Vaderan

The headstart is still fresh! Many players need to grind through tier 3 and 4 ships to unlock the CVs, others might just try out the Arkansas or already train their crews in that BB. The numbers of BBs in game will decrease, once the CV trees are unlocked by their players and the headstart/OBT is a few weeks old. By the way, Tenryu and Kuma are not really ideal to make up your mind about BB firepower. They have low HP, almost no armor and huuuge citadells! I even prefer shooting AP with my Tenryu when going against them, since it is almost too easy to sink them with 2 broadsides of 155mm guns. Besides that, it depends on how you play your Kuma/Tenryu. I consider them great ships, but you have to choose your targets and approach wisely! Had several games where i could take on BBs aggressivly, surprising them and...yay, there go the torpedos...

Had a look on that thread. Didn´t find the information or discussion i wanted to start with this thread (although i wasn´t aware at all of that thread, when starting this one). I will leave it to the moderators to link, close, combine ore leave the threads as they are. Thx for the hint / link anyway!

I would agree if tier IV carriers would automatically end up in games with no tier 3 or lower ships. But they don´t! Tier IV battles with CVs often tend to turn in turkey shooting matches, since 80% of the players are just not grown to keep attention on planes and enemies while in combat. I trained dodging CV planes since closed alpha, and i lost almost all fear before them, but no matter how much experience i earned in dodging TBs, no matter how much i focus on the planes, turn into them and ignore enemy shps fire, there are limits to any ship. A vanilla South Carolina with less than 17 knots of speed, no AAA power and a rather uncomfortable turning speed is nothing but easy prey. I had to face a hosho, and i almost felt like a pro, since he required 2 attempts to take me down, compared to my fellow teammembers of which have 3 already died to that guy. He just knew how to place the TBs within the 300 metres arming range, and how to make use of the rudder shifting time of my ship. When you do everything possible to minimize damage and still get shelled to ground, without ANY chance to at least reduce the firepower of the enemy, something is wrong. I mean, it´s not just the fact that all you can do is try to avoid damage, but the fact that the enemy doesn´t take ANY risk in attacking you. The worst thing gonna happen to him are a few torpedos gonna miss. But no loss in planes, no loss in HP. Any other player, despite IJN DDs with torpedo range > detection range has to take the risk to get shot back at. So, in regard of the low tier CVs, Atomskytten is right: it´s like having arty in WoT. All you can do is try to run... Usually, i would agree for historical correctness regarding ship setups. But, since WG already goes straight ahead to change parameters for balancing reasons (like drastically reduced range on secondary batteries. Batteries that were build into BBs and CAs to defend against DD, which ingame only work on very short range, so only lowbob DDs are in danger), they should be a creative as possible to balance out AAA defenso on low levels.

Absolut! Die 4 Geschütze würden immerhin ca 8 DPS geben, aber eben schon auf ca 3-4 km!

Gebe ich Dir prinzipiell Recht! Allerdings, unabhängig von der derzeitigen Situation der Spieleranzahl, wird es immer zu Unausgewogenheiten zwischen den Teams kommen, das liegt schon in der Natur der Platoonbildung. Perfekt gebalancte Teams bekommt man nur im Coop. Die Sache mit nur einem Träger im Spiel hat ohnehin nur dann eklatante Auswirkungen, wenn es im Bereich bis Tier 4/5 passiert, da dann das Team ohne Träger mangels eigener Flak stark im Hintertreffen liegt. Schließlich hat der Gegner eine Waffe, gegen die man sich dann nicht effektiv verteidigen kann. Im Mid-Hightier Bereich ist genügend Flak auf den Schiffen verteilt, um einen Träger auf eine Bedrohung zu reduzieren, wie sie auch von den meisten anderen Klassen ausgehen kann, finde ich.

Selbst wenn sich in den kommenden Tagen die Anzahl der CVs in den Teams mehr oder weniger ausgleichen wird, hilft das den Spielern ohne Luftabwehr nichts! Ich hatte vorhin ein Spiel, bei dem jedes Team eine Hosho hatte. Unsere Hosho war zwar stehts bemüht, aber die gegnerische Hoscho hat das Spiel für den Gegner quasi im Alleingang gewonnen. 10 von 12 Schiffen auf unserer Seite hatten keine oder quasi keine AAA, beim Gegner immerhin noch 8 ohne AAA. Die fehlende Fähigkeit vieler Tier III und mancher Tier IV-V Schiffe, sich auch nur ansatzweise gegen Flugzeuge verteidigen zu können, wird sich auch mit zunehmender Spielerzahl oder breiter gefecherter Schiffsauswahl kaum ändern. Ich bin auf Grund meiner Alpha und Beta Erfahrungen inzwischen sehr versiert im Ausweichen und Ausmanövrieren von TB Staffeln, so dass ich immerhin 2 Angriffswellen überstehen konnte in meiner vanilla South Dakota, aber das Bewusstsein, absolut garkeine Chance zu haben, die gegnerischen Flugzeuge unter Beschuss zu nehmen, das fühlt sich falsch an. Natürlich ist das Problem nicht neu, aber es wird jetzt, mit dem Beginn der Open Beta, erneut an Relevanz gewinnen, da es speziell für Neuzugänge ein großes Frustelement bedeuten wird!

mtm78 is quiet right. Besides the fact, that we are turning in circles, there is still the thing with "great power brings great responsibility". In addition: i don´t know, where Usertext comes from, but where i come from, the law hands over the responsibility to the stronger participant in traffic. I am neither justified nor allowed to drive over or through a pedestrian, just because he passed the road while his traffic light was red. Yes, sometimes even i wish the world would be a little more like Grand Theft Auto, so i would be allowed to shot dumb people to free them from their poor existence, but it isn´t. That´s why there are still people allowed to be around, who believe they are justified, even when they aren´t. Fun fact: i am not that Izumos lawyer, but i am a professional lawyer. Even better, i work as a defender almost all the time, for years by now. As a result, my job requires a very sensitive instinct for what strategy to go when defending a crime suspect. If you would make an "Izumo case" out of your destroyer story, Mr. Usertext, i can tell you, that any court in a civilized country will judge you guilty, because your behaviour, and your behaviour alone triggered the circumstances for the torpedo impact on the Izumo. The fact you shot your torpedos although you were able to see the result comming, makes it even worse. So, no matter how much you tell me to grow up, how much you try to exploit my statistics, and how many alternative scenarios you throw into the round (arrows, cars, torpedos, etc.) they will all lead to the conclusion that it was your fault, and your fault alone. The fact, that you still try to excuse, no, better, justify yourself and make the victim the one who committed the mistake, the more you make yourself ridiculous in the eyes of all who follow this discussion! mtm78 told you, you were wrong, von_Vietnam did, heck, even the team damage system did! Maybe, there is no "rule number 1" for you (maybe you should watch some DD guides at youtube, they all refer to that rule number 1), but instead of just keeping quiet about the fact that you feel justified in pumping your torpedos into the way of an ally, you start discussing your right on doing so. Usertext, in case you didn´t notice so far: you started to disqualify yourself with your first post in this thread, already before i wrote the first word! instead of accepting my friendly advice (which might have been written in a slightly sarcastic/ironic way) and accepting, that firing torpedos into the way of an ally is a "no go", you try to justify yourself and blame the victim...

So much anger, so much rage, and still you don´t get the point! The Izumo player might be the most brainless player in the game, maybe suiciding, maybe afk on autocourse, maybe disconnected, but that doesn´t change the fact, that YOU broke rule number one: Don´t shot your torpedos in the way of an ally. By the way, the Izumo, as the Yamato, received a secondary battery buff with the last patch. MAYBE, just MAYBE he wanted to check out, how it works. If this event was prior the last patch, he still might have been interested in checking his secondary batteries. But it doesn´t matter! Just just never shot your torpedos in front of an ally! Period! Don´t forget, there are some people out there, who don´t like DDs. That in mind, it is even possible that the Izumo thought: "Okay, since this is a suicide run anyway, i don´t need to evade those allied torps, just to show that DD that he should not fire his torps in a friends way..." Besides that, not all players out there are capable of understanding english, so he might just have not understood your warnings. But all that doesn´t matter, since you broke rule number one: never shot your torpedos in the way of an ally! By the way, with every post, you show that you had the situation under controll. You saw the Izumo behaving like a failbob, you almost expected him to run into your way. It was all in your hands to avoid it, but instead, you decided to do your thing. Shot the torpedos anyway, if that Izumo is to stupid to react, your torps will punish him, teach him a lesson. No matter how you turn it, it was your fault... Next time, tell your ally you want to shot your arrows, and see if he acknowledges. Don´t just start the disaster and then warn everyone... The honest, untold fact behind this story is the following: you wanted to exploit the perfect shot(s) you had on your targets. If you would have warned that Izumo, and waited for response, you opportunity might have parrished. Why just don´t shot the torps and force the ally to react instead? Maybe it was even you, tunnevisioning, not recognizing the Izumo before it was too late? It´s your story, we will never know the other side... But since you seem to be completly resistant to any logic and basic rules: yes, you are right, that Izumo was a turd and epic fail, and you are the poor DD who lost his torpedos to a failbob who crossed the way of your torpedos. Considering my "122" battles: you might have recognized that i am an "Alpha Tester"!? Besides that, the number of battles played doesn´t say anything about understanding. I don´t require 2000-10000 battles to realize, that shooting torpedos in the way of an ally might bear the risk to cause friendly fire! It should be obvious within the first battles every played in a vessel with torpedos. If you haven´t learned that by now, i completly understand why we have to discuss this matter... But i understand, refering to some statistics is always a good choice, when all other options and arguments are depleted.

Yes, i am a BB Fanboy! My favourite ship is the mighty soviet battleship Gremyashchy! Oh, wait... It´s kind of you to teach me in DD strategies, but you completly missed (or just ignored -would it be fitting to call you a biased DD fanboy now?) the fact, that rule No.1 for any DD is: don´t shot into the way of any ally! Not with 5 km range torpedos, not with 10km range torpedos, and especially not with 20km range torpedos. You already stated two times, that you were obviously able to see and calculate the way of your allied battleship. You ignored all basic rules in the greed for you opportunity to score hits, took the risk, and an ally payed for it. One day, you will learn, that with great (torpedo-)power, comes great responsibility. And, as you also stated completly correct: once a DD is spotted, he becomes priority target and people will look out for torpedos! Correct Well, correct for players who care. But lets say, all the three or four enemies enemies of you allied Izumo were skilled and aware players. The were focused on your allied BB. By now, we know you were just greedy for the scores, but in your original post, you at least tried to sound social, pretending the intention that your torpedoes should assist your allied BB in his battle. If you were truly eager to assist you BB, you would have taken the risk and revealed yourself. The enemies would have recognized you. Maybe not long enough to turn their guns on you (so you could still escape without a scratch on you hull), but they would have known, the Izumo is covered. They would have anticipated your torpedoes. That would have drawn their attention, giving the Izumo time and space to breathe. Due to the enemies reaction, the Izumo might have recognized you and your torpedoes, and the whole battle might have gone different. But instead, you sticked to the standard DD tactics. Not the good ones, but to those which make the DD class so much "hated" by other classes. In addition, you hold on them at the wrong time and in the wrong way, Even worse: you still consider yourself justified and the BB captain a fail. I am almost sorry to say that, but it´s behaviour like yours, that contributes to the bad judgment and reputation above the awesome DD class!

Dieses Thema wurde doch schon umfangreich und mit unterschiedlichen, stark von einander abweichenden Meinungen, in verschiedenen Foren und Sprachen diskutiert! Dieser Poll hinkt leider und riecht nach Voreingenommenheit. Zum einen, weil die Wahloptionen nicht wirklich objektiv formuliert sind (der Beigeschmack "Der Nerf hat die DD-Klasse getötet", haftet dem Poll an), zum anderen, weil die Überschrift des Topics schon absolut die Richtung vorgibt! Anstatt den Thread/Poll "Sind die Änderungen an den Zerstörern in 0.4.0 angemessen?" zu nennen, wird gleich das Schlagwort "Nerf" verwendet. "Nerf" ist negativ, und in Anbetracht der Wellen, die die 0.4.0 Version bei den passionierten DD Fahrern geschlagen hat, wird dieser Poll nur eins hervorbringen: eine Meinungsansammlung derer, die ihre Lieblingsklasse ungerechtfertigt beschnitten sehen, und die sie wieder in ihrer ursprünglichen Form wieder hergestellt sehen wollen. Deswegen wird die 4. Frage mit überragender Mehrheit gewinnen. Nicht, weil sie objektiv die Meinung der Spielergemeinde (oder einen gesunden Querschnitt aus dieser) repräsentiert, sondern weil gleich mehr oder weniger gezielt auf die DD Spieler zugeschnitten ist und ein Ventil für deren Unzufriedenheit darstellt. Erstellt einen solchen Poll angepasst für jede Klasse, und Ihr werdet identische Ergebnisse einfahren. Subjektiv ist die bevorzugte Klasse nämlich immer, in jedem Spiel, diejenige, die eine Veränderung am härtesten Trifft, und deren Veränderungen am ungerechtfertigsten sind. Objektiv, und nur auf WoWs bezogen, muss man jedoch einfach festhalten: WG versucht mit WoWs die Quadratur des Kreises in Sachen Balancing. Wenn man sich WoT anschaut, dann weiß man aus Erfahrung, dass dieser Balancingprozess auch Jahre nach dem offiziellen Release noch andauert. Der anstehende 0.4.0 Patch wird signifikante Änderungen bringen, soviel ist klar. Aber: diese Änderungen sind, wie auch alle anderen, temporär. Wir sind noch immer in der Beta. Und wenn diese Änderungen die DDs so sehr schwächen, wie alle proklamieren, dann seid dankbar! Denn: mit der Open Beta wird es tausende neuer Spieler geben. Diese werden nicht instant durch irgendwelche DDs weggebombt werden können. Im Gegenteil! Wenn die Nerfs so böse sind, wie prophezeit, dann werden die DDs in der breiten Masse während des Tests ganz böse untergehen, und DANN werden sie mit einem Folgeupdate auch wieder gebufft! Also macht einfach dass, wozu die Beta da ist: spielt alle Klassen, und liefert WG Daten, um das Balancing für den Release vorzubereiten!

Not sure if that Izumo story is irony, sarcasm or some misunderstanding of the meaning "fail". But if an ally is i a knifefight with 4 other ships, i would not expect or demand of him to watch out for allied torpedoes, no matter wether they are announced or not. It´s just an epic fail from any DD to shot torpedoes in the (potential) way of an ally, especially when the ally is distracted! Either the DD should make sure he can land secure hits, or leave it. But a one minute approach of the torpedoes looks like they have been shot from a range, where the DD couldn´t even be spotted by the enemy. A much more valuable engagement of the DD would have been to make himself noticed by the enemies, to draw fire from the outnumbered ally... However, to add to the story: MY biggest fail so far was a game in a DD, where i was so eager to torp an enemy cruiser, stuck to an island, that i ignored my surroundings. While moving into position for the torpedo-drop, i ignored the island in front of me. Although i sunk the cruiser, i got myself stuck on that island and suffered a quick death by enemy gunfire. My lesson from that experiene: never let your greed overcome yourself!

Passend ausgedrückt! Eine Aussage, die das Missverständnis über diese Klasse, das diese ganze Debatte anheizt, auf den Punkt bringt! Wargaming hat in der Vergangenheit mehrfach von einer gewissen Rollenverteilung der Klassen gesprochen. Wenn die BB-Spieler jammerten, dass CVs mit ihren TBs OP seien, kam seitens der Community oder WG Staff direkt die Aussage: CVs sind der Hardcounter zu BBs! Es muss so sein, dass BBs von CVs verprügelt werden, vor allem, wenn der BB Spieler ein Sonntagsfahrer ist. Seitdem gab es viel hin und her mit den BBs, Nerfs, Buffs, allerlei Kram. Mittlerweile regt sich keiner mehr auf. Ähnliche Debatten gab es in der Vergangenheit zu allen Klassen. WG verweist immer wieder gerne auf folgende Rangordnung: BBs>CAs>DDs>CVs>BBs usw.. Die Nahrungskette ist hier ein Kreis. Um das ganze zu "balancen", Werden die "klassischen" Rollen und Eigenschaften einzelner Schiffe oder ganzer Klassen verändert oder verzerrt. Bei den DDs ist es so, dass sie auf Grund ihrer speziellen Fähigkeiten und Eigenschaften ihrer Rolle entwachsen waren. Die eigentliche Idee hinter WGs ursprünglichem DD Konzept war, dass DDs wieselflink und ungesehen durch die Linien brechen, um unbemerkt auf die BBs jagenden Flugzeugträger Jagd zu machen. Anfangs wurde das auch praktiziert, doch die Spieler fanden heraus, dass DDs zum Preis von Zerbrechlichkeit die Fahigkeit erkauften, alle Klassen zu bedrohen, und mit ihren Tarnskills und Torpedos auch als "Gebietsverweigerungswaffen" zu funktionieren. Statt also CVs zu jagen, was, sofern man WGs "Nahrungskreis" folgt, ihre Aufgabe wäre, machten DDs lieber Jagd auf BBs und andere, möglichst unaufmerksame Gegner. Sollte der Gegner dann doch Aufmerksam werden, konnte man ja im Nebel verschwinden. Schaut man sich jetzt an, was WG mit 0.4.0 gemacht hat, ist das ein relativ konsequenter Versuch, den DD wieder in sein Rollenbild zu stopfen, wenn auch mit leichten Fehlern in der Umsetzung. Man lässt ihnen ihre Verstohlenheit, nimmt ihnen aber die Fähigkeit, sich (mehrfach) aus Nahkämpfen ohne Weiteres verkrümmeln zu können. Man gibt Kreuzern (als Eskortklasse und DD hardcounter) die Möglichkeit, sich zwischen Flugzeugjagd und DD Jagd zu entscheiden, und zu spezialisieren. Die Fähigkeit dafür dient dem CA aber nur im Nahkampf, bei seiner Eskortaufgabe. CVs bleiben nachwievor blind. Schlachtschiffe, obwohl die zur DD Abwehr gedachte Sekundärbewaffnung, abgesehen von den high Tier Japan BBs, immernoch zu Gunsten der DDs in ihrer Effektivität und Reichweite beschränkt ist, wurden bereits ihrer Rolle entsprechend angepasst. CAs haben an Effektivität gegen BBs verloren. CVs wurden verändert. Nun wird es auch die DDs erwischen. Aus dem fragilen "Jack of all trades" wird wieder der "Feind hinter den Linien". Und wenn das durch ist, wird wieder alles umgeworfen... Wenn man sich anschaut, was WG in den vergangenen Monaten mit den Klassen gemacht hat, ist das zwar stellenweise vor allem für die Liebhaber der entsprechenden Klasse nicht schön, aber konsequent und nachvollziehbar. Jede Klasse wurde gezielt in ihrer Rolle als Hardcounter gebufft, bzw die zu konternde Klasse entsprächend verwundbarer gemacht. BBs fegen CAs mit AP Granaten vom Platz und haben eine Chance, abhängig vom Können des Captains, allen anderen Klassen gefährlich zu werden. CAs fressen DDs zum Frühstück, haben aber auch die Möglichkeit, BBs und CVs zu bedrohen (auch wenn Feuer noch etwas unbalanced scheint) DDs machen aus jedem CV Kleinholz, können aber auch alle anderen Klassen mit ihren Torpedos ausknipsen. CVs torpedieren und bombardieren BBs auf den Meeresgrund, können aber auch CAs ärgern und DDs für feindlichen Beschuss aufgedeckt lassen. Bei jeder Klasse zeigt sich, dass sie die zu "dominierende" Klasse jeweils mit relativ geringem Risiko angehenkann, während die Konfrontation mit jeder anderen Klasse ein gewisses Risiko behält. Bisher waren DDs da gegenüber anderen Klassen leicht im Vorteil, da sie "Hit and Run" Taktiken fahren konnten, wo alle anderen Klassen "ihren Mann" zu stehen hatten... Die Rolle des "Räubers in einem Teich voller Weihnachtskarpfen" wird geändert zur Rolle "ein Raubfisch unter vielen". DDs mögen durch 0.4.0 möglicherweise stärker betroffen sein, als andere Klassen, aber nicht, um sie unspielbar zu machen, sondern um sie in Sachen Balancing zwischen den Klassen mit anderen Klassen gleich zu stellen.

As always, people only recognize the (negative) changes to their favourite class! It doesn´t require a lot to find "XX class has been nerfed to death" topics. However, all you see is people complaining about how their favourite toy has been "completly and utterly nerfed to death and made absolutely unplayable", with tons of threats that the players won´t spend any money to this (insert most hated class in her) favouring game, until (insert most favourite class in here) has been buffed again to be at least on pair. I´ve played from tier 1 to tier 10 during the OBT weekend, and neither class felt superior or inferior. I saw CVs instakilling BBs with a single torpedo plane attack, DDs controlling complete areas of the map and (in case of the tier X Japanese DD) collecting ridulous ammounts of torpedo hits and kills while never been spotted. BBs, oneshotting others or failing to do any damage at all on inferior targets. 0.4.0 delivered changes to all classes, to upgrades and skills, and with those, ships could be specialized in various ways. DD players claim, their ships are useless now. CV players say the same. CA players aswell. BB players complain ever since their main batteries have been rendered useless several patches ago (not in terms of potential damage, but of accuracy). So, since all groups complain, i wonder, which class is playable at all? Of course, all other classes except the prefered one the complaining player prefers... This is no "whoever cries the most, receives the biggest sweets" contest! This is closed beta, and WG tries hard to achieve the impossible: to balance 4 classes of warships, which were never meant to be balanced. So, as a natural result, whatever is the current state of balance, any class has to suffer and accept compromises...

Also was meine 0.4.0 Wochenenderfahrung betrifft, so sieht es für mich danach aus, dass DDs in den Low lvl Bereichen etwas anspruchsvoller geworden sind, in den high tier Bereichen jedoch zunehmend stärker. Ganz besonders grausam waren Matches mit dem japanischen Tier X DD (Shimikaze?). Wenn der Spieler halbwegs wusste, was er tat, dann hat das gegnerische Team das ganze Spiel über nichts anderes als dessen Long Lance Torpedos zu Gesicht bekommen die irgendwo mitten im Gefecht aufploppten. Ich kann ja den Unmut über die Restriktionen bei den Consunables verstehen, aber das trifft andere Klassen ja genauso, soweit ich das während des Spielens beobachten konnte. Man ballert seine Consumables halt jetzt nicht mehr einfach so raus, sondern muss halt überlegen. Der 0.4.0er Patch hat viele Änderungen für alle Klassen gebracht, manche sind gut, manche mag man nicht, weil sie einem gewisse Gewohnheiten nehmen. Alles in Allem halte ich die Balance aber nach wie vor für gegeben. Der OBT Test ist auf Grund der Spieler (viele Neuzugänge) und dem Rushen durch die Techtrees durch den XP Boost nicht wirklich repräsentativ, da man sich kaum richtig mit den einzelnen Änderungen en detail befassen konnte. Warten wir mal ab, wie das Spiel aussieht, wenn 0.4.0 die Liveserver trifft...

Eigentlich ein tolles Schiff, hat Potenzial für einen "Liebling". Aber: nicht ein einziges Flackgeschütz! Auf Tier 4, mit MM Reichweite bis Tier 6 (oder gar 7, wenns schlimm kommt?) ist das im Prinzip nicht vertretbar! Da die Arkansas ja momentan neu auf dem Testserver ist, kann man sie reihenweise in den Midtier Matches sehen. Viele Flugzeugträger Spieler haben inzwischen Spitz bekommen, dass das Ding komplett wehrlos gegen ihre Flugzeuge ist. Man kann daher relativ zuverlässig beobachten, dass Arkansas Schlachtschiffe als erstes rausgepickt werden, sofern die Torpedobomber und Sturzkampfbomber nicht gerade am anderen Ende der Karte sind. Die massive 21 Kanonen Sekundärbatterie entschädigt da kaum, da sie selbst mit Perks und vollen Upgrades nur auf 3,5 x 1,2 = 4,2; 4,2 x 1,2 = 5.04; 5,04 x 1,05 = 5,292 Km Reichweite kommt. (Berechnung: Basisreichweite modifiziert mit Upgrade. Modifizierte Reichweite erweitert um Captain Skill. Dann noch die 5% von den "Fähnchen" hinzuaddiert). Das klingt zwar eigentlich ganz ordentlich, aber bei 21 Knoten rennt einem da trotzdem alles aus der Reichweite raus, und dann sind die Hauptgeschütze auch noch unmodifiziert. Fazit: ein solides Schiff, aber hier müsste WG aus balancing Gründen dringen wenigstens einen geringen Flak-Schutz ergänzen...

Don´t forget, you will most likely find absolute newcomers these days on low tier PvE! All those with fresh accounts who have to start all over! Those players might struggle at first, while the AI will still perform as usual: easy to handle for a veteran, but point deadly against those who invite the AI to kill their citadels...

The Mikasa has a mass of secondary batteries! I wonder how much range they will have. If they receive just the 2-2,5 of the other low tiers, the Mikasa might struggle with her main guns against all those small, maneuverable ships. With 4+ km, she would be a deadly adversary, if anyone is unaware enough to let her get that close...

Although i am a CA player aswell, i dare to ask the OP the following: do you complain about the CA class-hardcounter for this game to work as intended? And, even more: BBs being the hardcounter against CA doesn´t mean they perform these massive hits instantly or automatically. The BB has to aim and lead carefully, and the CA has to offer the opportunity for these massive hits. BBs get owned by DDs, they get dominated by CVs and they have an eye to eye chance against other BBs. Even cruisers can harm them, it´s just that they don´t own them anymore, as they did with HE until the last patch. yes, i get enrage when my CA is spanked by a BB. But that´s how it should be. It´s my task to take on Cruisers with AP, DDs with HE, bring down planes and take on CVs if possible. Against BBs, i provide fireSUPPORT, but never go alone.

Intresting feedback! Some things i agree with, some things i don´t! 1. time factor: it might be an arcade game, but it has to simulate somehow the defference in agility and speed of the different ship classes. A DD will get to it´s destination faster than a BB. Yes, waiting for action is boring sometimes, but that´s because people don´t rush the middle. However, loosing 3-5 minutes on the beginning of the battle is a stupid thing, when the time is required at the end of the game... 2. inconsistent damage: due to aiming mechanics back in the 1900-1950´s, damage and shell spread were inconsistent, while armor layouts especially on larger warships became increasingly complex. Yes, it is annoying not to know how much damage a salvo is going to do, but besides the ridiculous spread of shells, i am content with the mechanics. Spread could be reduced (at least by some upgrades or skills), but everything else just resembles the gamble of a naval battle. 3. fire: agreed. 4. no real roles: i share the basic accusation: roles are not specific enough. However, thes "prey-circle" doesn´t work as intended anyway. Any class has the potential to take on any other, but they share a very complex area of efficiency. DDs just can blast away or threaten anything within their range (or at least a great part of the range where other ships can detect them). CAs are capable to take on anything with success, but they lack a clear identity. They share their effective combat range with the BBs. BBs are designed to take down CAs, so maybe that´s okay for balancing reasons. However, CA´s don´t get the tradeoff to take as effective against DDs. DD´s dictate the circumstances of engagement most of the time, so the engagement CA vs. DD often has to take place in the DD´s comfort zone. While DD´s as some kind of second hardcounter (next to CVs) against BBs should be able to dictate their comfort zone against the slow ships, CAs should be able to dictate the odds against DDs. This would make them a more valuable escort class. Maybe, CAs should receive some increased detection ability towards DDs. This could be a captains perk, a unique module, or a skill, like AAA-barrage. To specify the roles of the classes more clearly, significant changes to the classes would have to be applied. Too much to elaborate in here ;) 5. turning: good idea: add some kind of marker which shows a prediction, where the ship will go during it´s turn. Prediction arrow changes/addapts, depending on ship´s speed. Make that option available to turn on/off. 6. hit the land: yeah, this sucks... especially if you hit the land sideways, because of drifting while turning. I once manage to turn my Iwaki in a way that made it drift onto an island, with a rock in front and at the back of my ship. I was stuck there for the rest of the battle... There should be something like an "auto-drift-back" into deeper waters. 7. Auto correction: well, it can be turned of, no troubles with that... 8. too many things to monitor: yeah, many things to monitor, but that´s basically okay. However, there are things which annoy me very much, like trying to keep up with monitoring plane squads, especially when i am focused by several CVs. It´s hard to stay focused and coordinate your maneuvering, your shooting and your AAA focus when 3+ TB wings are inbound, maybe in addition with surface. I would love to have something like a fire priority list for my AAA guns, which allows me to mark up to 10 squadrons, so i can make sure my AAA is focused on the most threatening target, instead of choosing it´s priority by itsself, once the first priority target disappeared. It takes too much time during the heat of the battles sometimes. I would love to see something like an additional warning, as soon as planes or surface units pop up within a specific radius, like 5 Km or so. It could be an officers voice, who informs about when automatic defense mechanisms are triggered while your (camera-)focus is on a different target/direction, like "starboard secondary batteries opening fire" when you are watching elsewhere. Or "Long range AAA batteries engaging!" "Medium AAA guns opening fire!". It doesn´t say what is approaching and from where, but you receive at least a warning that something should be done. It would add to the atmosphere aswell... 9.invisibility of DDs: yeah, annoying, but as much as i don´t like it, i accept that stealthyness is the most important aspect of the DD role. 10. hm, not sure what to say about. This is a warship game, no fps or street racing game. Warships are slow, so has to be the game. It´s okay with me...

Thing is, the 203mm guns of the Furutaka can wreak havoc ammong other cruisers, IF they manage to score a decent hit. However, the cruel turning rate of the turrets, the horrible AAA, the long reload and the rather fragile structure (Furutaka seems to be prown to take citadel hits, even from small calibres) don´t make up for the big punch. Worst thing of all is the turret turing rate. If that would be buffed, i could happy with the Furutaka. Not a keeper, but not that horror of a grind anymore aswell...

The only thing you could the MM blame for, is the fact you had to face 2 CVs, since a 2 vs 1 CV battle is a handicap, if the 2 CVs know how to play out their advantage. The fact that you had a TB setup and they a fighter setup is no mistake or fail by the MM. You chose to go for hunting ships, the enemy might just have stuck with a set which provides fighters anyway, or have specialized on hunting enemy CV squadrons by purpose. You were on the unlucky side that time. I bet, you wouldn´t have complained if you were the only one CV in the game at all, being allowed to feast with your TBs on all those BBs without the fear of punishment or other threats. This is still CBT! Yes, the player count is low, MM never was the strenght of WG, but the beta factor makes it even worse. That´s not new, that´s no surprise. Sometimes it favours your side or your setup, sometimes it favours the other side. Take it like a man! Threatening WG, that they don´t deserve YOUR money, because YOUR "but mommy, i wanna pwn them with my TB setup!" doesn´t work out as you wish, sounds very childish and will make them smile at best. What do you think, how often WG had to read "change this or that or i will not pay (anymore)"?

If you encounter an experienced Fuso player within plunging fire range and don´t manage to avoid his hits, you get blasted... But that´s not a tier 6 Fuso Issue! It can happen whenever plunging fire is incoming and someone just keep moving in a straight line or somehow predictable...

Okay, walls of texts so far, but if we put it all together and summ it up, it just sounds a little bit like this: I like my cruisers, and i like my destroyers. Until the last patch, these classes were awesome, because HE was awesome, and my cruisers and destroyers were easily able to dominate all other classes. Now, with the new patches, my cruisers can´t yolo enemy BBs anymore. BBs now wreck my cruisers with nasty AP ammunition, and my HE spam and medium calibre AP shells don´t own them anymore. The hardcounter to my cruisers is finally somehow effective, if the player is aware and capable. Since we have many BB players out there, there are many players who can counter my cruisers. That´s not good, that´s not fine, i want my cruisers back in "i pwn everything"-mode. However, since BBs are already dominated by CVs and DDs and skilled CA players, and crippeled by several other mechanic flaws, asking for a BB nerf won´t fit, since all theses facts don´t stop people playing this class. So, to reduce their numbers on the fields, and make cruisers more pwning again, make them more expensive to maintain, so people are forced to play smaller ships. Maybe CVs or DDs, which i can pwn with my cruisers? No offense intended, seriously! Those lines of mine above are flawed by some irony and sarcasm, so don´t hit me for it! It´s just, you know, every one of us has his more favourite class and the one he/she doesn´t like that much. I love cruisers, and i like BBs and DDs. CVs are not my type of class, but they act to the action, and i looooove that "Dakka,dakka" when my AAA guns create atmosphere... I get enrage every single time when an enemy BB manages to perform one of these nasty citadell hits on my Cleveland, or one-shots my Iwaki alpha, but that´s the game. it has to be that way, and if BBs don´t dominate cruisers, who else are they allowed to have an advantage above? Enemy BBs are equal, DDs and CVs love to push them around and deny complete regions of the maps with their torpedo thread. Besides that, i already requires an able BB captain to stop an able CA captain, especially when the CA is of a higher tier. Low secondary range, sluggish maneuvering, long main battery reload, all that handicaps a BB if it wants to kill a dodging CA captain, while he gets hammered an incinerated time after time by fast firing medium calibre guns. This game and it mechanics already favours DDs and CAs in many aspects above the CV and the BB class, there is just no need to punish BBs just for what they are, "to make them artificially unattractive". The time when DDs and CAs with torpedoes dominate the maps again will return, sooner or later, anyway...

Sorry, dude, but you didn´t think this through, i dare to say! First, this is still CBT, and one of the latest branches implemented in this game are the US BB. It´s just logical that we have an increased number of BBs right now, since people get attracted by the big ships, and they want to test them, especially since the latest patches saw some modifications to BB gameplay. The numbers will eaven out, once more players are available. Second: if you want to increase the BBs maintenance costs for reasons of fairness, the next logical step would be to addapt the ammunition costs aswell. While small calibre guns might be cheap to resupply, torpedoes and complete torpedo-plane squadrons won´t. I bet, this is a change DD, CA and CV players woudn´t like to see, since it would drastically increase the costs of torpedo spamming, and it might render CVs complety unattractive. In addition, it will be the CV and DD players, who cry out first. A reduced number ob BBs in games will reduce the number of cash cows to feast on. If 3 DDs and 2 DDs have to share 2 enemy BBs, the shared ammount of damage will be highly reduced, leading DDs to either fight increased numbers of their own, or cruisers, which are designed to hardcounter DDs and CVs. CVs will feel even more useless, since they got no BBs to hunt, but have to go for agile DDs and CAs with tons of AAA power. It will be the DDs to cry for BB support against the pesky cruisers then. All the moneymaking and XP mechanics of this game are bound to reducing enemy HP points. With most of the BBs gone, there will be far less XP and credits to earn. For these reasons, you won´t the BBs leave the battles! Of course, i agree, noone wants to see battles with 6+ BBs per side, but a good mix with2-4 of them is absolutely adequate...

Der Sinn in dieser Änderung liegt darin, dass Cruiser (selbst low tiers) ihre Wendigkeit dazu ausgenutzt haben, sich im spitzen Winkel an BBs anzunähern, deren AP Munition dann nutlos abgeprallt ist, während HE zu ineffektiv war. Um HE nicht weiter zu buffen und AP als taktisch nutzbare Alternative anzubieten, wurde diese Änderung durchgeführt. Wenn man an WoT mit seiner "Overmatch" Funktion denkt (also automatische Penetration von Panzerung durch granaten, deren Kaliber das dreifache der Panzerungsdicke beträgt), scheint diese Änderung auch logisch. Ich bin zwar nicht glücklich, dass ich in meinen Cruisern nun noch schneller weggeholzt werde, aber ich kann auch verstehen, dass sich der alle 35 Sekunden schießende BB Kapitän wundert, wenn seine 35,5 cm AP Mumpeln harmlos and der 2 cm Stahlplatte eines leichten Kreuzers abprallen.