Exocet6951

The thing is, as with most hybrids, there's really no middle ground. They'll either come out as under or overwhelming. Arguments about overmatch, DPM, etc....aside, the only thing that it boils down to is this: if the ships have cruiser-like accuracy, they're going to stomp. If they have BB accuracy, they're pointless. If it's in between, it's not goodd enough to be reliable so it's pointless. And the closer it gets to cruiser-accuracy, the more it completely overshadows all but the more specialized cruiser. After all, having a Zao or Hindenburger is nice....but it's still nicer to have a ship that can tank 3-4 times more incoming fire, even if the HE damage reliability is worse. Exactly the opposite. I want BCs to take up BB slots, because battlecruiser is just a fancy word for battleship. A term that means different things for different nations in the first place, and became completely irrelevant/redundant past the 1930s. Most of the posts I've seen about BC and CBs were about making them T9-10 CAs. I find that absolutely insane, and found myself having to try to answer to half a dozen people in a single thread telling me that it would totally balanced. Hell, I can search the term "Alaska" and probably find 15 different threads made specifically to request that ship as a T9 free xp cruiser, or an alternative T10 cruiser. But the second the Russian navy gets exactly what those people ask for, it's an aberration and a cut-down variant of a BB takes up a cruiser slot is unbalanced. So yeah, nationality actually has a significant impact on the matter. It tempers the opinion a LOT.

Because people have been asking for battlecruisers and large cruisers (like the Alaska or Japanese BC whose name I don't recall) for years, arguing that it'll totally be balanced as high tier cruisers rather than lower tier BBs. Only now it comes in the form of Soviet ships so people are outraged. Hilarious. I legit think that WG saw my idea about the RBT (Russian Bias Test), implemented the Stalingrad as they would have they Alaska, and are laughing their asses off as they see uproar from the community getting exactly what it wants, but flying the wrong colors.

Turns into => I love how you're so damn fluid in your opinions that you go from "tinfoil hat moment" to "I don't have to do that" when demonstrated that you're wrong

Karma is there so mad blue/unicums in tryhard divisions can report you and feel good about themselves when you obliterate their DDs

Don't worry, I'll counter it requests for a super secret project for a stealth cloak IJN DD with nuclear torpedoes that are also invisible. It was called Akifucki trufax

The picture gets clearer. This thread is a thinly veiled "nerf DDs so I can smack people around with my big throbbing wiener wehraboo wet dream"

This is why you shouldn't smoke crack during pregnancy.

As I said, you can try to bandaid fix as much as you want, but that's just piling on. The poor branch has been suffering an identity crisis at WG's hands since they first realized than an anti cruiser cruiser branch wouldn't work when there are more BBs than cruisers in you average match. At one point WG needs to stop hacking into the branch like a deranged surgeon and actually let someone qualified do the work from scratch. If something isn't working anymore to the point of the overwhelmingly main choice of ammo changing from one to the other, no amount of buff, nerf or tweak will fix the underlying issue. You're just masking it until the numbers line up. But at its core, until a rework, it'll remain a boring ship to play, that spams unfufilling HE with a clumsy hull, and sometimes gets to nuke something that's not too armored when you're lucky enough to catch it off guard, which you would do in any other cruiser anyway. A ship that's annoying to play, but worth it since the only thing more annoying than playing it is playing against it.

1st result on Google Image search for "The Skybucks"

Because it's victim of the same boneheaded philosophy that made this mess in the first place: "Let's apply a global change to help out 1-3 ships"

Allow me to quote you back to you: "I haven't seen it so it doesn't exist" is confirmation bias. A branch based on high AP damage and low HE damage suddenly getting something to increase its HE penetration is not confirmation bias that something is wrong with the train of thought. I'll just ask you to read my post above, because I'm not typing it out again. It's stupid. They didn't improve her tankiness and AP to go along with the times, they just tacked on extra bells and whistles hoping it would work. It does work over the course of a battle, but it's clunky and clearly doesn't match other T8 cruisers' performances. It would be like improving the Yamato by making the secondaries be more accurate. Sure it might be better for it, but that's still not what the Yamato is built for. Again, I'm not asking for a nerf, I'm asking for the devs to pick a vision for the branch and stick with it, not give it two flawed shells that don't work with the hull and buffing it until it gives better numbers. Literally any time an HE shell hits a German BB's deck, or a non IFHE 203mm HE shell hits a US 38mm deck. It's really not rare, not sure why you're trying to fight me on basic HE mechanics... Almost as if that was the crux of my argument. The ships are so nonsensically by now that a reload nerf or buff wouldn't do much. You're getting so damn defensive about it that yes, it really does sound like it. And what better goddamn reason to rework it than saying out loud "This brawling cruiser with high AP damage can't brawl anymore, thus needs high pen on it's low damage HE to compensate" How do you not scratch your head at the ridiculousness of that train of thought? What next? "Kagero can't torpedo anymore because of too many radars and gunboats, so here's an AA buff so it can hunt CVs". WHAT.

Ah yes, it's well know that every T10 cruiser has over 50mm of HE pen to go through 38-50mm deck armor on BBs. /s You're seeing what I'm saying about the Hinden as something against the Hinden specifically. It's not. The fact that it was given, along with other ships, 1/4th HE pen is a problem in itself. The fundamental purpose of the branch was changed to the complete opposite, from heavy AP damage to pinprick, but constant HE. This is stupid. I mean, look at it this way, it has ridiculous rate of fire with long range but the ballistics are subpar. So you want to go to close quarters, but the concealment, firing angles and agility is rather poor. Herm... Then you having very good HE pen...but low alpha. That's...one way to do it... It makes you want to stay at slightly longer ranges to wither people down.... But then you have AP with low pen with huge alpha that make you need to get closer. WAT. The ship is dichotomically torn in two completely opposite gameplays that just don't mix. And that reverberates in the stats. The ship has huge tanking and damage potential, but it's very low in the ratings. Pick something and rework the branch to fit that vision, rather than applying bandaid fix after bandaid fix to that branch until it looks nothing like what it started out as. That doesn't mean nerf, like you're trying to make me out to sound like. Don't worry, you can keep your precious ship. It means a rework so it's not the end-all T10 ship that does absolutely everything, but in completely nonsensically ways by virtue of benefitting from lazy fix after lazy fix oer the course of the past 2 years that go against its original fundamental nature.

I see it literally every single game in which there's a Hindenburg. It's not just bow tanking, it's overall tanking. And bad alpha damage doesn't mean much when you can almost always deal damage when hitting anything that's not belt armor. I say it needs a rework because it's a branch that has lost its bearing compared to how it was made. It was made a brawly AP cruiser, and it's now used mostly as a long range HE spammer because of improved HE. It did a complete 180 degree turn on its fundamental raison d'être. If that's not a reason for a rework, then what is? And no, I don't have the Hindy, but I do have the Roon, and the Hipper is one of my most played ships, one which I've played since it first came out, so i'll ask you to not pursue that flawed argument.

Hindenburger is a ship that went from a very brawly AP focused cruiser to a 27mm bow armor, 1/4th pen HE spammer. It has benefitted from global buffs and buffs to the branch and has turnt into a complete aberration . It doesn't need a reload nerf, it needs (along with T7 to T9) a complete rework

But you'd be lucky to deal 5k damage if the bow armor of a DM were suddenly able to tank BBs. Now if you're talking about the citpen mechanic and its raw numbers, that's another conversation.

Try playing a 380mm armed ship against a bow tanking Des Moines. The best you can do is try to break turrets while it defecates all over you with DPM. At the end of the day, BBs counter cruisers, so the latter can't just sit in front of a BB and top kek DPM it to death while only risking damage to its superstructure and turrets.

The good ol' WG "See, we listen!" strategy. Step 1: Make a branch so ludicrous that every aspect is criticized, with one aspect you plan on removing. Step 2: In the midst of controversy, remove that one element you planned on ditching all along Step 3: Tell everyone that you listened Step 4: Release Step 5: When everyone complains that the branch is just borderline griefing, sit back an "collect data" Step 6 (optional): Release a public statement containing one spicy meme such as "fun and engaging" Applicable to RN BBs, FR BBs (less extreme, but used to have better sigma, lulz), PA DDs, etc...

Pls buff Needs more dakka

To be fair, "let's discuss a BB rework. BB mains not welcome" would probably be very productive

What they fail to take into account is that a ship's impact can be either positive or negative. Indeed, because of the potency of high concealment or a well placed radar, cruisers and DDs can potentially have a massive positive impact on the match, more so than a BB relegated to just doing damage on what's spotted and tanking hits. HOWEVER. A bad BB player is a ludicrously negative impact on the match. Have a team of 2 DDs and 5 cruisers playing poorly and 5 BBs playing very well, then compare that to a team of 2 DDs and 5 cruisers playing very well and 5 BBs playing poorly. By virtue of having absolutely no staying power and no high impact BB salvoes, you will do much more poorly in the team with 5 bad BB players.

4. Fun and engaging mechanics 5. Overconfidence

Yes poor you, you only have 380mm guns with 800mm of penetration, 20km of range, epic secondaries, 350mm of armor with autobounce turtleback behind it, and a massive amount of HP with a repair party that can propel itself over 30 knots. What ever will you do? Woe is you.

Pic (and facial expression) relevant

One thing to keep in mind, especially with the amount of people with Clevelands.... Anyone playing a Cleveland should have a HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE red message on his screen telling him not to sit on repair point and snipe DDs from max range. Anyone caught doing that should be banned from the operation. By the way, in case it wasn't clear from previous scenarios... Spamming IJN CAs with their nuke HE at cruisers with no heal is absolute madness. When you add to that a flurry of long range torpedoes that pretty much force you to save the DCP for that inevitable torpedo hit.... When you add onto that IJN DDs firing their rather potent 127mm HE in mass... THe only times we won was when our team yolo rushed the regiments at the start, taking rather bad damage from ignoring all the other ships, waiting a minute or two at the repair point, then half the remaining people sniping the airfield while the other half committed suicide on the defending AI. Having an operation relying on random players voluntarily all the attention in cruisers getting slammed with 203mm IJN HE WITH NO REPAIR KIT is bonkers. "How the hell did this even get approved for public test" bonkers. It's not challenging, it's just stupid.