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

Just checking to see how the Player base feels about Fires

Are Fires OP   

232 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you believe that Fires are OP


80 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Alpha Tester
349 posts
15,111 battles

I hope I get a response and that WG developers will address this only based on your votes or voice I know at times they said it working as intended but personally I have always believe it ws over done

Edited by Stieger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
306
[PISD]
Beta Testers
594 posts
35,216 battles

I want them to be more realistic... 

I voted Yes.

 

For example.. Fire burnt a certain section of ship. No more fires should be able to start in that spot, as all the flammable materials have already burnt. Also, there's a high chance that the Damage Control Teams sprayed some sort of fire-killing foam, further destroying the chance of more fires.

 

There is nothing more agitating in this game than being outgunned by a Destroyer sitting in smoke, or otherwise firing from stealth, because he can lob HE and start fires repeatedly.

Edited by Schlachtschiff_Gneisenau
  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
179
[HAIFU]
-Members-
702 posts
7,365 battles

I voted yes because I doubt that deck fires were able to destroy entire ships in real life. It was probably the internal fires that killed a ship. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
898 posts
14,840 battles

yes fires op, fire from DD should be half time. Otherwise 2xt9 mosquitos burnining mighty colosal ships for fun.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,622
[-KIA-]
Senior Volunteer Moderator, Beta Testers, Supertester, Privateers, Senior Volunteer Moderator
6,550 posts
8,491 battles

Wait, I thought you could burn ash? XD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,661
Alpha Tester, Members, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
12,413 posts

Fire is only OP when you're fighting a cruiser in a battleship and you lose not because you aimed terribly but because RNG decided you get to wash the enemy's deck.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,640
[WOLF1]
Members
9,915 posts
18,230 battles

 

O LOOK ANOTHER HE THREAD......
Just what we needed after not having one for a whole day....


towfk_zpsqebujecl.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah I am bored//.

Edited by pmgaudio
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,521
[WOLF7]
Members
12,620 posts

Fire is only OP when you're fighting a cruiser in a battleship and you lose not because you aimed terribly but because RNG decided you get to wash the enemy's deck.

 

+1. Everyone wants their preferred ship type to be OP....If you're letting a cruiser burn your BB down, you might want to rethink letting them live that long... 
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
737 posts
9,014 battles

People just forget this is not real life and there's not only DDs which needs the fire but CRUISERS.

How are cruisers are supposed to kill BBs? Are you guys seriously trying to say to get into 4km and try AP? :teethhappy:

 

I never see people complaining about BBs destroying a cruiser with one salvo. It's always the cruiser's fault!

The BBs shouldn't be blamed for being in a bad position, right? hahaha

 

And using consumables is too hard! Healing and insta-repair!

Maybe paying a little for premiums consumable? No?

Maybe using some points at the cap to reduce the dmg? No?

Maybe upgrading the ship to lower the fire chance? No?

There's no way to counter it! Oh no! :trollface:

 

If you guys are serious about it, at least try to say how change it without making cruisers disappear more.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,106
[ERN]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
10,906 posts
4,896 battles

I feel flooding is even more OP..... An single flood can easily take away 20-30k hp if left untreated on a BB. what even worse? 2-3 flooding at the same time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,661
Alpha Tester, Members, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
12,413 posts

People just forget this is not real life and there's not only DDs which needs the fire but CRUISERS.

How are cruisers are supposed to kill BBs? Are you guys seriously trying to say to get into 4km and try AP? :teethhappy:

 

I never see people complaining about BBs destroying a cruiser with one salvo. It's always the cruiser's fault!

The BBs shouldn't be blamed for being in a bad position, right? hahaha

 

And using consumables is too hard! Healing and insta-repair!

Maybe paying a little for premiums consumable? No?

Maybe using some points at the cap to reduce the dmg? No?

Maybe upgrading the ship to lower the fire chance? No?

There's no way to counter it! Oh no! :trollface:

 

If you guys are serious about it, at least try to say how change it without making cruisers disappear more.

 

I don't think you realize CAs are not supposed to actively engage and are supposed to be at an extreme disadvantage to BBs as the main job of Battleships is to kill them and other battleships.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
737 posts
9,014 battles

 

I don't think you realize CAs are not supposed to actively engage and are supposed to be at an extreme disadvantage to BBs as the main job of Battleships is to kill them and other battleships.

 

It's not about "exteme disadvantage". It would borderline impossible. :)

That's why CAs don't fight head on but when they are focused somewhere else.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,396
[SALVO]
Members
28,044 posts
41,542 battles

I feel flooding is even more OP..... An single flood can easily take away 20-30k hp if left untreated on a BB. what even worse? 2-3 flooding at the same time

 

 

Ummm.... flooding should be just about the most dangerous damage a ship can sustain.  Ships don't sink because you punch holes in them above the water line.  They sink because you punch holes in them BELOW the water line!!!

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12,396
[SALVO]
Members
28,044 posts
41,542 battles

People just forget this is not real life and there's not only DDs which needs the fire but CRUISERS.

How are cruisers are supposed to kill BBs? Are you guys seriously trying to say to get into 4km and try AP? :teethhappy:

 

I never see people complaining about BBs destroying a cruiser with one salvo. It's always the cruiser's fault!

The BBs shouldn't be blamed for being in a bad position, right? hahaha

 

And using consumables is too hard! Healing and insta-repair!

Maybe paying a little for premiums consumable? No?

Maybe using some points at the cap to reduce the dmg? No?

Maybe upgrading the ship to lower the fire chance? No?

There's no way to counter it! Oh no! :trollface:

 

If you guys are serious about it, at least try to say how change it without making cruisers disappear more.

 

I don't think you realize CAs are not supposed to actively engage and are supposed to be at an extreme disadvantage to BBs as the main job of Battleships is to kill them and other battleships.

 

 

I think that we realize it perfectly well.  But this is a game not real life (as so many of you like to constantly point out), and unless CAs and CL's have a way to damage BB's, this game might as well get rid if CA's entirely, because who's going to want to play a type of ship whose role is going to end up being cannon fodder for enemy BB's? 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
4,535 posts
16,597 battles

Fires are not OP, but sentence structure, grammar, and punctuation are.  Proof is OP's post.

 

I voted no, because I think fires should be buffed in intensity and duration.

Edited by mohawkdriver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
336 posts

I find it silly that fires have been implemented in such a way so that the small guns can deal comparatively reasonable/large damage against things that were literally designed in real life to be all but invulnerable to them (and are also listed as being preyed upon in-game by said larger ships).

Read: it's stupid how much damage Destroyers and Cruisers are able to do against both each other and especially battleships just by roasting them alive when battleships are supposed to be the counter to cruisers, destroyers are generally supposed to torpedo battleships and battleships struggle to land reliable shots at the long ranges that cruisers dictate the fight at with their speed.

Fire chance needs to be toned down for ALL classes including carriers and fires need to not deal so much damage.

Take a CL, 4-5 broadsides in 40s on a battleship and light 2-3 fires because of your accuracy and sheer volume of HE, battleship burns the Repair Party (because he has multiple fires going). 10 seconds later you just relight the fires and pull away leaving him to burn a slow and painful death. All the while you only had to dodge 2-4 salvos aimed against you most of which missed and you've successfully sunk your allegedly hard counter in-game. The same goes for a DD against a CA/CL if the DD has smoke.

Edited by Spongeman131
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WFR]
Beta Testers
252 posts
4,343 battles

Right now, I'd say no.  Besides who is to tell if the person seeing you on fire does not have the skills, upgrades, and/or signals to have a higher chance of causing fires?

 

Besides it looks like IRL, USS Evans, after losing power due to flooding, had to worry more about putting out the fires in order to survive.

 

A torpedo caused the USS Jarvis to catch on fire.  They got it under control but jettisoned ask their torpedoes for safety.

 

USS Hugh W. Hadley was also fighting off planes with the Evans and was on fire.

 

USS Morris caught on fire from an explosion from a plane's bomb or torpedo.  The fire took two hours be come under controlled, being extinguisher a half hour after that.

 

Most of those above were destroyers.  Looking at a list, looked like most sunk from flooding from torpedoes.  And most of those was during AA actions.

 

The USS Yorktown caught on fire below decks from a dive bomber.  Fire on carriers must have been a big worry because they "smothered the gasoline systems with carbon dioxide" prior to the engagement to prevent them from exploding.  It took them about a hour or so to feel the fire was under controlled enough to start refueling planes.

 

USS LST-396 (Landing Ship, Tank) sunk after an accidental fire caused an explosion.

 

Vietnam War era, USS Forrestal carrier had a plane misfire a rocket, dislodging another plane's external fuel tanks, causing a fire that lasted three hours.

 

Anyway, all this rambling just points out fires happened and could have burned a lot more than a twenty minute WoWs battle.  With you being able to hit a consumable to halt a fire immediately.  And saying a fire shouldn't start again in the same section is just insane.  Explosions could not only restart a fire on what was burning, the ship sections are large.  Technically when a ship section catches on fire, it doesn't actually have to mean that whole section is on fire.  It could easily be a small area the lit up.  The next fire in that section could be a different small area.

 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,113
[FOXEH]
Banned
14,364 posts
23,310 battles

Wait, I thought you could burn ash? XD

 

Isn't there a team member waiting to torpedo you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,156 posts

Fires, and ESPECIALLY flooding, are far too powerful, considering the prodigious rate at which they can be inflicted and the complete lack of countermeasures we have available to deal with them.  

 

When any HE shell fired is quite capable of setting fires no matter what/where/how/when it hits, and those fires being GUARANTEED to burn away several thousand hitpoints, no matter what you do?  That's excessive.  Yeah, you have your damage control ability, but that's a one-shot deal, with a cooldown lasting several minutes.  So you're forced to either trigger it immediately, or wait for multiple fires, losing thousands of hitpoints in the process.  Either way, the very next shot that hits you is liable to light something up again, and now you're screwed.  Thousands upon thousands of hitpoints are now burning away, with absolutely no further input required from the enemy, and until that cooldown is over, you have ABSOLUTELY no way to do anything about it.  That's not skill, or tactics, or good play.  That's you getting destroyed by automatic game mechanics simply because the enemy was competent enough to land a few hits.

 

And flooding is even worse.  Yes, it's rather uncommon, requiring torpedo hits...  But it strips away OVER THIRTY THOUSAND HITPOINTS!  That's an uncontrolled, unstoppable, automatic DoT effect that is GUARANTEED to completely and utterly destroy a target, from as little as ONE lucky hit.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,156 posts

 

+1. Everyone wants their preferred ship type to be OP....If you're letting a cruiser burn your BB down, you might want to rethink letting them live that long... 

 

OK, sure.  Let's do that.

 

MISSMISSMISSBOUNCEBOUNCEMISSOVERPENBOUNCEOVERPENMISSMISSMISSBOUNCEOVERPENOVERPENMISS.

 

That's a few minutes gone by, probably 100,000 hitpoints gone from your Battleship, and maybe 3,000 gone from the Cruiser.  Real viable option, that...

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
652 posts
13,807 battles

Not OP. BBs can one shot cruisers and cruisers can't do anything in return. You will get high damage rolls playing both ships; you'll just get the damage from each ship class over a different amount of time. Fires are just as frustrating to Battleship drivers as citadels are to cruisers.

Edited by MrEndeavour
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,326
[MUDDX]
Banned
8,144 posts
25,407 battles

Dratt_Dastardly I worked for a Fire Chief back in the 80s who was stationed on Forrestal during that fire. They were extremely lucky to have saved the ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,156 posts

Not OP. BBs can one shot cruisers and cruisers can't do anything in return. You will get high damage rolls playing both ships; you'll just get the damage from each ship class over a different amount of time. Fires are just as frustrating to Battleship drivers as citadels are to cruisers.

 

Just, you know...  1000x easier to inflict.

 

Battleships have to have perfect aim AND a ton of luck with RNG.  Cruisers just have to land a shot anywhere on the entire ship.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
737 posts
9,014 battles

 

Just, you know...  1000x easier to inflict.

 

Battleships have to have perfect aim AND a ton of luck with RNG.  Cruisers just have to land a shot anywhere on the entire ship.

 

If they are so easy and so OP, why cruisers do less average dmg than all BBs (except for Montana because reasons)?

And one more, if they are so OP, why BBs don't use HE 100% of the time? They have it too, you know?

 

"Perfect aim" nice joke!

 

 

RJwcaRb.png

2 hits with his "perfect aim" for 21k+ haha

 

Qx0CKKr.jpg

14k and "perfect aim" as always!

Edited by PauloBR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
534
[VPMN]
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
2,095 posts
8,175 battles

No, I feel HE is right where it should be. Its fire, it is supposed to burn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×