Jump to content


Do aimed and 'snap shots' need change

aiming snapshots dispersion

  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

Poll: Do aimed and 'snap shots' need change (64 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battles in order to participate this poll.

Do aimed and 'snap shots' need change

  1. Yes moon shots are far to often (20 votes [31.25%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 31.25%

  2. Mweh na its fine as is (33 votes [51.56%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 51.56%

  3. All shots should be more accurate (11 votes [17.19%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 17.19%

Vote Hide poll

_T_1_T_4_N_0_ #1 Posted 24 January 2018 - 01:27 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29096 battles
  • 1,114
  • [SQCI] SQCI
  • Member since:
    02-17-2015
We often get posts on here with a rant and rage of ridiculous shots.
In terms of dispersion do you think there is enough difference between how we envisage fully aimed static shots to on the move point and aim ones?

The arguments can be split into.

1...KV2 full acceleration just snap shotted me from moon! :angry:
2...Fully aimed static prepared Grille just sent shot moonwards! :angry:

Is there enough difference in dispersion and do some soft stats often make overall accuracy feel like a fallacy?
 

brumbarr #2 Posted 24 January 2018 - 01:42 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38626 battles
  • 6,326
  • Member since:
    07-30-2012

I think the ratio of fully aimed shots and shots hit on the move is fine.

Fully aimed shots hitting more would encourage more camping and reward campers and punish acive gameplay. It would also make  weakspots way too easy to hit.

Hitting more shots on the move would also be bad, then we wuld have tanks with bad gun handling and acc snapshotting you at full speed. No good.

 

Current balance is fine.  Yeah, sometimes people hit snapshots and mis fully aimed shots, but thats fine, its the chance of that occuring that makes the difference. And that chance is currently perfect.



_Flagada_Jones_ #3 Posted 24 January 2018 - 01:56 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 31261 battles
  • 1,172
  • [OMGR] OMGR
  • Member since:
    03-20-2012
Clearly it need a change, YOLO shot it often when someone aiming miss...

Just ridiculous :)

TheOneAboveAII #4 Posted 24 January 2018 - 02:06 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13357 battles
  • 488
  • [S4LT] S4LT
  • Member since:
    07-14-2016

View Postbrumbarr, on 24 January 2018 - 01:42 AM, said:

I think the ratio of fully aimed shots and shots hit on the move is fine.

Fully aimed shots hitting more would encourage more camping and reward campers and punish acive gameplay. It would also make  weakspots way too easy to hit.

Hitting more shots on the move would also be bad, then we wuld have tanks with bad gun handling and acc snapshotting you at full speed. No good.

 

Current balance is fine.  Yeah, sometimes people hit snapshots and mis fully aimed shots, but thats fine, its the chance of that occuring that makes the difference. And that chance is currently perfect.

So...learn to aim boys...or not...rng will [edited]you over anyways...gg...



LCpl_Jones #5 Posted 24 January 2018 - 02:09 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 9759 battles
  • 699
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    06-17-2017
aiming lowers dpm

TheOneAboveAII #6 Posted 24 January 2018 - 02:16 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13357 battles
  • 488
  • [S4LT] S4LT
  • Member since:
    07-14-2016
The thing is...i played almost all these "super accurate guns that always hit and never miss"...skorpion and all siege mode tds...and these things are supposed to have between 0.24m and 0.29m maximum dispersion at 100m when fully aimed right? So if i aim to a point on a tank 100m away with my tank that has 0.28m dispersion at 100m...skorpion for example...my shot should land in a circle with a 28cm radius from the point where I aimed at...so 56cm diameter circle...this is how it should be...then why on earth when I shoot at a tank at 100m...my shot lands in a crater on the moon instead hitting inside that 56cm circle on the god damn tank...because sure as hell tanks are bigger than 56cm...either change all the dispersion values in the game to "whatever, you just shoot, our rng server will decide if you hit or not regardless of your numbers"...or make those numbers actually mean something...because it's all just a slot machine...my heavy tanks with 0.4 hit on the move at 400m...and my tds with less than 0.3 miss fully aimed shots at 100m...and here's an example...strv 103-0 0.29...shot at the lower plate of a 1 shot T-10 at less than 100m away...i was fully aimed on the centre of the god damn lower plate...i shot at the centre of the lower plate...the shell went under his tank and missed and then he killed me...because..."git gud noob...learn to aim...etc"

Edited by TheOneAboveAII, 24 January 2018 - 02:26 AM.


Afdass #7 Posted 24 January 2018 - 02:41 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 12976 battles
  • 633
  • Member since:
    07-26-2016

View PostTheOneAboveAII, on 24 January 2018 - 01:06 AM, said:

So...learn to aim boys...or not...rng will [edited]you over anyways...gg...

This ^ ...

View PostLCpl_Jones, on 24 January 2018 - 01:09 AM, said:

aiming lowers dpm

... and this ^.

 

Whenever I aim for too long I know the shell will miss. Shooting a VK.100.01P at 500m with its flat side in my fully aimed aim (which by itself is not small) while aiming at the side of the hull -> shell went to the turret and didnt penetrated. RNG factor over 1000.

 

Whenever you fully aim anything, RNG makes sure you get the -25%.



_T_1_T_4_N_0_ #8 Posted 24 January 2018 - 02:47 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29096 battles
  • 1,114
  • [SQCI] SQCI
  • Member since:
    02-17-2015
Yeah its like the Circon quote "aiming lowers dpm" these are cold war tanks and the same centered dispersion model is used for static tanks aimed prepped and those cross country @ 50+Kph.
"aiming lowers dpm" shouldn't be funny, it shouldn't make sense, but unfortunately it does.

Its totally ridiculous in my conception of what these tanks are supposed to represent.

This is aiming though and dispersion has nothing! to do with RNG as that is another kettle of fish.

Basically I think WoT should use 2 dispersion models and have a setpoint in the current dispersion of all tanks that swaps between guassian centered (aimed) & random distribution model (not aimed)
Its just ridiculous that the same pseudo centered gaussian model is used for all shots and no distinction is made between the two, apart from widening its radius.
 

Edited by DumbNumpty, 24 January 2018 - 02:55 AM.


HassenderZerhacker #9 Posted 24 January 2018 - 03:53 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 25612 battles
  • 2,265
  • [1DPG] 1DPG
  • Member since:
    09-09-2015

View Postbrumbarr, on 24 January 2018 - 01:42 AM, said:

I think the ratio of fully aimed shots and shots hit on the move is fine.

Fully aimed shots hitting more would encourage more camping and reward campers and punish acive gameplay. It would also make  weakspots way too easy to hit.

Hitting more shots on the move would also be bad, then we wuld have tanks with bad gun handling and acc snapshotting you at full speed. No good.

 

Current balance is fine.  Yeah, sometimes people hit snapshots and mis fully aimed shots, but thats fine, its the chance of that occuring that makes the difference. And that chance is currently perfect.

 

can you explain how the snapshot mechanics work exactly. how the chance to hit with snapshot compares with aiming and how these chances are influenced by other factors such as crew skills ?

Jigabachi #10 Posted 24 January 2018 - 04:01 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17858 battles
  • 18,589
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
We need better maps, so that the majority of shots don't happen at swordfightdistance anymore. That would already solve most problems around accuracy.

_T_1_T_4_N_0_ #11 Posted 24 January 2018 - 04:04 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29096 battles
  • 1,114
  • [SQCI] SQCI
  • Member since:
    02-17-2015

View PostJigabachi, on 24 January 2018 - 04:01 AM, said:

We need better maps, so that the majority of shots don't happen at swordfightdistance anymore. That would already solve most problems around accuracy.

 

OP is nothing to do about maps its purely about how the dispersion mechanism of shots work.
Also it wouldn't make a difference as there is no differentiation over distance apart from the same center weighted dispersion model with just a wider radius.
"KV2 snapshot from moon" and sometimes does. 
But maps is another topic.

 

View PostHassenderZerhacker, on 24 January 2018 - 03:53 AM, said:

 

can you explain how the snapshot mechanics work exactly. how the chance to hit with snapshot compares with aiming and how these chances are influenced by other factors such as crew skills ?
 

Just isn't just a calc on base disp where current tank & turret movement is summed with soft stats applied to base dispersion to give the same center weighted dispersion of a larger radius.
Actual formula is some guess work and some reverse engineering but think its probably spot on and someone will prob supply.

 


Edited by DumbNumpty, 24 January 2018 - 04:12 AM.


Jigabachi #12 Posted 24 January 2018 - 04:12 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17858 battles
  • 18,589
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View PostDumbNumpty, on 24 January 2018 - 04:04 AM, said:

But maps is another topic.

It's one that is directly related to this. 

When maps get changed, allowing more distance shots, you also massively change the amount of snapshots, as now maps are way too small and thus allow even inaccurate guns to hit targets with ease.



_T_1_T_4_N_0_ #13 Posted 24 January 2018 - 04:16 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 29096 battles
  • 1,114
  • [SQCI] SQCI
  • Member since:
    02-17-2015

View PostJigabachi, on 24 January 2018 - 04:12 AM, said:

It's one that is directly related to this. 

When maps get changed, allowing more distance shots, you also massively change the amount of snapshots, as now maps are way too small and thus allow even inaccurate guns to hit targets with ease.

 

No its not I created the OP and I can tell you it has nothing to do with it. We have maps that exceed maximum render and irrespective of distance what is stated in the OP still happens.
More misses at distance, but still the crazy level of drunken gun slinger bulls eyes.

The OP is quite specific "Is there enough difference in dispersion and do some soft stats often make overall accuracy feel like a fallacy?"

 

 

 


Edited by DumbNumpty, 24 January 2018 - 04:18 AM.


HassenderZerhacker #14 Posted 24 January 2018 - 05:21 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 25612 battles
  • 2,265
  • [1DPG] 1DPG
  • Member since:
    09-09-2015

View PostDumbNumpty, on 24 January 2018 - 04:16 AM, said:

 

No its not I created the OP and I can tell you it has nothing to do with it. We have maps that exceed maximum render and irrespective of distance what is stated in the OP still happens.
More misses at distance, but still the crazy level of drunken gun slinger bulls eyes.

The OP is quite specific "Is there enough difference in dispersion and do some soft stats often make overall accuracy feel like a fallacy?"

 

I certainly feel like unprecise guns snapshot too much from too far away, yes.

250swb #15 Posted 24 January 2018 - 07:46 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 21735 battles
  • 4,873
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-23-2015
Just like skill based MM and removing premium ammo the OP post is yet another suggestion that will dumb the game down and make it bland. If you don't like getting hit with a KV-2 snapshot consider the times you've done it to the enemy, you had no sense of excitement, no frisson of satisfaction? A bit of frustration and a bit of excitement are the fundamentals of what keeps the game dynamic, dont try to murder WOT before WG find their own way to kill it.

Obsessive_Compulsive #16 Posted 24 January 2018 - 09:37 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 24378 battles
  • 8,048
  • [ADUK] ADUK
  • Member since:
    09-09-2014

View PostJigabachi, on 24 January 2018 - 04:12 AM, said:

It's one that is directly related to this. 

When maps get changed, allowing more distance shots, you also massively change the amount of snapshots, as now maps are way too small and thus allow even inaccurate guns to hit targets with ease.

 

View PostDumbNumpty, on 24 January 2018 - 04:16 AM, said:

 

No its not I created the OP and I can tell you it has nothing to do with it. We have maps that exceed maximum render and irrespective of distance what is stated in the OP still happens.
More misses at distance, but still the crazy level of drunken gun slinger bulls eyes.

The OP is quite specific "Is there enough difference in dispersion and do some soft stats often make overall accuracy feel like a fallacy?"

 

 

 

 

handbags!!!

Homer_J #17 Posted 24 January 2018 - 09:43 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 27652 battles
  • 29,000
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010
The only way to make sure snapshots miss is to deliberately rig it so if RNG says it would hit then roll again.  Which isn't really random any more. 

hendop #18 Posted 24 January 2018 - 10:28 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 47025 battles
  • 45
  • [U-L] U-L
  • Member since:
    05-24-2011
Is it not more an issue of how memory works, if someone snap shoots you in KV2 in one game it sticks in the memory the other six tanks that missed do not or the tanks that missed in the games you in between before the next lucky hit, the ones that hurt you remember but those many misses fade away giving a false impression.

Hotwired #19 Posted 24 January 2018 - 10:48 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 28741 battles
  • 490
  • Member since:
    09-12-2010

View PostAfdass, on 24 January 2018 - 01:41 AM, said:

Whenever I aim for too long I know the shell will miss.

 

That is such bad thinking.

 

If you're aiming a shell for "too long" it's because you know you're gambling (a) on the shell hitting or (b) hitting the bit you want or © both



Slyspy #20 Posted 24 January 2018 - 10:54 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14193 battles
  • 16,544
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostDumbNumpty, on 24 January 2018 - 04:16 AM, said:

 

No its not I created the OP and I can tell you it has nothing to do with it. We have maps that exceed maximum render and irrespective of distance what is stated in the OP still happens.
More misses at distance, but still the crazy level of drunken gun slinger bulls eyes.

The OP is quite specific "Is there enough difference in dispersion and do some soft stats often make overall accuracy feel like a fallacy?"

 

 

 

 

One issue might be that your poll and your OP ask different questions.

 

View PostHassenderZerhacker, on 24 January 2018 - 05:21 AM, said:

 

I certainly feel like unprecise guns snapshot too much from too far away, yes.

 

Try playing 100 KV2 derp games and enage solely from long range without aiming and let us know what the hit rate is.







Also tagged with aiming, snapshots, dispersion

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users