I mean, I’m in here so I can still know what I’m talking about. All these folx are doing is rocking back and forth. Forward a bit. Backward a bit. To fool the AI gunnery players aer dealing with. I’ve tried a tactic of NOT targeting a ship and lobbing shells center of where they’re rocking back and forth to hit them but… this is Dumb AF. Sure ain’t no naval gameplay. It’s gaming a system that isn’t adding to the experience, and is just taking away from it.
6 Likes
To be fair, the dispersion bug that wildly throws your guns off if your ship is even slightly turning is probably still unfixed. Hence all the players are just shifting back and forth rather than touching the rudder and screwing their dispersion up for the next 30 seconds.
6 Likes
I mean, look, if the “point at a ship and all the guns calculate correctly to hit it” function was flawless, I’d still be grumpy about killing the skill BUT, at least you could play with it.
The fact that there’s NOT information for the player means they can’t play the game. Without knowing where the guns are, it’s hard for us to know when something is off, or not working as intended.
The fact that turning destroys accuracy is just [chef kiss] perfect.
That this patch came out with 57 bugs, doesn’t absolve the damage they’ve done to the game mode, or to the player base that loved it so much. And Kweedko dismissing everyone is salt on a wound. [shrugs]
My latest suggestion is a request to return some Information to the HUD. The old lead carrot (even if it’s not used. It still give players an idea of how to lead later, and how the game calculates lead, versus player movement), and the dots representing the barrels on turrets, to give players a sense of where the guns are pointing.
That would ALSO help us work out these bugs.
6 Likes
This information is just so wild. We’ve got a guy in here who’s been dismissing our every issue, and I’m just now discovering that for like… the entire release of this aim change, you can’t turn and shoot at the same time. …it makes a lot of sense.
I used to do donuts in my American destroyers, leading and hitting evading Moffets, and killing them… and it felt AMAZING to understand the physics of the game that well.
And now you can’t turn and shoot at the same time.
Just dropped in a match and can confirm, when I feathered the rudder, aim went wild.
lol. If Naval and Naval Arcade are going down the tube, it’s because they’re releasing mechanic changes the community didn’t ask for, and they’re doing it like they’ve got three student interns vibe coding this whole thing.
Just… put it back like it was. lol for the love of gahd. Go to github, find the last stable naval version, load it back up in the next patch, let’s move forward from there.
It wasn’t the aim mechanics that was problematic. It was this Phantom Russian Coastal Navy sowing misery, unbalanced and unchecked. It was boring open map Bluewater matches. It was ANY map, or mechanic, that didn’t give players the opportunity to learn, grow, and DO something.
We’re like, two…three months into this patch and you can’t TURN and Shoot.
Wild.
But, we’re the jerks here. lol
8 Likes
This is of course guessing, but I actually expect a huge increase in the number of Naval players, especially in June. I suspect that even May can have the increased number of players.
Like you mentioned, players have to grind all rank 6 ships first to get access to new battleships. If I were still playing Naval Arcade, I would be grinding all the missing ships as soon as I heard the leaks about the iconic battleships being added to the game. But since I stopped playing Naval, I don’t have this problem anymore.
That’s why I expect Naval Arcade player count to start dropping in the coming months after the update. The question is, will these players just stop playing Naval completely or switch to Naval Realistic. It will be interesting to see if Naval Realistic will eventually become more popular than Naval Arcade.
Honestly, I don’t think there’s any chance of reversing these changes now. There is a much higher chance that they will try to make even more drastic changes and simplify Naval Arcade even further. They clearly don’t care about existing Naval players, their goal is to attract new players.
If you look at the global stats, you can understand their logic here. For example, Ground Arcade alone in February had 10 times more players than Naval Arcade, which is crazy if you think about this. And I’m not even including here much less popular Naval Realistic vs much more popular Ground Realistic.
The truth is that even if they lost all Naval players, it wouldn’t hurt them that much. They want this game mode to be much more popular. If you look at things from this perspective, constant changes they do makes sense. They simply try something, it doesn’t matter if it instantly works or not. They hope that eventually new players will appear.
The iconic battleships will be the first serious test of the current state of Naval. They hope that many players will join Naval for the first time and think: “Oh, this is really easy and I can get good results even without any experience!”. In the short term, this strategy may actually work. The devs certainly won’t cry when I’m replaced by 3 new players. This is exactly their way of thinking.
3 Likes
and to add one comment - alone the total absence of communication with the existing playerbase show their total focus on potential new players…
In ground and air mode its the opposite - there is a lot of feedback to several threads and issues…
5 Likes
It is more alive than ever , with that being said the issue of unbalanced vehicles are still not being added. I am sure as hell happy for the new 8.7 being added but the power different between 6.7 and 7.0 are still extremely big. Thank gaijin for adding new stuff but when I give a Sharnose 5 salvos into her magazine and did nothing just for her to do 1/3 of her salvo into my magazine I lose 60% of my crew. I would love for bigger map as well
That’s exactly what I’m talking about.
I’m not as good as Bruce with creating interesting graphs. But I tried anyway and here is what I managed to do in Excel (based on StatShark):
Is anyone looking at this graph really surprised by what devs are doing? Keeping the same number of players in Naval mode is certainly not the devs goal.
PS. I skipped the Sim game mode.
4 Likes
Thanks for the compliment. And this at a time when the SL you get for playing the top earning ship is 10x the top plane (Ju288C) and 5x the top tank in AB. (In RB it’s more like a 4x multiple for both).
After successive massive buffs to earnings in June 2023 and March 2025, with the mode earning players 4x as much SL now compared to other modes, they have managed to get naval up to… 1.5% of random games played and <5% of players.
6 Likes
That was the whole point of aiming changes. I see you are a new player in Naval, and your average SL per battle in this ship is 86111, which is higher than the average players SL per battle in the same vehicle according to StatShark, which is 57739. So, as a new Naval player, you are already above average, also because of the aiming system change.
This new aiming system doesn’t require any knowledge and this is good for new player, you don’t really have to learn anything to be effective. The only problem is that you also can’t improve much in the future, because this new simplified aiming system doesn’t really require any skill. I’m sure at some point most players will get bored with it.
In the short term this might work. We will see when StatShark release May/June stats. But it will be much more interesting to see what happens next. Whether new players will stay or get bored and leave. If they stay, it will be a huge success for the devs. If they leave, well Naval was pretty much empty anyway, so it was worth a try.
3 Likes
yea I played realistic naval before and biggest issue was waiting in queue 5 minutes to join match. Aiming isn’t bad but I can’t imagine playing it when Im doing so well on arcade battles. Also I think future of the naval mode is uncertain. Yamato and USS Iowa will rule the seas.
I like it.
Well alright. Maybe they are listening.
Agree completely.
Is the lags still common in naval? Play 2 battles, after looong time and first battle was ok, next was soo laggy and cant hit anything… So? Common as was, am i right?
1 Like
I haven’t seen much lag in naval lately but I haven’t played in a while bc I am boycotting bc of the aim changes which I don’t like.
2 Likes
Yup. Been common for years. Just wait until you start getting the random disconnects every other match. Super “fun”.
1 Like
Well, it’s certainly dead for me at this point. I’ve given up on the grind. I just did the math, and for a 25 minute long match, with the queuing time included, at a pitiful 4k RP with a premium vehicle, it would take just under 350 hours for me to complete the current US Bluewater tree and be ready to start working on the Iowa.
If this were ground or air, I would have easily earned three or four times that amount of RP in a shorter match period where I performed worse overall. Naval’s research economy is a fucking joke.
1 Like
