DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
wows forum
HTML https://wows.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Debates, Interviews
*****************************************************
#Post#: 1678--------------------------------------------------
Re: 900 € Debate: 20km Torps on Shmima
By: infty13 Date: February 12, 2024, 7:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
1. ?
2. Yes.
3. Yes.
4. Pretty much.
5. No, that is not my statement. My statement is that the
stealthy torpedoes are MUCH better at DOING DAMAGE.
You have never addressed the main point, that the stealthy
torpedoes are much, much better at their primary objective,
doing damage.
#Post#: 1679--------------------------------------------------
Re: 900 € Debate: 20km Torps on Shmima
By: Hanuman Date: February 12, 2024, 7:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
The point is in other words: comparing stealthier torpedoes with
not so stelthy ones, or as i phrase: comparing 12km and 20km
torps benefits. It is jsut stating the main topic, so it should
obviously be Yes for the point 1 as well.
Point 4 is generally Yes then. It means you agree with
generalization that Wows community is wrong with hteir opinion
about 12km torps for everyone.
So, points 1-4 are Yes generally.
For point 5 i understood earlier that you mean Good DDs only. I
can copy paste those places here and let's relook. Or can you
simplify the process and say shortly your statement again, does
it go for all players and situations or only for few ones?
You say "stealthy torpedoes are MUCH better at DOING DAMAGE". Do
you want to ignore totally player skills and other influencial
aspects? In that case your statement is very general, it goes
for beginners and others, it ignores if a DD dies or not, it
jsut talks generally about damage amount in a battle.
You agree with the advantages that i said about 20km torps and
with disadvantages i said about stealthy torps. Those advantages
and disadvantages all together make 20km torps a more benefitial
choice, do you agree?
Also i provided counter arguments to your Doing Damage argument.
12km torps player dies more often than 20km player and that's
why the total damage over many battles are worse, because a dead
12km DD player jsut can't make damage. Also 12km torpedo player
does not have damage making options so much as 20km player,
because 12km is jsut not enough to reach targets and the battle
time can go just swimming around with unused torps. That also is
not better as a damage argument. I explained that rows 2-3 of
stelthy torps are often undodgable no matter how stelthy the
torps are, plus many players don't dodge anything during any
torps, also it is totally doable to do devastating strikes with
slower torps as well. All those things debunk your Better Damage
opinion.
Show which your arguments i didn't answer?
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1678#msg1678
date=1707743906]
[quote author=Hanuman al Dente link=topic=224.msg1671#msg1671
date=1707729748]
Let's do a clear shorter summary of main statements.
1. Mainly we compare 2 torpedo types, long range torps have ca
14 secs spotted/reaction time, the 12km torps ca 8 secs reaction
time.
2. 12km torps lessen DD survivability because requires going
closer to enemies, 20km torps user don't have to take such risks
3. 20km torps impacts bigger area.
For example: from 15 torps, 2 torps may hit a CV from 20km
distance plus additionally 1 torp can hit a DD from 13km range
and plus 1 hit a cruiser from 9km range, in total 4 hits.
4. Wows community aka majority believe that 12km torps are
always a better choice for everyone, and 20km always worse. I
hope you agree with that fact of majority, i really haven't seen
anyone to propagate 20km torps.
5. Your statement is that 12km torps are a better choice only if
the DD player is Good. Or do you also require that a target BB
player must be Bad?
[/quote]
1. ?
2. Yes.
3. Yes.
4. Pretty much.
5. No, that is not my statement. My statement is that the
stealthy torpedoes are MUCH better at DOING DAMAGE.
You have never addressed the main point, that the stealthy
torpedoes are much, much better at their primary objective,
doing damage.
[/quote]
#Post#: 1680--------------------------------------------------
Re: 900 € Debate: 20km Torps on Shmima
By: Hanuman Date: February 12, 2024, 7:53 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1646#msg1646
date=1707676418]
The main point of torpedoes is to do damage and the one way to
ensure damage on the enemy is by making sure that the enemy can
not doge.
[/quote]
One way of course is what you say that ensuring torpedo damage
amount is to have stelthier/faster torpedos, but also there are
other ways that ensure that topedo damage amount. For example
taking less risks ensures a DD can stay alive longer and in
total eventually make more damage. Shooting torpedo rows number
2-3 ensures that rows 2-3 are not easily dodgable. A torpedo
salvo damage amount is not more important than surviving for
long battle time, and winning a battle is more important than
some kind of damage.
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1646#msg1646
date=1707676418]
Every second that a torpedo is detected REDUCES its
effectiveness ...
Hence, to maximize the effectiveness of torpedoes, they must
have the lowest reaction time.
[/quote]
All kind of torpedos hit very often in the game, there is no
practical importance about seconds.
Sepcially the torpedo rows 2-3 are totally effective and non
dodgable, no matter which stelthiness they have.
Do you agree that 20km torps provide more damage possibilities
during a battle?
You seem to behave by finally comparing 2 torpedo types by their
damage numbers and proving that 1 number is bigger than other.
The same would be that you debate that "BBS have more heath
points compared to DDs" etc. Maybe i can invent later a better
illustrative example. The point is that you seem to talk
theoretically about a detail ignoring practical reality. You
should prove a more bigger opinion.
For example, prove Wows commnuity popular opinion that 20km
torps are always a worse choice. Or prove that a good
playerssucceeds more with 12km torps. You seem to not dare to
say any such opinions as i see.
You seem to talk about one torpedo shooting, not about a battle.
Right? You talk about 3 rows of torpedos, and not about all
torpedo shootings that happen in a battle during long minutes.
Similar would be to say that "in a war a bigger granade does
more damage to enemies than smaller grenade", and later the
whole country say that bigger granades are always the best
option for everyone in all situations.
#Post#: 1681--------------------------------------------------
Re: 900 € Debate: 20km Torps on Shmima
By: infty13 Date: February 12, 2024, 8:43 am
---------------------------------------------------------
RIght
The secondary advantages of 20km torpedoes do not outweigh
DOUBLE damage potential of a 12km salvo.
On the practical side: 12 km radar is only on russian ships, and
only on a few. Most radars are ~<10km.
20km are the better choice if the player finds themselves unable
to survive at 12 km. With 5.6km detection, well, this is truly
just a matter of player skill.
Arguing that detection time of torpedoes doesnt matter is
strictly wrong and shows an ignorance of mechanics/random
chance.
Its like saying, blindfire is just as accurate as normal fire,
because sometimes it hits.
Comparison of two numbers is the basis of quantitative analysis.
It is the way we prove things are true.
The way you shoot doesnt affect the 'mean damage potential',
which i proved to be OVER 2 times as large (remember 2 times is
only for Hannover) for 12km torps. That is the whole point of
the argument, 20km are very, very rarely undodgeable (you would
have to be turning INTO the broadside for the torpedos, but even
then you can continue the turn so I dont see how). The only
reason that you find success with 20km torps is because enemy
players are not good at the game.
#Post#: 1682--------------------------------------------------
Re: 900 € Debate: 20km Torps on Shmima
By: infty13 Date: February 12, 2024, 8:46 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I propose a training battle, where you try to shoot me with 20km
torps, I play the ship you choose.
#Post#: 1683--------------------------------------------------
Re: 900 € Debate: 20km Torps on Shmima
By: Hanuman Date: February 12, 2024, 9:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1682#msg1682
date=1707749163]
I propose a training battle, where you try to shoot me with 20km
torps, I play the ship you choose.
[/quote]
Let's do 1 thing at the a time, so let's first end this debate.
Secondly, in our Wikipedia and elsewhere we have explained many
times that a battle result etc does not prove any method or
opinion.
HTML https://imgur.com/l89MXXi
#Post#: 1684--------------------------------------------------
Re: 900 € Debate: 20km Torps on Shmima
By: infty13 Date: February 12, 2024, 9:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
ok, im convinced that you dont actually understand how factual
debates work and have no idea what the word "prove" means.
Thank you and goodbye.
#Post#: 1685--------------------------------------------------
Re: 900 € Debate: 20km Torps on Shmima
By: Hanuman Date: February 12, 2024, 10:02 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1681#msg1681
date=1707748999]
RIght
[/quote]
That proves that you ignore the bigger picture and jsut look a
small thing apart from the bigger thing. That is a mistake.
Journalist do it often by cherry picking a sentence from a
bigger text and debunk it ignoring totally the whole context of
the sentence. Also i gave a good example with grenades where you
take a role saying that a bigger heavier grenade is better. Well
it is not better than a lighter grenade, both have advantages
and very likely a lighter grenade that can be through 20 meters
makes more damage/victories than the heavier grenade that you
can through maximum 12 meters far.
Your mistake is shortly ignoring the bigger context.
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1681#msg1681
date=1707748999]
The secondary advantages of 20km torpedoes do not outweigh
DOUBLE damage potential of a 12km salvo.
[/quote]
Yes they do, prove that they don't. For example the advantages
list for 20km torps were big enough. The 12km advantage was only
a bigger reaction time but even that got counter-arguments.
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1681#msg1681
date=1707748999]
On the practical side: 12 km radar is only on russian ships, and
only on a few. Most radars are ~<10km.
[/quote]
Radar DDs/CRs occur in the game enough times, much more often
than devastating strikes of 12km torps for example. The 12km
torps player must risk more, has less torping options.
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1681#msg1681
date=1707748999]
20km are the better choice if the player finds themselves unable
to survive at 12 km. With 5.6km detection, well, this is truly
just a matter of player skill.
[/quote]
Decide if you want to restrict your claim only on Good DDs and
Bad BBs then. Even then the counter arguments will win your
claim.
There were many mentioned 20km advantages, you agreed with few
of them but i believe you agree with all of them ifigo to the
Yes-no question methods and force your Yes answer for them.
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1681#msg1681
date=1707748999]
Arguing that detection time of torpedoes doesnt matter is
strictly wrong and shows an ignorance of mechanics/random
chance.
Its like saying, blindfire is just as accurate as normal fire,
because sometimes it hits.
[/quote]
About "that detection time of torpedoes doesnt matter". I didn't
say that, i said that everything has advantages and
disadvantages, obviously detection time is an advantage in the
game jsut like healthpool amount and other obvious advantages.
nobody says that bigger health points of a ship is a
disadvantage, or that torpedo speed is disadvantage. But it is
wrong to say that ships with biggest health pool are best, or
that HP captain skills are the most important in the game.
Blindfire example is not very illustrative, because both 12km
and 20km torps swim almost identically, it is not that you shoot
20km torps lindly but 12km torps with aiming on a visible
target.
The detection time doesn't really matter much because of the
given explanations.
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1681#msg1681
date=1707748999]
Comparison of two numbers is the basis of quantitative analysis.
It is the way we prove things are true.
[/quote]
Above i explained why you are wrong if you compare out of
context 2 numbers/statements.
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1681#msg1681
date=1707748999]
The way you shoot doesnt affect the 'mean damage potential',
which i proved to be OVER 2 times as large (remember 2 times is
only for Hannover) for 12km torps. That is the whole point of
the argument, 20km are very, very rarely undodgeable (you would
have to be turning INTO the broadside for the torpedos, but even
then you can continue the turn so I dont see how).
[/quote]
I don't know what you mean with your point here about the 2X
idea. I remember we covered that topic above where my counter
question was: do you think that 12km torps make 2 times more
damage in battles? Also i explained that there is no "2 times
better" idea possible because torpedo rows 2-3 are not
influenced by the reaction time. It is a typical picture that 3
rows of torps make 2-3 torps damage, but a devastating strike is
a rare risky picture and happens with all torpedo types.
For a minority 20km torps may be easy to dodge, in that case
narrow your statement to minority, and even then advantage does
not win the advantages of 20km torps, and also requires probably
even an additional narrowing of the statement to have only Good
dodging skills in a team.
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1681#msg1681
date=1707748999]
The only reason that you find success with 20km torps is because
enemy players are not good at the game.
[/quote]
Here it seems that you want to still empasize average player
skills and other aspects of battles.
If you say here that enemy players are not Good, then with that
you prove that they take torpedos in no matter which
stealthiness they have.
The 20km torps advantages are not only because of players
average dodging skills, there are more advantages.
Your whole post seems to try to stil ltake into the account
wider picture than just narrow theoretical talk about
stealthiness, but earlier you said Right that you talk only
about 3 torpedo rows and not about the wider game.
#Post#: 1686--------------------------------------------------
Re: 900 € Debate: 20km Torps on Shmima
By: Hanuman Date: February 12, 2024, 10:18 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=infty13 al dente link=topic=224.msg1684#msg1684
date=1707751584]
ok, im convinced that you dont actually understand how factual
debates work and have no idea what the word "prove" means.
Thank you and goodbye.
[/quote]
It is very common to Wows commnuity that they run away when they
feel loosing a debate.
Let's see your few msitakes:
1. You ignore the bigger picture, you ignore the whole battle,
but look separately only 3 rows of torps or even only the 1st
row. Such out of context method is a mistake. Also you narrowed
your opinion in the middle and at the end seems like widened
again. That is called "a change in opinion" and means a loss.
2. You ignore counter arguments. You should for example reply
even to my grenade example saying that you agree that your
opinion is like the heavier grenades opinion.
3. You use an inadequate method (a training battle) to decide a
debate result with a battle.
4. You make a personal attack by saying that i don't have fine
debating methods but you don't provide any proof to that.
5. In debates there is no need to say Hello, or Goodbye as our
debate rules explain i nthe rules section. Because they are just
emotional noise most times. But maybe you didn't know all rules,
so i don't count that as a msitake.
6. You don't say clearly if your opinion is for everyone in
every situation or in most situation, but you jump to a narrowed
impractical opinion and then back to a wider one, in other words
you don't have a clear statement. That's why i had to ask many
times that do you reperesent the legendary Wows commnuity
generalized false opinion or only Good players standpoint.
Good parts of your debating is:
1. You agreed that Wows commnuity is wrong about 20km torps
opinion, and you agreed that Wows commnuity is wrong in almost
everything. Very nice to hear that, and i agree with that.
2. Your debating methods were fine, no personal atatcks etc.
3. You are not afraid to try to prove your opinions. that's very
good, compared to Wows commnuity who are afraid of and just
blindly continues to believe their believes.
4. You don't mention TeamsWR at all, that is very fine and
unortodox.
If a skillful player playes with 12km torps he may really
perform better than with 20km torps, but i believe he perform
with both torps well, and there are not many such players.
The above msitakes i stated makes you a losoer of this debate.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page