Jump to content


Firefighting skill or just 'skill filler'


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

Bad_Mojo_incoming #1 Posted 30 November 2017 - 07:42 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 19541 battles
  • 205
  • [THIK] THIK
  • Member since:
    03-06-2014

Hows everyone's experience with the firefighting skill? As in tier 8 and above a lot of people chose to replace fire extinguisher (normal or auto) with premium food or sometimes gas. While I don't have the credits for using food constantly gas is sometimes a good choice.

 

Okay, to the point, how effective is the firefighting skill of the crew? Is there anyone among you who has 100% firefighting skill on all his/her crew and has been set on fire while not having an extinguisher? How much does it reduce the damage taken?

 

If it's a useless skill (which it seems to be) then WG should replace it with something else.



Hedgehog1963 #2 Posted 30 November 2017 - 09:26 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 50590 battles
  • 7,221
  • [DIRTY] DIRTY
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011
I run an auto fire extinguisher on any tank from Tier VI upwards, so I never train this skill.

Enforcer1975 #3 Posted 30 November 2017 - 09:27 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 19736 battles
  • 10,249
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

View PostHedgehog1963, on 30 November 2017 - 09:26 PM, said:

I run an auto fire extinguisher on any tank from Tier VI upwards, so I never train this skill.

 

Well it might be useful if you have a highly flammable tank when your extinguisher is on cooldown.

Homer_J #4 Posted 30 November 2017 - 09:33 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 27485 battles
  • 28,541
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

I used to have full (100% x 5) fire training on my Lowe crew before they introduced the new skills.

 

Average battle went:

shot from front, set on fire, use fire extinguisher.

shot from rear, set on fire, left almost dead.

 

I don't know if they improved the fire fighting skill since then though.


Edited by Homer_J, 30 November 2017 - 09:33 PM.


Pansenmann #5 Posted 30 November 2017 - 09:35 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 33507 battles
  • 12,274
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-17-2012

it is quite good if you don't know what to take as 6th skill for your crew...

for everything else, use automatic extinguisher, it reduces the chance for fire in the first place.



Nishi_Kinuyo #6 Posted 30 November 2017 - 10:15 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 7252 battles
  • 3,735
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

Fellow forumite TankSchmidt has written a rather nice guide about crew skills, including firefighting.

http://forum.worldof...ew-skill-guide/

 

Helped him gather hard data on the firefighting myself, along with a couple of others.



xx984 #7 Posted 01 December 2017 - 12:20 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 52152 battles
  • 2,277
  • [GO-IN] GO-IN
  • Member since:
    08-11-2013
it is very useful and i always take it when i can, On my tier 10 Obj 430, i use combat rations and full firefighting, when i do get set on fire it usually only ticks for around 300, compared to some of my other tanks which tick for 700-800+

Cannes76 #8 Posted 01 December 2017 - 12:43 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 63555 battles
  • 1,560
  • [3V] 3V
  • Member since:
    04-16-2011

View Postxx984, on 01 December 2017 - 12:20 AM, said:

it is very useful and i always take it when i can, On my tier 10 Obj 430, i use combat rations and full firefighting, when i do get set on fire it usually only ticks for around 300, compared to some of my other tanks which tick for 700-800+

 

/thread

Dava_117 #9 Posted 01 December 2017 - 10:19 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18187 battles
  • 2,584
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View Postxx984, on 01 December 2017 - 12:20 AM, said:

it is very useful and i always take it when i can, On my tier 10 Obj 430, i use combat rations and full firefighting, when i do get set on fire it usually only ticks for around 300, compared to some of my other tanks which tick for 700-800+

 

I may be wrong, but each tank should have its own base damage from fire. So the comparison should be done with the same tank and different crew.

BTW, I have some loaders with FF trained, just in case I get torched twice in a row. And will probably train all the crews after repair.


Edited by Dava_117, 01 December 2017 - 10:20 AM.


dennez #10 Posted 01 December 2017 - 11:41 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 16750 battles
  • 4,755
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    02-26-2013
Isnt it kind of obsolete now? You either run an AFE or use the 2-bond "new" skill if you have that swapped out for food.

Nishi_Kinuyo #11 Posted 01 December 2017 - 05:40 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 7252 battles
  • 3,735
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

View PostDava_117, on 01 December 2017 - 09:19 AM, said:

 

I may be wrong, but each tank should have its own base damage from fire. So the comparison should be done with the same tank and different crew.

BTW, I have some loaders with FF trained, just in case I get torched twice in a row. And will probably train all the crews after repair.

Doubt it, tbh.

Schmidty and co tested it with a wide variety of tanks and classes, and damage remained fairly consistant from what I remember.

Maybe I could tickle him to see if he could post some of the data he gathered if he still has it laying around somewhere.


Edited by Nishi_Kinuyo, 01 December 2017 - 10:37 PM.


Dava_117 #12 Posted 01 December 2017 - 09:25 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18187 battles
  • 2,584
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostNishi_Kinuyo, on 01 December 2017 - 05:40 PM, said:

Doubt it, tbh.

Schdmity and co tested it with a wide variety of tanks and classes, and damage remained fairly consistant from what I remember.

Maybe I could tickle him to see if he could post some of the data he gathered if he still has it laying around somewhere.

 

That could be really intresting! :)

TankSchmidt #13 Posted 01 December 2017 - 10:48 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23979 battles
  • 8,893
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-03-2011

Nishi-tickling got me to this thread :) Sorry, long post ahead :popcorn:

 

In a test server end of April I actually carried out quite extensive testing of the firefighting skill or rather fire in general with the help of several great guys. In total we set a poor FV215b 90x on fire, an E50 30x, a E100, Jagdtiger, TigerII, STA-1 20x and then lots of tier X meds also for 20x: E50M, Leo1, STB-1, TVP, 30B, CentAX, M48 &  BC25t.

 

Please send some cheers to especially Nishi and fishbob for their great help on collecting all the data which took (I think) over 10 hours...! :great:

 

Observations were the following:

 

1)

How does fire work in general? Well... WG built a giant WTF with that in my opinion. First, there seems to be an RNG roll on the very first fire tick. Secondly, there is a defined sequence of how the next tick is calculated. This "tick sequence" is in fact tank specific. Ticks will happen until a potential next tick would inflict zero or less dmg. If you read up to this point without your mind blown away, take a look at these examples:

- On the E50M, on 10 cases, the highest first tick we got was a 107. The lowest one was a 84. No matter the first tick, the sequence for the E50M is always (and ticks can start anywhere whin this sequence): -4, -5, -4, -5, -5 and then repeat. Which is an average tick of -4,6.

- On the M48, on 10 cases, the highest first tick we got was a 99, the lowest being a 76. However, the tick sequence is: -4, -5 and then repeat! YES, it is that simple, HORRAY! No seriously, the Patton ticks at -4,5.

- Other cases I analysed is the TVP with a -4,375 tick rate and the BC25t with a ... -4,05 tick rate.

 

Anyways. As you can see and imagine, any combination of a first tick and the tick rate will influence the fire behaviour of a tank. So even if a tank has a relatively lower first tick, if its tick rate is also low, it will burn as long as another vehicle with a higher first tick and higher tick rate. Which probably was the goal of WG. Still, the tank with lower first tick will burn for less overall - more on that later on.

 

2)

Caliber of the gun of the guy that shoots you has absolutely no impact on fire duration or amount of fire dmg; a 57mm gun will inflict the same fire dmg as a 183mm.

 

3)

Major qualification of the crew has either no impact or its impact is so low that we could not reliably observe it or we got unlucky with RNG. Clearly, there is no difference between a 50% and a 120% crew if both crews do not have firefighting skilled. However, I also did not notice a significant/relevant difference between a 100% crew with 100% firefighting and a 120% crew with 100% firefighting. However, there should be a difference - at least if firefighting works like the camo skil where it does make a difference whether the 100% camo crew has 50% major qualification or 120%. However, I did not carry out too many tests on that.

Anyways, here are the figures: avg. dmg on a fire for a 100/100 crew: 596 over 20 cases. For a 120/100 crew it was 588 avg. dmg over 21 cases. That is not even 2% difference and thus much less than expected with 20% more major qualification.

 

4)

For how much will a tank burn? Well, that is tank specific. As we saw in point 1) there is also heavy RNG involved, so I will just post the results for the tier X meds:

 

All values with a 100% crew and NO firefighting. 10 test cases each. First value is avg fire dmg, second value is tank HP and the % is the avg. fire's dmg in relation to the tank XP. Also given are min/max values

E50M
1020 / 2050 = 50% // Min 809 Max 1288

 

TVP50/51
977 / 1800 = 54% // Min 752 Max 1212

 

Leo1
941 / 1950 = 48% // Min 835 Max 1078

 

M48 Patton
894 / 2000 = 45% // Min 684 Max 1144

 

BC25t
879 / 1800 = 49% // Min 666 Max 1101

 

AMX 30B
867 / 1900 = 45,6% // Min 726 Max 1011

 

Centurion AX
821 / 1950 = 42% // Min 656 Max 996

 

STB-1
786 / 1950 = 40% // Min 569 Max 1079

 

We can see that (even if 10 cases each is not that much) fire dmg will vary per tank. A E50M and a TVP will burn relatively more than a Cent or STB-1. Why? No clue! Did we just get lucky/unlucky during the tests? Maybe, but even with 10 cases per tank, I think they should be closer together if they all shared the same behaviour upon fire.

 

5)

Impact of firefighting. Finally, those are the important figures. Like in point 4), here are the results for tier X meds:

 

All values with a 100% crew and 100% firefighting. 10 test cases each. First value is avg fire dmg, second value is fire dmg without firefighting and the % is the fire dmg reduction in comparison. Also given are min/max values

E50M

554 / 1020 = 45% // Min 384 Max 731

 

TVP50/51

573 / 977 = 41,5% // Min 488 Max 653

 

Leo1

489 / 941 = 48% // Min 380 Max 576

 

M48 Patton

528 / 894 = 41% // Min 441 Max 659

 

BC25t

478 / 879 = 45% // Min 361 Max 605

 

AMX 30B

493 / 867 = 43% // Min 375 Max 613

 

Centurion AX

530 / 821 = 35% // Min 434 Max 688

 

STB-1

439 / 786 = 44% // Min 310 Max 505

 

So... the myth that firefighting would decrease the firedmg by 50% is flat out wrong. In no single case did we come even close to that kind of reduction. Given these figures, I would say that the avg reduction is somewhere around 41% - 44%. No idea if we got unlucky with the Cent though.

However, in total amount reduction it is somewhere around 300 - 400 for tier X meds. So that is one more shell to take - not bad really. Edit: Was I disappointed with the results? A bit, yes, because I had the hope the reduction would be 50%. Mind you though, I should not have been surprised. It is WG after all where a 100% camo skill will increase the camo of a vehicle by ... how much? Yes, 81%! Makes total sense, right? :P

 

6)

How about other classes / tiers?! No general rule really. Well, what we did see when checking tier IX and VIII tanks is that the dmg reduction from firefighting is better: between 46% and 48% - actually coming close to that "50% myth". The impact of fire without firefighting was around 36% on a Jagdtiger (which has plenty of health compared with its tiers), 41% on the TigerII and 43% on the STA-1 - nothing unusual there as well.

 

Just as a comparison, we only tested the E100 as a tier X heavy: Avg dmg without firefighting was 36% of its health and the reduction by firefighting was 35%. On the poor FV it was around 40% reduction, so also here we can see that it is rather tank specific.


Edited by TankSchmidt, 01 December 2017 - 10:55 PM.


Dava_117 #14 Posted 02 December 2017 - 01:03 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18187 battles
  • 2,584
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014
Spoiler

 Really an intresting reading! 

Good job all the team! :medal:



Tomotorqemada #15 Posted 02 December 2017 - 01:53 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 14056 battles
  • 391
  • Member since:
    03-21-2017

View PostTankSchmidt, on 01 December 2017 - 10:48 PM, said:

Nishi-tickling got me to this thread :) Sorry, long post ahead :popcorn:

 

In a test server end of April I actually carried out quite extensive testing of the firefighting skill or rather fire in general with the help of several great guys. In total we set a poor FV215b 90x on fire, an E50 30x, a E100, Jagdtiger, TigerII, STA-1 20x and then lots of tier X meds also for 20x: E50M, Leo1, STB-1, TVP, 30B, CentAX, M48 &  BC25t.

 

Please send some cheers to especially Nishi and fishbob for their great help on collecting all the data which took (I think) over 10 hours...! :great:

 

Observations were the following:

 

1)

How does fire work in general? Well... WG built a giant WTF with that in my opinion. First, there seems to be an RNG roll on the very first fire tick. Secondly, there is a defined sequence of how the next tick is calculated. This "tick sequence" is in fact tank specific. Ticks will happen until a potential next tick would inflict zero or less dmg. If you read up to this point without your mind blown away, take a look at these examples:

- On the E50M, on 10 cases, the highest first tick we got was a 107. The lowest one was a 84. No matter the first tick, the sequence for the E50M is always (and ticks can start anywhere whin this sequence): -4, -5, -4, -5, -5 and then repeat. Which is an average tick of -4,6.

- On the M48, on 10 cases, the highest first tick we got was a 99, the lowest being a 76. However, the tick sequence is: -4, -5 and then repeat! YES, it is that simple, HORRAY! No seriously, the Patton ticks at -4,5.

- Other cases I analysed is the TVP with a -4,375 tick rate and the BC25t with a ... -4,05 tick rate.

 

Anyways. As you can see and imagine, any combination of a first tick and the tick rate will influence the fire behaviour of a tank. So even if a tank has a relatively lower first tick, if its tick rate is also low, it will burn as long as another vehicle with a higher first tick and higher tick rate. Which probably was the goal of WG. Still, the tank with lower first tick will burn for less overall - more on that later on.

 

2)

Caliber of the gun of the guy that shoots you has absolutely no impact on fire duration or amount of fire dmg; a 57mm gun will inflict the same fire dmg as a 183mm.

 

3)

Major qualification of the crew has either no impact or its impact is so low that we could not reliably observe it or we got unlucky with RNG. Clearly, there is no difference between a 50% and a 120% crew if both crews do not have firefighting skilled. However, I also did not notice a significant/relevant difference between a 100% crew with 100% firefighting and a 120% crew with 100% firefighting. However, there should be a difference - at least if firefighting works like the camo skil where it does make a difference whether the 100% camo crew has 50% major qualification or 120%. However, I did not carry out too many tests on that.

Anyways, here are the figures: avg. dmg on a fire for a 100/100 crew: 596 over 20 cases. For a 120/100 crew it was 588 avg. dmg over 21 cases. That is not even 2% difference and thus much less than expected with 20% more major qualification.

 

4)

For how much will a tank burn? Well, that is tank specific. As we saw in point 1) there is also heavy RNG involved, so I will just post the results for the tier X meds:

 

 

We can see that (even if 10 cases each is not that much) fire dmg will vary per tank. A E50M and a TVP will burn relatively more than a Cent or STB-1. Why? No clue! Did we just get lucky/unlucky during the tests? Maybe, but even with 10 cases per tank, I think they should be closer together if they all shared the same behaviour upon fire.

 

5)

Impact of firefighting. Finally, those are the important figures. Like in point 4), here are the results for tier X meds:

 

 

So... the myth that firefighting would decrease the firedmg by 50% is flat out wrong. In no single case did we come even close to that kind of reduction. Given these figures, I would say that the avg reduction is somewhere around 41% - 44%. No idea if we got unlucky with the Cent though.

However, in total amount reduction it is somewhere around 300 - 400 for tier X meds. So that is one more shell to take - not bad really. Edit: Was I disappointed with the results? A bit, yes, because I had the hope the reduction would be 50%. Mind you though, I should not have been surprised. It is WG after all where a 100% camo skill will increase the camo of a vehicle by ... how much? Yes, 81%! Makes total sense, right? :P

 

6)

How about other classes / tiers?! No general rule really. Well, what we did see when checking tier IX and VIII tanks is that the dmg reduction from firefighting is better: between 46% and 48% - actually coming close to that "50% myth". The impact of fire without firefighting was around 36% on a Jagdtiger (which has plenty of health compared with its tiers), 41% on the TigerII and 43% on the STA-1 - nothing unusual there as well.

 

Just as a comparison, we only tested the E100 as a tier X heavy: Avg dmg without firefighting was 36% of its health and the reduction by firefighting was 35%. On the poor FV it was around 40% reduction, so also here we can see that it is rather tank specific.

 

What the hell do you call a tick and why do they have a negative value?
Why do you call apparently one end the same parameter 'average tick' and 'tick rate' whaich even sound as quantibles of different dimensions?

Is the burning process Markovian?

Is fire really causing as liitle as 4-5 dmgh on tier10? Or do you have some other measurements?
 



Dava_117 #16 Posted 02 December 2017 - 02:40 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18187 battles
  • 2,584
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostTomotorqemada, on 02 December 2017 - 01:53 PM, said:

 

What the hell do you call a tick and why do they have a negative value?
Why do you call apparently one end the same parameter 'average tick' and 'tick rate' whaich even sound as quantibles of different dimensions?

Is the burning process Markovian?

Is fire really causing as liitle as 4-5 dmgh on tier10? Or do you have some other measurements?
 

 

a tick should be a single fire hit. And I would say those small nubers are percentage, like -4% then -5% and so on...

At least this is what I understood yesterday night.



TankSchmidt #17 Posted 02 December 2017 - 02:50 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 23979 battles
  • 8,893
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    06-03-2011

View PostDava_117, on 02 December 2017 - 02:40 PM, said:

a tick should be a single fire hit. And I would say those small nubers are percentage, like -4% then -5% and so on...

At least this is what I understood yesterday night.

 

A tick is a single fire hit indeed. The small numbers are not percentages, but the actual dmg points the next tick is reduced.

E.g. on the E50M we could observe the following ticks:

 

Spoiler

 



Dava_117 #18 Posted 02 December 2017 - 03:17 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 18187 battles
  • 2,584
  • [B-BAS] B-BAS
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View PostTankSchmidt, on 02 December 2017 - 02:50 PM, said:

 

A tick is a single fire hit indeed. The small numbers are not percentages, but the actual dmg points the next tick is reduced.

E.g. on the E50M we could observe the following ticks:

 

Spoiler

 

 

That makes sense. It's like the initial fire is slowly taken out by the crew! Thanks for the further explaination! :)

arthurwellsley #19 Posted 02 December 2017 - 03:39 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 50998 battles
  • 2,724
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

View PostBad_Mojo_incoming, on 30 November 2017 - 06:42 PM, said:

 

Okay, to the point, how effective is the firefighting skill of the crew? See TankSchimdt answers. Depends on tank and crew.

 

Is there anyone among you who has 100% firefighting skill on all his/her crew and has been set on fire while not having an extinguisher? How much does it reduce the damage taken? 41-44% reduction of the damage that would have been taken

 

If it's a useless skill (which it seems to be) then WG should replace it with something else. It is a usefull skill at fourth and above when running food. Running food maximises your tanks abilities.

 

Quite sometime ago WG announced that they were looking at a complete re-work of crew perks. This re-work seems to have disappeared off the radar.



Nishi_Kinuyo #20 Posted 02 December 2017 - 08:01 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 7252 battles
  • 3,735
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

View Postarthurwellsley, on 02 December 2017 - 02:39 PM, said:

 

Quite sometime ago WG announced that they were looking at a complete re-work of crew perks. This re-work seems to have disappeared off the radar.

So have a fair amount of other announcements/promises that WG made. :trollface:

 

Anyhow, seems like I misremembered some things concerning the fire stuff.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users