Earl_of_Northesk

The main problem is here, and I just realised: you do not even really play the game You don't have an idea if 14" guns at T8 can work. Your gameplay experience in T8 BB's is less than 40 games in TIrpitz, Everything you say about balance is pretty much invalid because you have no idea about the current game or the current meta. That in addition to your obvious neglect of facts and your ignorance of actual data explains a lot. Thank you god sir, I can rest now. And if you think that an AA stronger than the on on North Carolina is fine at T7, alright then, It would also still be the fastest BB there apart from Gneisenau.

So, pretty extensively nerfing it (armour, AA, probably HP) is okay, but buffing the reload of the guns by 2 seconds isn't? And completely scrapping a valid T7 design in Nelson to introduce some paper design at T8 is well? I seriously don't have words for you, your way of reasoning is illogical to the core. "At least I know which tier it belong in" Stronk argument by the way.

Still dodging my question then? Clinging on to an argument most other people do not think is valid? Awesome.

Okay, beginnen wir mal mit den basics. Du scheinst nämlich die Datenbank nicht zu verstehen, die du selbst zum Vergleich heranziehst. Also warships.today zeigt dir nur die Spieler, die sich entweder einmal selbst in die Datenbank eingegeben haben, oder aber gesucht worden sind. Was bedeutet das? Verschiedenes. Zuerst einmal: viele Neulinge sind nicht enthalten. Was bedeutet das für die Statistiken der letzten 2 Wochen und eventuelle Anstiege? Neulinge sind dort nicht enthalten, sondern überproportional viele erfahrene Spieler. Der Witz ist aber, dass in den all-time-Statistiken dieser Verhältnis deutlich ausgeglichener ist. Warum? Dadurch bedingt, dass die Seite erst bei Erstsuche trackt, aber ab diesem Zeitpunkt alle bereits erfahrenen Ergebnisse der Datenbank hinzugefügt werden, aber OHNE Zeitstempel, WANN die Gefechte stattfanden (diese Daten gibt die API von WG nicht her und muss von den Internetseiten selbst gespeichert werden), werde ich, wenn ich jetzt zum ersten mal jemanden Suche, der gerade erst bei der Mutsuki ist, zwar seine Isokaze Daten in die Datenbank einspeisen, aber NUR in den All-Time Speicher. In dem Reiter für die Gefechte der letzten 2 Wochen tauchen seine Gefechte nicht auf, da er sie, zumindest für warships.today, nicht in den letzten 2 Wochen gespielt hat! Verstanden? Was bedeutet das für CV's? Du hast in den Daten der letzten 2 Wochen überwiegend professionelle Sealclubber. Das die Neulinge in Carrier nass machen ist kein Wunder, der Einfluss der Klasse ist dann überproportional und erleichtert hohe Winraten. Okay, haben wir das auch aus dem Weg. Und damit auch den angeblichen starken Anstieg bei der Isokaze in den letzten 2 Wochen. Weiter gehts: T6 Bestenliste: Premiums und Träger T7: Premiums T8: Nagelneue Schiffe und die Benson Die Kagero war zu schwach, da brauchen wir uns nicht drüber unterhalten. Auf T10 ist alles, die Winrate betreffend, ziemlich nah beieinander. Frage mich aber eh was das soll, die Schiffe sind zum Großteil eh bald weg. Schau dir die Neuen doch erst einmal an.

YOur core argument is "guns are weak, thus T7". I've never said the guns are strong, just that they are enough for T8 and it will be properly placed there. Because with her package at T7, she will be overpowered. All you ever did was denying the guns could be balanced at T8 and thus the whole ship would be unviable at that tier, while never actually tackling the issue of how she can be balanced at T7. And yes, far more arguments than armour have been brought up and I never mentioned battle reports in this thread, because this would be pretty pointless. Come on now, it's your last chance of gaining back a bit of respect.

Please tell me then how you would balance a modern treaty battleship at T7. Because that's the core of your argument and so far, you are falling short of being able to answer this core question.

Weil? Vor ihr ist ein Carrier mit wenigen Spielen, der sowieso immer etwas außer Konkurrenz fährt. Überhaupt sind Träger aufgrund der Schwächer der Datenbank (Neulinge nicht enthalten) etwas schwierig zu beurteilen, da ein guter Träger immer sehr rasiert, wenn der gegnerische nichts kann. Fast die komplette restliche Liste besteht aus Premiumschiffen, die zum Teil ausschließlich für sehr erfahrene Spieler zugänglich sind (preorder-Schiffe, Alpha und Beta Rewards) aber auch in jedem Fall wahrscheinlich mit Kapitänen 10 Punkte Plus gefahren werden und somit immer schwer vergleichbar sind. Was bleibt dann noch? Isokaze und Clemson. Beide zu stark. Außerdem ist dein Vergleich eh Mist, es geht nur um den internen Vergleich der 4er DD's. Was interessiert da die Svietlana.

Das Gewinnerteam bekommt auch einen Credit-Bonus. Die Verteilung der Credits erfolgt jedoch nach anderen Maßstäben als die Verteilung der XP, deswegen kann es Abweichungen zur relativen XP geben.

Which has been proven wrong again and again but at this point, it really is pointless to discuss with you. You are just ignoring every argument brought up against your position, it's tiresome.

Jetzt mal abgesehen von deiner sealclubberei, die Datenmenge auf warships.today ist SEHR groß. Zehntausende Spieler sind dort registriert, wenn, rein statistisch betrachtet, wohl schon 1000 reichen würden um einigermaßen verlässliche Aussagen zum Balancing treffen zu können. Und wenn ein Schiff für den "dummen Kevin" (Wortwahl?) ist, dann wohl die Deppenkaze, die alle 30 Sekunden Torpedos spammt die ein Schlachtschiff oneshotten

Working as intended. If you do not open them, or do not decide which type you want, until the day ends, the game will do it for you.

He probably meant what I said and it is true. Rudder shift is far more important than some random 90m of turning circle. The questions is: how fast do you get your bow turning into torpedoes? For that, the turning circle is pretty much irrelevant.

Sorry Icey, that's actually wrong. And I think both of you have not gotten the concept of linear....btw, it is non-linear at the moment, being relatively more effective at ranges below 3km's, increasing relatively linear after that.

Tirpitz is, in my humble opinion, only an easy target because it is mostly played by....not very good players... Although I agree, it's AA isn't a problem. Gneisenau, Bismarck? Yeah, right there. Even Bayern can be a nightmare for a same tier CV. Losing random planes to them at their max AA range is costly in a carrier lacking reserves.

What's the comparison with T10's even good for? And btw, rudder shift is way more important, Bismarck trumps every other high tier BB in that regard. Combined with hydro, that's just straight up OP.

Since the reload is that short and normally, you are not always the first target for a DD, it might as well be active all the time. Hydro needs to go. Seeing a Kurfürst dodging wave after wave of torpedoes is just ridiculous. Taking to account we were once told these ships biggest weakness would be torpedoes (and it was right once), this went entirely into the wrong direction.

Well in regards to German BB's, I have to agree. Hydro needs to go because torps were once supposed to be their weakness, now it's almost impossible to hit them outside of VERY close range. Also the AA, while overall not as good as American AA, is way too strong at range. I think the effects of that, especially with the T4 AA skill, where underestimated by the developers. Historically German AA was pretty weak, now we have a situation where it is arguably not the best, but the most effective in game.

Since Yugumo is the only T9 in the tree, I'm not sure what it's worth to compare her with the new T8

Takru, since very supertest is announced in the patchnotes ("you may see those ships in battle, driven by our supertesters" or something along the lines) I think it's safe to say we can say these ships haven't been livetested yet. The German DD's that is.

Why was she even there? And what kind of event was that?

We have established that and I never disagreed. I just think we have different opionions about the consequences in game, which I don't think are as negative as you think. Tbh, we will have to wait and see until they arrive in ST to settle this argument

Since you talked about the Nelson being a bypass to a T10 in a slow line, without ever mentioning G3's position in your proposal, you should probably just write it down properly. While your first paragraph here STILL hints at you wanting to Nelson at T8. Okay. And I don't give a crap about fandmade tech trees from random people, because most people have no clue. I remember the fan made tech trees before the German battleships came out. Even the ones made by "gaming magazines". Atrocious. I don't care.

As in, no one. Nelson would have, to sum it up: - the worst speed of any T8 BB (by far) - second worst armour behind Amagi - the worst guns (marginally better than the 14" guns on KGV which you are advocating so heavily against, while historically having atrocious disperson) - AA only superior to Amagi - least HP And you advocate against small buffs for KGV while wanting to give Nelson completely ahisotrical guns? At this point, I doubt your cognitive abilities.

[edited]

Okay, we basically got reload and traverse out of the way then right? Because as I see it, that is something WG makes up along the way, at least the traverse. We can also agree the armour is pretty good for T8 and would also be sufficient for T9, although it can be argued how much more efficient it would be game balancing wise. Still, T8 easily. As far as I remember the late war AA suite of the ship (of course this could be tweaked into a earlier war suite as well, I realize that) would be pretty amazing. 8x2 DP 133mm (we don't have them in game yet do we?), 20x4 40 mms, various 20mm guns including 12x4 20mm and 2x8 20mm...AA would be actually awesome. And now I'm talking about the guns from a mechanics point of view, since we seem to have a different one here. If König and Scharnhorst (and Gneisenau in comparison to her) have showed my anything, the number of barrels and the numbers of shells per minute can be quite more important than the actual penetration. Because you could make the same argument (can't overmatch bow armour of cruisers, could get rushed) about Scharnhorst. Does it happen though? No. Because you can't just sail straight at a battleship in 98% of situations. Maybe in late game. But if you do in a normal situation, something else will punish you, simple as that. And regular pen damage will still happen! Remember, you don't need overmatch to pen, you can do a regular pen. So as I say it, a likely agile (since WG only cares about ship length it seems) battleships with good DPM and weak alpha, but very good AA can definetly work at T8 and easily so.