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

What class actually benefited from all the US CV and IJN DD nerfs this year?

59 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
634 posts
6,210 battles

Im curious man. I mean, i am a battleship driver and I honestly dont feel much change to gameplay.

There is less torps but the number of HE spamming cruisers increased,

 

Is there any stats which showed that after these nerfs that a certain class or nation's WR increased?

 

just Curious

 

Also, a search on asia.warships.today showed that CA and DD are still the class with highest average winrate. With BB in 3rd and CV having least average WR.  why is that?

Edited by TorpedoBeat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles

I seriously wonder why people say BBs are overpowered.

SERIOUSLY

Take a look at the stats

Recent two weeks

Yamato WR 50.55%

Montana WR 49.73%

Shimakaze WR 49.35%

Gearing WR 51.83%

Khaba WR 53.68%

(GK has higher WR at about 52%, but this line has just came out a few months ago so most players are relatively experienced)

WOW BB SO OP!

WOW DD SO UP!

And why do people blame battleship players for the nerf of Shimakaze?

First of all, devs check the stats and combat experience of server RU for balance, that's why MW isn't buffed. MW has over 50% WR on RU server and an avg DMG of 105K.

And people still blame battleship players for being noob and don't know about "WASD hacks"

Srsly, just try a T10 battleship. You will know why WASD isn't a hack.

And back then, cruisers often got torped by shima, so they don't know about WASD hacks. Carriers sometimes got torped by shima early in the game, so they don't know WASD hacks. Even DD often get torped, so they don't know about WASD hacks… Wait, what?

And why people just imagine battleship players as "don't know how to maneuver"? Come on they reached T10! Remember Isokaze and Minekaze? How could they survive and grind to T10 if they don't know how to maneuver?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,174 posts
10,495 battles

BBs benefited immensely, but you won't notice it unless you played other class as well. BB used to be balanced. Now they are overpowered 

 

In what way did they benefited. And how are they actually Overpowered?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,637 posts
7,230 battles

BBs benefited immensely, but you won't notice it unless you played other class as well. BB used to be balanced. Now they are overpowered 

 

of course they are, they're battleships. They're meant to be overpowered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
54 posts
7,180 battles

 

In what way did they benefited. And how are they actually Overpowered?

 

Give me the link that says BBs were nerfed

 

Meanwhile in 0.5.X, there was AA buff

There was buff to vigilance and addition of radar cruisers, which is a nerf to DDs

Badly designed USN CV loadouts means lesser carrier population overall that punish BBs the hardest other than from DDs.

All these even though BBs were deleting ships before. Yet received 0 nerfs for probably more than past 15 patches.

I mean they are most played class for a reason afterall you know.

Edited by AKagai42

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
634 posts
6,210 battles

BBs benefited immensely, but you won't notice it unless you played other class as well. BB used to be balanced. Now they are overpowered 

 

a quick search on warships.today showed that DD and CA are still the class with most winrate on average. with BB 3rd and CV the class with least wr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles

 

Give me the link that says BBs were nerfed

 

Meanwhile in 0.5.X, there was AA buff

There was buff to vigilance and addition of radar cruisers, which is a nerf to DDs

Badly designed USN CV loadouts means lesser carrier population overall that punish BBs the hardest other than from DDs.

All these even though BBs were deleting ships before. Yet received 0 nerfs for probably more than past 15 patches.

I mean they are most played class for a reason afterall you know.

0 Nerf?

Just ignore these facts plz.

1. Soon after OBT ended, high tier ships receive more damage due to flooding, which is a nerf to battleships as they got hit by torps most and they must use damage control ASAP after a torp hit.

http://worldofwarships.asia/en/news/announcements/ver-051-patchnotes/

2.Citadel hits mechanics was changed a few months after OBT, causing far less citadel hits by battleships.(before this, a shell passing through citadel causes a citadel hit, regardless of overpen or not) While a later patch fixed a bug caused by this, still battleships hits far less citadels.

http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/57529-051-armor-mechanics-explained/

I am not going to dig further for now, as searching for patch notes a year ago is tiring. But I believe that this is convincing enough, BBs WERE nerfed.

3.Torp detection range was buffed once

4.Ships with a displacement of above 35000 tons got their maneuverability nerfed

5.After an accuracy rework, battleships are now less accurate.

6.HIJMS Yamato's repair party was nerfed

7.Skill rework. Before skill rework, last stand was a 4-point skill, and there wasn't survivability expert skill.

I entered this game in late OBT and these are some facts about battleship nerf in the past 15 patches from 0.5.0 to 0.5.15

From what I've heard of about CBT, DDs once had CITADELS, just imagine, 1 large caliber AP shell hitting the mid part of your destroyer, you get destroyed. Boom. Well, that isn't gonna happen anymore, unless you don't equip an anti-detonation signal flag.

Edited by _Halcyon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
40 posts
2,588 battles

The carrier population cannot possibly have a high WR - you get matched against another carrier, therefore 1 must win, and 1 must lose.  Its a zero sum game, that at most can tell you which carriers are weak relative to their peers.  There is no point attempting to compare the WRs to destroyers, because in a significant proportion of matches with destroyers there are less destroyers on 1 team.


 

The interesting metric for the last 2 weeks for carriers, is KD and kills per match.


 

9 of the top 10 KDs are carriers for the last 2 weeks.  9 of the top 10 KDs are carriers for all time.

ie by and large you do not die during a match playing a carrier.  Even if your team loses, there is a good chance you will not be sunk.  You can do whatever you want to do, attack whoever you want to attack with virtual impunity.


 

For kills per match, there are

3 CVs

3 BBs

3 CLs

1 DD.


 

Which reflects the role of the DD in the capture objectives match, ie its is not uncommon for me to be killed first in a round in my Benson (and thus not getting a kill), because I overplay my contest points role.


 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
525 posts
7,946 battles

 

Give me the link that says BBs were nerfed

 

Meanwhile in 0.5.X, there was AA buff

There was buff to vigilance and addition of radar cruisers, which is a nerf to DDs

Badly designed USN CV loadouts means lesser carrier population overall that punish BBs the hardest other than from DDs.

All these even though BBs were deleting ships before. Yet received 0 nerfs for probably more than past 15 patches.

I mean they are most played class for a reason afterall you know.

Here you go.

 http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/62027-052-patch-notes-and-feedback-thread/

tl;dr : 

  • Reduced the maneuverability for ships with displacement exceeding 35,000 ton

they do get nerfed.

Edited by Skooma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
54 posts
7,180 battles

0 Nerf?

Just ignore these facts plz.

1. Soon after OBT ended, high tier ships receive more damage due to flooding, which is a nerf to battleships as they got hit by torps most and they must use damage control ASAP after a torp hit.

http://worldofwarships.asia/en/news/announcements/ver-051-patchnotes/

2.Citadel hits mechanics was changed a few months after OBT, causing far less citadel hits by battleships.(before this, a shell passing through citadel causes a citadel hit, regardless of overpen or not) While a later patch fixed a bug caused by this, still battleships hits far less citadels.

http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/57529-051-armor-mechanics-explained/

I am not going to dig further for now, as searching for patch notes a year ago is tiring. But I believe that this is convincing enough, BBs WERE nerfed.

3.Torp detection range was buffed once

4.Ships with a displacement of above 35000 tons got their maneuverability nerfed

5.After an accuracy rework, battleships are now less accurate.

6.HIJMS Yamato's repair party was nerfed

7.Skill rework. Before skill rework, last stand was a 4-point skill, and there wasn't survivability expert skill.

I entered this game in late OBT and these are some facts about battleship nerf in the past 15 patches from 0.5.0 to 0.5.15

From what I've heard of about CBT, DDs once had CITADELS, just imagine, 1 large caliber AP shell hitting the mid part of your destroyer, you get destroyed. Boom. Well, that isn't gonna happen anymore, unless you don't equip an anti-detonation signal flag.

1. The damage that a higher Tier ship receives from flooding is no longer significantly less than the damage a lower Tier ship receives from the same flooding.

I dont think thats nerf, is more of correction of sense. Higher tier has much more hp, the idea behind a ship with higher hp but takes lower DOT damage compare to a ship that has lower hp but takes higher dot damage make sense to you huh?

 

2.Citadel hits mechanics was changed a few months after OBT, causing far less citadel hits by battleships.(before this, a shell passing through citadel causes a citadel hit, regardless of overpen or not) While a later patch fixed a bug caused by this, still battleships hits far less citadels.

 

Again I say this more correction than nerf. A citadel hit should only be counted when the shell explode inside. Its is the explosion that should deal damage, not the passing by of a mere shell. Back then when your shell fly past it still counts as if the shell exploded, fair? LOL

 

3.Torp detection range was buffed once

 

then nerfed because torp soup area in high tier games, for the IJN ones that is, it then stayed where it is even though torp soup era has ended so long ago. Its so bad even the usn dd torps are stealthier now

 

4.Ships with a displacement of above 35000 tons got their maneuverability nerfed

And thats it? At the same 5.1 patch notes air torps got nerfed too.

 

5.After an accuracy rework, battleships are now less accurate.

 

If you can remember this, then you would remember the patch where they reworked the USN BB armors, and along with that comes with better accuracy to their guns, and then include the mod that -11% dispersion of main guns. This happened because they want their accuracy to be more balanced and fair vs the ijn bbs that were arguably more accurate than the usn bb in the past

 

6.HIJMS Yamato's repair party was nerfed

 

only nerfed because it was too much in comparison with and against other bbs. It was nerfed to be equalized with other bbs

7.Skill rework. Before skill rework, last stand was a 4-point skill, and there wasn't survivability expert skill.

Buff to DDs, because why? radar is coming,german hydro which was superior hydro was coming. and lets not forget even BB AP volleys are still dangerous to DDs today. The last stand buff and SE is what is making DDs more playable than before.

 

From what I've heard of about CBT, DDs once had CITADELS, just imagine, 1 large caliber AP shell hitting the mid part of your destroyer, you get destroyed. Boom. Well, that isn't gonna happen anymore, unless you don't equip an anti-detonation signal flag.

 

DDs were suppose to counter BBs, having citadel doesnt make sense, since any ship with citadels now is better for BBs than not having it since their AP volley to citadel damage are the highest. how would dd counter bb if dd has citadels for a single ap from bb to delete them?

Edited by AKagai42

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
54 posts
7,180 battles

Here you go.

 http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/62027-052-patch-notes-and-feedback-thread/

tl;dr : 

  • Reduced the maneuverability for ships with displacement exceeding 35,000 ton

they do get nerfed.

So one nerf compared to the multiple nerfs the other classes gets? And this nerf was like how many moons ago?

OK granted my statement of that they didnt nerf BB was exaggeration. But BBs were never nerfed badly, at least compared to other classess

Remember the nerfs that made CV extinct? literally 0 cv population. And now there are rumors of CV reworks in 2017

Also the nerfs to IJN DDs? Granted they wanted to stop torp soup but going so far as to nerf them to the point where they need a rework? dont see that happening to BBs

Edited by AKagai42

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BMRSF]
Member
373 posts
2,517 battles

I seriously wonder why people say BBs are overpowered.

SERIOUSLY

Take a look at the stats

Recent two weeks

Yamato WR 50.55%

Montana WR 49.73%

Shimakaze WR 49.35%

Gearing WR 51.83%

Khaba WR 53.68%

(GK has higher WR at about 52%, but this line has just came out a few months ago so most players are relatively experienced)

WOW BB SO OP!

WOW DD SO UP!

And why do people blame battleship players for the nerf of Shimakaze?

First of all, devs check the stats and combat experience of server RU for balance, that's why MW isn't buffed. MW has over 50% WR on RU server and an avg DMG of 105K.

And people still blame battleship players for being noob and don't know about "WASD hacks"

Srsly, just try a T10 battleship. You will know why WASD isn't a hack.

And back then, cruisers often got torped by shima, so they don't know about WASD hacks. Carriers sometimes got torped by shima early in the game, so they don't know WASD hacks. Even DD often get torped, so they don't know about WASD hacks… Wait, what?

And why people just imagine battleship players as "don't know how to maneuver"? Come on they reached T10! Remember Isokaze and Minekaze? How could they survive and grind to T10 if they don't know how to maneuver?

well i agree with this one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
7,534 posts
7,978 battles

Checking stats of all these people from BBs are over powered school. None of them have overpowered BB stats :D

 

A simple question, when does BB feel overpowered? When you play BB or when you play CV? Just be honest and answer the question. Oh probably I wont get any answer to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,174 posts
10,495 battles

Remember the nerfs that made CV extinct? literally 0 cv population. And now there are rumors of CV reworks in 2017

 

Also the nerfs to IJN DDs? Granted they wanted to stop torp soup but going so far as to nerf them to the point where they need a rework? dont see that happening to BBs

 

CVs are not getting extinct because they are getting nerfs. CVs are getting extinct because you players are seal clubbing in T4 and T5 using CVs which denies the new player an opportunity to learn something. and Now-a-days I see T4 CVs with Air Supremacy. I mean like seriously? AS in T4?

 

Even I tried playing CVs but no!! In 4 straight games I've played against guys who had 70+ matches in T4 CVs. How do you expect CV population to increase when you guys do that? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
419 posts
4,207 battles

US CA got the short end of the stick too.

Less US CV --> Their biggest strong point have less chance to be utilise, IJN CV also deal with US ship better because they can bait DFAA, US CV can't do that effectively.

 

Most DD right now are gunboat. Mean they are often far from radar range to kite, the short range radar can't do crap to them unless they decide to sit in smoke and you creep up on them.

 

With BB population still growing they get crap on even more because they are most powerful at anti cruiser not BB.

 



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
54 posts
7,180 battles

 

CVs are not getting extinct because they are getting nerfs. CVs are getting extinct because you players are seal clubbing in T4 and T5 using CVs which denies the new player an opportunity to learn something. and Now-a-days I see T4 CVs with Air Supremacy. I mean like seriously? AS in T4?

 

Even I tried playing CVs but no!! In 4 straight games I've played against guys who had 70+ matches in T4 CVs. How do you expect CV population to increase when you guys do that? 

 

have you played any games before 0.5.3? no offense and if Im wrong I apologize but I dont think you play wows before 0.5.3 where there literally no cv players in queue whenever you play

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LNA]
Member
1,659 posts
10,430 battles

Now from my view point a few points :
-BB benefits the most , their surface combat power is more RNG based now , some times they cant hit an island , other times they rekt half a team or getting a lucky 1 shot salvos. However , their air defence got buffed significantly , virtually all BB now has AA suite that makes CA looks bad. This means that Carriers now has to take far more risk to prey on their natural target - bbabies. Before AA revamp , BB that go alone will get rekt by carriers san US bb. Right now all BB can yolo all they want without CA cover b/c of buffed AA that allow them to partially or alright destroy 1 attacking squadron. They can sit bow on going back and forth and CV cant even get the drop on them ( IJN squishy squadrons just cant attack them without incurring noticable losses ) and even US squadrons cant get out without 1-2 losses.
-BB no longer has to worry about long range area denial attack that force them to move around - they can sit miles back and not worry about torps getting at them b/c their range was shortened and they can be detected from further away. So they actually camp more.

-DD lose their ability to deny an area with a spray torps attack and in many case their torpedo bite is significantly less , making them rather useless even when the situation favors them ( island ambush - damn radar that see through island ).
-CA also got a sidegrade in that they no longer really care about carrier attack. Before , even with DFAA on they will need some serious WASD hack to deter gud CV captain from nuking them. Now they can laugh their ass off with 1 button pressed and a slight turn.
TL;DR : WG caters too much too BB rendering their weakness relatively irrelevant at 12-15km stand off range. The only thing that can actually hurt them are other BB. This make them even more comfy in sitting back and let CA "tank damage" for them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
54 posts
7,180 battles

Checking stats of all these people from BBs are over powered school. None of them have overpowered BB stats :D

 

A simple question, when does BB feel overpowered? When you play BB or when you play CV? Just be honest and answer the question. Oh probably I wont get any answer to this.

 

On cv, heres the scenario.

Im playing hiryu, 2/2/2, no t5 airsupre skill

Im facing against a 301 saipan, with t5 airsupre skill

All I need to do to control the air was simple, make my fighters dogfight saipan FTs under a single Gneisenau.

Just a single t7 bb was enough to make sure 8 t7 fighters planes win 12 t9 fighters planes. Those are T9 planes, yet get rekted when it gets locked by lower number of fighters that are also lower tier above one single t7 bb thats wasnt even aa speced. If thats not the sign of aa being abit too strong for bbs(consider cvs are supposedly the one to keep bbs in check)then I dont know what is. But since you are so biased towards aa you probably wont say aa is strong anyways

Edited by AKagai42

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles

1. The damage that a higher Tier ship receives from flooding is no longer significantly less than the damage a lower Tier ship receives from the same flooding.

I dont think thats nerf, is more of correction of sense. Higher tier has much more hp, the idea behind a ship with higher hp but takes lower DOT damage compare to a ship that has lower hp but takes higher dot damage make sense to you huh?

 

2.Citadel hits mechanics was changed a few months after OBT, causing far less citadel hits by battleships.(before this, a shell passing through citadel causes a citadel hit, regardless of overpen or not) While a later patch fixed a bug caused by this, still battleships hits far less citadels.

 

Again I say this more correction than nerf. A citadel hit should only be counted when the shell explode inside. Its is the explosion that should deal damage, not the passing by of a mere shell. Back then when your shell fly past it still counts as if the shell exploded, fair? LOL

 

3.Torp detection range was buffed once

 

then nerfed because torp soup area in high tier games, for the IJN ones that is, it then stayed where it is even though torp soup era has ended so long ago. Its so bad even the usn dd torps are stealthier now

 

4.Ships with a displacement of above 35000 tons got their maneuverability nerfed

And thats it? At the same 5.1 patch notes air torps got nerfed too.

 

5.After an accuracy rework, battleships are now less accurate.

 

If you can remember this, then you would remember the patch where they reworked the USN BB armors, and along with that comes with better accuracy to their guns, and then include the mod that -11% dispersion of main guns. This happened because they want their accuracy to be more balanced and fair vs the ijn bbs that were arguably more accurate than the usn bb in the past

 

6.HIJMS Yamato's repair party was nerfed

 

only nerfed because it was too much in comparison with and against other bbs. It was nerfed to be equalized with other bbs

7.Skill rework. Before skill rework, last stand was a 4-point skill, and there wasn't survivability expert skill.

Buff to DDs, because why? radar is coming,german hydro which was superior hydro was coming. and lets not forget even BB AP volleys are still dangerous to DDs today. The last stand buff and SE is what is making DDs more playable than before.

 

From what I've heard of about CBT, DDs once had CITADELS, just imagine, 1 large caliber AP shell hitting the mid part of your destroyer, you get destroyed. Boom. Well, that isn't gonna happen anymore, unless you don't equip an anti-detonation signal flag.

 

DDs were suppose to counter BBs, having citadel doesnt make sense, since any ship with citadels now is better for BBs than not having it since their AP volley to citadel damage are the highest. how would dd counter bb if dd has citadels for a single ap from bb to delete them?

FIRST AND FOREMOST, I HAVE SUCCESSFULLY PROVEN THIS FACT: BATTLESHIPS DID GET NERFED, AND A LOT.

Currently high tier ships lose slightly less percent of HP due to flooding than low tier, they still lose far more HP due to their larger total HP.

If you just evade these facts by saying it's a bug fix or talk about CVs get nerfed, I can tell you this.

The 3inch 70 caliber Mark N1 guns on the British cruiser Minotaur has a RPM of 120, and this figure is far more than 3"/50 on DM or the Russian AK-726(which is also a 3" of late 1950s or early 1960s), both had about 50 and are already deadly against prop planes. And Mark N1 should not be challenged by those prop planes on T10 CV, not even early jets. So, let's fix a bug, give Minotaur's Mark N1 an AA DPM of way over 1000, her guns deserve that.

BTW, DDs→BBs is correct, so CA/CL should counter DD, that's what radars are for. But survivability expert has made radar far less threatening to DDs. And battleships never get their version of anti-CA/CL consumable(smoke for DD and radar for CA/CL). BTW, have you ever tried a T10 battleship? I guess you never felt that kind of hopelessness when you get burnt to ashes by a zao and you can't even see that zao. And even if you do see a zao, you usually get overpens.(it's not because of my gunnery skills, I got 31.7% MBH on Gneisenau, isn't that enough?)

And for the air torp nerf, it's normally a "bug fix", as flooding DMG was buffed, air torps get nerfed because they are easier to hit than DD torps. CVs used to use 1 torp to consume enemy DaCon and use another to get the flooding DOT. Still, the signal flag rework added the flooding signal, and the negative detonation effect doesn't affect CV.

I apologize for posting such an untidy post, but I think I have expressed my point of view.

Edited by _Halcyon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
54 posts
7,180 battles

Currently high tier ships lose slightly less percent of HP due to flooding than low tier, they still lose far more HP due to their larger total HP.

 

If you just evade these facts by saying it's a bug fix or talk about CVs get nerfed, I can tell you this.

 

 

 

I didnt say bug fix. A bug fix and making logical sense in game is different. Its logical for a high tier BB to take in more DOT damage than low tier BBs since

1. he has higher HP

2. He already should learn by now to WASD hax, since he is more experienced now at higher tiers. Low tier is for him to learn that

3. If a DD could predict his movement to land torps, he should be rewarded, simple.

 

About the overpen getting citadel damage, it makes no sense either

Pretty sure in game they did indicate somewhere along the lines that AP works by penning enough armor before the shell can explode inside the ship, dealing good amounts of damage. Flip it around and is not hard to think that if it didnt pen enough armor, it overpens, no explosion = low damage, pretty simple and logical

There is even tons of videos for beginners telling AP works like this

So why should an overpen on citadel area reward full citadel damage?

 

 

The 3inch 70 caliber Mark N1 guns on the British cruiser Minotaur has a RPM of 120, and this figure is far more than 3"/50 on DM or the Russian AK-726(which is also a 3" of late 1950s or early 1960s), both had about 50 and are already deadly against prop planes. And Mark N1 should not be challenged by those prop planes on T10 CV, not even early jets. So, let's fix a bug, give Minotaur's Mark N1 an AA DPM of way over 1000, her guns deserve that.

 

If you want to quote history, then your argument is already invalid,

 

 

This is a WG employee telling you history is 2nd priority, and gameplay is more important

 

If you want historical accuracy, I dont see the ships that changed naval warfare altogether and still be relevant till this day being represented as VERY STRONG in this game

I also dont see tons of DDs like 6 - 8 DDs every match.

And what about crossing the T?

Sounds like we have a case of selective history usage do we?

 

BTW, DDs→BBs is correct, so CA/CL should counter DD, that's what radars are for. But survivability expert has made radar far less threatening to DDs. And battleships never get their version of anti-CA/CL consumable(smoke for DD and radar for CA/CL). BTW, have you ever tried a T10 battleship? I guess you never felt that kind of hopelessness when you get burnt to ashes by a zao and you can't even see that zao. And even if you do see a zao, you usually get overpens.(it's not because of my gunnery skills, I got 31.7% MBH on Gneisenau, isn't that enough?)

 

Because the potential to one shot a cruiser isnt enough? Pretty sure there is more one shot deletion of cruisers by BBs than one shot deletion of DDs by Cruisers.

While I do say you aim very well, better than me, MBH isnt the full story, since you mention Gnei, lets use her for an example

Say I use her, and landed 6 shells out of all 6 on a ship on non citadel areas, I have 100% MBH (obviously wont happen but lets exaggerate)

Say you use her, landed 2 shells out of 6 on a ship, but on a citadel, you have 33% MBH, much much lesser than me, but because you hit citadels, you deal much more damage.

While MBH says some parts of how good your aim is, it doesnt says the whole story, since you need to take into account how well you aim for citadels and not just shp itself

 

And for the air torp nerf, it's normally a "bug fix", as flooding DMG was buffed, air torps get nerfed because they are easier to hit than DD torps. CVs used to use 1 torp to consume enemy DaCon and use another to get the flooding DOT. Still, the signal flag rework added the flooding signal, and the negative detonation effect doesn't affect CV.

 

 

 

so alpha damage nerf and flood nerf to fix a "bug", even though there was no indication that air torps were different than dd torps. Granted they are easy to hit, so 2 nerfs for ONE reason? K, also lets not forget the constant AA buffs. What about the fact CV has limited planes to dish out damage while BBs dont have limited shells and gunpowder bags?

 

FIRST AND FOREMOST, I HAVE SUCCESSFULLY PROVEN THIS FACT: BATTLESHIPS DID GET NERFED, AND A LOT.

those "nerfs" you say are either for logical sense reason, counter buffed back, or a certain thing is just straight up ridiculous even after compared with other BBs(yamato pre nerfed heal was a little crazy when compare to other bb's heals)

The only nerf granted is the maneuverability nerfed, which was way too long ago

Edited by AKagai42

Share this post


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

×