Naval mode is finally dead

Game Discussion Arcade Battle
,
2693

You’re arguing with such passion but I honestly cannot see any logic to what your saying, when a ship is turning I imagine the centre point and adjust my aim up/down/left/right, for a destroyer turning hard it can be up to 3 sight markers off to the side of the ship, battleships is about 1 marker.

old NAB still did lead calculations for you it was just an aimbot on an update cycle telling you where to point - what’s the real, practical difference to how it is now? what agency did you think you had in the old way?

what’s bugging me at the moment is how the aimbot cares about terrain and will throw shots off to the side when trying to fire over stuff sometimes, just like it does when a target is out of range - but this probably comes from it just being a repurposing of AI gunner code with only the firing removed

1 Like
2694

No, you can’t, because once you do that, your guns are now aiming at the spot of water, not tracking and leading the ship itself. It is a major difference. The guns track to the thing it is aimed at, not what target you have selected- that means they are now adjusting their lead based off a static area of water, aiming and pointing automatically to hit that, rather than tracking the enemy ship and you aiming/pointing them yourself to meet where the enemy ship will be.

1 Like
2695

So what you just did was admit that this is literally an AI gunner code with only the firing removed. What that means is exactly what many, the majority in fact, of naval players have noted about the NAB changes: it makes it an on-rails shooter in which the only thing you have to do is point at the enemy and click.

1 Like
2696

Nope they still track selected ship.

2698

No, they do not. I can’t believe I am still having to explain this to you 2 years onwards.

The guns point and aim to strike whatever the pointer is on. Be it a ship, a body of water, a hillside, etc. If you aim at the enemy ship, you can aim exactly at his magazines, fire, and hit those magazines, all else being equal. If he manuveres, your guns will automatically train to continue to hit those magazines, but only based on the direction of travel/speed of the exact point in time you fire, rather than the point in time when the shells would arrive. This means that, if the ship turns harder, slows down, speeds up, ceases turning, etc, the shells are now going to strike empty water, because the ship is no longer going where the guns auto-calculated the ship to end up.

If you try to adjust and aim where you think the ship will be, you have a new problem. The guns are now aiming to strike an individual patch of sea, regardless of selecting the enemy ship to target. The guns are now pointing at that patch of sea, and calculating their lead based on your ship’s direction and speed in regards a static patch of sea. Instead of being able to KNOW where your guns are pointed (where you are pointing), they are now pointing at a different angle and lead to hit that static spot of sea. This messes with the ability to calculate shot fall. It’s just like SilentTracker has repeatedly brought up- they have delinked the pointer camera from the guns, so now we don’t actually know the direction the guns are pointing. There are MANY times where you need to aim not at a patch of sea, but at a horizon (close action comes to mind), which then means the guns are now going to attempt to elevate to absurd distances.

I have played NAB since the patch, I have seen how it works- it dumbed things down, oversimplified, and made it into a nonstop barrage of hell. It took away the skill that was needed, and made it an on-rails shooter. NAB numbers only just made it back to pre-patch levels- that means 2 years of player growth was needed JUST to get back to pre-patch levels, which is exactly not what should have happened. NRB saw a brief surge, but still suffers from its own issues. Hell, I can even look to how many new ships simply don’t have player skins now- where previously new ships WOULD get player-made skins pretty regularly, both historical and ahistorical, now with fewer players only a few skin makers do it, and then only for a couple of the big ships or such. That alone shows a drop off in player interest in doing work FOR naval.

Naval is not going to be fixed until we get reversion to the changes that were not wanted by the community (apart from you, Kweedko), and the devs actually reach out to the community looking for support, ideas, and thoughtful discussion on what is actually needed.

3 Likes
2699

wrong, I don’t think you played enough to get over the neophobia

2700

You clearly don’t understand how aiming worked before aiming patch neither after it.
Here you go shot with correction on turning target

2701

So you contradicted yourself.

The guns fire where you aim, taking into account the last update.

Almost like the old aiming system, the difference is you’re not locked to a specific plane like you were with the old system.

Meaning at longer ranges you have to account for time, enemy movement, etc.

The old system you could almost perfectly catch the enemy’s stern (and rear magazines) almost every time.

2702

Yes, so now it is essentially easy mode enabled, which is my entire point- this removed the skill needed in naval gameplay, and replaced it with an on-rails shooter that is MASSIVELY less skill-based. It makes it more and more into a “whoever fires first wins” shitfest. And yes, I have played the new system, multiple times, I have disliked it every time. It is almost impossible to NOT get first rounds on target, where previously it was actually something you had to WORK for.

1 Like
2703

You complained that you can’t adjust aiming when target turns. And now you naming shown adjustments “easymode”. Make shot like this and then we’ll talk.

2704

No it ain’t.

It didn’t. Most people can’t even aim (read; skill issue™) in Naval even with the current system and it allows for the ability to duck dodge and weave far easier at range. The current system simply hides the marker you’re shooting at.

The current aiming system has flaws, as did the old system and for a while, I didn’t really like the new system. Besides, if you wanna whine about ‘skill’, there’s always Realistic.

Bullshit. The old system you just waited for the circle to appear and aimed left or right of it without any ability to control aiming high or low.

Meaning you could just as easily aim magazines if you knew the proper length of the ship since the circle aimed dead center.

If you want to complain about something, complain how they overly simplified the armor system from pre-Leviathans.

2705

Which is even less skill cause of blind ships fighting on closer distances.

2706

ammo explosions are so boring, spawn with 180 shells in USS Tenesee or Colorado (only about 10 minutes of firing, to close to a cap?) with enemies around 10k, racked 3-4 times, sink with about 80% crew. What am I missing, really, I’d love to know if there’s something wrong with how I’m playing

ammo explosions are so badly done, they need toning down, maybe increase repair times overall so component damage is actually impactful too, because lets face it in reality once something is broken, its done, so why have these stupid ammo explosions.

also I miss the easy to see hull condition indicators

and they also need to sort how ships with a segment between the bow and the fist set of guns is so weak, eg Rodney and Strasbourg (which makes no sense being at 7.3 either AFAICS - which to be fair isn’t very deep ;)

the entire game is about aiming at the same spot and hoping for RNG, and that’s got very little to do with how we aim overall. Its not like tanks, you can’t hull down to try and protect your ammo

also why don’t destroyed ammo lifts seem to slow down RoF?

maybe we’ll get ballast control soon if subs appear? that’s be nice, to sacrifice some speed for durability or something
the Dunkerque class and many US ships were apparently notable for their level of protection too, yet they seem to be among the most easy to sink

adding EC was great, but these days I’m quitting more and more if there’s someone 1 BR higher that can pen my ship with every shot and I can’t reply, which isn’t good but everyone else is doing it

1 Like
2707

Are you broadside? Angled?

What are you fighting at time of detonation? Details, they are important.

2708

look at what an ammo cook-off did to hood or roma lol

2709

Aarchengesk and a Novo, I just tried to watch the replay for the kill shot but TBH I don’t get along with the replay UI at all.

One of the finishing shots was when I was at the smallest angle to allow rear guns to fire, and it was the rear ammo he popped, so maybe about 30-40 degrees? before this my front ammo had been blown multiple times and was empty, angled or head on it was just getting popped, but was still making huge explosions and since there were maybe 1 or 2 shells in the from storage I can’t even see the explosions being possible.

Given the complexity of the DM I just don’t believe that everything is fairly represented, and I think it’s likely we do get RNG because of resource limits. This is fine, but maybe it needs to be an order of magnitude lower chances.

Maybe I should just take less than 100 shells when trying to take a point? this paradox is what annoys me

Having played some EC every day with US ships for the last few days, I can say that all the 7.7 and 7.3 feel incredibly weak in all situations regardless of approach or opponent of equal or higher BR.

I’ve tried to angle, but it never seems to make a difference other than in causing misses from lower profile vs incoming spread

1 Like
2710

everyone says that, its silly, of course there’s tons of examples of ammo explosions sinking ships

how many times have you heard of a ship repairing it’s guns or engines after they get destroyed a dozen times? its a game, realism based, but still a game.

Have you seen how long crippled ships can stay afloat even without pumps? give me a permanent list like we see with bots, not a hull break

Racking is a good idea, it just needs to be harder, more in line with common game engagement distance etc

2 Likes
2711

Uh yah but I play it anyway, me and the other 5 naval guys. Seriously, If they did anything, they need to put the hammer down on lag and aimbot cheaters. And maybe nerf the bots.

2712

maybe you shouldn’t assume every cook-off is the same, good luck repairing a ship that literally had the turret blown out of its housing due to the sheer force, this explosion literally killed everyone on the ship instantly btw, hood was less catastrophic initially, but the fire spread and it went up killing everyone but a few

2713

Do you happen to know the distance by chance?

American dreadnoughts in warthunder can’t really play close range due to the somewhat poor belt armor and their deck armor isn’t great either.

Add in the fact they sit oddly high (in my opinion) in the water with horrid rate of fire and it’s just frustration incarnate.