totally bad machanism , plz revert!
I don’t want to see this new mechanic.
This mechanic is worse for dreadnoughts in the early game than for battleships in the late game.
1 Like
There is a lot of room in the game for teaching players about systems.
Air is terrible for it. If you’ve never heard of notching, there’s nothing to teach you what it is, how to do it etc.
A complete set of tutorials for more advanced concepts in game would be great, rather than relying on content creators on YouTube and stuff. Ideally we’d get to try different tactics against bots on these missions.
1 Like
I was testing Liverpool which is bit extreme example with very low plating on the bridge. New Orleans or Nevada with unprotected bridge wont be fun, tbh New Orleans already is very unfun but yeah.
1 Like
New player will not need to think about notching until few months of playing the game…
…if said player didnt buy top tier premium, but is researching/spading down the tech tree.
I support this change, great job Gaijin. Pre-war dreadnoughts are currently way too overpowered when in reality these ships should burn like kindling.
I wonder how many of these people that are upset are people that seal club cruisers in overperforming 6.0-7.0 dreadnoughts, or are upset that the Sovetsky Soyuz will have the worst damage control of all the top tier battleships?
What are you talking about
Either those who have at least some brains and tested HOW it will work.
Spoiler
And yes, the other ship types are going to have it much worse.
What I am talking about is, pre-war dreadnoughts with extremely primitive damage control technique, horrible fire prevention and ventilation, and bad ammunition storage should not repair modules even nearly as fast as modern battleships-- but that is currently how it is in game. Pre-war dreadnoughts are severely overperforming and are rarely vulnerable to modern cruiser fire in game. These ships historically struggled with defeating severe fires and containing large floods.
This change is one step closer to truly balancing ships by era, and not their displacement. This is a win for high ranking destroyers and cruisers.
Do you have any evidence of them struggling
My opinion is that top-deck repairs should not be possible while being fired at. But, for the player to control when crew does or doesn’t put out a fire that is threatening their battle station, that is unrealistic. For the player to decide a turret crew will not repair their battle station when it is slightly damaged and fixable, that is unrealistic, because that is partially their job. When a player decides that he will not pump out water of a compartment so that the ship can have a lower waterline and be less vulnerable, that is unrealistic.
I understand that there is a fundamental issue with the way this mechanic works, but it is overall a great change with some tweaking. My original comment speaks on pre-war dreadnoughts, which my point still stands and I did not comment on the AA/secondary battery issue.
“Gaijin: This new additional mechanic is intended to have no real effect at all!”
It is very widely agreed upon by ship designers and historians of both WWI and WWII that damage control had improved by enormous margins into the late 1930s. The burden of proof is on YOU SIR, to prove to me how 1910s, and 1920s dreadnoughts should be more survivable, and have just as efficient damage control than late 1930s heavy cruisers and battleships
Dreadnoughts had transverse bulkheads, allowing for easy flood spreading. WWII ships had damage control centers for directing damage control parties all throughout the ship with modern communications. Modern ships had far better smoke ventilation and fire insulation. Modern ships had multi-layer torpedo bulges, while dreadnoughts had either one, or just a thicker armor belt. WWII BBs had foam blanketing for aviation fuel storage, more fire hoses and portable foam equipment. They had flash tight doors for ammunition magazines… shall I keep going?
Do I even need it talk about their unrealistically accurate cannon fire, due to the point and click nature of aiming cannons in game?
Where is the evidence that suggests their durability in game is even remotely realistic? These ships should literally get dogged on by 1940s light cruisers.
Right, so experienced crews improving on damage control is your evidence, sorry but you’re gonna have to do better than that
All true but, as OP says, the generational differences between World War I and II in this new mechanic will “not significantly” change anything.
(EDIT: I think that’s more a problem with the writeup not the reality. Would have been nice to see actual facts and tables about things like the generational multipliers, that was what I was hoping for from this devblog.)
1 Like
Not sure who’s comment you read, because it clearly wasn’t mine. Most of my comment was actually technological and design improvements of modern WWII damage control, not crew skill. The design of pre-war dreadnoughts was inherently flawed in regards to damage control, which can be seen in real life examples by HMS Queen Mary, Indefatigable, and Invincible, who all suffered magazine explosions and lacked flash-tight bulkheads. IJN Fuso suffered a magazine detonation due to fires spreading from only two torpedo impacts. WWII warships had centralized damage control centers, WWI ships mostly did not. They had flash-tight bulkheads, eliminated transverse bulkheads for more even compartmentalization, better smoke ventilation, especially in powder magazines, better fire insulation. They also had way more damage control parties, portable pumps, hoses, and CO2.
None of these things are a matter of “experienced crews” it is decades of technological advancements in ship design.
I agree with that. I am not saying this change is perfect, but in my opinion a step in the right direction. We should eventually see a point in game where, the more realistically these ships are modeled, the more ships will gravitate into their appropriate eras, similar to how WOWS tech trees are set up, minus the artificial buffs like invisible destroyers…
These 3 ships all had flashtight measures in place, but when theyve been jammed open on orders from frankly a man who had no idea what he was doing it was a recipe for disaster
This is factually incorrect. These ships did NOT have flash-tight bulkheads. Even if their bulkheads were closed at the time of the impact, they were not flash tight and lacked ventilation.