Since the introduction of various recent changes to the naval mode, a significant portion of the player community has expressed deep dissatisfaction. These modifications, which were probably intended to bring a new dynamic, have unfortunately resulted in negative impacts on the overall gaming experience, disrupting many strategic and historical aspects.
Firstly, the deactivation of the towing cable used to pull damaged ships has caused a wave of confusion. This mechanism was not only useful but also essential in certain critical situations. When a ship suffered major damage or became immobilized due to enemy fire, the ability to tow it to a safer area or extract it from a dangerous position provided a realistic and immersive strategic alternative. Its removal takes away a tactical dimension that contributed to the depth of naval battles, making certain matches far more frustrating for captains seeking adapted solutions.
Secondly, the significant weakening of shell penetration capabilities below the waterline is a change that has seriously harmed the effectiveness of many ships, particularly those from the French and Italian fleets. These nations historically relied on a specific doctrine and design philosophy, often focused on speed and powerful guns aimed at hitting vital points below the enemy’s waterline. By rendering this approach obsolete, the developers have nullified the value of several cruisers and battleships from these navies. These ships are now heavily disadvantaged against opponents better suited to the new game mechanics, leading to an increasing underrepresentation of these nations in battles.
Additionally, the reduction in the visibility of tracers has made it increasingly difficult for players to identify the source of incoming fire. This change significantly hinders situational awareness, leaving players vulnerable to attacks without the ability to effectively respond or adjust their positioning.
Finally, the addition of so-called “post-war” coastal ships as bots is perceived as an anachronistic and disruptive intrusion. These modern vessels, deployed automatically, create a break in the historical and strategic realism that many players appreciated. These fast units, often equipped with contemporary weaponry, provoke a sense of injustice and absurdity when they interfere in engagements involving World War II-era or pre-war ships. These so-called “post-war” ships unbalance the game and tend to render players incapable of taking any action against their superiority. Coastal vessels thus often face enemies against whom they cannot compete, suffering from a complete lack of balance.
It would be relevant for the high seas mode to allow the research of coastal ships, similar to how helicopters can be researched through tanks. Such an option would facilitate access to these ships and contribute to restoring a healthier balance between the different categories of naval units.
Moreover, it would be wise for the developers to consult veteran naval mode players before implementing any changes that could harm the game mode. Seeking input from experienced players would provide valuable insights and help prevent disruptive decisions, such as the potential addition of post-war anti-ship missiles, which could further damage the delicate balance of naval battles.
In summary, these changes undermine the coherence and balance of the naval mode, harming the immersion sought by military history enthusiasts and aspiring strategists. It would be wise for the developers to reconsider some of these decisions to restore the harmony that once made this unique maritime experience so rich and popular.
In addition, there is another topic about this.
