Aotearas

It's not conjecture. We have the stats straight from the DevBlog. That's how the ship currently looks like. If your point would be to wait until finalized stats, would be a bit late to start discussing it, at least if giving feedback to WG is of concern. Pretty sure everyone still remembers how WG tested the Graf Zeppelin before its release and what that lead to for an example. Point is, we have the data as it stands right now and we can discuss it. Naturally the discussion will evolve if new data arrives.

Even with TRB, DDs are a suboptimal pick given that in operations really all you need/want is a crapton of dpm. Torpedoes don't really help even with TRB, plus bots are pretty good at dodging torps and even better at shooting DDs.

Gee, I wonder how OP can even operate a computer in good conscience if he flips out over mere crashlogs.

And I don't see how people in here are asking the Azuma to be a Stalingrad copy. They're however saying that for being at the same tier and fulfilling the same gameplay niche, it is considerably inferiour to the Stalingrad, which stands contrary to the logic that a same tier ship of equal design whoudl perform comparatively equal. Those same people are entirely correct in stating that given the stats we know, the Azuma is in fact much better suited to be a tier IX instead. Also, there is no "it may be that this ship will need to be balanced against its contemporaries". It MUST be balanced against/with its contemporaries. That's precisely what the term balance implies, that's what the concept of balance is about. As for waiting until the ship is being tested, first of all that doesn't invalidate any concern and discussions at this point because people are looking at what we know right now and everyone is free to draw their conclusion from the facts that are present at this very point as opposed to a nebulous "this isn't what the ship might end up to be". We're discussing facts here, simple. And another point in keeping the "BabyRage" to a minimum until it's been tested, the same has been said in regards to the Yue Yang nerf when it got mentioned in the DevBlog. People said "they're testing it, it probably won't look like that in the final stage" ... fast forward two weeks (with no intermittent updates on any testing) and the exact same nerf goes life in the patch. So yeah, for all we know these could be final stats and until we get presented with updated informations there's nothing wrong with discussing it.

Alternatively, remove Concealment Expert entirely, tweak individual ship concealment values where needed and open up more diverse captain builds without any must have captain skills, no matter how cheap you can make them. That would by extension also count for Last Stand for DDs (just give DDs the same measure of manouverability as with the skill by default) and possibly even for Superintendant (that one is a bit more subjective as there's good other alternatives for three captain points, however it's by far the most utilitarian choice for most classes with worthwhile consumables, making it a de facto must pick too). Same deal for Air Superiourity Expert for CVs (though that's probably being adressed in some fashion with the CV rework anyway).

That's rich coming from the guy who dropped this gem: Yes. People compare new ships with old ships that fulfill equal roles. A most shockingly novel concept for sure ... Also: That's coincidentally also not how communism works. So, how about a bit less ... ... and a bit more discussion. Or alternatively, if you think the discussion isn't worthwhile you're welcome to stay out of it and keep your ignorance to yourself.

Wow. Is WG telling us the average Operation player can't even handle CV bots? Or do they simply hate CVs so much they're culling their own bots now? I just ... what? I got so many questions @Crysantos.

So the amount of steel available throughtout those events is known/leaked?

This is something that caught my eye a couple times now: As you can see, only the First Blood achievement. However: I hit the enemy CV with three torpedoes from a single torpedo salvo (the hits all landed consecutively within two seconds) for ~31k damage. That should've been a Devastating Strike, yet it wasn't awarded. The same issue was also present in Yuro's latest funtage (@1:16, embedded video should play from that timestamp): Nothing particularily important, since there's no rewards associated with the achievement (other than counting them for a small number of campaign missions), but whenever the development finds itself bored, it might be something to look into and fix since it's evidently not working as it should. Cheers

No, only the absolute majority in Europe ...

You guys might want to consider adding timestamps to your video description. Makes it a lot easier for people to get to a specific bit of information.

They apparently also changed the team seeding logic from a previously top to a bottom feeding algorithm. That means MM will no longer search for tier X games, then fill it with tier IX and VIIIs if it can't get enough tier Xs, but instead it starts at tier I, feeding tier Is into the match, etc. which should in theory mean the instances of ships being regularily seeded as bottom tier being reduced. That alone should hopefully result in a noticable decrease of the usual bottom tiering in less populated tiers compared to higher ones (so tier V, VI and VIII mostly).

In what way was it dominating? We know the theoretical dpm numbers (simple math) and they weren't that significantly higher than other contemporary gunboats to warrant a 33% nerf. It most certainly won't have been anything to do with the deep water torpedoes (which makes the torpedo nerf questionable at best if DD vs DD performance is supposed to be the argument here). Is it survivability? Is it the readily available short cooldown smokes or radar? If so, has the data been correctly sorted by which of the two mutually exclusive consumables were used (which I doubt going by the wording the original DevBlog entry about this had)? I'd love to see the data that indicated the gun and torpedo dpm was the culprit, because if that were the case, why aren't the Gearing's guns and torps being nerfed considering it has the exact same pre-nerf gun performance and its torpedoes can actually hit DDs. Also inviting @Sub_Octavian to that discussion considering he's bound to have a more hands-on opinion on the balancing aspects than @MrConway

Premium CVs, which WG said were not going to go on sale until the CV rework is done, available in the expensive armada bundles. Why am I not surprised ... Yep, just saw it aswell when I was checking what duplicate ships would give. Still wouldn't be surprised though if it happened.

HHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN-NEP NEP!!!

Sorry for the double post, but this is a matter of the utmost importance! We shan't suffer a re-roll to blemish our reputation. I hereby cast the vote to have @havaduck impeached as President of the CoOp and subsequently prosecuted for collusion with the WG bots in conspiracy against the humanitarian union of windowlickers! I call upon Grand Inquisitor @Loran_Battle to enact your judgement forthwith to cleanse our widely respected clan of such foul heresy. I'm sure the Emperor's Torture Minion @T0L0S will be able to produce a most satisfactory confession at our earliest convenience!

NEVER! How about the Balancester (pronounced "Boostah"), Saipalan or Baragumo?

That was a bit more subjective as the Gearing torps had substantially more range, which meant you could slap Torpedo Acceleration on the captain and thus have pretty damn fast torpedoes that still generously outranged the Fletcher torps (with a much lesser torpedo reload difference at 30 seconds). Or just enjoy the 6km range advantage which could make for hilarious moments when you missed your intended target only to sink something else a minute later. Gearing also kept the gun dpm advantage over the Fletcher. Nerfed Yue Yang will only have a 3km better torpedo range, without keeping the superiour gun dpm (dpm difference is so miniscule with only a negligible advantage over the Chung Mu). Everything else is equal or better on the Chung Mu (50 seconds faster torpedo reload ... 50 seconds!).

So, can we just drop all pretenses and simply switch the Chung Mu and Yue Yang around? With that massive nerf the Chung Mu is better tier X material than the Yue Yang.

So, @Sub_Octavian, can we just switch the Chung Mu and Yue Yang tiering around?

I have to wonder if WG will also eventually cycle out steel ships as more and more people will eventually get them.

xD WG balans never fails to impress.

Just had to come back for this one and ask: did you read the freshly released 0.7.11 patchnotes already? Oh and before you bother, that was a rhetoric question. I'm out again, you guys keep having fun in here.

You sure that's snow? I mean, we all know you're living in the drug-den of the US, soo ...

Well, I think everyone knew that those Arsenal ressources would make it to the premium shop in some fashion ... coal could essentially be bought during the American CL Arc (premium containers contained multiple tokens which could be spend to get a couple normal containers which always contained some coal) and now they're selling missions that grant steel. Their precious safety net on how "the amount of steel being granted won't devaluate the rare ressources" is pretty hollow as they're happily setting the precendent for selling those ressources and like OP said, if it sells, a business is going to keep selling.