That will never happen.
I really like players that do not like something want everything change for they own little eyes.
DO NOT CHANGE RB.
If you like PVE as well, make custom missions and play PVE. Or play regular mode.
All those PVE players wants to destroy every game.
That insane !
Also, SO NOT CHANGE naval RB aiming.
What a shit idea again…
Why the F you want everything even if players hates it ?
Another great move to make game worst.
Your mindset is Me-myself and I ?
And also, we are in RB channel, not AB.
4 Likes
Bro, it was popular, naval EC match before update were full.
We had every shipclasses during the match. It was awesome !
Now, its just a BB fest/CL-CA fest depending the BR you play
3 Likes
Oh god.
I just checked … why …
@Ckasaron I’m really sorry to see this…
But the problem is not the game here. You are complaining even without understand the gamemode.
I can understand that you like PVE, but its you like this, I think that you need to make your own PVE mission with CDK.
Also, if you want to perform in naval and understand RB system, here a tutorial from Dollarplays.
Also, if you like AB aiming system, why dont you play AB ?
You have only 66 AB battles !
This is not an ashaming message, but its to help you.
4 Likes
I am not sure why RB should be changed period.
If anything, maybe add distance correction (read; game says ‘shot was off by .xx km’ so you can correct it for next salvo and no, not in the little radar icon) but that’s as far as I’d be willing to change it; I think it’s fine as is otherwise.
1 Like
This is almost 1:1 what I was talking about
2 Likes
its horrible for actual gameplay but it turned the mode into a RP/SL farming paradise
1 Like
But farmers can just keep playing random battles
2 Likes
No, you resorted to stat-shaming just like everyone else who fails to have actual logic to fall back upon in every single long-form discussion I have had on this website does. Because god forbid your ego has to consider being wrong for once.
I proposed the concept based on my experiences, and also given that generally AB seems far more populated than RB most times regarding Navy. And what reasons are there beyond 1) markers 2) an actually good aiming system and 3) artificial mobility boosts to all vessels?
Thus I proposed borrowing one of those three to make the most-ostentatious part of current RB no longer a pain in the ass. Sure, I once played a considerable amount of Naval RB, but dropped it back after yet another total DM inversion with Update 2.05 I think. And sometime after that point Snail in their infinite wisdom made all guns spray all over the place to where when I bothered playing it again, even though I had the controls bound and knew how to operate them, actually hitting things was seemingly not possible until almost at point blank ranges.
Now then, I tried AB EC and immediately noticed with its different aiming system my rounds were actually hitting consistently despite the increased dispersion. What I don’t know is whether the two modes have different levels of gun dispersion or not, however.
I also took inspiration from how the other two vehicle classes operate in the AB/RB divide - your weapons fly exactly where you aim them, and aiming is intentionally all point-&-click. The only differences with planes or tanks is 1) artificially boosted engine power and 2) all-seeing red enemy marker mechanics. Thus Naval sure struck me as quite the outlier with no real justification for why it even is set up the way it is other than to be intentionally frustrating. Sure, you’re used to how it works, and I was in the past prior to it being excessively fucked with, but as soon as I found a better system for that purpose I wanted to see that one aspect merged with realistically sluggish ship mobility, sluggish ship maneuverability, and lack of idiotmode red enemy markers.
If you’re wondering why I avoided playing AB much, terrible map designs meaning every round is a combined logjam and spawn-to-spawn crap with no ability to think or surprise anyone are the reasons.
Right now EC is pretty bare-bones. But wasn’t it always such? I think we can all agree that it needs a lot more flavor to it.
And Snail having done more total DM inversions than I can possibly remember has not helped things - clearly the core gameplay of Naval is still pretty…iffy.
Can I have whatever you’re on?
A crew of 100+ men is not going to wait for the CO’s signal to start opening up on aircraft or incoming PT boats. Let alone 2000+ unless it’s a night op and they’re 100% certain they’re not yet spotted. And I’m almost certain they’ll still unleash hell.
Counterpoint: breach is still a viable place to hit, which effectively does the same thing. I feel barrel sniping shouldn’t be ‘as strong’ as it is but it should 100% still be a thing.
2 Likes
It’s for the sake of the smaller vessel’s gameplay. If your BB or CL or other large ship gets tunnel-visioned in a long-range gunfight to where you forget to check your surroundings periodically and then you get surprised by a PT boat or even DD torps from another direction, you shouldn’t have any kind of automated system alterting you, you should be destroyed because you got careless, no differently than being careless in a plane or tank gets you.
If you think I’m “on something,” well sorry to disappoint you. I’m completely sober, and dead serious.
In what I proposed, breeches would be left as-is. If a tank’s design is so cramped that the breech physically protrudes from the turret face (example KV-1), then the breech sticking out is a weakness of the tank design.
But barrels? No. The “just shoot the gun if you can’t pen it” kicks the vehicles which already are painful enough to play as is. Barrel damage as a concept is what gets people so irrationally angry when fighting autocannon-equipped anything.
Thus I proposed simply making barrels immune to all damage given they already phase through walls and terrain to fix the problem.
Radar: exists
And yes, many WW2 vessels had it. That is an automated system.
Also: observers, which is their job to alert the crew on incoming threats
Dead ass I’d rather fight autocannons than someone in a plane because I sniped his tank.
At least I can pull back to repair.
i mean it is kinda dumb but fits in the still somewhat esports implementation of ground rb. And is mainly a problem for people that want to stare straight at enemies while on a 10 second reload or poke their barrel out from behind buildings. That whole thing is completely negated in sim, where you have to account for your guns parallax and hitting an enemy barrel like that is simply pure luck. When youre not on your 1000th match in the same tank and know how much parallax that tank has in mm.
Besides that being completely offtopic that was just examples how it doesnt work and never has, in 13 years of wt, to change mechanics that are more or less fitting for the gamemode they r in. Ground RB is designed with esports in mind. 10-15 min matches, pinpoint accuracy with camera in barrel, etc. etc. is it a bit bad that a 120 mm smoothbore gets taken out by 2 subcaliber darts of a PUMA? yes…could be toned down vs rapid firing aa guns and such. would it be bad to not give one of the most important parts of the tank a hitbox? absolutely. And for quite a lot of tanks the breech isnt a viable weakspot…
But, once again, thats offtopic.
What i want to get at is: distinctive gamemodes should have distinctive characteristics imo to differentiate them from each other. And realistic as such, obviously doesnt have arcade markers, doesnt have the aim help, still has scout marker popups, because it is designed with quick, esports-like gameplay in mind. And such is Naval realistic. There being skill involved to know where your shells will go differentiates it from arcade and thats working perfectly fine imo. Who doesnt want to bother with the aiming system (which admittedly could use some better functionality, but it does work once you put time into learning how it functions) the arcade point and click just to see your whole salvo going 300 m to far for no apparent reason has no place in RB and would only make RB much worse and too similar to arcade. When theres already tons of players that dont even play arcade anymore because of the implementation of the automated arcade aiming system and no option to chose not to use that.
1 Like
I wouldn’t say it’s dumb but it should be toned down just a little bit, at least against smaller calibers.
But you are right; it’s going off topic.
2 Likes
? this is from an a record i have from 2 years ago and the aim was more harder than now who are alot more simply in those time with some buff (in general for the ammo ecc.) i dont see this spray or inconstatly measurament. maybe you have to train an a bit in shooting range with free test where you can shoot all the type of ship the aim is not was harder in past and now is not more harder, now is more simply
1 Like
I have to disagree with that. I find Gaijin’s current range finding system to be at times so inaccurate as to make it almost impossible to take any given distance at face value. It is too often that I find myself muttering “The game’s been lying to me again” when I have to observe sets of measurements being at odds with each other even with my and my target’s course and acceleration having been taken into account. Allow me to quote myself from 2 years ago:
If Gaijin can’t manage to provide consistently accurate distances between two stationary ships in Test Sail, it’s no wonder players have to cross their fingers in battle whenever they embark on yet another round of Schrödinger’s Distance Measurement.
That being said, all this can be mitigated against to an extent by frequently refreshing target lock and deliberately ignoring measurements that seem incorrect, relying instead on your experience to adjust your aim properly, and so making hits at extreme ranges and impressive scores still entirely possible.
But it shouldn’t have to be that way; Gaijin seemingly dropped the ball regarding distance measurement accuracy ever since they abandoned the original RB aiming system (which for various reasons I consider vastly superior), and I understand Csakaron’s frustration. However, I don’t share his belief in the solution for the problem, as fixing distance measurement inacurracies strikes me as preferable to porting the needlessly simplified AB aiming system over to RB.
2 Likes
i dont have this problem with my level 100 expert crew he give the same exact location and measure and even if you dont trust you can control for fix this bad calculation even in a real fight becouse you can control your aim and not only wait the measure
this is an a ex you can control your aim and check manually the actual real range you dont need wait only your crew measure.
2 Likes
I can agree that distance are not friendly for new players.
The problem is that gaijin totally removed this information from sight.
It was on the old one !
Farest there is, bigger is the estimation error.
That’s one of the reason that the old one was better than the actual one.
And this is a reason that I asked in the old forum (was accepted in old forum in suggestion and deleted in new one) a idea to mix new one and old one
The actual one is not the best one, its potable.
But it need to be reworked.
GAIJIN ! I see you ! Reworking do not mean that we want assisting our shots like arcade !
But like ideas the the link above è_é
2 Likes