Pigeon_of_War

Feedback and Thoughts Directly to Pigeon_of_War

  • You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.

2,217 posts in this topic

 

I think 3.8 seconds is a little too short, personally. It would lead to a lot of blinking in and out, which is something Wargaming has specifically said they want to avoid. I can see why, too. Ships like Bogatyr and Krasny Krym and the like would blink with their 130s. I think there should be a lower bound of say, 10 seconds. It would be a significant improvement still.

 

As usual, Hopp, a well thought out post that makes a good point. And you are right in that no one likes to see a ship blinking in and out of visibility. It makes targeting difficult and lowers one's effective hit ratio.

 

Sort of like what happens when a ship fires at range. And also, consider this; while I don't know what caliber Bogatyr's guns are, I do know that by going by my dynamic, a Russian DD with 130 mm guns would be visible for 6.5 seconds, and that isn't exactly blinking in and out of sight. There does need to be a lower limit, I'm just not sure it should be as high as 10 seconds.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on Pigeon, pull all the strings you can, poop on a few heads, and Get This Done!

 

Not going to happen, but the idea was there at some point. 

More interesting captains may be coming in the future:read_fish:


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Pigeon, as you know ruslan3d_akmanov made his own ship the "Kronstadt" Tier 8 Project 69 Battleship

 

It looks like he managed to inject it in the game - which is hard but not impossible.

 

This means he took even more time on the model than required.. perhaps he copied the way the ships are in the game (wont go into technicals) which could even mean he did ship split zones.

 

From what I can see, the model is mostly done, all that would need to be done would be maybe a week of tweaks compared to how long it takes to actually get the plans and make the darn thing - this guy is giving it for free!

 

Now of course the "stats" that were listed are OP ofc but I'm sure WG could make this balanced.

 

 

Anyhow, do you think there's even a chance that this Fan-made ship could make it's way in the premium shop? He himself has stated that he would like that to happen "to see it official". And I for one would LOVE another Scharnhorst-type ship.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Pigeon do you think that you could give this idea to Wargaming to maybe mitigate a bit of the hate the patch caused in terms of invisi-firing, while this will probably not satisfy everyone I think that it makes logical sense.

When you are in a DD you should not remain spotted for 20 seconds after firing, DD's have much smaller guns, Therefore the muzzle flash is smaller, this should be reflected in game by reducing the amount of time you have your detection range maxed out, Wargaming can keep their new mechanics just adjusted slightly so that DD's can shoot and not then have to panic for 20 seconds and not want to fire to avoid the hassle of having to doge everywhere for 20 seconds.

My thoughts (subject to appropriate testing time of course and subject to change): 

Calibers below 5.9" - 8-10 seconds

Calibers between 6" and 12" - 11-14 seconds

Calibers between 12.1" and 16" - 14-18 seconds

Calibers above 16" 20 seconds

 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we have an option to streamline the loading screen to nothing more than a loading bar and a picture? I feel like the current waste resources and I would like to be in game then watching the game from the loading screen. Also I find the music for the loading screen annoying and I'd like to be able to turn that off...


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate Hate Hate the new CV rules. Cant target? what were they thinking? Cant Sraif?  Weak.  Change it back!


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think it is a little odd that since 6.3.0 a destroyer (Blyscawica) firing 4" guns is detected further away than Furutaka firing 8" guns?

 

Is the new passive destroyer gameplay intended by wargaming?  Are destroyers intended as the primary class to contest caps?

 

Or: are destroyers designed to be the "light tanks" of WoWs (only spot at start, get clean-up damage at the end after most opponents dead?).  If so, will spotting be rewarded more?

 

Thanks!


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

As usual, Hopp, a well thought out post that makes a good point. And you are right in that no one likes to see a ship blinking in and out of visibility. It makes targeting difficult and lowers one's effective hit ratio.

 

Sort of like what happens when a ship fires at range. And also, consider this; while I don't know what caliber Bogatyr's guns are, I do know that by going by my dynamic, a Russian DD with 130 mm guns would be visible for 6.5 seconds, and that isn't exactly blinking in and out of sight. There does need to be a lower limit, I'm just not sure it should be as high as 10 seconds.

 

Novik, Bogatyr with the upgrade, Svietlana, and Krasny Krym all have 130mm guns with an 8 second reload, I believe. Somewhere around there. For the size of the gun, they're very slow, but I believe balanced for the volume of fire they can put out. 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Novik, Bogatyr with the upgrade, Svietlana, and Krasny Krym all have 130mm guns with an 8 second reload, I believe. Somewhere around there. For the size of the gun, they're very slow, but I believe balanced for the volume of fire they can put out. 

 

They could probably give you a cumulative penalty. Some kind of factor based on how many guns you fire.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Novik, Bogatyr with the upgrade, Svietlana, and Krasny Krym all have 130mm guns with an 8 second reload, I believe. Somewhere around there. For the size of the gun, they're very slow, but I believe balanced for the volume of fire they can put out.

 

.

They could probably give you a cumulative penalty. Some kind of factor based on how many guns you fire.

 

 

What would make or break a caliber based detection range timer would be the Rate of Fire for the guns, which is where the IJN slow reloads actually helps them, because it would allow them to disengage between rounds. Ships like Akizuki, Atlanta, and Belfast will NEVER be able to disengage between rounds, as their ROF's are much too short. The way to keep IJN, and other slow reloading DD's from blinking in and out of visibility, would be to INCREASE their rates of fire.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a simple answer, please. Even just an acknowledgment will do. This will be the last time I bring this up in this thread. Thanks in advance! - ​http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/120709-tirpitz-needs-to-be-lowered-to-match-her-historical-waterline/


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Myoko's main gun traverse needs to be unnerfed, matching Mogami's 203s traverse.  Those were put in back when Myoko was far more potent and Pensacola was her only competition.  Now that we have 3 other cruiser lines, it's time to remove the nerf.  This doesn't change anything else other than improve some on-the-fly flexibility.

If that happens, her RoF would have to be reduced to the standard 4 RPM instead of the 4.2 (?) she has now. Otherwise her guns would be just straight-up better than the Mogami and Ibuki's. 

Mogami's 155s need to be rebalanced to lower RoF but higher traverse.  The reason they were nerfed in the first place was because a stealth-firing 155 Mogami was clearly overpowered.  Now that there is no such thing as stealth firing, it's only fair to unnerf the traverse, but to keep balance, bring down the RoF closer to or at historical (which is more or less the same RoF as the 203s).  As well, with the first round of Captain skill changes, the remaining two parts that made her OP, BFT and AFT, have already been rebalanced to exclude shells over 140mm.

I think nerfing her RoF would make the guns pretty bad. I think WG should allow the 155s to be an option, instead of a stock module. If you nerfed the RoF to historical levels (5RPM), her DPM would be slightly worse than the Chapayev's, while her fire starting capabilities would be significantly worse. 

Mogami's 203s, Atago, and Ibuki to get AP Mod 1 shell upgrades.  They plateau in both AP and HE performance from Furutaka all the way to Ibuki.  All they need is the AP Mod 1 shell for better AP performance (penetration and damage).  Their HE can remain as-is for the impressive fire-starting potential.

I don't think Mogami and Atago need better AP, but Ibuki certainly does. 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wondering if any consideration has been given to adding points or damage assists for spotting as is in WoT. This would be a bonus means of rewarding DDs for going ahead and spotting for the team and maybe even aid in team play.

-  Also how about having a way to turn off your spotting so that RDF cannot find you i.e. if I am not spotting for the rest of the team yet in front of them I cannot be seen by anyone with RDF as a skill.

- And this one is just thrown out for anyone to answer - a way to encourage more team play vs just out for me; possibly making kill assists a ribbon similar to capture ribbons?

 

 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Pigeon do you think that you could give this idea to Wargaming to maybe mitigate a bit of the hate the patch caused in terms of invisi-firing, while this will probably not satisfy everyone I think that it makes logical sense.

When you are in a DD you should not remain spotted for 20 seconds after firing, DD's have much smaller guns, Therefore the muzzle flash is smaller, this should be reflected in game by reducing the amount of time you have your detection range maxed out, Wargaming can keep their new mechanics just adjusted slightly so that DD's can shoot and not then have to panic for 20 seconds and not want to fire to avoid the hassle of having to doge everywhere for 20 seconds.

My thoughts (subject to appropriate testing time of course and subject to change):

Calibers below 5.9" - 8-10 seconds

Calibers between 6" and 12" - 11-14 seconds

Calibers between 12.1" and 16" - 14-18 seconds

Calibers above 16" 20 seconds

 

(I know I am repeating this but I really think this is the best solution to get people to stop being so angry about the removal of stealth-fire, not completely of course but less then currently.)

 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pigeon, what about this?

 

Release Notes 0.6.3.1

  • Submarine removed, Commander sent to reserves trained for Orlan, Skill points saved
  • The sub's Port slot stays as a gift for you!

 

How does that work with:

 

 

Not going to happen, but the idea was there at some point. 

More interesting captains may be coming in the future:read_fish:

 

?

 

This captain that's going to drop in reserve and be retrained to Orlan, will that be the same one? IE, same name and icon as the sub captain? Or just be a random captain with the same points but an existing portait / name?

 

<Edit> It seems we have our answer, Russianbias was dismissed and we got a 'normal' Orlan captain.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pigeon, what about this?

 

 

How does that work with:

 

 

?

 

This captain that's going to drop in reserve and be retrained to Orlan, will that be the same one? IE, same name and icon as the sub captain? Or just be a random captain with the same points but an existing portait / name?

 

 

it's going to be a Russian version clone of Steven Seagull, called Stephan Segulski.

he comes with absolutely no skills at all and specializes in emptying vodka bottles and running into friendly ships.

he then passes out, but when he wakes up he cooks Borsht for the entire crew.

 

(try to contain your enthusiasm)

Edited by Umikami

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that happens, her RoF would have to be reduced to the standard 4 RPM instead of the 4.2 (?) she has now. Otherwise her guns would be just straight-up better than the Mogami and Ibuki's.

That's a reasonable change, though I don't feel it really necessary, considering that she has worse firing angles than Mogami or Ibuki.

 

I think nerfing her RoF would make the guns pretty bad. I think WG should allow the 155s to be an option, instead of a stock module. If you nerfed the RoF to historical levels (5RPM), her DPM would be slightly worse than the Chapayev's, while her fire starting capabilities would be significantly worse. 

Something has to give though for some reasonable traverse.  While I would like for WG to consider just straight up reversing the traverse nerf and nothing else on Mogami's 155s, considering that BFT/AFT/EM were already adjusted to exclude 155 primaries, I don't think that it will fly.  Maybe a slight RoF reduction somewhere around 5.75~5.5RPM, if not brought down to 5RPM.  It just needs to be made competitive again without being a completely superior choice to 203 Mogami.

 

I don't think Mogami and Atago need better AP, but Ibuki certainly does. 

Mogami and Atago both need it as well as Ibuki.

 

Mogami needs it to make the 203 AP performance better than Myoko and also more enticing to upgrade to; moreso, if the 155s simply had their traverse unnerfed, or had a slight RoF nerf along with the unnerfing of the traverse.

 

Atago needs it as she has the lowest RoF between Myoko, Mogami, and Ibuki, and worse firing arcs than Mogami and Ibuki.  This just keeps her in-line with Mogami in the gunnery aspect while still being better than Myoko.

 

And Ibuki does need it to slightly bring her general performance up a bit vs same-tier cruisers as well as against the most heavily armored BBs within the spread instead of constantly relying on HE for damage. Alternatively, just give her the Zao's 203s with a 16s reload time.  That buffs both her AP and HE performance, and makes her a much more enticing upgrade in general from Mogami (unnerfed and buffed or not).

 

The main thing is giving the IJN cruisers more direct combat capability, now that they don't have to hug the edges of their range spamming HE from T5 to T9, and at T8 and T9 especially, have a bit more AP kick without really affecting their overall stat performance.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with Mogami 155 ROF nerf. The ship has to give up NOTHING in exchange for having the turret rotation un-nerfed.

What made the Mogami OP before was the AFT plus the fire mechanics back then. AFT no longer increases 155 range and fire proc chance is nothing like it used to be back then. Heck back then I used to set dual fires consistently with Mogami 155 PER SALVO ... now only soviet cruisers do that.


 

Remember too that the turret rotation is still slow even with the un-nerfing compared to other cruisers..and thus Mogami needs to take the -ROF+Rotation upgrade to get it to match other cruiser's turret rotation. You have the nerf right there... or the Mogami has slower turrets than the 203s or other cruisers. Remember too that soviet bias is king..and thus the Chappy, having 152mm guns, not only has much higher fire chance, rotation rate and almost as high damage per HE shell than Mogami's 155... but it also gets a brutal damage increase with IFHE...which puts its damage output above mogami 155 with IFHE.


 

I don't see why Mogami needs more AP punch. Its quite nasty as it is even vs tier 9 and 10 cruisers.


 


 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/common/born-2-b-kawaii-ld/

 

Pigeon I hope you can tell us that there are missions going to happen to get these ships otherwise I will be very disappointed that WoWs took the Blitz route and made their unique vehicles Premium shop only. I hope that you guys just forgot to say there would be missions but a little confirmation would be nice. (Also tell URL Guy to keep up the great work!)

 

Also can I get an answer on this?

Pigeon do you think that you could give this idea to Wargaming to maybe mitigate a bit of the hate the patch caused in terms of invisi-firing, while this will probably not satisfy everyone I think that it makes logical sense.

When you are in a DD you should not remain spotted for 20 seconds after firing, DD's have much smaller guns, Therefore the muzzle flash is smaller, this should be reflected in game by reducing the amount of time you have your detection range maxed out, Wargaming can keep their new mechanics just adjusted slightly so that DD's can shoot and not then have to panic for 20 seconds and not want to fire to avoid the hassle of having to doge everywhere for 20 seconds.

My thoughts (subject to appropriate testing time of course and subject to change):

Calibers below 5.9" - 8-10 seconds

Calibers between 6" and 12" - 11-14 seconds

Calibers between 12.1" and 16" - 14-18 seconds

Calibers above 16" 20 seconds

 

(I know I am repeating this but I really think this is the best solution to get people to stop being so angry about the removal of stealth-fire, not completely of course but less then currently.

Edited by Fog_Repair_Ship_Akashi

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pigeon:

 

If Mogami turret rotation is indeed being lowered in the next patch then wonderful! That makes me very happy.


 

Shimakaze needs help. Its torps are trashed by the nerf and its guns are mostly harmless.


 

Torpedoes: Let's do the math.


 

Gearing:

16km range, 1.3km detect, 68 knots and 10 torps @ 18k damage each. Total torp damage: 180k.


 

Shimakaze:

20km torp has 2.5km detect, 62kn, 15 torps @ 21k damage. Total torp damage: 315k.

12km torp has 1.9km detect, 67kn, 15 torps @ 23.8k damage. Total torp damage: 357k.

8km torp has 1.9km detect, 71kn, 15 torps @ 21.4k damage. Total torp damage: 321k.


 

On paper the Shimakaze has practically twice the torpedo damage output but in reality the higher detection range makes that torp damage virtually vanish.


 

Pre-nerf the Shima was very OP because it had high damage torps with low detection range and it had 5 more torps than anyone else... the nerf it was given was not the way to balance it.


 

How to balance it:


 

The lower the detection range of the torps the slower the torpedoes.

The slower the torpedo the longer its range.

The longer its range, the lower its damage.


 

Applying this we end up with:

20km torp has 1.2km detect, 55kn, 15 torps @ 15k damage. Total torp damage: 225k.

12km torp has 1.5km detect, 60kn, 15 torps @ 20k damage. Total torp damage: 300k.

8km torp has 2km detect, 70kn, 15 torps @ 23k damage. Total torp damage: 345k.


 

Why this works:

The 20km torps have lower damage because the shima is not putting itself in danger firing from that far. The 1.2km detect and slow speed give it roughly the same reaction as Gearing torps and also its slower speed means the Shima has to 'lead' the torp shots a lot more than a Gearing.

The other two torpedoes gain more damage given the Shima has to get inside radar range and aircraft detection range and risk running into gunboat DDs that literally dominate and exterminate Shimakazes. The 8km torps are brutal but the Shima is at extreme risk using them.


 

Guns:

Shima guns cannot be used to defend itself because of the horrid turret rotation and the 2x slower ROF. It's even silly to use them offensively unless you're behind some solid cover and you've no other means of helping the team.


 

How about making the guns synergize with the torpedo armament?


 

Lower gun range to 8km. This counteracts the ship having the longest range torps.

Keep ROF and Turret rotation as is. Reason for it follows.

Increase fire chance to 14%.


 

The increased fire chance enables the Shima to counteract its lack of damage output due to rotation and ROF with fire damage..yet the lower ROF and the short range requires the shima to assume a ton of risk to do so.


 

Remember, Shima has the lowest hitpoints of any DD... as such risk=quick death.


 

Frankly I cannot see a reason why WG would refuse this. Soviet ships have insane fire chance and have twice the ROF... shima having 14% fire chance and short range with half the ROF would not be anything to cry about.

 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pigeon, you guys really - really - need to take a long hard look at what value it is to keep team torp damage in the game and seriously consider just removing it altogether. What downside is there to removing?

 

"Removing it will increase torp spam"? - the whole reason this is even an issue is the number of people that are spamming it disregarding the safety of teammates anyway. Whatever change there will be will at worst minimal.

 

"Realism"? - this ain't a sim and if we want to talk about realism, then we have a WHOLE host of things to discuss that hey, involve balancing things out that are currently unbalanced.

 

"We have penalties"? - they do nothing.

 

"They'll get better"? - sorry, if they haven't figured it out by tier 6 and 7, they aren't going to.

 

I can not find ONE good reason for torpedo related team damage to stay, not.one.

 

All this does is breed animosity, cause issues, and hurt teams with trolls or fools. An all too familiar scenario for me, why my bad advice contest entry was on this subject, headed toward an enemy BB, firing away, becomes clear he's willing to ram. I go right well before that, I give him my broadside in a Dun, I go right when we get to this point, I round a ground and become a sitting duck, with just under half health (partially to a Farragut that despite no visible smoke and being in the open ocean was shooting at me unspotted) so my only option, go left and try to duck around him. Start the turn, and then that infamous sound of approaching torps crops up, and as I look to the hud, torps, from one of my teams DD's, headed right at me. Even had I not started this turn, I was still in the path, but now starting to go broadside to them. So I'm forced to come back right and hope I can hit the gap between that ship and the island. But I get hit by the two torpedoes which do damage, start a couple floods, and jam my rudder so my stern hits that ship and so we both die to a ram. And I was screwed anyway because my repair was down from having to put out fires. What scenario is this fair or fun pigeon? I'm out because someone else isn't paying attention and lets loose torps. He gets a penalty, albeit deserved that unless it turns him pink is a slap on the wrist. And sure, this time it ends in me taking a ship with me but now our team is down a ship. It makes sense in tanks, it has to be a perfect storm or arty splash to cause damage outside of intentional targeting. Even in that awful game somehow still allowed to be part of the "World of" games Warplanes it makes some sense, granted there was a point where module damage was in a state it was an issue just like here because Russian (go figure) planes were tearing wings off but accidents were still few and far between. Even here in regards to ship artillery, it makes sense because you have to be really not paying attention or foolish and often does little damage the handful of times I've seen it. But torps are just too much a damn issue to stay like this because they rack up way too many direct and indirect team kills and most players earn pink status because of the bloody things.

 

It is seriously better for everyone involved to just turn it off.


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....Also can I get an answer on this?.....

(snip)

 

Oh yes, i thought I answered this, or rather I meant to on Friday and go sidetracked. No more excuses....

 

So I looked it over and this is not necessarily a bad idea, it's just complex. It would be difficult to explain to a new player that different caliber guns have different visibility detection times and that's why a ship is able to still open-sea invisibly fire at them.  This ultimately also still promotes invisible firing to some extent, which is what is not desired. 

 


0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.