Shells dropping short bug....

[3LUE]

I wish WG would at least tells us they can't fix it. It has been brought up to them many times for over a year and they still have said nothing about it. It is annoying as all hell. If they can't fix it they should at least tell us.

[SeaQuest]

21 minutes ago, 3LUE said:

I wish WG would at least tells us they can't fix it. It has been brought up to them many times for over a year and they still have said nothing about it. It is annoying as all hell. If they can't fix it they should at least tell us.

WG has known about this for a long time. I am not sure why they have not said anything about it. Some think it has to do with an assist that WG has in game. Players have posted vids showing it happening and also have posted vids of people shooting shells in the air and landing on the aim locked ship they have targeted. This is not just effecting the main game but also Legends.

[Aethervox]

Has this occurred to anyone that this is not a bug but, in fact, intentional? 

[Yedwy]

2 hours ago, 3LUE said:

I wish WG would at least tells us they can't fix it. It has been brought up to them many times for over a year and they still have said nothing about it. It is annoying as all hell. If they can't fix it they should at least tell us.

They dont WANT to fix it, its adding another layer of RNG into the game and WG loves RNG, the more RNG there ist the more random and closer to the "coin flip" result it will be and the WR of everybody beeing around 50% give or take a bit is what WG likes the most

[torino2dc]

Some context about the 'shells dropping short bug' and why it is unlikely to get fixed in the near future:

Background 

When WoWS was first developed, the game-builders faced a problem: How do they give players control over the depth of the aiming reticle? Players had to be able to make 100m increment adjustments on 20km+ distant targets with the aiming camera generally just above the water. At long ranges, moving the crosshair one pixel up or down might translate into several hundred meters of additional depth. From a UI perspective that is kind of a nightmare, especially since they didn't want the player to have manually set target distance, since that would kill the arcade-y vibe they were going for.

The solution was the lock-on targeting system. In simplified terms, it is a type of aim assist that creates an area around the locked target which takes the same UI inputs but 'interprets' the depth adjustments in a much more fine-grain manner. Hence why the player can aim water line at a distant target and the game actually understands what is intended. It is several kludges glued together to create the impression that you could aim a battleship gun at 25km using only a mouse. 

Given how tricky the problem is, the solution we have is actually remarkably good. Most folks never even notice that they are receiving help targeting every single shot they fire. Only veteran players who know exactly where each salvo should be landing will notice its occasional shortcomings. One of these is that the aim-assist will occasionally get confused and drop a salvo short of its target. It's as if it knew perfectly well where the salvo should be going but thought the target was ~300m closer than it was. It's an especially galling bug because it often turns what should be a devastating strike into a moment of keyboard smashing frustration.  

Will it be fixed?

Unlikely if ever. There is a good chance the person(s) who wrote the targeting code in ~2014 are not working for WG or Lesta anymore. That would mean dedicating personnel resources to re-learning how all the smoke and mirrors within the aim assist actually work. Assuming that the error could even be found (dubious -- if it was easy, they'd probably have found it already), it would require laborious testing cycles to make sure that the fix didn't introduce new bugs -- which is a distinct possibility given how kludge-tastic the system is. The risk-reward just isn't there.

[Admiral_Karasu]

The only suggested player end fix I think I've seen is manually locking off the target and re-locking on before you fire. There's apparently also a delay in the aim assist, meaning if you move your crosshair, it will take a while for the game to catch up.

[Tpaktop2_1 NA]

42 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

The only suggested player end fix I think I've seen is manually locking off the target and re-locking on before you fire. There's apparently also a delay in the aim assist, meaning if you move your crosshair, it will take a while for the game to catch up.

I was going to suggest this too. For some reason the autolock on a target causes wild shots. Un "X" then "X" again for a better target lock.

[Andrewbassg]

4 hours ago, torino2dc said:

Some context about the 'shells dropping short bug' and why it is unlikely to get fixed in the near future:

..........

That's a very interesting and informative reading.

A couple of things: we actually know quite a bit about the aiming bug(s) thanks to people who tested them out . It has been proven, that the line of/on the reticle plays an important role. If something else is also on the line, it will interfere  with the aiming and it will throw it off. Be it islands or ships, or other objects. So that's a good starting point. Then it should be verified if the closeness of the (other) object plays a part in this.

Still the fix is quite obvious: lock on should eliminate all other objects from consideration. Something  like:

IF X(* lock on condition) = 1 THEN  A,B, C.......Z = 0 ( *A, B, C.......Z being the other objects not subjected to the condition, but still on the reticle line )

The condition already exists and as such, it is not necessary to insert/redefine it, again. Just needs to take precedence.  The need for the accountability of stray shells hitting other objects( for RNG reasons) should be completely disregarded, for the moment. Later, alternative solutions ( such as handing it out to the receiving end) could be explored, but the major problem needs to solved first.

While this is not necessarily an "elegant" solution, it is an effective one. Sometimes finesse works against effectiveness and the "quest"  for "elegancy" could obscure the solution.  🙂 

Edited December 4, 2023 by Andrewbassg

[Asym]

15 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

That's a very interesting and informative reading.

A couple of things: we actually know quite a bit about the aiming bug(s) thanks to people who tested them out . It has been proven, that the line of/on the reticle plays an important role. If something else is also on the line, it will interfere  with the aiming and it will throw it off. Be it islands or ships, or other objects. So that's a good starting point. Then it should be verified if the closeness of the (other) object plays a part in this.

Still the fix is quite obvious: lock on should eliminate all other objects from consideration. Something  like:

IF X(* lock on condition) = 1 THEN  A,B, C.......Z = 0 ( *A, B, C.......Z being the other objects not subjected to the condition, but still on the reticle line )

The condition already exists and as such, it is not necessary to insert/redefine it, again. Just needs to take precedence.  The need for the accountability of stray shells hitting other objects( for RNG reasons) should be completely disregarded, for the moment. Later, alternative solutions ( such as handing it out to the receiving end) could be explored, but the major problem needs to solved first.

While this is not necessarily an "elegant" solution, it is an effective one. Sometimes finesse works against effectiveness and the "quest"  for "elegancy" could obscure the solution.  🙂 

Simple is the most eloquent solution most days.   IME, the falling short bug is a game geometry bug.  When our host mangled the game engine to "force subs" into a three dimensional engine, the 4th dimension of depth created "negative exploit regions" where the math simply is taking the maximum depth numbers instead of the surface numbers.  Ever try to shoot at max elevation when in that bug zone?  The shell lands in the same place because they are actually exceeding max elevation of the weapons.

Just a thought.

[Admiral_Karasu]

33 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

That's a very interesting and informative reading.

A couple of things: we actually know quite a bit about the aiming bug(s) thanks to people who tested them out . It has been proven, that the line of/on the reticle plays an important role. If something else is also on the line, it will interfere  with the aiming and it will throw it off. Be it islands or ships, or other objects. So that's a good starting point. Then it should be verified if the closeness of the (other) object plays a part in this.

Still the fix is quite obvious: lock on should eliminate all other objects from consideration. Something  like:

IF X(* lock on condition) = 1 THEN  A,B, C.......Z = 0 ( *A, B, C.......Z being the other objects not subjected to the condition, but still on the reticle line )

The condition already exists and as such, it is not necessary to insert/redefine it, again. Just needs to take precedence.  The need for the accountability of stray shells hitting other objects( for RNG reasons) should be completely disregarded, for the moment. Later, alternative solutions ( such as handing it out to the receiving end) could be explored, but the major problem needs to solved first.

While this is not necessarily an "elegant" solution, it is an effective one. Sometimes finesse works against effectiveness and the "quest"  for "elegancy" could obscure the solution.  🙂 

Having used a dynamic crosshair mod for a longish time (before switching back to a static one), I know the islands completely screw up your aim assist, because the game will start targeting the islands, not the ship. (Why this is extra important is that I don't know if this is just a 'feature' of the dynamic chrosshair, or if we just don't see it with the static ones.) Same if there's anything in the direct line, as you say, be it a ship, or maybe just a seagull who knows.

[Yedwy]

22 minutes ago, Asym said:

Simple is the most eloquent solution most days.   IME, the falling short bug is a game geometry bug.  When our host mangled the game engine to "force subs" into a three dimensional engine, the 4th dimension of depth created "negative exploit regions" where the math simply is taking the maximum depth numbers instead of the surface numbers.  Ever try to shoot at max elevation when in that bug zone?  The shell lands in the same place because they are actually exceeding max elevation of the weapons.

Just a thought.

Nope, aim bug was there before even the first sub tests in halloween ops were carried out, if you ask me the problem is that wows is not targeting a point around which dispersion is calculated but it has a defined dispersion field that is the “aim pont” for the guns and when you slap on rng it often brings out strange results but as I said WG doesnt see a problem, the more RNG the better in their eyes

Edited December 4, 2023 by Yedwy

[Andrewbassg]

50 minutes ago, Asym said:

......

Just a thought.

Interesting take. Still, I think the camera rework is the main culprit. That completely messed up things and accentuated already existing problems. Adding  to all those problems, now one can "edit" his perspective....

 

44 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

Having used a dynamic crosshair mod for a longish time (before switching back to a static one), I know the islands completely screw up your aim assist, because the game will start targeting the islands, not the ship. (Why this is extra important is that I don't know if this is just a 'feature' of the dynamic chrosshair, or if we just don't see it with the static ones.) Same if there's anything in the direct line, as you say, be it a ship, or maybe just a seagull who knows.

Not just the dynamic ones present problems. Islands completely mess up aiming, it is almost impossible to reliably cit a beached or near island cruiser. Even for the bots 

The why is simple, we all need to lead in, therefore the line is the deciding factor, not its center.

Never used the dynamic ones, not even the built in( only need a point of reference, greatly preferably fixed) , tho I did tried them out, buuut .......now with the camera rework it is outright impossible for me to use them.

 

 

[3LUE]

Thanks for replies folks. Would have said earlier, but just got home from work. 

[WES_HoundDog]

On 12/3/2023 at 11:30 PM, Aethervox said:

Has this occurred to anyone that this is not a bug but, in fact, intentional? 

Welcome to rigged games

[YouSatInGum]

On 12/4/2023 at 4:49 AM, Admiral_Karasu said:

The only suggested player end fix I think I've seen is manually locking off the target and re-locking on before you fire. There's apparently also a delay in the aim assist, meaning if you move your crosshair, it will take a while for the game to catch up.

Actually I use this "fix" most often for when you "lose" the lock on dispersion bonus when it appears to be locked on.  This aiming bug which is related but separate from the low shell bug happens to me much more often. 

The low shell bug happens infrequently enough that relocking is way too much trouble for the one out of 20 games that it might happen.

Unfortunately, though, the dispersion bug is much more prevalent...at least for me.  Especially since I do a ton a blind firing and having objects like islands between you and the target exacerbates the issue.

Here's an example: