Allied_Winter

Fine, I don't care if the HE spam increases if we get rid of BB AP pen on DDs in the process! Oh and before you go mental: Read on please: If however in turn HE spam turns out to become another issue. Guess what: WG can change that too. Simple as that. But saying: "Oh no, WG mustn't do that (and before you jump me again, I'm not quoting you, but other forumites and redditors), it could potentially lead to x, y or z." is bad, because you have to take risks to salvage a situation. So yeah. As said, I don't care if the HE spam increases. If it turns out to be a problem it can be fixed down the road. And if that leads to another problem, that can be fixed too. Oh. And on a personal note: Don't use stats to discredit other forumites opinion!

Mate. If I say: "How is this different from now." That means that any increase that might occur to me is not different to what we have now. Hence I added the word insignificant in my reiteration of said post. If 10 million people die each year to a disease, 200.000 more is insignificantly more (to me). Hence I'd say: How would 10.2 million be different from the 10 million we have now. The difference is too small to take note of it! GOT IT? So yes, by the numbers the HE spam MIGHT increase (you're right, we don't know by how much), but in the end, said increase is not worth mentioning. Especially if we get rid of BB AP pen that way.

Mate! That's the pepper mill! You want to sprinkle Salt. Not pepper!

My bad. I said HE spam would increase insignificantly to which you disagreed. To me that means that you think HE spam will increase significantly = by a large margin. Harder to punish for bad play... by a BB using AP. Yes, that's the goal. If the BB has HE loaded (or teamwork happens): Then nothing changes. I mean, let's assume you have the current mechanic, but RNG says no and you miss two salvos at point blank range ... where's the difference. And if you land 50% of your shells at close range that's still dependend on the BB between 5k and 8k DMG. In mid to late game that can be enough to delete the DD. Buffs for DDs? Really? The last buffs to all the DDs was what? IFHE? I honestly can't remember the last time there was a game mechanic change that overall was considered a buff to DDs. Sure we have the 1/4 pen for the IJN gunboats, but that's rather specific. I'm not saying DDs got shafted constantely, but buffs? No mate, no buffs as far as I can recall it in the last patches for DDs.

In short: BBs (like other ships) have two ammo types. They should use both ammo types! If one ammo type (as currently AP) comes out to be the one type fits all, then BBs need to be forced to switch ammo. Good players (as in: skilled players) know, when to switch to what ammo type. If in turn it turns out then that (as you fear) e.g. HE is too strong. HE needs to be nerfed consecutively (e.g. remove 1/4 pen from RN BBs).

Depends. Overall yes, I agree. However I see the DMG to DDs as a bigger problem than the HE spam. So, yes HE spam will increase - again in your opinion by quite a large margin, in my opinion not that significantly - but if that's what reduces the BB AP impact on DDs, I'm all for it.

Yes Yes. But in a non siginificant way. As in: Overall I believe it doesn't matter (since there is already so much HE around). You've seem to overread the last part of my post: That's the way it's supposed to be!

Oh? So you have run all the tests and also a small productive environment with a few hundred players to know the outcome of this. Or are you a wizard that can read the future? If so: Can you please tell me the lottery numbers and when will I get my next payraise? All we have for now is different assumptions: You're assuming HE spam will rise because people won't bother switching. I assume that HE spam won't rise significantly because there is already so much HE spam.

Hmmm stimmt. Das 'vermutlich' kann man da durchaus hinsetzen. Ich habe es halt so verstanden: Capped at 1/10 of the max dmg per shell. Das heißt für mich eine Mumpel kann noch soviele Compartments durchschlagen sie macht nur einmal 1/10 ihres gelisteten Schadens. Aber gut, das ist Semantik darüber kann man diskutieren.

... My comment referred to OP as he claimed, that with this change going through BBs will only spam HE, to which I responded accordingly. 2/3s of BBs I meet in game shoot primarily HE nowadays. Will the good players switch ammo more often? Absolutely. But this is something they're used to and doing it even under current circumstances. So yeah, I see that people need to switch ammo more. I don't think however that this is a problem (as some in this thread make it out to be). Will we then have more HE spam? We will see. Let this change go live an test it.

Ok, mal zusammengefasst: AP Multi Pen Bug: Etwas nervig, schwer reproduzierbar, tritt in 1 von 100 (wenn überhaupt, ich rate hier nur) Salven auf, hält Spieler nicht davon ab DDs zu spielen BB AP auf DDs: Richtig fies nervig, relativ einfach reproduzierbar, tritt in jedem Gefecht bei jedem zweiten BB auf, hält Spieler davon ab DDs zu spielen. Die ST Ankündigung behebt letzteres (und damit auch den Multi Pen Bug auf DDs). Somit hat man 95% aller auftretenden Fälle erschlagen.

Which is how it should be... I don't get what's so hard to grasp here. A DD should counter a BB....

Weil da der Effekt eben nicht so dramatisch ist. Ich meinte das nicht. Ich könnte es mir lediglich als einen möglichen weiteren Schritt vorstellen. Gesetzt den Fall es gibt etwas nachzubessern. Was es aus meiner Sicht nicht benögtigt. Mit dem Abschaffen der BB AP Pens auf DD (bzw. deren Ersetzen durch 100% Overpens), halte ich das Gesamtsystem für mehr als brauchbar. Bzw. ich kann immer noch nicht so ganz nachvollziehen wo du so viele Probleme siehst.

WUT? Torping a BB is indeed easy... if the BB player plays along (doesn't WASD, sits still for 5 minutes) Hmmm you sure? I don't have a particularly hard time hitting Gearings and Z-52s in my Montana or Izumo. Rightfully so I might say Well... they're the natural counter of BBs... so in theory: A 1v1 should ALWAYS be won by the DD. That's where teamwork (should) come in. A friendly DD spotting the enemy DD giving the BB a chance to evade. Or a friendly cruiser radaring the DD giving the BB a chance to shoot at it. But one lone BB against one lone DD? That should basically be an auto loss for the BB.

Nun ja... ich habe jetzt ein Problem. Dann ändere ich etwas am System und dann ist das Problem weg. Klingt für mich nach einem Fix. Zumindest nach einem der gut genug ist. Ob da etwas verringert/vertuscht wird ist ja dann auch eher subjektiver Eindruck. Nun ja, vielleicht macht WG das ja. Wobei ich persönlich nicht sehe warum, aber das wäre eine andere Diskussion. Und wer ja sagt uns denn, dass WG gerade nicht dabei ist die Mechaniken grundlegend zu überarbeiten und sich mit dem BB AP Fix etwas mehr Zeit 'erkauft'?

Bevor ich mich jetzt in irgendwas verrenne: Was wäre denn deiner Meinung nach die Ursache? Oder wo siehst du hier die Probleme die 'grundlegend geändert werden müssten?

Is this sarcasm?

Das ist für die meisten die mit dem Fix nix anfangen können ein absolut unzumutbarer Zustand. Ich persönlich sehe da kein Problem darin.

Hmmm maybe. I don't see that as an issue. She's a cruiser hunter with the short fuse AP. And the change will certainly not stop me from continuing to shoot AP whenever a DD pops up and I have it loaded. I'd say: Same reply as for every other BB in the game. Maybe. I'm actually quite happy with this 'trick'.

Naja 25% wären nicht weit vom regulären 33% Pen entfernt. Und Dank RNG habe ich lieber eine Mechanik bei der viele Mumpeln wenig Schaden erzeugen als wenige Mumpeln viel Schaden. Deshalb: Fangen wir mal mit 10% an und wenn das wirklich zu schlimm ist, kann man mal 11% probieren.

Really? Never thought I see you jumping a band waggon. Hood is a BB so why should the BB solution hit her differently? Due to the reduced RN BB AP fuse? And Scharn has an even quicker reload to go for HE ... sooo... yeah. Much needed and much overdue change.

You seemed to completely ignore my points about stuff that can counter a DD. Ok. Apparently you're not interested in a constructive discussion. Have a nice day.

Then we disagree on that one. I'll happily sail with my BBs as a cruiser. That is, if the BB moves towards the objective. So a DD not getting blapped by AP is stupid play? TIL. Sorry we disagree on that one too. DDs no longer taking BB AP to the fullest makes it easier for DDs, I'm not denying that. But to imply that DDs are now the brain dead class is off. DDs suffered far too long and too harshly. Now it's BB suffering time. If you react when the torps are spotted then I have bad news for you. Example: I had a game a few days ago in my Izumo. I was in the C-Cap on Loop. Suddenly the B-Cap started to flip red. I moved up a bit north to have an island between me and the B-Cap. Roughly two minutes later two sets of Benson torpedos sailed by harmelessly behind me on the spot where I was. Actions on my end: Seeing the minimap (or the cap flipping), pressing "W" twice and "S" twice about 20s later. Torpedos avoided. And now we can discuss about this solution. There's no point in discussing stuff we now nothing about besides the 'We're working on it' memo of WG.

So you think BB AP was the counter to DDs all the way? Interesting. Bottom line: A BB SHOULD in my opinion be countered by a DD. BB HE would be the last ditch effort in my eyes for a BB to prevent that. But as of now, BBs are far too easy to play and that needs to be changed. Do DDs have counters? Sure: Cruisers, CVs, other DDs (why make you sound it as if this was just a very minor counter...), a BB that's on the move and not sitting still ... Still plenty of counters as far as I can see. Which we currently know nothing about, so I wouldn't count on that until WG has released at least a dev. blog about it.

Just curious: Who forces you? And which radar fix are you talking about? Wooster + Seattle?