Bl4ckh0g

I think MOBA-s usually try to balance the individual heroes rather than the "class" they are in. This "everything must be equal" is more of an MMORPG,RPG class balancing style.

That really depends on which guns you use. The 203 mm guns can deal with even the Yamato's armor you just have to be uncomfortably close, but generally from less than 5-4 km They can penetrate most of the Battleships belt armor. I've dealt 6 k damage per salvo against a NC with the Myoko beforehand, I just had to be 6 km from him.

Is there some ships that can be released as premiums? Like some cruisers, destroyers or just the Tegetthoff-class?

I know what you're saying, but it's not how SC2 works - shown by the fact that the little marine is the most "whined-about" unit in the game next to immortals. It's also not a fair comparison since both those units are not in the same tier (zergling vs marine would be the correct one). I do understand what you mean, like marauder being a counter to roach (there's the right one ;) ) - but that's not the whole game. All in all, the "RPS" system doesn't work brilliantly, shown by the all-to-well documented protoss deathball. Or templars generally being the answer to everything. Not saying SC2 is completely unbalanced, but the amount of things make a difference there as well (it's about cost effectiveness - some units can slaughter their supposed counters if in the right amount, even though cheaper) is too high to say it's a well working RPS system. In my opinion anyway. Just as a sidenote. I only really played Wings of Liberty, so no idea about current stuff. But theory is that every single unit has a counter, against which said unit will always fall behind unless our unit has the preferential circumstances, meaning a Cruiser will be dead by a battleship unless the cards are in the cruisers hand, same with destroyers and battleships. And actually MOBA-s kind of follow a same-ish balancing theory where an AP carry will win against a support all the time, but still a support has a role and such. Thing is, that you cannot make the cruisers what they are not meant to be. They are the junglers, not the tanks nor the AP carries.( DDs are kinda like a heavy hitter support)

I am trolling you with logical thinking and common sense. How deep have we fallen? It matters not, for we are in the age of death and suffering. The end is close and redemption is at hand.

It's not about race vs race balance. It's about unit type vs unit type balance. like Roaches counter marine, and such. Rewards are based on percent of HP removed not based on number of health points removed, the game already encourages to engage the same or smaller class of vehicles rather than bigger ones. And really nice to use the same old same old this is not a simulator argument, but that does not justifies ridiculing reality and forsaking logical thinking. You are so far up your delusional world that you cannot grasp the reality that equality is non-existent between these ship classes You cannot possibly believe that giving every other class the same chances against each other in equal terms is a plausible solution. That contradicts such a basic connection of the game with reality that you cannot possibly link this game to real life anymore. Meaning that based on your ideal this game should be categorized as fantasy arcade combat game featuring ships that look like their historical counterparts, but without any other link in-between them, making this game LITERALLY on the level of games like Kancolle. Stop with this thing that you make WG look like that they knowingly sabotaging their own game or they developing this game without any actual knowledge of game development. They are testing. And testing means observing something from as many different angles as possible. This current game balance situation is only temporary. You cannot balance this game on the assumption that WG will revolve their whole game around the battleships. If you cannot accept that then I have no business with you anymore.

Oh yes, campaign for buffing cruisers so we can drift even further from reality, do not even consider trying to argue about how we need CV and DD buffs instead to divert back. Genius. Let's make cruisers stronger so destroyers become even more useless. Let's talk about how WG made bad balance decisions and try to get them to make even worse ones. Let's make it utterly impossible to implement new nations and lines. Let's forget about common sense, Let's ruin ships that are generally okay. Let's just accept every decision the developers made It's not like we are here to test them and tell them how bad they were and so that they can actually fix stuff from our feedback. Always come with the HE argument, always try to balance things based on present status of the game, forget the concept of the "future". It is not like games like StarCraft, and every RTS ever made taught us that you can actually make a RPS balance system. Nah, We need to melt every single class into one grey glob of metal.... It's also completely impossible that the game developers actually want to expand their game. Or that they actually care about it and stuff. Nah, let's assume that they are gorillas that eat bananas all day and steal our money. GENIUS!!! Edit: Forget to add: Yeah, let's make he damage dealing our main balancing parameter and kill off every chance this game will ever gonna get to be in competitive E-sport

What the hell are you even talking about? I am always vehemently against battleships being the center of the game. In my opinion Carriers should be the main force to reckoned with, not the battleships. And hell, Damage is not important! The game gives rewards based on the percent of health point damage you did, not pure numbers!! Ever played a destroyer? I had games where I did 25-30 k damage against other destroyers, sinking two of them and receiving way more experience and credits than dealing 50 k damage against battleships. You have no idea how the reward system works, Do you? It is ALWAYS better to damage same class ships because you always get better rewards for them! The game is trying to be balanced as a rock-paper-scissor type, but you guys who only played like 5 games in your lifetime just come here and start speaking nonsense with these everything must be equal BS. You are blabbering ridiculous nonsense stuff about making the game balanced by generalizing classes and not even thinking about that If the game would be balanced in hindsight of historical and logical standpoints Battleships would be simply regulated as carrier escort because they would be useless in a battle! You see me as yet another battleship lover when you clearly have no idea what kind of posts I made in the past. I want a game where every class has a role and cruisers would not be reduced to miniature Battleships with more speed and maneuverability. Really funny how you do not even consider things like carriers and destroyers countering battleships, I guess because this game only needs two classes,eh? Godlike Battleships against agile Battleship food with some fangs a.k.a. Cruisers, huh? Ignore the two other classes, let's just make them masochist dreams, because they are harder to play.... Because the people only need brainless gunslinger classes, forget balancing something in a global level, I guess most of people cannot comprehend the whole "Big Picture" concept, huh? I am fed up with people like you who have only the capability to balance things by generalizing them into a grey paste. You people are the ones who believe that everything and everyone must be equal in order to comfort yourself into this grey, mindless beehive where the individual is non-existent. I congratulate you, you actually made me forget my exams with your ridiculous statements. And believe me I would join the navy without a single thought, but my nation's "navy" consists of 2 freaking boats.

Check out Lightbaron with his 340k Zao game Also I do not understand why should we apply RPG-like class balancing into a WWII era naval game. It's not going to work without distorting common sense and further connections to reality. It kind of worked in WoT, because tanks are more limited by technology of their time than ships were. You cannot really made a fast tank with good main armament and protection, you'd have to sacrifice something, speed, armor or gun. Until the later half of the 20th century you could not really make a tank that had everything and that's why the different tank types existed. Light tanks were fast, but lightly armored and armed, heavies had good armament and protection and mediums were in-between those two. In Modern Warfare that's no longer true, You can make a 60 ton tank accelerate past 70 km/h, An M1128 Stryker do not have anything that makes it better than an M1A2 Abrams, It's plain worse or barely better in most categories, but It's helluva cheaper and that's why they use it. That's the case with cruisers, They are barely better than Battleships, especially high tier ones. A Baltimore is plain worse in every category(except maneuverability) than the Iowa, It just is. A Baltimore had worse AA, main armament, protection,range and they had the same speed. The US Navy built Baltimores because they were cheaper and could be built faster than an Iowa class battleship. If Nations would have had the resources, nobody would be bothered to build cruisers ever. They had nothing over a battleship, Their only advantage was their speed, but even then, There were battlecruisers. Cruisers were built because they could be built faster, cheaper, in greater numbers and they needed less logistical support than a Battleship. But in a battle, There was nothing they had over a battleship or battlecruiser. Absolutely nothing. By assuming that they should be equal on the battlefield you effectively remove any logical sense from the whole class and global class balance. You cannot apply WoT and RPG-like balancing logic here. If you want to look for similar balancing problem look at AW, they have the same problem. A modern MBT is simply the best possible vehicle you can have on the battlefield, everything else is just there to support them or replace them to some degree. Nations build AFVs, and things like Stryker MGS, and BMPT Terminators, because they are cheaper and require less logistical support, not because they have an advantage over an MBT. You simply cannot balance cruisers to take on battleships. Because there is absolutely no sense in that. That simply does not make any sense. I know that cruiser captains should given a chance against them and all, but this is not the way. In my opinion, torpedoes should be buffed to make destroyers more effective with some buffing to CVs to counter battleships. Cruisers should occupy a spot where they are relatively safe from carriers and destroyers, and thus They'd have more freedom on the battlefield and via wolf-packing they can make a push or flanking maneuver. Battleships on the other hand would require constant air cover and DD, CL screening to be able to perform their duties. This is a really heavy team work burdened option, but I think It still beats going into Cuckoo-land.

They could be used in some kind of low tier PvE mission where You try to take a port with tier 3-4 ships, but other than that they cannot be possibly used in this game.

That's because, the weird foreheads and blades are just made-up stereotypes to confuse the puny people of Earth while we prepare for the final assault... Damn, maybe I shouldn't have said that...now they are coming for me

Nah because when I say: [edited] then you have no idea whether I wrote that sentence in Klingon or Hungarian

Instead of the Juneau, The Oakland would be better (Atlanta subclass, with same main armament as the Juneau, but with more sensible AA for tier 6) Other than that yeah +1 for ya

She has 16-17 seconds. And that's acceptable for the damage and punch of the guns. Only problem is the bad turret placement and turret train rate, but that can be countered with the extensive use of your rudder and right mouse button.

Against cruisers? AP Against everything else? HE most of the time. When I'm in close range against a BB with a heavy cruiser (less than 6 km) I tend to use AP You can rack up a hefty sum of citadels against other cruisers in the Furutaka.

The Omaha has 6" guns which can barely penetrate the Furutaka's belt armor from ranges exceeding 8,2 kilometers, meanwhile the Furutaka can happily penetrate the side armor of a friggin' Kongo class battleship from less than 15-17 kilometers.(hell knows actually but around 12-13 km is certain) Does that sound so bad to you? Edit: I know, the Omaha is good, but the ships play differently, one is a heavy cruiser while the other one is a light/scout cruiser...

That's like literally the last three rows of what I posted

I just tried to correct my post, well anyway I was kind of wrong Yamato and such tier 9 and tier 10 battleships might be protected from these bombs, but some BBs could suffer from these. Well, you have to consider that if a CA will see dive bombers coming and he knows that they can potentially carry AP bombs then he'll activate his AA when the DBs go for their run, and most of those bombs will miss, while battlesheeps cannot really do that.

Weren't the Yamato and the Musashi sunk by AP bombs and torpedoes? I think I've read somewhere that's there isn't really sufficient deck armor that protects against AP bombs, bombs that are dropped with a speed of 150-200 m/s at an impact angle of 45° and a mass of 400ish kg

Isn't that kinda backwards? Cruisers are more maneuverable and have the AA ability to negate the AP bombs while battlesheeps are big, and slow. AP bombs gonna hurt mostly battlesheeps I think.

I'm guessing you never tried to support a BB in a CA,eh? Also, A cruisers job is to screen for the fleet and in my eye the fleets most important asset should be the carrier not the battlesheep, as battlesheeps are also regulated to carrier screening. Fire is essentially the only useful feature of the dive bombers(along with crits), so yeah If you cannot manage your (half minute long)repair and health potion abilities that's your fault not the dive bomber's.

You want a freaking Des Moines in tier 5 matey? Srsly people always this stuff with the Furutaka, bloody ship's only problem is the slow turret train rate. Every single one of you want to roflstomp every else in OP ships and refuse to appreciate the fun ones. Bloody Gorgeous

That stuff in the Montana, Iowa and Furutaka when the gun module and the stat description contradict each other, is that fixed yet? Montana and Iowa having 406 mm/45 modules, but 406 mm/50 guns on the stats, same with Furutaka 203 mm type 3 module and 200 mm type 1 in the stats

Here I fixed it for you.