Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'balancing'.
Found 4 results
One thing that I’ve always stand against is the (stupid) addition of TWELVE 419 mm guns as STOCK. TWELVE OVERPOWERED GUNS. Montana Yamato GK (406) GK (420) Conqueror (419) Conqueror (457) Number of shells per salvo 12 9 12 12 12 8 Fire chance per shell (%) 36 35 38 41 48 63 Fire chance full salvo (%) 432 315 456 492 576 504 Maximum HE damage (per shell) 5.700 7.300 4.800 5.000 7.200 8.200 Maximum HE damage (full salvo) 68.400 65.700 57.600 60.000 84.600 65.600 Maximum AP damage (full salvo) 162.000 133.200 152.400 162.000 156.000 119.200 Does Conqueror have ¼ HE pen like GK? Yes. Does Conqueror have the most insane HE fire chance? Yes. Conqueror 419mm has the second highest maximum HE damage per shell, but Yamato has only nine guns and her 457 setup has only eight guns. Conqueror 419mm has the highest HE damage and fire chance per salvo compare to other 12-gun T10 BBs. Disgustingly so. The fire chance per salvo of Conqueror 419mm is much higher than even her own 457mm guns, which has the highest fire chance and HE damage per shell, but only eight guns. Why removing the 419mm gun option? Because she has TWELVE guns now. Nerf dispersion all you want, but TWELVE shells are more than enough to secure a hit every salvo with a player that has a slightest clue on how to aim. Eight shells per salvo? Meh. That's why New Mexico is so good. Why Fusou is so good. And why no one could reliably snipe in Gneisenau. Sheer number of shells per salvo. Requires next-to-no skill to play. How WG even considered adding them (419mm guns) at the first place is unthinkable. The ship was "marketed" with the second biggest gun size in the game and with that gun option, no one will use the obviously overpowered one for obvious profit. Nerfing Conqueror's repair and stealth only breaks the "traits" of the line (from T7) on, that they have low heal but great repair, they are stealthy and are better than any battleship at dealing damage through fire. At the current state it's TOO GOOD at that with that gun option. Remove the 12 419mm guns and everyone will stop complaining about how she is too much of a [content removed]. She will continue to survive match after match, but the damage she deals will be much less [content removed]. Literally nothing else needs to change (because they don't). Maybe even a slight HP buff to 85k. The announced "nerf" will only encourage more and more Conqueror's players to snipe, which adds more [content removed] into the game. Finally decided to swing the nerfbat, but at the wrong places. Conclusion: 419 mm gun “option” needs to go. It needs to be removed. Derogatory. Post edited, user sanctioned. ~amade
Right now in Tier 10: Shimakaze got nerfed torps, underpowered Zao nerfed invis fire, still good to play with Lets not talk about CVs. Montana good all rounder except when vs yamato. Hindenburg, not so bad, not so good Des Moines No CV=Poor credit /exp yield Yamato, welp, still good when VS other BBs, but got burned bad. Gearing's fun to play Khabarovsk is???????What does this ship even do? Annoying BB and CA players to hell and terrorize DD players? But still not op Now Moskva....this thing Huge health pool, AA better than IJN, can bounce BB shell's armour when angled, high speed, decent RPM, soviet penetration, magic shell velocity, BBs range The thing is Devs try to justify it by saying it has sluggish turning and bad concealment, But you dont even need to go frontline or to use broadside to unleash this things power, all moskvas just turn bow at enemy BB CAat 18-20 Km and fire non stop, BB can not do anything about it. Yes other nation's cruisers can use concealment to surprise attack, but that doesn't stop it from having the best shell arc/velocity/penetration of any CA in game. Because its better than IJN AA even CVs prefer to torp a poor ibuki/zao/atago over it. German CA have good AP penetration and torps. But in return gets bad armour, bad HE and bad conceal Japan CA have good HE, good shell arc best CA torps and good conceal, but in return gets ultra bad AA, huge citadel, lowest rpm and sluggish turning and no radar American CA have best AA, best RPM and radar, but in return get ultra bad shell arc thus not even good shells are gonna hit anything, and no torps Russian CA Has Good HE, decent RPM, best shell arc, long range, best penetration, high speed, high HP, radar what else does it possibly need? Your opinions, keep it civil.
Hello everyone, I have a suggestion that the smoke launcher ability on some cruisers and all destroyers have a draw back, I'm sure that I'm not the only player who gets annoyed when a destroyer positions himself inside smoke then spam's HE rounds at my ships, my idea changes this to a more realistic option. when a destroyer uses smoke they can't possibly see you on their own at least in real circumstances. (my point is, if you can't see them how can they see you?) option 1: Destroyers get Hydro acoustic search allowing them to see ships that are outside of their smoke. option 2: use it like it's meant to be used to escape incoming fire and detection, rather then hide inside it and be a menace while spamming HE. option 3: once a ship fires inside smoke they become spotted unless their are no enemy ships in line of sight. option 4: leave it as it is so that destroyers and some cruisers can remain a menace and virtually invulnerable while in smoke.