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

Enforcing Appropriate Engagement Distances: Torpedos, CQB, & Subs Inspiration

3 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

20
[AAYC]
Members
30 posts
26,028 battles


Enforcing Appropriate Engagement Distances: Torpedos, CQB, & Subs Inspiration


--Activation range of nearly all classes' torpedos should be increased to enforce appropriate engagement distance and reinforce class roles. 

Shorter torp range: closest activation distance, smaller 'deadzone'

  • gun boats, certains CLs with under 8km torps; even these need extended activation deadzones, and/or cause splash damage if detonated too close in a drive-by

Higher torp range: farther activation distance, significantly larger 'deadzone'

  • CAs with 'forgiveable' armor schemes (Germans, French), or over 8-12km torps (IJN)

--Torpedos of certain characteristics (speed, depth, ship class) should have the possibility of deflecting and/or not arming at certain angles, particularly bow-on BBs.

--Torpedos deployed while actively spotted should be indicated to the opponent, with appropriate skills modifying the timeliness and extent of information: 

  • an alert at the moment of being sent, e.g. Incoming Fire Alert skill for main battery fire; 
  • a highlighted field of possible incoming angles from the enemy; 
  • using sound tempo cues, e.g. the beeping already in game for encroaching torps danger close, applied sooner toward unlit incoming torps, in conjunction with Hydroacoustic Search/RF skills.

 


Y Tho?

--Drive-bys with torps should require more finesse in all classes. 
Current torp activation distances: preclude more interesting, and asymmetric CQB engagements; negate certain aspects of being around hard cover; and act counter to the natural instinct to close in defensively to prevent torp activation. Changes to this ...

  • Reward more angling and maneuvering (esp. BBs) while disincentivizing ineffective speculative zoning torp racks from head-on to the end of BBs actually pushing/tanking in vision limited cases; 
  • Presents challenges to yolo DD trades, ambushes and duels, as well as CQB across classes ('gun play'/direct fire damage is the core mechanic; these changes reinforces torpedos as supplementary and last ditch armament to the benefit of CQB type engagements for non-DD classes.


Example

A torp boat is not impeded significantly from using its primary armament (torps) in a knife fight with another DD (gunboat) with current torp activation ranges. A gunboat ought to be able & incentivized to aggressively close the distance to negate the torpboat's torp use, and plan ambushes from cover/against smoke sitters accordingly. This further delineates the cap contesting gunboat sub-class' littoral terrain advantage from open water torpedo boats' scouting and zoning function. 


Analogues

If submarines cannot be actively trialed on live servers, the design/mechanics ecosystem for sub interaction(s) with other ship classes still can, all while innovating on existing gameplay. Sub torps in the non-homing 'proximity fuse' configuration (e.g. supercavitating torps) should be the most susceptible to the aforementioned bow-angle deflection preventing their detonation. 

  • The Incoming Fire Alert for spotted DD's torp salvos functions described above can and ought to interact with the Sound Signature they produce, if the ambition is to eventually implement submarines (giving them an additional passive spotting type/role in picketting/recon). 
  • Vigilance skill on battleships could make the torp bubble trail animation visible from farther out, without any other animation cue in the absence of Hydroacoustic Search or Spotting Plane consumables active. 
  • Radio Frequency skill on DDs & CLs would provide the Incoming Fire Alert function against the torp racks of lit surface ships, but against submarine torps for friendly ships within a certain range. It would also detect the zone of an active Communication Float/Sonar Buoy deployed by submarines keeping station at operational depth whom is providing the enemy with passive spotting.

 

Conclusion

We've just brought back and entire line of Giga Chad German Secondary BBs. There are enhancements to class & role delineations served by making torpedo activation distance and torpedo angle of attack significant and relevant to gameplay in a way that encourages higher tempo, aggressive plays and gameplay, especially in CQB situations. Addressing these can - and should - be integrated in Commander Skill & Mechanics changes that dovetail with prospective submarine introduction aims which are relatively simple:  expanding on sound & visual cues for torp detection and warning with these and consumables' action (such as Hydroacoustic Search) with this in mind can be a low impact start in that direction. A good, evergreen, balanced mechanic/skill enhancing the game ecosystem is worth as much as a new tech tree for the end user. How much more so if it accomodates a problematic, but high potential new class?

 

  • Boring 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,302
[PAT]
Members
1,258 posts
15,083 battles
37 minutes ago, facilegoose said:

A gunboat ought to be able & incentivized to aggressively close the distance to negate the torpboat's torp use, and plan ambushes from cover/against smoke sitters accordingly.

Why? Torps are already borderline useless in DD vs DD fights due to the difficulty of hitting another fast and maneuverable ship. If you're regularly eating torps in a DD, you're probably doing something wrong. "Aggressively closing the distance" already works fine in situations that call for that kind of play. Ambushing from cover pretty much eliminates torps as a threat because, you know...it's an ambush.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,911
[WORX]
Members
16,978 posts
22,074 battles
1 hour ago, facilegoose said:

A gunboat ought to be able & incentivized to aggressively close the distance to negate the torpboat's torp use, and plan ambushes from cover/against smoke sitters accordingly.

Before I investigate why you want an ordnance with only server avg of %8 hit rate, to have even more disadvantages then it already have... If this ^^^ is happening (which is rare), a DD gunboat loses to a torp DD... Give that Torp DD driver the credit for achieving something for the underdog position... (ala Cincinnati Bengals).

Must of the torp DD are mothballed... Its mainly due to a lot of factors... No need to advocate MORE restrictions... And besides, power creep is a HUGE issue for torp DDs... Though they need for other in-game mechanics to be relaxed a bit (Or a lot). I'm not welcoming power creeped DD guns (even though they have) to negate torpd DD and light cruiser units... 

In a regular match... Guns are 3 times more accurate per game then torp AND have more salvos then torps...

With this stat in mind... I dont see a need to weaken torps anytime soon.

 

Edited by Navalpride33

Share this post


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×