Pukovnik7

Rather good game in my Campbelltown... and a guy asked me in chat why I play that garbage ship.

That is how it should be, but doesn't work because: 1) HE is very powerful and negates BBs main defense (armour and angling). Which basically means that a destroyer is far better at tanking damage than a battleship, because it can dance at long range and simply avoid shells. 2) Islands are low and allow a pushing ship (or ships) to be focus-fired even over the islands... many maps do not have islands which you can use for actual cover, they are so low they can be fired over. Hugging an island and presenting angled flank or bow to an enemy can be a very powerful mechanic - it allows you to bow-tank much of the enemy fire, while negating long range bombardment, and provides you with an escape option. And then you can push by basically island-hopping. But when islands are so low and flat they can be fired over anyway, when the entire enemy team can shoot over the islands from 10 clicks away so your only hope of survival is to remain unspotted and/or out of range because islands are useless... that kinda puts a damper on any attempts to push. I always try to support the cruisers and DDs when playing battleships, and... at low tiers, it works splendidly. At high tiers, doing so usually results in death, because of the above issues.

Why, then, would you say that high-tier games nearly always devolve into snoozefests for mentally retarded sloths? If CVs don't matter, if HE doesn't matter, if map design doesn't matter... why are games so passive? And [edited], you say I do not understand game mechancis, yet you clearly show you do not understand game reality. 1) Fact that battleships can counter-HE snipe means that sniping IS promoted. Just think about what you write. You just wrote (bolded part) that HE mechanics do not promote sniping, because a battleship can counter cruiser HE sniping... by HE sniping themselves. 2) HE is used at long range, and against superstructure. And many battleships have large superstructure, which means that there is nothing to shatter HE shells. Bow and turrets only shield superstructure at short range; at medium to long range that I complain about, shells fly over them (ballistics, capisce?). And you cannot be bow-on when map is so freaking open that any attempt to push immediately gets you focused by several cruisers and battleships the moment you are spotted, which means that a lot of fires will get started simply by HE shells hitting side of the ship. And add to that that higher-tier battleships have very large areas covered by 19 mm armour which cannot shatter cruiser shells, and you see problems. 3) Yeah, DDs and cruisers provide vision to battleships... in your dreams. In half the mid-to-high-tier games I played, DDs died to CVs rather quickly. And at least half of the rest of the time they did not provide vision because they'd either bunch up in a single cap or get otherwise distracted / forced to smoke up etc. And I can't exactly blame them - I play destroyers myself so I'm all too aware of how distracting being hunted by a carrier or focus-fired by half the enemy team while being permaspotted by said CV can be. 4) One of reasons I push is to help friendly destroyers deal with enemy DDs and more importantly, to protect DDs from cruisers. I am not going to wait until all friendly destroyers have died, because if I do, I won't be able to do anything useful for the rest of the game. A team that loses destroyers usually loses the game. Yet all your answers on how to deal with HE spam come down to "sit back and be useless"... which truth be told, is what most BB players do. But you cannot say then that HE + map design + CV do not cause problems for gameplay, because they clearly do.

I don't think cruisers were supposed to ever counter battleships, at least with guns... basically, battleships hunt cruisers, cruisers hunt destroyers, destroyers hunt battleships. Of course, question is whether player base is good enough to implement that, or you'd have cruiser players shooting at fat battleships and letting enemy destroyers do their thing... but if it could be done properly, it would be lot more fun than current differentiation where everyone hunts everyone, and the only difference is the optimal engagement range. HE mechanics do in fact help promote sniper play, because you don't need to aim at specific points at the hull (such as magazines), you don't have to worry about bouncin too much and so on. I have had games where I sat in the back... yes, I would definitely survive longer, but enjoyed the game? I'd rather be on fire and sinking than shooting enemies from max range and not doing a single useful thing. Yeah, I'd say that main problem for pushy battleships are actually CVs and maps. CVs can spot them too easily and keep them permaspotted, while many maps have islands that are either so distant, so low, or both, that the entire enemy battleline can easily focus its fire on a single ship, from across the map.

If you are going to argue, do it properly. Try and understand what I am actually saying instead of pretending that I am saying what you want to argue against. I never said that battleships should be immune to anything. I did say that battleships should not be so vulnerable at short range that long-range HE spamfest is the only viable use of the type. If you are incapable of understanding something that simple, we can end our discussion here... battleships should be tankers and brawlers, not snipers. But HE mechanics promote sniping behaviour for all ships - battleships included. And that is why I do not like them. HE fire mechanics can easily be replaced by superstructure damage mechanics. Increase HP loss taken from hits to superstructure, and done. Except superstructure is smaller target than the entire ship, which would force everyone closer together.

As I have already pointed out a dozen times... I am not complaining about cruisers as such, I am complaining about a) map design and b) HE mechanics, in general. It isn't cruisers per se, it is a) islands which allow ships to lob shells over them and b) HE mechanics meaning that you don't need to do anything more than hit some part of a ship for damage. Cruisers are most noticeable when they do it, but all ships utilize these mechanics to sit in place and farm damage.

The only difference it makes is that you are harded to hit when you are nose-in. But when you are hit, it does equal amount of damage. And as I have pointed out, this promotes the camping gameplay. Staying at 16 km or more means that battleships can't push. If battleships can't push, then cruisers can't push either because they don't have projectile sponges to hide behind (as several people have pointed out, a cruiser can get deleted in a single salvo by a BB or even a CA) - so they camp behind islands and hope that something will wander into range. If cruisers can't push, destroyers are in danger because they don't have AA cover... though at least destroyers can survive, somewhat. THAT is what the problem is. Not that cruisers can kill battleships; but rather, that the manner in which they do so helps promote passive playstyle.

It is not cruisers per se, it is HE spam in general. It burns you down, you can't angle against it, and it promotes maximum-range sniping because it does damage no matter where it hits. Doesn't matter whether it comes from cruisers or from battleships, it is cancer, at least as much as carriers are.

I like it, but only if it applies only against targets sailing in a straight line or being stationary. If target maneuvers, it throws off the aim, which should be represented as well. Otherwise you only promote even more camping and sniping. Anyway, I have a far better idea: reset the game mechanics to how they were in December 2015., and leave it be.

Completed the Raptor Rescue

Bring back brawling. 1) Make AA and secondaries powerful enough to keep planes and destroyers away. Not so powerful that these classes become useless, but powerful enough that they have to mount ambushes or else use smoke against BB players instead of simply waltzing in with no fear. 2) Remove fire damage mechanic and remove HE damage to the hull. As it is, HE spam can burn down a battleship in less than a minute, even from a cruiser. Instead, make AP the primary type against battleships, thus forcing ships to either target the superstructure (in which case HE would be more effective) for slight but guaranteed damage, or the hull for potentially massive damage which requires setting up good angle. Overall, cruisers and DDs shouldn't be able to kill battleships with HE hull hits, while battleships would generally overpen or cause relatively low damage with HE shells. This means that lighter ships would have to rely on HE and overpens against superstructure for dealing damage, while battleships would have to rely on overpens and targeting magazines. Main weapons for cruisers and DDs would be torpedoes, and main weapons for battleships would be secondary guns. This should also rather reduce the power of "lol I'm camping behind island you can't hit me 'cause trajectory" cruiser HE spam, as well as advantage battleships with small superstructures. 3) Redesign maps to make long-range sniping possibilities fleeting, while also removing possibility of focused fire against single targets. 4) Reduce precision and accuracy of guns of all classes of ships. One of major reasons why BBs don't push is that a cruiser firing from its maximum range can murder a battleship with fires and HE due to a combination of guns' innate high ROF, fire damage and high precision + battleship lack of maneuverability and large size giving cruisers very high DPS against a battleship, while battleship is often unable to retaliate because of flatter shell trajectory + greater dispersion at said range, meaning that a cruiser can sit behind an island and murder a battleship before it can either move away or get to the brawling range. 4.1) Change around relative precision of shells. As noted, destroyer and cruiser guns are far more precise than battleship guns, allowing them to achieve far greater DPS. In reality however a heavier shell would be far less affected by the wind and atmospheric conditions - meaning that at same range, battleship guns should be more precise than cruiser or destroyer guns. This would be countered by the evasive maneuvers and the fact that battleships are both larger and less agile. 4.2) Reduce accuracy of guns. Currently, hits are long ranges are possible because we get basically bird's eye view of the battlefield. But if mouse movements have far greater impact at long range, then missing is much easier. Remove the decimals on the range readout and make the zoomed-in view at the same angle as normal zoomed-out view, thus making range finding more difficult. And use planes for spotting only, not for targeting. Sad reality is that natural selection at high tiers selects against that... only those who stay at long range and do not push survive. BB players had their balls burned on the altar as a sacrifice to an accuracy buff. In a BB, you can either play for fun or play to win... not both. My 45% WR in a BB is probably very high considering how aggressive of a BB player I am ("S key? What do you mean, there is an S key?").

That was actually part of my point. Still, I do believe that interplay of factors makes it far worse than any of the factors individually. 1) Map design is often too open, allowing any pushing ship to be focused. 2) This is made worse by the gun accuracy, because hitting more often = far greater effect of focus fire. 3) Which is made even worse by HE shells, which mean that armour angling or armour design has no effect and thus focus fire cannot be even partially mitigated. 4) Which is made even worse by CVs, because their presence means that not only islands are useless for cover, they are useless for concealment as well. And that is what leads to what I wrote: 1) reduced skill level required to deal damage 2) increased ability to deal damage at range Thanks. Yeah, that is a very good system.

It is many reasons, yes. But all of them come down to one or both of the major problems that both CV and HE have: 1) reduced skill level required to deal damage 2) increased ability to deal damage at range And you can see both of these problems excarbarated by CVs, HE, map design, weapons accuracy... What was Steel Ocean like? From what you wrote it sounds like a far better game than World of Warships.

And as I have been saying the whole time, game needs elements that will mitigate these factors: 1) Using islands to block some of the enemy fire (doesn't work if the enemy can fire over the islands anyway - so we need more maps with tall, dense islands) 2) Using angling to mitigate the effect of the enemy fire hitting the ship (doesn't work due to HE damage mechanics - so remove those) 3) Better secondaries to make destroyers more cautious and push engagement out to longer range (but secondaries as they are have trouble hitting battleships, nevermind destroyers) 4) Better AA to push out CV planes to engage from longer range (AA right now is useless) I am generally a very aggressive player (which is probably part of the reason for my 45% win rate in a BB), so I'm rather closely acquintated with all the difficulties involved in pushing. At least at low tiers you have battleships missing each other from two clicks out... but a Vanguard can delete an enemy battleship from 15 kilometers. When you combine that with all the points I have noted previously... yeah. But pushing, when done properly, can work even at a high tier:

Range doesn't really matter here. What you need is to change general mechanics. Nerf or remove the fire damage, and make HE shells simply deal damage when hitting superstructure.

It is unethical because of its impact on game - overpowered HE is one of reasons for camping and lack of pushing. Indeed.

In general, the team with better CV wins... and that is the main problem with CVs specifically.

Except with smoke firing you can try blind couterfire (by looking where shells are coming from) or get into the smoke yourself... with a CV, you do not even have that option. But yeah, smoke firing is a problem. Smoke is there to support other ships or GTFO of the dangerous situation; IMO, smoke firing should be removed as a mechanic (of course, then you would get smoke torpedoing, but that at least makes sense). The only reason why I'm not sure about it is that removing smoke firing might make DDs more vulnerable to CVs. And it is far from the only unethical thing... HE mechanics as such are unethical...

Personally, I want a red button with label "Auto kill BB" while I am busy harassing DDs with my main guns... and even as a DD player, I would like battleship secondaries to be an actual threat, instead of being able to get so close to a BB that I am not sure my torpedoes will actually arm...

That is part of what I meant by the factors reinforcing each other... if you can hide behind an island while dealing with planes, that is okayish... but when you are a) attacked by planes, b) spotted by planes and c) in range of half-a-dozen enemy ships? Yeah, expect a quick death.

Try killing a CV in a destroyer while dodging its secondaries... you will NOT enjoy it.

And my point is that CVs do not fit into current game design. They have no reliable counter, and due to combination of practical invulnerability, ability to ignore terrain and ability to quickly cover distances, they dictate behaviour in a way that no other class does. CVs are so unbalanced that they need a heavy nerf. And you are forgetting several things: First, that AAA gets destroyed by HE and fires. Second, even such nerfed CVs would still have massive advantages in positioning, reconnaissance and so on. Third, CVs would still force destroyers to play far more carefully - and in fact would force them to escort battleships. But why would destroyers hang out with battleships if latter only serve to attract planes and serve no defensive purpose? Yeah, but the idea here is to force BBs to push by forcing them to escort DDs. Though, as usual, it is questionable whether it will work. Except CV allows basically permanent spotting, and permanent threat. That alone is not enough, but when you combine with the fact that many maps have either flat or distanced islands which allow ships to easily get focused... can't hide, can't cover, can't run. Of course nobody will push. It matters, and it matters a lot. While you are not technically wrong, you are forgetting the interaction of various elements. 1) Presence of a CV means that there is a constant threat, and any mistakes can be punished extremely harshly. There is no room for misplay, and this has a psychological effect of making players more passive. 2) Many maps being open and/or with flat islands means that it is very easy for ships to get focus-fired, and very difficult to find cover. Such islands could still offer concealment, but CVs can easily spot ships and make concealment useless. 3) HE is simply too strong - it deals too much damage, and also makes it easy to damage-farm from long range because it ignores armour and angling. And all these factors reinforce each other to make the game more passive. CVs can spot ships, making concealment useless. That would not be such a problem, if islands could offer cover - but on many maps that is not the case, meaning that getting spotted leads to instant death. And the unholy power of HE means that it doesn't matter where you hit, you are causing massive damage - which removes any reason for getting in closer while also negating a lot of the value of proper positioning. And God help you if you get attacked by a CV while fighting another ship. Not if islands provide cover. Actual cover, not just concealment. Not necessarily huge, just very tall. And yeah, that is what I was getting at. Yes, smoke would really help an aggressive battleship survive. But you also need good AA and good secondaries to fully make use of a brawling ship, and smoke would actually be far more useful against surface ships than against aircraft. Read the rest of what I wrote... CVs are far from the only problem, it is an interaction of elements. EDIT: That being said... CV can be a problem all in and by itself...

Tier IV battleship in a Tier V match... I can tell you right away it is much less of a difference than a Tier III BB in a Tier IV match...

Yeah, but from what I have seen, fires and citadels account for a significant percentage of damage of respective ammo types.

Not really. 1) A battleship or a destroyer not doing damage but tanking for the team is still providing value. 2) A destroyer scouting, spotting or capping is not doing damage but is doing more for the team than some other ships that are doing damage. 3) A ship doing most of its damage with AP is worth more than a ship doing equal damage in HE, since HE can be healed much more easily. 4) A cruiser or a carrier hunting destroyers is doing more for the team than the same ship farming damage on battleships. I do agree that WR isn't end-all, because if the entire team suicides then you won't be able to do much either... but the other stats are even less useful for determining performance. From what I have seen, Thunderer is problematic because its HE spam allows it to spawn-camp while farming damage from relative safety while providing little value for the team. Honestly, Grosser Kurfurst looks a lot more useful ship than Thunderer, but...