HaachamaShipping

Premium consumables, camos, upgrades, even the special upgrades all are grindable within a decent aount of time. The likely hardest to get as a complete F2P player would be the 3 million upgrade for T9/10, which however still is pretty cheap compared to actually getting he ship. Legendary commanders like Yamamoto or Halsey require a decently high skill and luck to get their insane traits (while Kuznetsov is an issue by himself, given how he just requires to lose enough hp without dying outright. But nowhere as insane as this). NTC is basically a set of significant buffs that are locked behind a grind that is brutal and absolutely unmanageable for any new player. If the modules on your ship didn't just cost like 50% of the ship's cost max, but needed a year to grind out, then you can guess how well that'd be perceived and how fun it is for new players to play a year against people who got improved versions of the ship and smash their face in in randoms. Do you think that's enjoyable first experiences for people? Why would anyone stick around for that? Also, there's to be considered that this initial proposal was so absolutely out of touch and bonkers, that even if you folks work on mitigating the effects, you can't expect us to trust you to not bring out even worse ideas in the future, which isn't helped by the fact you are selling a NO with booster, as if to rub it into our face that this is all about getting more money out of people who fork over cash for easier benefits and that this idea is presented and already cancelling it altogether seems unthinkable. But well, I can't help it, if this is the hill the WoWS devs decide to have their game die on, then I can't do much but leave. Which is utterly sad, but yeah. Yeah, I don't envy your position right now, though it makes me no less angry at what is being done to a game I really like. Have a nice day.

Legendary mods are cenceptually sidegrades. In practice, not every sidegrade is worth the same, some are great, some are crap, but overall, every one of them comes with a trade-off. If any mod is too strong, then that is a siple balance issue to be adressed and people did voice that concern multiple times about mods like Yamato LM. But NTC is different. It's just straight up buffs. No pretense at a sidegrade, this is a pure upgrade, even conceptually.

First off, Fiji would be better than Belfast for this, as Fiji gets torps too that benefit from the buffs and doesn't suffer from firing HE that cannot pen T8 BB decks ever, while having halfed fire chance. Fiji can at least AP pen or torp. Second, You can likely get even lulzier results by just buffing out Leander, which is not just less likely to run into T8s and t9s, but also is only 200 m of true stealth torping. Third, keep in mind, RN cruiser armour might be buffed. I doubt the response will hold up in the end, but so far, yes, the RN CLs get noral plating, it seems.

Leander would likely become the best T6 non-prem you could ask for at T6 aong cruisers. Though tbf, it already is very strong. But getting competitive armour, having an extra repair party, having no need to spec into IFHE while having AP that at least has some chance to deal with high tier targets and lastly, having 8.8 km torps on a 9 km concealment is pretty insane. If Perth wasn't in a non-grindable nation and with same AP, it would be even more absurd, given it would actually be able to stealth torp ships. Also, lol at 30 mm Mino getting confirmed.

Well, wouldn't be Independence day art without Independence.

If these changes would be applied to RN cruisers, that'd be insane. I would think they won't but given what we heard so far, it cannot be ruled out. If these are armour buffs to RN cruisers, I really might just regrind RN cruisers with accumulated free exp to get 8.8 km torp Leander, which will be the uncontested best T6 CL in the game. Then quit, because f*** this.

premium HE could basically be like German HE, higher pen, less everything else.

Don't forget 40 mm plating on hipper bow!

Atago.

It's not enough, but if it does not fix the issue, what does it fix? The CV haters (and frankly certain people are just that) will jump on any train and feel they can finally rub it, though any good CV player can still humble a few selected surface ships before they have to consider running out of planes. And some don't even care about that. 0.8.5 is to me not a bad change because CVs are "unplayable", it's a bad change, because it hit certain CVs harder than others, undeservedly so. Just like the speed nerf for example, Enterprise will notice the least impact, GZ meanwhile is still able to do something, but in a match GZ vs most other CVs, with equal skill the GZ team is at a disadvantage. And Saipan got hit hard too. If it implies that this direction of "fixes" actually could ever bring results. It cannot.

Yoshino is less outclassed, but Hindenburg still is a more consistent pick at that point. Yoshino would trade dpm for extreme range on both armaments. But Hindenburg doesn't need the range, as it basically can dodge and tank at 15 km just fine (compared to Yoshino anyway).

In a Yamato, I also don't need to be massively better to end a Des Moines. In a YY I also don't need to be massively better to end a Yamato. And frankly, shooting down a few planes does not make you less helpless. If the amount of planes shot down does not prevent a strike, the surface ship basically is helpless. If surface ships can actually kill planes reliably before they can attack, the CV basically is helpless. That is how current AA works. CVs are detached from the standard rules of engagement and from the standard rules of balancing, which many seem to not be able to grasp. Short of making AA punitive to the level where it shreds planes and shuts CVs down, CV will always be able to grief and kill some players before running out of planes (or carrying the game if the amount of planes killed is too low). What the game needs is a skill-based defensive element, not more/less AA. This is however seemingly quite hard to understand, which is also why WG efforts at balancing all are focused on getting the damage numbers into line, not the player experience (being able to kill fewer players reduces match impact, but makes those players not exactly any less frustrated at being "helpless". And people continue bitching about CV surviving matches more, despite it being pointless, because service cost is fixed and CV cannot position in the corner for free, CVs positioning in a corner basically sacrifice their dpm. And you whether a CV loses all its hp or gets deplaned, the difference is minor, as their match participation basically crashes at that point, given CVs cannot tank and most are also terrible at hiding. In fact, if you want to find something that is terrible for CVs, something keeping them spotted and some long-range BBs deleting them from across the map. But these are all things one has to consider outside the typical way WoWS is played in other classes. Damage output by CVs in 0.8.4 was largely fine. The way the damage gets dealt is the issue. And this does not get fixed by adding a bit of AA damage, that gets fixed by revamping the basic interaction of surface ship and CV to be equal, in that both apply similar amounts of skill.

Why would you though? Three buffs on Hindenburg don't make it magically great when three buffs on Zao or Henri exist.

Izumo is a decent BB. Pretty sure it'll be more comfortable to grind that three times than to grind stuff like RU cruiser line to get super-buffed Stalingrad/Moskva.

25 mm side is one thing, but no amount of IFHE change will make other T6s magically pen that 48 mm deck.

Premium consumables can be mounted for credits. One can be F2P and have premium consumables. Which btw is also why the statement brought up during the presentation of the NTC to CCs is kinda silly, as anyone is able to bridge the gap in performance due to consumables by just knowing how to switch consumables. Meanwhile, there's no such easy way to actually bridge the gap with someone who just sails a ship that is basically half a tier to a tier better, because they grinded a lot. One mistake is on me, the other is just blatant imbalance. Not to mention that just because imbalance narrows in one way, it has to be reopened elsewhere. It's not like the ideal is less mechanical inbalance, the ideal should be proper balance among ships, so skill matters, not just how utterly pimped out my ship is due to some silly mechanic. Not to mention, if such a high percentage makes what amounts to a pretty noob mistake of taking stock consumables, then what does that say about how people currently progress through the game without being taught properly how basic game mechanics work? Why can't the bonuses from the NTC be things that are appealing, but non-gamebreaking? Like, give extra credits, or give extra free exp, or allow mounting commanders without retraining like on a premium. Economic and QoL changes that don't give a competitive edge.

Assuming no further changes, Aoba gets buffed relative to others, as it would overmatch same tier cruiser bows and needs no IFHE to deal with BBs.

Imagine being a Dallas. In a T8 match. You might face some lucky day where the T6 BBs are Fusos and bounce off your central plating. Or they are Bayerns and overmatch you still. You need IFHE, because without, you cannot deal with same tier BBs efficiently and T8 cruisers would just laugh at your ship. Without IFHE, IJN cruisers would be the bane of your existence, given they got extensive armour deck plating and like all heavy cruisers, they overmatch your bow now. Aoba and Myoko are to their tier mates what Furutaka is to its. And then you run into some T8 Monarch that outspots you, shoots every 25 seconds and you cannot deal damage anywhere except superstructure, while your fire chance is absolutely pathetic. And being a Dallas, you don't even get torps, because you left those behind with the Omaha. Only way this could get any worse is if that Monarch player gets 10% better dispersion and 22.5 seconds reload, because they played the game for far longer than you.

If you aren't some T6 CL or Harugumo, maybe.

Are there any buffs for ships like Hipper and Roon planned? You know, ships where the entire point was their 27 mm armour, which now becomes much less of an advantage when a Cleveland or Mogami can tank the same as long as it doesn't hit the bow or stern?

Grind a ton and you can give a ship you really like some serious buffs. And people thought oathing was a joke. Nah, it just comes in a different way.

Unless burst damage is stupendous, it's 4 points down the drain, just like AFT. I really don't like the way the skill got redesigned. I'm happy to have a more intuitive ability to set my sector and the burst might be ok for ships with utter garbage AA, but in the end, that's really not helping the case, because CVs will get worked to be usable despite losing 1-2 planes to everything that uses its burst, making that change meaningless. I would've preferred if the sector was made a more useful mechanic in that correct sector setting makes an incredible difference and people who use it properly can defend themselves while potatoes just die. But I cannot really understand how this system is any good.

Naval Training Centre is like the most *edited* idea I saw this year and that really says something. Why is it insane performance buffs? Why can't you just, dunno, slap 20% extra credits ontop, or extra free exp or an option to swap out commanders like on premiums for free? You know, things that don't just crap all over the game balance. Please use appropriate language. Complaining is ok, but please refrain from using inappropriate language. Arty_McFly

It's an inquiry on the personal definition of "helpless" related to the overall argument, the clarification a prerequisite to properly respond to the argument, not potentially go off on a detour due to misinterpretation. So, no, it's neither for PM (just alone because it might clarify the matter also for others) nor is it something random folks can properly respond to. Which I did not think I would need to point out, as I would have thought people would get that due to the nature of the question and some logical thought, but then again, this is the WoWS boards. My expectations might have been a bit too high.

Yes, but when I ask Excavatus to explain what he meant with the term "helpless", then there's little point for others to explain, because it defeats the point of the inquiry. If I were to just go off on the first interpretation of the term by someone els, I could as well go by my own interpretation of the term. As however I wanted to be clear what I am responding to, I asked for an elaboration, which however only the person in question themselves can give for it to have any meaningful authority. This isn't some question like "Can Kaga rockets pen T8 BBs?" (please don't answer, this is just an example), where an objective technical response exists that anyone with enough game knowledge can provide. Thus I felt like pointing out that what you are doing by responding to the question is basically waste both our time, as your response just has no value in this specific case.