Adding sub or half tiers to the game 9.5-8.5-7.5-6.5-5.5

[kriegerfaust]

The idea is simply adding half tiers i think the game is big enough just look at world of tanks, who would not love to see more American heavy and light cruisers.  How it would work for people who have already unlocked the line i do not know i am not a game designer but it could be fun.  how it would work to add ships, step one take an existing ship in game.  step two use a real refit or imagined refit and update the ship, bingo bango you have a half tier improved ship.  Or do the opposite imagine a cheaper version of a ship and downgrade it by half a tier, than give it the name of a sister ship of the line.  A new ship you can play in a new way hours of fun to unlock and play.

• As Built:
• 8 × 5-inch/38 caliber guns (127 mm) single purpose (4 × 2)
• 8 × 1.1-inch/75 caliber guns (28 mm) (2 × 4)
• 2 × .50 caliber machine guns (12.7 mm)
• 12 × 21-inch (533 mm) torpedo tubes (3 × 4), 12 torpedoes
• 2 × depth charge stern racks
• 1944:
• 6 × 5-inch/38 caliber guns (127 mm) single purpose (3 × 2)
• 2 × 40 mm Bofors guns (1 × 2)
• 6 × 20 mm Oerlikon cannons
• 8 × 21-inch (533 mm) torpedo tubes (2 × 4), 8 torpedoes
• 2 × depth charge stern racks

 in this case make the main guns dual purpose but otherwise a good ships idea is the 44' Sommers

[Jakob Knight]

Half-tiers would do nothing to improve any aspect of the game.  MM would still be going for a 2-tier split, and all you would be doing is microsplitting the game even further than the 11-tier system we have now.

 

The refit system is already in place via the sequential upgrades to the hulls, fire control, torpedoes, and/or aircraft that are part of the game already and which players must do before proceeding to the next Tier of progression.

 

So, I don't see any point in adding more complexity for complexity's sake.  The benefits are nil and the complications to coding and gameplay would be large.

 

[Project45_Opytny]

6 hours ago, kriegerfaust said:

how it would work to add ships, step one take an existing ship in game.  step two use a real refit or imagined refit and update the ship, bingo bango you have a half tier improved ship.  Or do the opposite imagine a cheaper version of a ship and downgrade it by half a tier, than give it the name of a sister ship of the line.  A new ship you can play in a new way hours of fun to unlock and play.

The closest thing to this idea seems to be Monaghan and to a less extent HSF Harekaze (the original version).

[Wolfswetpaws]

1 hour ago, Jakob Knight said:

Half-tiers would do nothing to improve any aspect of the game.  MM would still be going for a 2-tier split, and all you would be doing is microsplitting the game even further than the 11-tier system we have now.

The refit system is already in place via the sequential upgrades to the hulls, fire control, torpedoes, and/or aircraft that are part of the game already and which players must do before proceeding to the next Tier of progression.

So, I don't see any point in adding more complexity for complexity's sake.  The benefits are nil and the complications to coding and gameplay would be large.

+1

[kriegerfaust]

It would allow them to add more ships without 1 adding paper ships, 2 creating an insane number of new sperate or split lines, 3 adding all new ships as premiums, 4 it would allow them to add more real steel ships not as premiums, 

so yes that's my goal you to add tens of new ships without breaking the game

[Jakob Knight]

23 minutes ago, kriegerfaust said:

It would allow them to add more ships without 1 adding paper ships, 2 creating an insane number of new sperate or split lines, 3 adding all new ships as premiums, 4 it would allow them to add more real steel ships not as premiums, 

so yes that's my goal you to add tens of new ships without breaking the game

 

1.  Paper ships are a large appeal of this game, as players like to see what might have been.  The Montana against Yamato is a classic example, as is the Graf Zeppelin.  They will always be added, and indeed several nations wouldn't have the chance at equal representation without them.  As several lines have yet to be completed, this is not something even remotely going to be avoided, nor should be.

 

2.  The act of fracturing the Tier system, by definition, will result in an insane number of new separate or split lines as the currently upgraded ships are split off into their own positions in the tech tree.  Further, costs to advance would increase as a new ship would have to be purchased to get the upgrades to an existing ship as a new ship.  And, the number of port slots would have to double to hold all the new ships.

 

3.  All new ships are not added as Premiums.  Many of the new lines have been added as tech tree ships, such as the new American Carriers and the Commonwealth Cruises being the most recent examples.

 

4.  All steel ships will be Special or Premium Ships because the Armory (where one spends steel) is separate from the tech tree lines.  Even Free XP ships are such because they are not part of the regular progression line and not required to advance.  I hope you are not advocating putting a Steel requirement for a player to advance in a national line?

 

 

[Aethervox]

No.

[kriegerfaust]

1.  Paper ships are a large appeal of this game, as players like to see what might have been.  The Montana against Yamato is a classic example, as is the Graf Zeppelin.  They will always be added, and indeed several nations wouldn't have the chance at equal representation without them.  As several lines have yet to be completed, this is not something even remotely going to be avoided, nor should be.

------------------------------- am not saying no paper ships, also only the Montana is a paper ship Zeppelin is not a paper ship she was finished and launched just because she did not see combat does not make her paper

 

2.  The act of fracturing the Tier system, by definition, will result in an insane number of new separate or split lines as the currently upgraded ships are split off into their own positions in the tech tree.  Further, costs to advance would increase as a new ship would have to be purchased to get the upgrades to an existing ship as a new ship.  And, the number of port slots would have to double to hold all the new ships.

-------------------------------so, adding port slots is not something that would require new programing or employees to achieve

3.  All new ships are not added as Premiums.  Many of the new lines have been added as tech tree ships, such as the new American Carriers and the Commonwealth Cruises being the most recent examples.

------------------------------and that's great but how long can they add new lines

4.  All steel ships will be Special or Premium Ships because the Armory (where one spends steel) is separate from the tech tree lines.  Even Free XP ships are such because they are not part of the regular progression line and not required to advance.  I hope you are not advocating putting a Steel requirement for a player to advance in a national line?

----------------------------of course i am not asking them to charge steel, i am sure they can find a way to unlock fraction tier ships

Edited February 27 by kriegerfaust

[Jakob Knight]

25 minutes ago, kriegerfaust said:

1.  Paper ships are a large appeal of this game, as players like to see what might have been.  The Montana against Yamato is a classic example, as is the Graf Zeppelin.  They will always be added, and indeed several nations wouldn't have the chance at equal representation without them.  As several lines have yet to be completed, this is not something even remotely going to be avoided, nor should be.

------------------------------- am not saying no paper ships, also only the Montana is a paper ship Zeppelin is not a paper ship she was finished and launched just because she did not see combat does not make her paper

 

2.  The act of fracturing the Tier system, by definition, will result in an insane number of new separate or split lines as the currently upgraded ships are split off into their own positions in the tech tree.  Further, costs to advance would increase as a new ship would have to be purchased to get the upgrades to an existing ship as a new ship.  And, the number of port slots would have to double to hold all the new ships.

-------------------------------so, adding port slots is not something that would require new programing or employees to achieve

3.  All new ships are not added as Premiums.  Many of the new lines have been added as tech tree ships, such as the new American Carriers and the Commonwealth Cruises being the most recent examples.

------------------------------and that's great but how long can they add new lines

4.  All steel ships will be Special or Premium Ships because the Armory (where one spends steel) is separate from the tech tree lines.  Even Free XP ships are such because they are not part of the regular progression line and not required to advance.  I hope you are not advocating putting a Steel requirement for a player to advance in a national line?

----------------------------of course i am not asking them to charge steel, i am sure they can find a way to unlock fraction tier ships

1.  If you are inferring being refloated after being scuttled incomplete and unable to fuction and used as target practice as 'finished', then I guess we will simply disagree about what constitutes a finished and commissioned warship.

 

2.  You did not address the core objection raised in this section, so we can agree that implementing your proposal would act against your stated goal of avoiding the creation of an insane number of new split or separate lines and would increase the cost of advancement significantly.

 

3. They can keep doing so as long as they please.  And that is irrelevant to your claim that all new ships will be added as Premium.  I must again take it that you concede the point.

 

4. As the point is that fractional tier ships make no sense from what you are proposing, I don't see how this matters.  Further, you were inferring that it would enable more steel ships that were not premium, and I don't see where you are denying that they must be for the reasons I gave.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 27 by Jakob Knight

[a252]

Half tier?  It is already there in tech tree as researchable modules.

[pepe_trueno]

16 hours ago, kriegerfaust said:

The idea is simply adding half tiers i think the game is big enough just look at world of tanks, who would not love to see more American heavy and light cruisers.  How it would work for people who have already unlocked the line i do not know i am not a game designer but it could be fun.  how it would work to add ships, step one take an existing ship in game.  step two use a real refit or imagined refit and update the ship, bingo bango you have a half tier improved ship.  Or do the opposite imagine a cheaper version of a ship and downgrade it by half a tier, than give it the name of a sister ship of the line.  A new ship you can play in a new way hours of fun to unlock and play.

over the years WG had no problem adding clones of ships with a twist so i dont see a reason for half tiers to exist other than to screw the MM even more.

 

if you want variety within existing ships your best bet is to suggest a rework to modules that right now offer little to no variety since everyone picks the same modules 99% of the time.

for instance instead of a bunch of modules we could have "ship modifications". basicaly we get a certain amount of points say 100 that we can spend in this ship modifications that will upgrade the soft stats of the ship.

for instance:

main gun/torpedos health: 5% per point with a cap of 150% (30 points) 
secondary/AA health: 10% per point with a cap of 300% (30 points)
main guns dispersion: -0.5% per point with a cap of -15% (30 points)
secondary guns dispersion: -1.33% per point with a cap of -40% (30 points)  
main guns ROF: 0.7% per point with a cap of 21% (30 points)
torpedos ROF: 0.7% per point with a cap of 21% (30 points)
secondary guns ROF/AA cont damage: 1.33% per point with a cap of 40% (30 points) 
main gun range: 1% per point with a cap of 30% (30 points)
secondary/AA range: 1.33% per point with a cap of 40% (30 points) 
increase asure detection of ships and torpedos: 0.09km per point with a cap of 2.7km for torpedos and 4.7km for ships(30 points)
fire chance and fire duration: -0.5% fire chance and -1% duration of fire per point with a cap of -15% fire chance and -30% fire duration (30 points)  
increase rudder shift:
concealment: -0.5% per point with a cap of -15% (30 points)
ETC...

one will be able to specialice and go over the existing limits but doing so will come at a heavy cost like going all with main guns range, accuracy and ROF at the cost of concealment, fire protection and main guns durability.

Edited February 28 by pepe_trueno

[kriegerfaust]

modules do not change the appearance of the ship nor do they radically change the playstyle of the ship, what module changes my ship from carrier chow to carrier terror.

[Project45_Opytny]

3 hours ago, kriegerfaust said:

modules do not change the appearance of the ship nor do they radically change the playstyle of the ship, what module changes my ship from carrier chow to carrier terror.

Monaghan says hello.

It's likely that tech tree ships would have to developed with a "theme" of designated role as well as the more testing efforts needed prevented Monaghan-esque options in researchable ships. There used to be historical "AA hulls" for USN destroyers, yet they have all been axed years ago due to a drive to streamline research trees (weeding many "C-hull"s as a part of the efforts) as well as these configurations being not useful: only marginally better in terms of AA while being significantly handicapped in surface combat is hardly a good choice even for the RTS CV era.

And sometimes radical changes can be brought by merely consumables (like radar Edinbrugh vs smoke Edinburgh).

[Jakob Knight]

4 hours ago, kriegerfaust said:

modules do not change the appearance of the ship nor do they radically change the playstyle of the ship, what module changes my ship from carrier chow to carrier terror.

 

I suggest you look at Omaha, New Mexico, and Mogami from where their base hulls start to the final upgraded hull.  

 

 

[kriegerfaust]

I suggest you look at Omaha, New Mexico, and Mogami from where their base hulls start to the final upgraded hull.  

what percent of ships does that hold true for 5 10 15

[Jakob Knight]

1 hour ago, kriegerfaust said:

 

what percent of ships does that hold true for 5 10 15

 

I'm not going to go through every single ship in the game and list the visual and equipment changes that occur as one goes through the hull upgrade steps.  It is sufficient that they do happen and your statement that upgrades to the hull and modules selected (such as the differing weapons armament options from such) do not change either the appearance of the ship or change the play style of the ship is incorrect.

 

The simple fact of the matter is that your proposal already exists in the game in the form of hull and system upgrades within the tech tree system, and is thus both unneeded and would work against your stated goals to implement.  Accept it or not, as you will, but I have spoken my piece on this subject.

 

 

[kriegerfaust]

i have upgraded many ships with new hulls, and one in twenty or one in ten that you could tell are different without a magnifying glass do not count, i am also not including ships that are in the same line or add additional letters or words to make then new ships, most at least 90 percent of ships do not change their appearance with the hull upgrade

[derf]

 

like, ewww

 

1.  i do not want to work up 5 more captains up to capable levels for each line

2.  people restting lines for RB would like this 'cause...why?

Edited March 2 by derf

[majmac]

On 2/27/2024 at 6:13 PM, kriegerfaust said:

i think the game is big enough

The game is not big enough.

Now, if there were about 100 000 players worldwide at one time, it would be big enough.

A.T.M., the numbers are stagnant with tops of about 30-40 thousand players on patch release day, then they fall off.

[kriegerfaust]

i was not talking about player count

[Project45_Opytny]

9 minutes ago, kriegerfaust said:

i was not talking about player count

A basis for all discussion about how to change the game for the better should be acknowledging that the game is one basing on a narrow but unique niche, unlikely to suddenly become vastly more popular, and have celebrated its 8th anniversary, which would automatically reject calls for a deep overhaul, like what you've proposed, or things like "whatever new system of matchmaking that would be better for me".

[AdmiralThunder]

Outside of it allowing more ships to be added, which in many cases can be done via a line split like we do now anyway, I see no benefit to it.