Lucky you. Could have ended in one volley too. #irony off
Scharnhorst and Kronshtadt with a degree less are absurdly powerful and tough
to play against. Generally the whole naval-mode cares way too much about magazine-hits - yes, they happened and yes, as a player of HMS Hood I tend to say “wow, that´s quite realistic, awesome”. The given damage-model - a great and ambitous idea - simply does not work properly. In my eyes it gives more harm than benefit to the game.
That’s kinda how it’s meant to be. If you can’t pen the armour then either bring torpedoes or don’t bother.
Talking of which I put two torps from a coastal boat into a Scharnhorst. Made the mistake of blazing away at it with a 20mm popgun once I was sure they were going to hit. Then saw a wall of death headed my way. Torps did hit as I saw such when I respawned, though the animation for a majorish event is pretty much the same as getting a 20mm hit. So sailed down to the same spot in a proper DD and laced it with torps, couple to the rear 4 to the front in case he accelerated and 5 directly at her.
Seems the coastal boat torps didn’t even count as hits on the score screen ( and only seemed to do about 10% of damage) but the DD torps didn’t even hit. Don’t see how he could have evaded them.
So ammo rack someone with a torp after sneaking around and you get a kill sure, but the scoring system doesn’t seem to reward or even realise that this is what DDs are for against capital ships. And do Torps die in the water with your ship? Dying bravely to get torps on a capital isn’t a thing?
Had a game where only BBs were in range so spammed my tiny 4" popguns, difficult to miss a BB sized target, and ended up with a surprisingly decent score. Despite not doing anything even remotely useful. Whereas taking out a major surface vessel with a low tier DD and capping twice to win the game results in no activity and not that much in terms of points.
It’s just quite bizarre, as though someone has tried to turn what is supposed to be a naval combat sim into something strangely akin to paintball. And as you don’t have torpedoes in paintball we’ll just add them for a bit of flavour without any real reward mechanism or maps where they might be useful. Open ocean, dakka dakka dakka. Now I do like moar dakka, was also verily keen on paintball back in the day. Though I never confused the two or thought naval combat should be a lot like a speedball tournament.
True though it seems as though the noble principles of sim based accuracy are never going to apply to premium ships which actually sell for money. The perfect fleet in top tier WT is every player with a BB and then a another BB BC / CA as backup respawns. In lower tiers it’s the most spammomatic premiums which were generally considered poor designs historically, though clearly someone’s precious.
So why play anything else? You don’t need scouting, screening, smokescreens or speedy light cruisers. You can ignore the caps and just moar dakka for more SL and points. The only teamwork required is focus fire. There’s no need for a balanced fleet, just moar battleships, moar moffats, moar bots.
Hence submarines would be hilarious… Everyone spawns into the same hex with a BB then realises there’s lots of subs on the other side and they just look at each other like, did you bring any depth charges?
Seems they have subs in the mobile game and they’re desperately needed here. Other wise what is the use of a destroyer spawning 12km from 10 BB/BC/CAs?
No, they do not despawn when you die, I’ve had cases where I get a kill notification of a torp I sent off on its merry way at the very start of the match but have since died in that vehicle.
From the sound of it, yeah looks like how the scores are determined should be looked into as well. I’m not complaining when the damage value I get as a coastal battle lets me do my Daily Tasks, but it does seem a bit odd how it’s so easy there yet so hard with bluewater vessels slamming someone’s deck with an HE volley.
Imagine that if gaijin does not block br aircraft on ships, then when yamato appears in the game on such br 9.0-9.3 it will fight with f4 phantom or mig21pfm LOL
The problem is that the rate of fire matters on ships, because in this game every ship has 99% accuracy, such an ikoma was not able to hit any ship sailing at full speed, even at lower speeds it would have a problem, and in tues every shot hits, the problem is small maps and the fact that the ships are too accurate, as if to introduce the mechanics of gun wear, and the higher the wear, the lower the accuracy, more fast-firing ships did not have such an advantage, scharnchorts is too strong I have kd 8.0 on it, and I’m afraid to think what will happen when a bismcark appears that will reload only 2 seconds slower, and it already has 380mm guns, it will be a tragedy, but also look at the fact that gaijn doesn’t care about ships, when adding such a bismarck, they don’t look at the balance and whether it makes sense, only how many people will be missed who would buy a tree or how many premiums would they buy, gaijn ships didn’t work out, instead of repairing them, they made them a money printer, unfortunately this company is like a child, if something doesn’t work out the first time, they get offended and ignore the topic.
As mentioned when the idea of barrel wear was raised, I doubt the players will appreciate some accumulating debuff that happens through the duration of the match that they have absolutely no control over. Although the connection to speed to accuracy could be worth addressing, requiring players to slow down to have greater accuracy the further the target is away, which makes them an easier target in turn.
There are such channels on most of the “coastal” maps - hydrofoils often get caught in them too if they are not going fast enough.
Why would you expect anything else??
You can certainly disable it’s secondary’s, but if you are hitting the turret fronts and belt you aren’t going to do much.
So aim for hull ends, superstructure and bridge.
Sounds like you have some unrealistic expectations.
what kind of excuse is this again? You want to win a game, you need to destroy enemies, how the hell can you win if you cant hurt one player? not to mention most of the time, there are almost 4 battle class ships on that team… this has to be adressed already !!!
Step 1: Remove bots, not just talking about removing bots.
Cough Later French Naval Cough
…Seriously, why did they decide to add all the PRE-AA refit ships possible?
Sink bots - it’s what I do.
I figure out what I CAN do - and then do my best to do it.
So what?
What has to be addressed - cruisers having a hard time vs battleships?
That seems perfectly reasonable to me - just like destroyers having a hard time vs cruisers, and every other time lower BR vessels have a hard time vs higher BR vessels.
As this is part of that transitionary problem Naval faces as you up the weight class, I think this part could possibly be softened by adding a more defined transition BR bracket for Battlecruisers, perhaps a bit analogous to how coastal boats have access to frigates to stand a little more chance against destroyers. That way you have the guns to actually damage battleships but armor light enough the late cruisers can get a punch in.
Something seems to be off about the 5"/38 mounts, in other words pretty much the entire US Destroyer tree plus the secondary armaments on their Capitals. UK 4" seems to be similar… Haven’t tested the others.
As per this…
USA 5"/38 (12.7 cm) Mark 12 - NavWeaps
Time of flight out to 10,000 yards should be 20.81 seconds for a 25kg shell, which all of the ammo natures are.
Yet if you test it, the time of flight is 15.2 seconds. The stats screen for the projectile claims a muzzle velocity of 2600 fps yet to reach 10,000 yards in 15 seconds implies a muzzle velocity well over 1000 m/s.
Other ranges seem to be off by similar percentages. Bit difficult to tell on 1k, 2k yards but becomes very noticeable at 4k, 6k etc.
Far harder hitting something which isn’t stationary with a 21 second lead time than 15…
Haven’t all the other calibres, are they all off or is it just the 5"/38 and 4"? This chart shows the time of flight for such…
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_4-45_mk16.php
If the ballistics are wrong, which they clearly are, then presumably the terminal effects are wrong too. For instance the terminal angle should likely be steeper leading to them hitting armour plates at less effective angles etc. They would retain less terminal velocity hence penetrate less given the fuse settings.
For instance at 10k yards with a 0.01 second fuse the terminal velocity should be 1000 fps. Hence the explosive charge would activate no more than 10 feet into the ship. Which would be good for turrets but engines, magazines etc would simply be out of reach provided they’d hit hull or armour prior.
What’s the point in trying to get accurate armour plans when the sodding guns are massively out performing their historical abilities?
Think it would be better to ask @HK Reporter about this one.
Why can’t I mention you HK?
I would but I know that on new forums we can´t tag anyone with space in their name so I knew it would be impossible to tag HK Reporter
Well Mag will probably try to bring HK in anyway I guess.
To continue the discussion on improving naval, here are some other suggestions raised in the old forum that could use some more love; this time focusing on the Crew and how it relates to the current gamemode:
[Naval] Replace Crew Hitpoints with Sinking as the Primary Means to Kill a Ship - Gameplay - War Thunder - Official Forum
A revision of the ship’s defeat condition from running out of crew at some point and your ship just suddenly realizing their desire to become a coral reef habitat to actually your ship struggling to keep the flooding at bay as your crew no longer can keep up with the damage control while manning their stations. Now I know the idea of “Not Enough Crew Members to Repair” is something of a legacy of how Ground Battles does things, as mission kill (loss of vehicle because an essential component is broken but all crew is alive) isn’t a thing, but the way it’s currently implemented just makes the game end up feeling like a health bar in disguise, something anti-thesis to WT’s whole gameplay loop. Not to mention the UI readout in regard to crew loss in the damage indicator is something I’ve never been able to figure out. There’s an indication of how much crew is left out of the total on the top left then on the bottom left there’s a percentage of crew? Aside from being seemingly redundant, the two value doesn’t seem to even match each other’s value; with, say, 268/273 which is 98% but the Percentage value instead provides 84%? I know there is something about crew skills among all these calculations but to say it’s not intuitive is an understatement.
Allow naval ships to "uncrew" secondaries and AA guns to mitigate HE spam, boost repair speed - Gameplay - War Thunder - Official Forum (my reposted suggestion of the same idea)
Now I wish this idea was implemented to reverse the intention of the OP. I’ve already mentioned my issues with the current nerf to HE ad nauseam in this thread alone, so I will avoid restating it here. But that being said I think this is a solution that could be easily implemented to offer the best of both worlds. Combined with the existing “target surface target/air target/both” feature (with a little cooldown so you have to plan ahead), those commands now dictate which parts of your ship are manned. This idea might also be effective at weakening the (current) bots as they tend to set their secondaries/AA to fire on all targets; meaning those positions are manned at all times and therefore will suffer greater crew casualties from surface combat. The alternative will just make them vulnerable to CAS or sneaky patrol boats.
As we are speaking of Crew and their implementation, I guess now is a good time to talk about the Crew Skills in Naval that have caught my eye:
Enemy Torpedo Spotting Distance crew skill needs an overhaul. Currently, it’s broken (again), but even if it works as intended, it would be utterly useless beyond a certain stage. While I can understand its application when it was made at the very start of Naval game mode with speedboats and the like, the max distance of 10 metres is absolutely useless for larger ships. Instead, I believe the detection range should be based on the size of your ship, say each “bar” represents a percentage of your vessel’s length, with a filled-out skill allowing you to see the full length of your ship outwards or something.
Other Suggestions To Consider (for now, I’m sure we’d find more over time):
Less Pressing Issues:
After quite sometimes and also after the “big” updates before. the good things is they add “bot” on the reporting players. but still bots still arround and ruined gameplay. at some point you can exploit it to your adventage but most of the time it just ruined it.
Gaijin got a lot things to fix Naval Gameplay, especially the bots for me