Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
Flemboy

Make Battleships more competative

33 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[AE]
Member
202 posts
9,515 battles

I understand fully that you need to make this game function in a way that makes people want to play all 4 types of ship.

But this is a suggestions section, and I am a marketer by trade, so....

I do believe that had you brought out a game with just Battleships, and called it say, "Jutland" people would still have flocked to it. The problem this game is going to have, IMHO, is that it becomes obvious fairly early on, as low as tier 2-3 play, that Battleships simply aren't competitive. In my limited experience, I have found that I can easily exterminate the tier 3 battleships, and tier 4 ones for that matter, with a cruiser, carrier, or destroyer. Quite simply, they are the easiest targets for my torpedoes if driving a CV or DD, and if in a cruiser I can usually burn them down to nothing within a couple of minutes. In company with another cruiser, I actually look forward to engaging a battleship, as they can't defend themselves against the onslaught of HE spam found in this game. Now some will say, "But high tier BBs are more accurate, and DDs become almost powerless at high levels". Problem is, potential players will have a lot of misery playing BBs to get there. It only takes, in my case, a few hundred games, to understand that BBs are hopelessly outclassed by every other type of ship from tier 1-5. Apparently they are just COVERED in wood and other flammables for the enemy to set fire to. Of course, under the wood should be hardened steel, which flames will do nothing to of course.

The game is called world of warships, which is fortunate, because it could not possibly be called world of battleships.

THE ISSUE IS OF COURSE, that almost anybody who grew up with this stuff will WANT TO PLAY BATTLESHIPS. The Yamato is the LUST OBJECT. I can tell you, that with a mere 300 or so games under my belt my interest in going up the various lines is waning fast.

From everything I have read on these very forums,

1) DDs are non-competitive at higher levels.

2) CAs have to deal with increasing levels of BB accuracy, so they loose some competitiveness at highest levels

3) The US vs IJN Carrier play styles have advocates, but effectively, the IJN aircraft get shot out of sky, and IJN torps spread is deliberately wide, and YET apparently, their CVs are OP??? ( I personally believe that the easiest answer to ALL your CV problems, is simply to make the individual aircraft, for any given tier, have EXACTLY the same stats as any other. ie. It doesn't matter which nations carrier you play, a tier 6 will have a certain number of fighter/db/torp aircraft, with same stats, so that any match SIMPLY comes down to your skill.)

4) And I know that the accuracy of BBs may improve as you go up the levels but this is the point - for any given level their accuracy should be far better than a DD or CAs. BBs carry a LOT more improved, top of the line, optics, and mechanical systems that make their guns FAR more accurate. BBs should have pride and place, after all, in a game where people can win sitting on a circle, what would be wrong with a cruiser trying to win through stealth? BBs SHOULD BE FEARED. I think the ones I've met, and destroyed, and the ones I've driven, and been set on fire in, are a sick joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,163 posts
1,874 battles

I take it that you haven't played higher tier battleships?

 

Tier 4 and 5 battleships are actually pretty competitive (Yes, even Myougi when you get used to kiting). But the lower tier battleships are meant to have a really steep learning curve - you either figure out the class fast, or flounder. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,677 posts

If anything else, pretty sure that you're going to advocate to the sheer might of the battleship and be one of em "Battleships are Supreme" soon after. A question however: how far are you up the rung to conclude such things? Because the more funky things start to develop at tiers 5-7 and the early iterations of the battleships may be hard to handle for some, if not most.

 

And DD's at high tier being unable to be competitive? What if I told you that there was an event posted here that a destroyer actually sank a Yamato, your so-called LUST OBJECT, just by the magazine blowing up and from full health no less? Or would you rail that they need to fix the magazine section in order to secure the capital ship's dominance in the game?

 

A battleship in the right hands can be feared. If you want loopy examples, there are plenty out there such as a Fuso destroying a full health nagato in a single salvo, Kongo chasing down and thugging cruisers really hard or a New Mexico whose citadel is rather hard to hit.

 

BONUS: here's a bit for the fighter planes on a carrier 

Edited by EvyL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,083 posts
5,169 battles

buffs on secondary gun accuracy might help a little. at lower tier is dd has low torpedo reload time. saw lots of DD manage to stay  inside the secondary guns range for long time but stay unharmed and keep on dumping their torpedo at helpless bb who's trying to point its main guns at the DD. there was even a battle where i saw minekaze been following a myougi below 2 km ranges for more than 4 and a minute so, the myougi manage to dodge torpedo after torpedo but while trying to shoot minekaze with its main guns but the shell keep on splicing and missing the minekaze, same goes with the secondary guns fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,718 posts
1,988 battles

*Yawn*

 

After (And including) the Kongo and the New York it's heaven for Battleships.

 

I spend some time reading your complaints.

All I can say without even looking at your stats is, you don't have enough games in Tier 5 and plus ships and experience to back yourself up.

Inb4 the "you have even less game than me". Yes I have even less games than you, but as you can refer to my title.

Edited by Alvin1020

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,634 posts
4,639 battles

Wasn't the secondary battery accuracy already buffed?

 

Also the main cannon hits true within a certain range.

Edited by Haku

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[1NATN]
Beta Tester
192 posts
11,293 battles

As a DD driver i can say there are some fearsome BB drivers out there, I've been one shot from max range several times by masters at the art of BBing.:izmena:

My advice is to keep practicing on your gunnery and continue the grind, if it gets too hard switch to something you like for a few games and then go back to the grind again, BB's at higher tiers are awesome machines of pixelated death.

See you on the battlefield captain.:honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
210 posts
4,306 battles

The sad fact about CVs is exactly as you pointed out. IJN CVs are called OP, but arent, all because of "rearming time", which doesnt count when US torpedo bombers are faster, do more damage with each torp, and have a narrower spread, but saying that just opens up a whole bag of worms so ill leave it there.

 

Unfortunately, its very apparent you havent played many high tier BB battles at all. Kawachi and Myougi, whilst still being fairly bad, can do well if you learn to play them right. From the Kongo and New York on, it keeps getting better, with the exception of the Colobado and Nahgato, both of which have a hard time either hitting or getting good damage rolls. Its unfortunately not the ships fault if they arent doing well. It took me a very long time during Alpha and early Beta getting used to shooting at long ranges at CAs and DDs, but i can now be a terror to the likes of jimmywrangles here. Most memorable moment being 1 AP hit on a full health Minekaze at 18km and blowing a magazine lol

 

Either way, BBs can be good, but you just need to read the situations more often and better than you do in any other class, since youve basically only got 1 shot what with the 30 second reload and the slow nature of the ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AE]
Member
202 posts
9,515 battles

I would not call them so much "complaints" as distinct from suggestions. The reason I make the suggestion is that you do not want a particular "TYPE" of ship to dominate. Understand, I know full well that I have very little time in game. At the moment the low tier BBs are simply off-puttingly bad. My points are valid. I doubt that many people hopped into this game deliberately to drive destroyers. Marketing wise, what will bring people to this game is the big boys. But when the big boys are not competitive, the DRIVE to continue will drop. Simple. That's when people jump around the types, hoping to find a dominant vehicle.

My biggest problem is that I have 25k games under my belt in WoT. So it is impossible not to compare the two games. I am sure that many other people currently playing this game played the hell out of WoT. And, being human, they can't help but make comparisons between the two. The reason I am "Suggesting" - not complaining as such, is because I have witnessed so much pain and angst in WoT that I would have hoped that WG would have said "Alright, clean sheet, lets not make the same mistakes we made in WoT, after all, we have that whole experience to go on"... Unfortunately, the games are almost a carbon copy of each other good and bad:


 

The good:

1) Both are the most beautifully crafted, and exiting, battle games that I have ever seen. (ie. sure some of you guys may have played other games that you think were much better). I haven't played WoT for 3.5 years for nothing. There is simply nothing else on the market that does this as well. (Including the unnamed tank competitor). Graphically they are perfect. Sounds are great. Effects are great. WG have put a LOT of time into these games.

2) The human aspect makes them incredibly addictive, non-predictability, etc. Fantastic. It feels great to win, and bloody awful to lose.

3) They have one particular aspect that makes them (IMHO) incredibly superior to the other MMMMOs (whatever too many Ms) - the single ended, and only once a game, spawn. The importance of this cant be overstated. I, and I am sure many others feel the same way, can't stand your average first-person, multi-life domination game. The "Battlefield" series bore me to tears. They are so obviously aimed at kids its not funny. Get shot, die. Respawn, hop in a tank, die. Respawn, hop in a jeep, die. etc, etc. Garbage. The truly awesome thing about WG games is that your ONE life matters. Your survival becomes vitally important. (Those who have played lazer tag vs paintball will understand the difference. One is zap zap I got you, no I got you crap, and the other is WHACK, OMG that hurt. It gets one truly invested in the game.

The bad: (please note WG):

1) Balance. Yes I understand that in a game like this that is hard, but this was, with WoT, a never ending source of pain for you as a game developer. Every time a new vehicle line came out, after probably months of development by hard working staff, entire lines would be either universally condemned as underpowered garbage or "Game breakingly" OP. Power creep is something that walks a fine line between being a great marketing tool -ie . The WT E100 can fire a 6 round clip of 127mm ammo in 12 seconds, OMG I have to have one, to great now my Maus is useless, thanks for nothing WG". Poor old WoT was an example of just how hard it is to please all. Massive swings in power towards one type, or line, followed by a deliberate nerfing, and a swing to some other type. It was painful to watch. At one stage WoT was seeing 5 arties per side (15 vehicles per team), which was not just game breaking, but kind of silly given that it was World of Tanks, not artillery. They got nerfed into oblivion. Many tankers happy, but now a whole lot of artie players utterly pissed off (no other word covers it), given the amount of time it took to climb the artie tree. Also unintended consequences, for example, no artie to spot for, or to race in an kill at end of match, then suddenly, no scouts. Nerfing the artie tree suddenly saw a massive drop off in scout drivers. Then, due no artie, and with hiding in bushes still an option, the TDs reigned supreme. So they got rid of the bushes. In its current form medium tanks reign supreme. JUST LIKE WOWS. Cruisers are awesomely OP. Of course, many will take advantage of this, after all, one of the great skills to have in these games is knowing WHICH trees, types, or individual vehicles, are winners or dogs. And that is great for those that do that. Unfortunately for WG, people knowing that there is simply no point playing say for example, an E100, because it fires once every 17 seconds, is unmaneoverable  (sic), and gets totally owned by medium tanks kills any push to get that "Big" tank. But you can't tell me that people WANTED to play a medium. People see the BIG ones and want them. So to a certain degree I believe they SHOULD be made slightly, or even moderately, superior to other lines. Because if you spend 250k xp and get a DOG, then it will strip your will to go up the line. Also, just like someone getting a job for their experience (something quantifiable) over the modern "Merit" garbage, people are willing to lose out to something superior, without rancour. You EXPECT a HEAVY tank, or Battleship, to be superior. So if it beats you the negativity isn't there. But when a "Top of the line" gets totally owned, then the product will seem broken or wrong.

*Yawn*

 

After (And including) the Kongo and the New York it's heaven for Battleships.

 

I spend some time reading your complaints.

All I can say without even looking at your stats is, you don't have enough games in Tier 5 and plus ships and experience to back yourself up.

Inb4 the "you have even less game than me". Yes I have even less games than you, but as you can refer to my title.

 

 

 

Sorry Alvin1020. I know I am long winded, and don't have the experience. But not having the experience in WOWS is the point. These games need to get people in. WOWs is up against it, compared to WOT, because its a far slower moving, and a little bit of "More of the same". ie. People have pre-conceived notions after playing WOT. Also, the very similarity of the two will be great for many (the comfort of the familiar aka MacDonalds family rest), but not so good for some, ie. Wow I thought I would get into this more, but, its kind of like tanks but slower, MEH".

2) One big gripe about the BB vs CA balance is the lack of realism required to make it so. Three biggest -

     a) BBs awful dispersion.

     b) BB has just as many 6-8inch secondary guns as the entire loadout on a CA, but the CAs 6-8inchers rain down every 6 seconds or so, but the BBs don't fire at all (despite being same calibre) until much closer in. Why? How does a 8x8inch gun ship overwhelm a 8-12inch guns + 8x8inch gun ship?

     c) Fire. OMG. Please ditch, or extremely modify the fire stuff. Its just silly. Name one BB in the wars burnt down to the waterline. One! It is the detonation of magazines and the loss of multiple water tight compartments that sinks BBs. Sure the Bismark was seen to go down "Burning from Bow to Stern". But when actually found on the bottom, was found to have suffered "No significant structural damage" that would have sent her down - She was scuttled. The whole point is that BBs are made to be relatively IMPERVIOUS to lower calibre shells.


 

Another point, already mentioned in another post, but vitally important- DO NOT ALLOW XVM to enter the game. BAN IT. STOP IT BEFORE IT HURTS THIS GAME. In WoT , you can take some precautions against XVM ruining your matches by remaining unseen, or using cover. But in this game there is no hiding from the aircraft. If XVM is allowed to come in, so that CV drivers know which ship players are competent and which are good, then they will simply make good players lives hell. They will come to smash YOU, just YOU. They will ignore others and come after YOU. This is a real gamebreaker.


 

As said earlier, suggestions, for what is a great game. I have read the forums. I can see EXACTLY the same anger being generated, as in WoT. Its just painful to see that exactly the same issues will appear. CVs are the new artie. HP vs penetration. Apparent nerfing/buffing of US/IJN carrier fighters/dbs/torps aircraft. Different torp spreads? Why? If the aircraft and weaponry had the same stats per tier, then it would come down to which CV driver got his through. The apparent unwillingness of WG to deal with the things that really piss people off, ie. the bluelining. You cannot possibly tell me that that would take any more than a week to fix. Small patch. Sit on line, life ebbs away, or cant fire. Simple.


 


 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,634 posts
4,639 battles

Regarding blue-line fix, the public test patch notes. Or, watch Jingles instead.

 

 

I fully agree with you on the XVM part. I'm even with you on the secondary battery part; we should make secondary batteries fire longer ranges (not necessarily make them more accurate, though).

 

On the other hand, I'm not so sure about reducing battleship dispersion. Games without RNG generally have less potential for exciting and unexpected outcomes. Think of poker when a player makes a bold all-in move on very long odds and somehow wins.

 

How you handle RNG as a player is about all about managing your risks. Good players learn to make the best of bad RNG and ride on good RNG. Nothing is truly "random", but it would be really boring if we didn't have RNG. Think chess: sure, a select few will enjoy it immensely and will appreciate a game where a loss is based solely on their skill and nothing else, but what about everyone else?

 

There are plenty of ways to play whilst ensuring that optimal result occurs most of the time. The same approach should be had when playing on the other side of RNG. You do not just consider your own hand, but your opponents as well. Take the risk for sharp play or take much more cautious sound play. Which do you pick? The choice is up to you.

 

Also, don't forget that when you get to high tiers, those battleship salvos certainly do not feel like RNG...

 

Edit: There is a case of too much RNG, however; this includes the AA system, which should be changed to be more consistent (and so that planes cannot simply cruise around a ship, manoeuvring to get into the ideal firing position.

Edited by Haku

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
210 posts
4,306 battles

Grind yourself up to Kongo and you will enjoy that accuracy. Than the Fuso, absolute CA killer up close (12km)

 

Dude, Fuso is the MOTHER of all Battleships! lol i can kill DDs at 14km or greater with her. In a match i had in early September, i ended up brawling 1 on 7 ships, A Kongo, A New York, A New Mexico, 2 Omahas, A Furutaka and a Mutsuki, and i took out all but the New Mexico before i finally went down.

 

Fuso is a BEAST!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
295 posts
501 battles

 

Dude, Fuso is the MOTHER of all Battleships! lol i can kill DDs at 14km or greater with her. In a match i had in early September, i ended up brawling 1 on 7 ships, A Kongo, A New York, A New Mexico, 2 Omahas, A Furutaka and a Mutsuki, and i took out all but the New Mexico before i finally went down.

 

Fuso is a BEAST!

She can one salvos ship easily

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
7 posts
6,451 battles

About the Premium Battleship HMS Warspite, her low range is making her and easy target for the bigger tier 8's which she is now facing more and more, if she is going to face the larger Amagi, North Carolina and Tirpitz, I think her range needs to be enlarged out to 18km standard and 20km with spotter, so a 2km buff. When she's facing her own tiers and below she's fine but as soon as you get a big battle this Grand old lady is as good as sunk. but that's my opinion as I've used Warspite since she first appeared in Closed Beta. She needs a little help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
48 posts
1,729 battles

I have to agree with Flemboy on this.

 

A lot has changed to the different ship classes after all these updates being implemented in game. However, I still do not find BBs carrying the fearsome image all through out. Normally, the pressure is when we see BBs with lots of guns pointing towards us, how about the 8-guns ships? not that much of a scare because the chances of missing is just too high.

 

1. CAs and even DDs will continuously fire HEs, and burn the ship down. This is ridiculous. BBs are floating bonfire! I would have accepted this if it doesn't drain the ship's HP that much, like 5% in 45s, and maybe chances to damage the modules. but as observed, it drains somehow like 1% per second.

 

2. Are slow turret traverse, and long reload not enough to be considered a weakness for these BBs? Is an abysmal dispersion really necessary to make these ships suffer more than it really has? Making the dispersion more compact can really make a difference. What's wrong with having a good, accurate/semi-accurate salvoes from a BB, anyway the next shot will be around 25s-35s. 

 

3. How come BB spotters are so negligent of spotting a DD in the area? How can a BB captain provide support, and protect themselves if we can't even find a way to figure out that there's a ship nearby?

 

4. Secondaries are unreliable in the most critical conditions.

 

BBs are like big brother to the fleet, they lead, support, defend, and protect. As of the moment, they're just floating targets, and a remarkable metal-build bonfire. A fiery sight to behold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
406 posts
6,287 battles

I have to agree with Flemboy on this.

 

A lot has changed to the different ship classes after all these updates being implemented in game. However, I still do not find BBs carrying the fearsome image all through out. Normally, the pressure is when we see BBs with lots of guns pointing towards us, how about the 8-guns ships? not that much of a scare because the chances of missing is just too high.

 

1. CAs and even DDs will continuously fire HEs, and burn the ship down. This is ridiculous. BBs are floating bonfire! I would have accepted this if it doesn't drain the ship's HP that much, like 5% in 45s, and maybe chances to damage the modules. but as observed, it drains somehow like 1% per second.

 

2. Are slow turret traverse, and long reload not enough to be considered a weakness for these BBs? Is an abysmal dispersion really necessary to make these ships suffer more than it really has? Making the dispersion more compact can really make a difference. What's wrong with having a good, accurate/semi-accurate salvoes from a BB, anyway the next shot will be around 25s-35s. 

 

3. How come BB spotters are so negligent of spotting a DD in the area? How can a BB captain provide support, and protect themselves if we can't even find a way to figure out that there's a ship nearby?

 

4. Secondaries are unreliable in the most critical conditions.

 

BBs are like big brother to the fleet, they lead, support, defend, and protect. As of the moment, they're just floating targets, and a remarkable metal-build bonfire. A fiery sight to behold.

 

I play mainly BB so far I am Grinding the Colorado.

 

A well played BB (my fav so far is the New Mexico) can be an absolute beast. Doing solid 70-100K damage a round.

 

1: Yeah, Fire Damage is annoying, especially when you think 'I'm made of steel, not wood and cotton' but it has to be balanced to allow a good CA captain to have a chance against a BB. Perhaps further down the line, the HE shells will be HE, and what is currently HE will be Incendiary Shells (so FA damage, unless they set the target alight). Some ships like the Cleveland, the Fire chance per shot is still a bit too high (with the RoF, number of Barrels and the Accuracy)

 

2: Dispersion has to be balanced - too little and they would have to nerf the Citadel damage from a BB, because it would instagib everything. That said, RNG needs a tweak - when I am aiming at a stationary target at 7 Km away and placing a perfectly aimed shot at the citadel (its stationary) and not hit the Citadel (doing only measly 1k damage) something isn't balanced right - I think the Dispersion calculation needs to be tweaked (possible with it being that at least one shot lands where you aimed, and then all the other shots scatter around that point)

 

3: Yeah DDs are annoying, especially with their 'now you see me, now you don't trick when they pop into and out of detectability, but then this is their only defence.

 

4: Secondaries - Okay. I'll admit, if the secondary gunners shot like that IRL, they would be Flogged and hung from the yardarm (okay maybe not) - I would suggest that the secondaries accuracy rises with your ship accuracy - if you aim well consistently, acheiving say 30% hit rate with your primaries, then your secondaries should be accurate to around 35% (so base ship accuracy + 5%) - this is to take into account the range at which your secondaries activate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
9 posts
4,545 battles

"Let them burn my flesh so i could crush their skulls", that's what BB is in this game to me. In the right hands, it doesn't matter if you burn his ship, they will crush yours anyway.

 

I'm one of the guys that got into this game because of the big boys, and i'm perfectly fine with the way it is as for now. Maybe you just haven't figure it out yet. I can say this because i'm grinding all four lines, and gone through what you're experienced now, in every ship line to be honest. Just keep at it, figure it out slowly and i'm sure you can play it as you like.

 

The Yamato is the LUST OBJECT.

 

This is the only thing that i can't agree more. There's something wrong with y'all if you don't lust for her. Just look at her LARGE BOOO.... i mean BRIDGES! Truly amazing spectacle and sight to "behold" XD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
406 posts
6,287 battles

"Let them burn my flesh so i could crush their skulls", that's what BB is in this game to me. In the right hands, it doesn't matter if you burn his ship, they will crush yours anyway.

 

I'm one of the guys that got into this game because of the big boys, and i'm perfectly fine with the way it is as for now. Maybe you just haven't figure it out yet. I can say this because i'm grinding all four lines, and gone through what you're experienced now, in every ship line to be honest. Just keep at it, figure it out slowly and i'm sure you can play it as you like.

 

 

This is the only thing that i can't agree more. There's something wrong with y'all if you don't lust for her. Just look at her LARGE BOOO.... i mean BRIDGES! Truly amazing spectacle and sight to "behold" XD

 

Pfft.

 

The USS Iowa, She will be mine. That said, the Fuso looks like it could be fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
48 posts
1,729 battles

Am also on the US line, currently having a love-hate relationship with my North Carolina.

 

1: Yeah, Fire Damage is annoying, especially when you think 'I'm made of steel, not wood and cotton' but it has to be balanced to allow a good CA captain to have a chance against a BB. Perhaps further down the line, the HE shells will be HE, and what is currently HE will be Incendiary Shells (so FA damage, unless they set the target alight). Some ships like the Cleveland, the Fire chance per shot is still a bit too high (with the RoF, number of Barrels and the Accuracy)

 

Y'know, 4 areas on fire on a NC, caused me thousands of damage way more than the torpedo flooding at the same time (unless it's a Japanese T8-T10 torp). I would have let the crew have a barbecue and steak party at least before it sink. :D

 

2: Dispersion has to be balanced - too little and they would have to nerf the Citadel damage from a BB, because it would instagib everything. That said, RNG needs a tweak - when I am aiming at a stationary target at 7 Km away and placing a perfectly aimed shot at the citadel (its stationary) and not hit the Citadel (doing only measly 1k damage) something isn't balanced right - I think the Dispersion calculation needs to be tweaked (possible with it being that at least one shot lands where you aimed, and then all the other shots scatter around that point)

 

According to my friend, the Fuso before v0.5.1 has better chances on hitting a target without much issue with the dispersion at about 14-16 km range. Now, at 6-8 km range, it's just all over the place. This is really bad especially to the ships fitted with only 6 to 8 guns.

 

I understand the idea on the ricochets and over-penetration, but the effect is just wow. We've been forced in using mostly HE's now because the damage is at least true, and chances of fire is high.

 

We do not mind a little about the vertical dispersion, but the horizontal dispersion that goes on a V or X after being fired is ridiculous. Maybe a tweak in the horizontal dispersion per turret might work, since the guns fire per turret.

 

3: Yeah DDs are annoying, especially with their 'now you see me, now you don't trick when they pop into and out of detectability, but then this is their only defence.

 

This is alright, but, I think it's way more than what is expected. However, BB's defenses may at least be fortified. On a 1v1 match between a DD and BB, the DD will have the upper-hand. BBs will be dealing with several factors in a single encounter.

 

1. DD's concealment

2. DD's guns + HE shells

3. DD's torpedoes + flooding / detonation

4. DD's smoke + they can still fire while they're inside that smoke. An idea to present is to allow a 2-way street competition to both parties. If BB cannot see DD or other ships through the smoke, the ships within that area shall also be affected with the same handicap. Currently, this is both DEF/OFF.

5. BB's turret traverse rate

6. BB's gun reload

7. BB's dispersion

8. BB's secondary guns off-range

9. BB's heavy maneuverability

 

Well of course unless Cruisers will help us out, a lot can be ignored for a while.

 

4: Secondaries - Okay. I'll admit, if the secondary gunners shot like that IRL, they would be Flogged and hung from the yardarm (okay maybe not) - I would suggest that the secondaries accuracy rises with your ship accuracy - if you aim well consistently, acheiving say 30% hit rate with your primaries, then your secondaries should be accurate to around 35% (so base ship accuracy + 5%) - this is to take into account the range at which your secondaries activate

 

This is better. With an adjustment on the accuracy and efficiency of the secondaries, an invisible/blinking DD can be dealt with even on a huge gap in handicaps. Else, BB will just be a mechanized floating breeder.

 

In the meantime, I'll be on the CA to cool down.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
460 posts
8,365 battles

I dunno about you guys but I find the BBs quite fun to play, but absolutely require you to pay attention and plan ahead. Even the T3 BBs can dodge torpedoes if you take notice and turn when the DD is spotted (rather than waiting to spot the torpedoes) sure you'll still get hit and sunk occasionally, but not as much. The dispersion is a tricky matter, I think shots from a single turret should land closer together than they do, but the average dispersion for all as a whole? I dunno might make the BBs too much of a beast. As it is now if you get a shot at a broadside you can absolutely wreck a ship, look for these oportunities, especially on cruisers. The AP ammo does seem to need work to me, but I think it may be a matter of rebalancing/tweaking given the new model for AP physics and damage.

 

The secondaries I can see your point, they do need some attention, but this mostly applies to the T2-5 BBs as some of the high tier BBs have monstrous ranges on their secondaries, and from about T6 and up there is a module in addition to the crew skill to increase it if you want. I'd like to see the range buffed and maybe a little accuracy.

 

Fires, I can also see your point there, it feels a little silly that a piddly little fire on the very bow or stern should do so much damage. Definitely needs a rethink, I'm sure there is a better way.

 

As for fighting DDs, well despite the disadvantages many BB captains cope just fine. I've sunk many DDs myself in the various BBs (even T4 ones). Most of the problems you listed are just part of the nature of the beast. BB guns are big, so they turn slow and take a long time to reload, that's how they worked in real life too. The problem lies in the fact that the secondaries aren't much of a deterrent for a DD closing to a really short range and filling them with fish. But give the DD captain a break, if you sail in amongst islands and get ambushed well that's kinda your own fault. Otherwise change your course every now and then and torpedoes are less of a threat.

 

I fully agree about XVM.

 

Re-reading some of the posts here it seems that people expect BBs to be extremely formidable, and they can be if used correctly, but they are vulnerable to torpedoes and aircraft weapons. This is actually fairly true to what happened in real life, they were sunk by aircraft, submarines and in the case of the battle of Surigao strait a destroyer wrecked one with torpedoes. The trouble is that BBs have been hyped and romanticised to a degree which makes people think they were invulnerable when they weren't/aren't. If they aren't vulnerable to something in game, then every other class would be UP.

 

I'm pretty sick and tired of seeing WoT players comparing the two games and using strategies from WoT and wondering why they get sunk. Ships work differently people, going backwards and forwards behind a island is not a good idea for a battleship, a DD might get away with it though. Learn how ships work well together.

 

Also I've played a little of WoT as a complete newb (i'm still a complete newb there) and there are improvements in the newb experience here in WoWs. I've found in WoT that you often get destroyed quite quickly without much chance to learn how to play correctly, all whilst a few professional seal clubbers rack up heaps of kills. I found when I started WoWs that didn't happen so much, you'd always get to participate to some extent, and seal-clubbers find it harder to whack a whole team. This is mostly because in the lower tiers (1 and 2) you can't really be one shot by anything except torpedoes, and they aren't around in T1 games. This is partly just due to the nature of the games and how tanks and ships are different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SH0T]
Member
8 posts
9,108 battles

 

3) The US vs IJN Carrier play styles have advocates, but effectively, the IJN aircraft get shot out of sky, and IJN torps spread is deliberately wide, and YET apparently, their CVs are OP??? ( I personally believe that the easiest answer to ALL your CV problems, is simply to make the individual aircraft, for any given tier, have EXACTLY the same stats as any other. ie. It doesn't matter which nations carrier you play, a tier 6 will have a certain number of fighter/db/torp aircraft, with same stats, so that any match SIMPLY comes down to your skill.)

 

that might have been a good suggestion but....... NO, its fun because cv's and also other ships of different nations have different characteristics which make them more intresting to research and play, if they all will have the same stats its no different from just researching a single nation and then abandon out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
334 posts
13,034 battles

About the Premium Battleship HMS Warspite, her low range is making her and easy target for the bigger tier 8's which she is now facing more and more, if she is going to face the larger Amagi, North Carolina and Tirpitz, I think her range needs to be enlarged out to 18km standard and 20km with spotter, so a 2km buff. When she's facing her own tiers and below she's fine but as soon as you get a big battle this Grand old lady is as good as sunk. but that's my opinion as I've used Warspite since she first appeared in Closed Beta. She needs a little help.

 

Only thing wrong with Warspite is she is placed a tier to high. Should be 5

 

As for the rest I think the biggest problem is too many Battleships about tier 5 and up and Carriers games with 2 Carriers and 4 Battleships and a sprinkling of smaller ships every game turns into all the smaller ships sinking each other Destroyers trying to knock off the bigger guys and trying to survive till the end. Should be a better ratio of ships per game with rewards for team work so it pays off. Why drive a destroyer and hang around to protect a Battleship from aircraft etc  when you have bigger rewards sinking something. I have done that stayed close to Battleships adding AA to their defense shooting down aircraft sniffing out enemy destroyers keep the big boy alive to do real damage and end game get a pittance in comparison.  Battleships are competitive if they have support.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
575 posts
5,354 battles

I think the BBs of the IJN line, the Tirpitz, and Warspite are in a good place competitively. However, when you look at the US BB line from tier 7 up they fall far behind their counterparts, specifically their dispersion. The North Carolina, Iowa, and Montana all have the worst dispersion in this game compared to the other BBs. NC dis = 293, Iowa the same, however, it can be modified with the FC module lowering it to 273, the North Carolina does not. The Montana is 297 meters of dispersion (I don't know if that can be lowered because I'm not that).

 

Compared to their counterparts they are any where from +20 to +80 meters of dispersion. And should the Amagi, Izumi, and Yamato get the use of the mod to decrease the dispersion, the gap opens even further. So, this is balanced? This is WG's idea of being competitive between BB lines? Funny that the top 3 US BBs are giving such bad dispersion when they had the best fire control radar in the world when they were fighting (Yes, I know this is a game but for crying out loud, give them the kind of dispersion disadvantage than the IJN/KM BBs? No, that doesn't wash. Their reasoning is indefensible as far as I am concerned).

 

This needs to be rectified and fixed. I quit using the North Carolina in ranked and ultimately got rid of it because it could not hit the broadside of a barn effectively unless it was in the gun range of the flame throwers and other ships that have rapid firing main guns. A tank the North Carolina is not. WG really screwed the pooch on this one.

 

And as an American player here on SEA it sickens me that the ships that represent my country accuracy is so bad when I know beyond a shadow of a doubt they were not. However, I know WG really doesn't give a flying pig how I feel or think about their idea of 'competitiveness.'

Edited by RebelliousYankee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
48 posts
1,729 battles

I have to agree with RebelliousYankee on this.

 

I tried my best to get the NoCal the soonest possible, and played few games with it. Well, it's squishy for my style of playing, and when it happens to be an unlucky game,  the consequence is unbearable. I was losing all credits down the drain. 4 stacks of fire from CA/DD, totally nonsense. Right now, I am leaning towards the IJN BB's and may spend my resources to that line for good.

 

For the HE gunners and burners, I just hope they can implement a dynamic reload process called 'fatigue', wherein fast reloading guns will soon start to slow down if continues firing has been observed. Re-loaders get tired too, just like the gunners, that's why we get bad shell dispersion because of fatigue.

 

External fires kill a huge portion of a BB's HP but never damages a single module, nonsense. 

Edited by cszino

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
28 posts
3,107 battles

To be honest the OP does make some good points ref the appeal of BB for the new players.

 

Battleships burn far to readily, and lose a lot of health to these fires (bit over rated...but part of the game - just wish that Destroyers and Cruisers when hit with 12 inch HE rounds would burn just as quickly and easily), however I don't think that is where the main issue lies. I think the main pain for most new Battleship players is the lack of gun range. Lets face it low tier Battleships have the same range as their cruiser counterparts, however are spotted a lot faster, have a lower rate of fire and seem to burn easier, however their extra gun range is not translated in game.

 

Take the St Louis Class Cruiser - Armed with lots of  6"/50 (15.2 cm) Marks 6 guns her firing range with standard charges was 13.7km at 6 rounds per min. In game however her rate of fire is higher (reloads every 7.8 secs so around the 8 rounds a min mark) and has an in game range of 11km. The South Carolina (12"/45 (30.5 cm) Mark 5) which has a rate of fire of 2-3 rounds per min (pretty close to the game) with a r/l range of about 18.9km (depending on the charge round etc) however has exactly the same range in game as the St Louis. So in this case the battleship cannot extend and get out of the range of the St Louis without losing its own ability to engage. All this leads to is Cruiser HE spam and burn for a Battleship.

 

The same with the Kawachi (30 cm/50 (12") 41st Year Type (Model 1908)) - Given an in game range of 10km and about 2 rpm, where in R/L it was over 21km. So in game its out ranged by the St Louis and the Tenryu (14 cm/50 (5.5") 3rd Year Type (Model 1914)) which has an 11km range at 10 RPM (the Tenryu had a 20km range and 6-10 rpm in R/L so actually more comparable), but in this case the Battleship is actually out ranged by the cruisers.

 

And lets not even talk about the Mikasa (30 cm/40 (12") 41st Year Type (Model 1908) - range 13.7km )which is out ranged by even Tier 1 Cruisers, and gets set on fire just trying to engage, she's like a giant pinata of XP and damage for anyone that sees one.

 

I assume that these range issues translate into later Tier's but just not with such a great impact (as ranges for both types is high). I know some will say but its for balance etc, however Cruisers mostly have lesser main gun ranges  in R/L than Battleships which doesn't translate in the lower tiers of the game, thus as we have seen on many an occasion where the Cruiser starts firing first, is far more accurate than a Battleship at ranges, and causing fires and hits that kill Battleships before the Battleship has chance to really impact the Cruiser. Add to this Cruisers with Torps and unlimited reloads lower Tier Battleship play becomes extremely painful (how about limiting reloads like you do Battleship repair abilities??.....  say DD 10 reloads, Cruisers 6 Reloads).

 

The whole point is to get players into the game and get them to stay, if they find it bad at lower tiers you can lose up to 50% or more that just don't follow through to the higher tiers (or they do other things to get higher tiers which becomes a major problem in its own right)

 

H

Edited by H_87A_2CU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×