Ship stats, even with those 15 guns, she does worse damage than unreliable Gneisenau.

Premium CA Indianapolis 31.7k

 

Here you see one of the worst Battleships found in Tier V and beyond dealing more damage than the any Cruiser within her tier.  Even most of the Premium Cruisers are eclipsed in damage dealing by Unreliable Gneisenau.  Only 2 Premium Cruisers in Tier VII do as much or better damage than Gneisenau:  Belfast and Gorizia.  Belfast got yanked by WG a long time ago because she was Broken OP.  Gneisenau's gunnery is bad, I think nobody will refute that, yet her staying power as a Battleship lets her hang around and keep trying and trying in her salvos.  All while her Cruiser peers are getting sunk.

 

If you dig up stats for the other tiers, at least Tier V and higher, you will find the Cruiser damage dealers not keeping pace with the Battleships.  Even in Tier X you will find a spike in Cruiser damage dealing by the likes of Venezia, Goliath, Henri IV, but they still pale in comparison to a number of the much higher end Battleships in the tier.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,784 posts
16,599 battles
27 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

  Only 2 Premium Cruisers in Tier VII do as much or better damage than Gneisenau:  Belfast and Gorizia

Interesting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,598
[PVE]
Members
10,596 posts
32,060 battles
45 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

Let's say I'm playing an Omaha or something like that.

Let's say I go against a NY, I put a couple fires on it, it DCPs then I put a couple more permafires. Rinse and repeat.

Let's say I go against a Gneisenau. Exactly the same recipe, it will die roughly as fast as the NY. HP and armor become irrelevant.

Is it harder to take down the superior ship? Not in a really significant way... That's my observation. 

To expand on that... let's say the attacking ship is irrelevant & all HE shells shatter (aka only fire damage)...

NY(5)/Gneis(7)/Izumo(9)/Hannover(?11) will all burn at the same rate w/out any nullifiers...no matter what ship type/tier sets the fires because all fire damage is percentage of the targets HP based...

Think that's the point OP is trying to make...

More armor has zero effect & more HP just means more HP is removed w/every tick...but all at the same percentage.

Chances to start fires lessens as ship tiers increase...but actual fires do the same percentage at any tier...

Aka...super BB burns down same speed as a T3...

Which is only completely relevant if the super BB doesn't start w/a given 21 points & all upgrades slots to counter balance it which is the balancing factor...if those skills & upgrades are chosen over other skills & upgrades...

If not it's T3 at T11.

Edited by IfYouSeeKhaos
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,293
[SALVO]
Members
16,448 posts
10,185 battles
33 minutes ago, Kesh_Lives said:

Well, there are always mechanics where it doesn't feel good to be on the receiving end.  I think it's perfectly fine for the cruisers that are most likely to get devstruck by BBs are also the most likely ships to burn a BB down.  It works out.  I'm sure the cruisers who are on the receiving end of citadels from across the map from a BB they never saw 'feel good' about it.  

So, yeah, sympathy is in the dictionary between a couple words.   And HE mechanics are not the only place it "doesn't feel good" to one type or another, but that's PvP between multiple ship types.  It's going to happen, because the game, in the end, is all about sinking the other side's ship, somehow, someway, whether you're delivering the ordnance yourself, or you're spotting for those who are.

EDIT: In the Omaha example by @ArIskandir,in an Omaha, burning down that BB is also flirting with death, more so in this case than a DD usually is.  Omaha has a citadel and just enough armor to fuse the AP, unlike DDs that are completely protected from those shells past overpen status.

 

Yes, it is natural you won't enjoy being on the receiving end but the issue I'm pointing is not if the mechanic is enjoyable or not but how it scales properly (or not).

Let's say you are a BB fighting a cruiser of your same tier. You probably overmatch its armor, 2-3 citadel on it and it is toast, cool. Now let's say you are fighting a cruiser 2 tiers higher, maybe now you can't overmatch its armor, probably you would need  3-5 citadels on it to sink it... fighting the ship from a superior tier became much more difficult.

Let's imagine now a reversal case, you are a Cruiser fighting BBs. The higher tier armor might shatter more of your shots, but as fire chance is unrelated to shells shattering or not it really doesn't matter, you just need to shower it with enough shells and it will burn all the same... fighting the ship from a superior tier isn't significantly more difficult

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,293
[SALVO]
Members
16,448 posts
10,185 battles
41 minutes ago, shinytrashcan said:

Fire damage being percentage based makes sense, it is an easy and readily understandable mechanic and it equalizes the AP mechanics that favor BBs very well.

The problem I see is Fire and AP scales differently on tier progression. If you are AP based you get punished much harder than if HE/Fire based, when playing against higher tiers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
6,667 posts
5 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

Yes, it is natural you won't enjoy being on the receiving end but the issue I'm pointing is not if the mechanic is enjoyable or not but how it scales properly (or not).

Let's say you are a BB fighting a cruiser of your same tier. You probably overmatch its armor, 2-3 citadel on it and it is toast, cool. Now let's say you are fighting a cruiser 2 tiers higher, maybe now you can't overmatch its armor, probably you would need  3-5 citadels on it to sink it... fighting the ship from a superior tier became much more difficult.

Let's imagine now a reversal case, you are a Cruiser fighting BBs. The higher tier armor might shatter more of your shots, but as fire chance is unrelated to shells shattering or not it really doesn't matter, you just need to shower it with enough shells and it will burn all the same... fighting the ship from a superior tier isn't significantly more difficult

Yeah, I understood that the first time, but, same as you, I'm not sure what the answer is...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,293
[SALVO]
Members
16,448 posts
10,185 battles
47 minutes ago, Ahskance said:

Did this a while ago when folks were complaining about HE spammers.  In short, small shells make small fires that can be upgraded through continued shell spam.  Big shells start at medium and big fires so the HE shell choice feels appropriately impactful

Raw Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7rf1UrXI00

Sounds really interesting, can't watch right now but will do later and will come back to this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11,293
[SALVO]
Members
16,448 posts
10,185 battles
10 minutes ago, IfYouSeeKhaos said:

To expand on that... let's say the attacking ship is irrelevant & all HE shells shatter (aka only fire damage)...

NY(5)/Gneis(7)/Izumo(9)/Hannover(?11) will all burn at the same rate w/out any nullifiers...no matter what ship type/tier sets the fires because all fire damage is percentage of the targets HP based...

Think that's the point OP is trying to make...

More armor has zero effect & more HP just means more HP is removed w/every tick...but all at the same percentage.

Chances to start fires lessens as ship tiers increase...but actual fires do the same percentage at any tier...

Aka...super BB burns down same speed as a T3...

Which is only completely relevant if the super BB doesn't start w/a given 21 points & all upgrades slots to counter balance it which is the balancing factor...if those skills & upgrades are chosen over other skills & upgrades...

If not it's T3 at T11.

Precisely, TY for the clarification Khaos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,167
[PVE]
Members
8,775 posts
19 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

The problem I see is Fire and AP scales differently on tier progression. If you are AP based you get punished much harder than if HE/Fire based, when playing against higher tiers.

But this doesn't seem to present any balance problem.  Until a real tangible problem gets identified we're just spinning our wheels.

1 hour ago, Ahskance said:

Did this a while ago when folks were complaining about HE spammers.  In short, small shells make small fires that can be upgraded through continued shell spam.  Big shells start at medium and big fires so the HE shell choice feels appropriately impactful

This concept would exacerbate an already existing problem, damage of smaller shells/ships doesn't scale well in terms of overall damage.  In other words, smaller ships already average less damage, and you want to effectively nerf the one mechanic that acts as an equalizer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,872 posts
41 minutes ago, ArIskandir said:

The problem I see is Fire and AP scales differently on tier progression. If you are AP based you get punished much harder than if HE/Fire based, when playing against higher tiers.

Then the answer would be to modify AP mechanics to scale similar to HE. You could for example remove citadel overpens, or instead of linear dispersion curves have then exponential so that the closer you get your chance of landing AP where you want it go up much more.

From the BB perspective my gripe with HE spammers was always the feeling of being powerless to a death by a thousand cuts. Even when you get close, you can't delete them reliably since you will only get overpens and misses even at sub 8km range. If instead you were rewarded for pushing through the withering HE spam to catch the HE spamming CL within 10km or so and you could reliably chunk them for at least 75%, that would make it worth it.

Imho this is already the case at lower tiers, where the spam is not as bad simply because the ROF of most ships is lower and you have less fires per minute (have to do the calculation on that though). Couple that with the fact that cruisers don't have heals down there, with exceptions, and they are more fragile to AP than at T10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,654
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
5,165 posts
15,884 battles
3 hours ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

Do Battleships really need that much more help now?  I don't think so

The whole damage model of WoWs needs review.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,653
[CLUMP]
Members
2,861 posts
3,004 battles

I find it interesting how takes forever to light up a bot with fire :Smile_sceptic: But one shell from a bot lights you up :fish_palm: Fire mechanic in this game I weird both against players and bots :fish_sleep:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×