|
|
-
Torps going under ships
08. 28. 2011 13:13
Paasan
|
Can some one tell me why some of my torps are going underneath ships. Im a new SSdriver and finaly got close to a BB4 and fiered all tubes on his broadside. The aim was perfect but only 2/4 hit, they went on trough. Did i do something wrong or is it a glitch??
|
-
Re : Torps going under ships
08. 29. 2011 15:49
jikemenkins
|
Yes. I remember when i first started playing as SS, (only a few months ago) and i remember easily noticing the prox torps would detonate if i were to miss slightly off the bow or stern. However somewhere along the line Prox torps were either nerfed into something now un-recognizable or done away with entirely. Had I known they would take away my prox torps i would have chose nation with more forward torp tubes.
Edit: O-well, i dont really mean that. i love KM.
|
-
Re : Torps going under ships
08. 29. 2011 18:25
Invinciblor
|
They're still proximity in the only scenario where that's important -- sub vs. sub.
|
-
Re : Torps going under ships
08. 29. 2011 18:34
richardphat
|
A game feature.
|
-
Re : Torps going under ships
08. 30. 2011 01:31
eagleowl68
|
I first started playing nf in 2008.
At that time,the ss2's had just come out.
From that time,the subs had a "built in nerf" in the form of torps "going under"-regardless of the range you fired them from.
On average,1 in 3 torps went under.
However,ijn sub torps went under more than average,and km sub torps went under less than average-which went some way to balance the 2 nations' subs.
|
-
Re : Torps going under ships
08. 30. 2011 11:57
leaderwolf
|
Originally Posted by nyerkovic
Originally Posted by leaderwolf
Some of shells not explode in contact,is happen in war that must been balanced like torpedoes.
Don't cut add shells duds in similar rate.
Adding shell duds to ships in a similar rate wouldn't be fair for anyone. No one should suffer from duds. In real life it happened, but in a game, If a player aims well it should be rewarded... and this also applies to SS.
Is fair for smalls non armored ships,I remb. Yamato hit smallCV and shells not explode.I call that balance. If you are out of history is a shame a empty pumpkin in charge thx no.
|
-
Re : Torps going under ships
08. 30. 2011 12:56
nyerkovic
|
Originally Posted by leaderwolf
Originally Posted by nyerkovic
Originally Posted by leaderwolf
Some of shells not explode in contact,is happen in war that must been balanced like torpedoes.
Don't cut add shells duds in similar rate.
Adding shell duds to ships in a similar rate wouldn't be fair for anyone. No one should suffer from duds. In real life it happened, but in a game, If a player aims well it should be rewarded... and this also applies to SS.
Is fair for smalls non armored ships,I remb. Yamato hit smallCV and shells not explode.I call that balance.
We will have to disagree on this point I'm afraid. In the game, if a player aims well, he should be rewarded... this goes for every level and every ship in this game. I couldn't call balanced, anything that says otherwise. I hardly call it fair if someone has duds (may it be a BB, CV, SS, DD, CL, CA, FF or APA).
|
-
Re : Torps going under ships
08. 30. 2011 13:47
Invinciblor
|
Originally Posted by nyerkovic
We will have to disagree on this point I'm afraid.
In the game, if a player aims well, he should be rewarded... this goes for every level and every ship in this game. I couldn't call balanced, anything that says otherwise.
I hardly call it fair if someone has duds (may it be a BB, CV, SS, DD, CL, CA, FF or APA).
You have a good point, but I think you take it to the extreme. If the numbers were such that you only average one dud per six torpedoes, that wouldn't be so bad. Sometimes you'd dud none, sometimes you'd dud two. Firing four torpedoes and having three or four miss, that's much worse. It's still not completely deterministic, but let's talk about crits on shells, random chances for crew death, and spread not being evenly distributed on each BB salvo shot by less-accurate guns. The only difference is those happen in smaller amounts with larger sample sizes, so one unlucky streak isn't going to swing a battle. Random chances to get lucky or unlucky aren't inherently bad, but when random occurrences have a more significant impact on the outcome of a battle than your level of skill, then it's a problem.
|
-
Re : Torps going under ships
08. 30. 2011 14:02
nyerkovic
|
Originally Posted by Invinciblor
Originally Posted by nyerkovic
We will have to disagree on this point I'm afraid.
In the game, if a player aims well, he should be rewarded... this goes for every level and every ship in this game. I couldn't call balanced, anything that says otherwise.
I hardly call it fair if someone has duds (may it be a BB, CV, SS, DD, CL, CA, FF or APA).
You have a good point, but I think you take it to the extreme. If the numbers were such that you only average one dud per six torpedoes, that wouldn't be so bad. Sometimes you'd dud none, sometimes you'd dud two. Firing four torpedoes and having three or four miss, that's much worse. It's still not completely deterministic, but let's talk about crits on shells, random chances for crew death, and spread not being evenly distributed on each BB salvo shot by less-accurate guns. The only difference is those happen in smaller amounts with larger sample sizes, so one unlucky streak isn't going to swing a battle. Random chances to get lucky or unlucky aren't inherently bad, but when random occurrences have a more significant impact on the outcome of a battle than your level of skill, then it's a problem.
I think that crits and crew death are a completely different matter than duds. Crew death is the same for all... everyone can receive it. Sometimes we might not like it, and sometimes someone gets really unlucky but overall, its balanced across the board. Crits are something that enhances your performance. You would still hit if it wasn't a crit... the crit just makes you hit harder. It is a random factor, yes, but in the end is based on skill... if you aim well, you might get a crit... if you miss, you will never get one.
Originally Posted by Invinciblor
Random chances to get lucky or unlucky aren't inherently bad, but when random occurrences have a more significant impact on the outcome of a battle than your level of skill, then it's a problem.
I like this final phrase, cause it's pretty much where I come from with my duds point. Random chances like crits and crew death aren't inherently bad, but when random occurrences like duds have a more significant impact on the outcome of a battle than your level of skill, it's a problem. If you aim well, you should be rewarded... your skill should determine the outcome of the battle, not some random number.... no one should have duds in this game.
|
|
|
