My effective engagement range is now 60% of before that FCS update. Ruined +1
7 Likes
That is not the point. No one asked for this.
3 Likes
Wholeheartedly agree.
3 Likes
I so totally agree, most of the Naval hate comes from those who don’t even play it. All that negative commentary is just straight up trolling. I put it in the same trash can as the rants that start off with garbage like "Warthunder will die in X(number) years ! ". Ideally posters should either make a constructive suggestion or get off the bus. But, it is their free speech moment , so, oh well …
8 Likes
Good point. I should probably just act like troll 🧌 back a little bit at them rather than actually taking the trolling seriously 😂
Cheers 🍻
HEADPHONE WARNING! 👇
(Sorry, accidentally deleted first post lul)
2 Likes
Alvis doesn’t know Naval from navel, but that never stops him from generating complete tripe. At least he is always consistent: Consistently wrong, consistently annoying, and consistently fatuous.
9 Likes
I play it.
here have a read, from someone who does play it.
4 Likes
The Iowas had gun sights in the turrets of the main guns where the gunners could check their aim. This was shown in the movie “Under Siege”. Also the whole point of games like these is the aiming. If the aiming is done for you, what’s the point? GJ really blew it on this one.
4 Likes
Aiming ain’t done for you just aim adjustments for your and target speed and directions. And yet you still need target maneuvers correction. So you have more time for prioritizing and choosing targets, maneuvers and strategic planning instead of staring and aiming at the point at sea.
2 Likes
EDIT#2: After re reading your comment, I am not sure if you are arguing for or against the idea that us “Captains” in game should need to do manual aiming. So, sorry if I misunderstood your point, and the following information can be directed at whoever thinks we should be doing manual aiming in game, especially in Naval Arcade. (IRL the Captain et all NEVER concerned themselves with aiming/leading, only deciding on which ships to fire on, and where they wanted the ship to move.) Cheers
Original post:
There were dozens if not upwards of 100 sailors on duty for aiming on an Iowa. Here is a video talking about just ONE of the plotting rooms, 18 sailors in just ONE of the plotting rooms. And there were multiple plotting rooms, and backups to those too. Not even counting the sailors in the rangefinders themselves:
There is another more recent video going through all (or at least most) of the rangefinding compartments, will edit when I find it in a few mins.
EDIT #1: Here it is, if you want to watch a veteran go through all of the various rangefinding/targeting compartments that again, were ALL filled with sailors during battle:
(I don’t think they even go through the plotting compartments in this video, JUST the rangefinding ones)
The point of all of this is that the Captain or whoever was in charge of deciding which targets to shoot at had nothing else to do but effectively say “I don’t like that ship, vaporize it” and the shells would start flying, immediately. The targeting and lead calculations were completed before the enemy ships where within gun range. There was no “aiming” done by the Captain et al, it was all taken care of by the dozens/hundreds of sailors who’s specific duty it was to handle all aspects of targeting/rangefinding/leading etc etc etc.
SO, “technically” the “realistic” way to play in game would be to simply highlight an enemy ship and only concern yourself with steering your bote around 😂 Not saying it should be like that, but the current Naval Arcade aiming system is actually far more “realistic” than the current War Thunder Naval Realistic aiming. So there 😝
(Please feel free to pick apart my arguments/evidence and how it relates the current state of the game. I thoroughly enjoy the discussions about our War Thunder Naval games, and IRL history, cheers bros.)
5 Likes
And he is not wrong, either. Snail has an infuriating tendency to “fix” stuff that isn’t broken, that no one asked for, making it worse while ignoring what the community has been asking for all along (Recent example the player card). It’s just that the “NAVAL IS DEAD, I’M NOT PLAYING THIS ANYMORE” proclamations do not add value either. I think it’s better to remain patient, and continue to offer constructive suggestions as opposed to foot stomping tantrums, which causes everyone to ignore the central point.
6 Likes
they looked at all the feedback and suggestions and decided to ruin a perfectly good mechanic instead
16 Likes
I would be fine with these changes if they nerfed their accuracy against planes and firing range
2 Likes
yep. i have no idea who even asked or wanted bots to be laserbeam accurate and the new aiming mechanics. They could have done something about compression, bots, OP ships, ridiculous damage models (looking at you lowtier coastal DD damage model ships), and the atrocious grind, but they butchered the ability to fly a plane without being lit up at over 7km+… accurately… It was bad enough before with bots targeting and lighting up skies when a single plane spawned but now they are 10x more accurate
13 Likes
yeah. Ai squad mates for aircraft? No. A more fleshed out ec mode as a sim alternative? No. Submarines and the required mechanics rework to make them work? No.
But screwing up the aiming system was in their budget somehow
8 Likes
Exactly. The whole point of naval warfare 1914-45 is speed of delivery of accurate rounds. They’ve removed the entire point of a naval game of this era.
The analogy would be “what if a plane game, but they all just drive around the tarmac and shoot each other instead of taking off”. Or, “what if a tank game, but all the tanks were made of wood”. I mean at some level the result will be amusing, sure (“mindless” would be another word for that) but it’s no longer anything recognizable that reveals anything about the actual combats you’re replicating.
10 Likes
(I still like the new aiming personally LOL, but I am going to support whatever the majority of Naval players end up preferring.)
7 Likes
I just don’t like how easy they make it. Point and click means so many mechanics and all skill go out the window. And it it too much a difference compared to rb
7 Likes
The issue with that take is, why wouldn’t that also apply to tanks? You’re the tank commander, not the crew of five. Why should you have to do anything with aiming THAT main gun? Just tell the AI which tank on the other side to do it and let them figure it out. It can’t just be “number of people whose collective actions we’re representing is larger”.
7 Likes
SO! I actually have an issue with the visibility mechanic in ground battles (specifically in Ground Realistic) in that that we only have 2 eyes, but IRL, tanks have 4 to 12+ eyes that would be looking around 😂
But I do agree that full automation would make for a very boring game. Naval and Ground battles. Except for the new Naval AB aiming system, I think it is good and more realistic. But but, if too many Naval players really don’t like it, I would be fine with the aiming being reverted back.
1 Like