El2aZeR

I use this:

Actually official art has been released of her.

Still better than 70% of the playerbase.

I mean, okay, I can kinda understand the reasoning behind removing the premium CVs (as they'll likely have to offer a refund for every premium CV after the rework just like they did with the premium smoke cruisers after the smoke change), but everything else? I don't get it. Probably should be glad I don't.

Could also be taken as a design issue (BB AP wasn't meant to do this kind of damage to DDs) that has negative influence on the balance of the game. Regardless of how you twist it however, it remains an issue independent of whether or not DDs have more potential influence on a match than BBs. Then again with your extremely flawed view of balance I'm not surprised you're incapable of understanding that. Well, I can only view the relation of the four classes from the beginning of CBT, which is why I arrived at my previous conclusion. No idea what happened in alpha. I'm guessing you are not allowed to discuss in detail what exactly has happened?

Clearly what I said. But hey, what can I expect from someone whose very definition of balance is wrong? :) Here's the deal: Much like StarCraft (which you have admitted is a well balanced game with which I would concur) WoWs employs a counter-based system when it comes to class on class interaction, except the counters are distributed among the different classes. In the basic essence that means the "counter-circle" works (or at least should work) like this: CVs -> DDs -> BBs -> Cruisers -> CVs But, much like singular role classes, singular counter classes would be not only boring but incredibly awkward to play. This is why every class is capable of fighting any other to a certain degree in relation to the overall system. This is also where individual counters come in for the different abilities and roles each class has along with teamplay as well as the ability to swap such characteristics around (e.g. Zao is pretty good at fighting BBs but sucks vs CVs as a trade-off). The point however is that no matter how overpowered an ability is, as long as there is a viable counter to it (accessibility of which depending on the system, roles of the class and power of said ability) it is fine. As a basic example torpedoes have high potential damage, which is why they are easily countered by WASD hax. Thus, based on the balancing system this game employs, BBs being capable of demolishing DDs while disregarding the mechanic given to them to do this very job, instead using one that is already used against everything else, represents a balancing issue regardless of whether or not DDs are more influential on a match. In fact, the potential match influence of a class is almost completely independent from the balancing system as it is a design choice made when drawing up which roles a class, or even the individual lines should and shouldn't succeed in, naturally favoring some while shafting others. Which is still fine because every role is both viable and needed. Therefore yes, it is in fact more than reasonable. It is a necessity. As for the amount of whine threads, we should simply accept there are whiners within every group and leave it at that. Trying to form some sort of statistic now is hardly possible considering all of the older threads have been deleted.

...True.

I would call it an observation rather. Your failure to once again understand asymmetrical balancing is astounding. Hint: It is not the goal to have every fundamentally different class have the same amount of potential influence on a match as this is impossible to achieve based on the limited amount of roles you are able to distribute.

And you've just proven my point. I'll edit in the reason why later, am a bit busy now. Sry, playing Mino is a bit of a full-time thing. ^^ Alright, so you're having fun dodging shells, no? Take the interaction (aka WASD) away and what are you left with? Nothing but taking damage and eventually sinking. You can hardly tell me that is fun. Thus, the interaction with a mechanic is fun, being targeted by a mechanic is not and rightfully so.

Give me a single serious MP game in which it is fun to be the target of a mechanic which has the express purpose to make you die/lose.

Numbers are kinda irrelevant when it comes to the legitimacy of these complaints. E.g. when a lot of DD players are complaining about how their torps don't oneshot everything, that's whining. When a lot of DD players are complaining about how BB AP is capable of wiping almost half of their hitpoints in a single hit, that's a legitimate complaint. Threads made from a DD/cruiser perspective often contain legitimate complaints (even if their proposed solutions frequently aren't exactly stellar just like in this thread). From BBs on the other hand it's almost always whining.

Indeed and I definitely look forward to that. Still, it means that there will be one less cruiser capable of air denial in mid tiers. Certainly not what is needed.

That is assuming the purpose of cruisers is to counter DDs, which it is not. In fact, it's kinda the other way around as you've correctly deduced. The purpose of cruisers is to deny the enemy CV. Something they utterly fail at in low tiers, kinda do depending on the nation in mid tiers and are extremely good at in high tiers (a progression that is exactly as idiotic as it sounds). The role of DD hunter was forced upon cruisers once CVs went extinct and they're not particularly good at it. Which really shouldn't surprise anyone.

Yes they do. You always have that as a mental checklist when selecting a target. As for your example, unless you're dumb as all out you will not attempt to strike a target which will take you over a quarter of the match duration for perhaps even negligible outcome because the enemy CV has either seen what you're doing or correctly predicted what target you will try to strike. And no, you will not try to feed your planes to someone either. What you will do is try to keep relevant targets spotted so that your team will hopefully create openings which you can exploit. Even if it were my only target I would still think twice about whether it is worth it to waste my time striking a BB camping on the other side of the map as that will have a negligible impact on the match and waste one of the precious few strikes I'll be able to fly per match. Midway nowadays enjoys parity with Haku, if not a slight edge. Essex is still lagging behind a bit but she's definitely workable. Spawns is an entirely different issue that WG has failed to address over the months. Idiotic spawns remain idiotic regardless of CV presence. Same with the hilariously stupid progression in plane survivability and AA (best example here would be the Cleve, a T6 cruiser having better AA than most higher tier ones along with being one of the only cruisers capable of doing their job in air defense in the entire mid tier bracket). What I meant was that it is an entirely different environment than in high tiers, thus an entirely different issue. CVs in low tiers are far too strong, I think everyone with half a brain can agree on that. The problem here is that WG did a soft nerf on them that negatively impacted almost everything while utterly ignoring the problem at hand. A plane survivability nerf along with reduction in torpedo alpha would've easily done the trick. It depends on whether or not the general gameplay concept and especially the teamplay aspect of CVs is to be kept (what I mean is the concept of CVs enforcing teamplay, not the ability of CVs to teamplay). If it is not, that opens up an entirely different can of worms due to the fact that every class including CVs will need to be self-sufficient.

Which is why they buffed the Essex & the Midway amirite? As I stated previously, low tiers is a problem in itself. So why should CVs be dependent on teamplay then? If you don't want teamplay then CVs shouldn't be reliant on it either. That means removal of all AA defenses and upping the alpha of bombs and air dropped torps. The game is fundamentally conceptualized as a team game. To remove that aspect means a complete redesign from the ground up.

Honestly, I don't. It just makes managing your positioning in relation to your concealment more important. (Which is something the average player is incapable of doing but hey, that ain't my problem. )

Which is another hilarious misconception most people seem to believe. Contrary to popular belief, a CV can NOT have the choice of any target on the field. There are strict and extremely unforgiving rules you have to follow when choosing a target unless you want to take disproportionate losses for minuscule or even no damage dealt. These are: Restrictions by AA High tier cruisers are capable of projecting extremely hostile AA bubbles of over 17km in diameter in which any squad that spends more than 5 seconds in it will take hilarious losses. Have a single cruiser on one flank means that, unless it is dealt with by your teammates, you're completely incapable of striking said flank. Have two cruisers split between two flanks and the entire relevant playing field is essentially closed to you on some of the smaller maps or maps in which caps are in close proximity to each other. Things obviously get worse the more such cruisers there are in the game. Concentration of AA by multiple ships (necessary number is as small as two and as big as 4 depending on nation, tier and class, with exception in low tiers but that is a problem in itself) does essentially the same thing. Restriction by time/efficiency You have by far the least amount of attacks per game. Your response time is humongous if you've completely [edited] this up. You need to find a target that gives you the most return for the least time spent (which to be fair isn't that hard in the current meta as most of the playerbase is full of *insert long string of insults here*). That means that yeah, you could strike the one camping BB in the back by flying a path that will take you over 5 minutes before you can get another strike in the air, but that'd be completely, utterly idiotic even if the strike is successful. Restrictions by enemy air opposition This is a factor heavily dependent on the enemy CV, but if he knows what he is doing the mere presence of fighters will deter you from making any strikes on a potential target. To say that CVs can strike and kill any target on the map simply shows you have understood absolutely nothing about CV play.

Hint: It's the former.

A simple look in the armor viewer will tell you that that's not true. Like the new citadel on T9+ USN BBs it bounces below and above the waterline, as such it should be considered a waterline citadel. You also have to adjust for perspective in your head as the view isn't orthographic. There are two ways to citadel a KM BB nowadays: - shoot through the bow/stern and utilize a small gap in the armor scheme (this has an extremely small margin of error, if the angle is too high your shells will bounce off the bow/stern, if the angle is too small your shells cannot hit the gap anymore) - shoot at the waterline when said KM BB is making a full turn towards you (this works with every BB)

Amagi & Kii have a waterline citadel + turtleback (albeit a "bad" one) which is infinitely more reliable to hit than a completely submerged one, as has been proven by previous tests. That said, RN BB citadels aren't impossible to hit, however like the turtleback on Amagi/Kii they do provide complete immunity at close range (barring wrong maneuvering) and require a certain distance before such shots become possible (for T9+ USN BBs e.g. it's 8km and above, all other lines require a bit more distance since they have better shell arcs. Yes, better shell arcs actually gives you a smaller chance to hit submerged citadels due to the nature of underwater ballistics). But even at such distances citadel hits remain extremely rare unlike with Amagi/Kii. Still inferior to what the Germans have, though.

Most of them don't, Khaba and Udaloi being the only exceptions (unless I missed one?). It can be seen in the armor viewer. So technically speaking a shell "hitting" the barbette will just pass under the turret unless the DD is one of the aforementioned exceptions.

It is possible to citadel full broadside high tier RN BBs at ranges of ~8km and above for USN BBs (a bit more range is needed for BBs with better shell arcs due to the nature of underwater ballistics). To do so you must aim for the waterline then sacrifice at least 3 goats to RNGesus.

Considering the barbette nowadays is a module (part of the turret), shouldn't it simply "eat" the shell?

Well, time for some non-Touhou tra- HA, YOU THOUGHT I WOULD POST SOMETHING NOT TOUHOU RELATED? xi-on - Illusion Barrier (Spring Lane + Necrofantasia) Fantasy Maiden Wars 3 OST - From Now On, We'll... (Lullaby of a Deserted Hell + Hellfire Mantle) Yuuhei Satellite - The Gensokyo the Gods Loved Floating Cloud - Heaven of Scarlet Perception WAVE - Fate of Sixty Years

Is balans comrade!