thiextar

Not until carriers are fixed, that would just add to the problems.

Using sectors properly requires about as much skill as counting to 10, and it does nothing to defend against air attack.

Why are you defending carriers anyways? You if anyone should know exactly how op they are right now. What is it, 79% wr in midway? You have broken every bloody damage record in the game in carriers...

You dont release a roadmap for minor balance changes.

You do know that wargaming said they would release a roadmap of future cv changes mid may right? What they posted on the dev blog right now is just a starter lol.

rn already have battleships, wargaming wont add another line until all the other major tech trees have their own battleships lines. Gameplay-wise, its important that as many tech trees as possible are fleshed out, rather than bunching all interesting ships into three tech trees just because they happened to exist in real life. This is an arcade game, gameplay comes first

Yes, you can use stats for balancing, that is the entire point of them. Anyways, wargaming have much more detailed statistics that arent publicly available. In these statistics, they weight the results of the ship, vs the skill of the player achieving said results, thus creating a balance curve where performance is normalised vs player skill. Its these stats that wargaming balance after, but we dont have access to them ,so we have to use the next best thing. And those 400k hakuryu games are just as relevant to balance as the opposite end of the spectrum: The low damage games. Statistical anomalies works both ways.

But the line is interesting, it offers unique gameplay in comparison to every other bb line, what more could you possibly want?

Then order the stats by the top 5% of players, that will remove nearly all of the statistical influx that carriers may have. Still shows the same results, that t10 carriers are drastically overperforming on every stat. All im saying is, dont complain about nerfs, when they are clearly needed.

Here are t10 carriers: https://wows-numbers.com/ship/4179605488,Midway/ Here are t10 battleships, keep in mind that bourgogne is only available for steel, so it will have an influx in stats: https://wows-numbers.com/ship/4277090288,Montana/ Now sort by top 50% players, to get rid of statistical anomalies. Carriers have more: Winrate than battleships. Avarege damage than battleships Significantly higher k/d than battleships Significantly higher avarege xp than battleships more planes shot down than battleships More average kills than battleships And these statistics dont even show spotting, one of the things that carriers do better than any other class. Seems to me like they are drastically overperforming in every statistic, and need a lot more nerfing than they have gotten so far.

They nerfed khaba like half a dozen times after it was released, that was my point. Those nerfs to th khaba were warranted, even if captains of the khaba werent happy with it. Same goes for this situaton. And whats wrong with gneiss? Its actually a well balanced ship...

It doesnt matter how many times a class or ship has been nerfed previously. If its still overperforming, or bad for the game, you nerf / rework it until its balanced / not broken. Khabarovsk is a living example if this.

Nerfing carriers is an improvement, not to the carrier player, but to the meta and balance of the game. When they say they are improving the class, they mean that they are trying to improve the balance and meta, not buffing the class.

But in 4/5ish matches, you didnt face rts carriers, so in most of the battles, we had a carrier-free meta.

The fact remains, we got the blob meta at the same time as carrier rework, coincidence? The meta we had before was waaay more active, and actually rewarded flanking, rather than punishing it.

Pretty sure you are the first one ^^

Battleships cant go from one flank to the other in 30 seconds. Battleships cant hunt destroyers. Battleships cant spot and abuse flankers, or any ship that dares stray from the blob. Battleships cant stay at complete safety and be effective. Battleships dont have by far the best spotting capabilities of any class in the game. But most importantly: Battleships dont force a boring and campy blob meta.

Congrats, you quoted the exact problem of carriers, "A cv does any damage to any ship" A cv can do damage to any ship, anywhere, any time. That is exactly the problem. It is what is causing the blob meta, and it is the blob meta that people hate.

Wargaming literally stated this as the reason we dont have a cap of 1 cv per match. Here is the source: You should read the whole post for a full understanding of the subject, but if you are lazy, here are some highlights: "So basically, introducing hard CV cap that is below average CV player inflow into MM queue will cause incomplete teams and snowball effect at the respective battle tier. And for sure, a CV will feel more beneficial in a match against 4 or 5 regular ships, while other players won't." "And, as I hopefully showed, it's not about "hey, that CV can wait for 3 minutes, who cares" or "hey, I'm okay with waiting for 1 more minute to get 1 CV game". If it was that easy, we would have gladly done it already."

Then you simply do not understand maths.

The soft limit at tier 10 works, because the cv population in tier 10 is close to 9%... A hard limit at all tiers wouldnt work, because the cv population is much higher, thus there isnt physically enought surface ships to create enough 1 cv battles for all carriers in queue. This would result in the queue growing and growing, not ever emptying faster than new players fill it up.

Thats the beauty with math and science. You don't have to agree with it for it to be correct.

If one nation built the biggest and strongest battleship in the world, you would obviously want that ship at tier 10. But now what? How can any other nation compete with that ship? Seeing as it was the biggest battleship ever build, is it just supposed to be overpowered? Of course not, thats why the other nations need to have imagined tier 10 ships capable of competing with the biggest battleship in the world.

Thats not how numbers work.... Let me illustrate with a simple example: Lets just say the the cv population is 18% of the total amount of players in the queue. this means there are 4 carriers for every 22 normal ships in the queue, which in turn means that with a hard limit of 1 carrier per battle, 2 of those carriers would get into a match with the 22 ships, and then there are 2 carriers that cant get into a match. Then the next set of 4 carriers and 22 ships arrive in the queue, but we already have the 2 carriers that didnt get into the last match in the queue. Now after this match has started there will be 4 carriers in the queue, and no normal ships. This will just increase more and more and more, and make the waiting time longer and longer until it reaches close to infinity, and you only get into a match when some other carrier has enough and leaves the queue. Tl;dr it is impossible to limit carriers to 1 per battle without first decreasing the carrier population to 9% of the playerbase. Simple mathematics.

Its almost as if i stated exactly this in the very next post to the one you quoted...