BillydSquid

Yep, if the super testers think radar is a good idea or don't see the problem with it, the higher tier meta is going to absolute carp, and an unplayable mess for any CA/CL which doesn't revolve around long range HE spam. Which makes me question how much truth there is to the staff comments that they are aware that there is a BB over population and they're working on it, personally I won't hold my breath, the way things seem to be going with the RN BBs it's going to be a bit of a joke when they come out as a broken mess and then it's stated that they're working as intended, we'll see what happens in the end, but as it stands I'm expecting a train wreck in the high tier meta.

So are we going to revert the shima torpedo nerfs then? Clearly BBs were miss playing when they were running into walls of torpedoes from a pair of Shimas. If they knew that a Shima was in the area, then why stick around? If we're going to go down this line of thought then every nerf should be undone because it was a "misplay" not a mechanic being exploited. So ready to undo the nerfs? Radar on an BB is not extremely situational, it's massive pain for the entire RN CL line. Any competent BB captain will exploit it to render the RN CL line obsolete, so why play the Des Moines if the Conqueror can do it better, or the Moskva for that matter, 19km range and radar range of 12km, surely that's situational? Yet, I have the Moskva and it's a bloody pain for a DD which gets anywhere inside the range with the ship's rail gun like main armament, and if you have any ship in support, God help the DD/CL he'll be shredded. The difference with the Conqueror, you're a BB with 457mm guns and enough armour and HP to tank the hits which would cripple a Des Moines and Moskva. Both CAs have to be extremely careful of counter play from enemy CAs and BBs which will knock them out or cripple them. I forced you to disengage, the fact you got away from the torpedoes was lucky, if it was a any other T9/10 I'd have caught you in the stern with a torpedo. You were then able to come back with 21k hp. No other BB is capable of doing that even if they were lucky with the torpedo and would have spent the time limping round the rear outside of radar range afraid to get torpedoed by the DD which was in support. The situation was, I'd just knocked out the St. Loius, the enemy Kiev was sunk and you were facing a DD and my Minotaur. You were able to completely negate your direct class counter, the DD and my smoke, with radar. Why play a CA with Radar at this point, the Conqueror and Lion can do it better. If you're pushing that the Conqueror isn't unbalanced with radar, which it is, only a blind man would say it's not, but we'll just indulge it for now, why should I bother using a short range high risk/ reward CL? I'll switch to the Moskva or Zao and spam HE at you it's just as effective. WG created a line of CLs which are glass cannons, can deal an extreme amount of damage at 10/12km but die if you look at them funny, while providing smoke and low concealment to facilitate aggressive positioning, then created a BB line which negates the entire premise of the CL line. Why should I bother to use the Minotaur, when I can avoid the issue entirely by using the Zao and Moskva.? And disengaging was not an option because the Hindenburg at B would have spotted me, as would the Iowa. the 8.9km detection allowed me to sit in the middle of the 3 ships and dance on the edge of detection using terrain and smoke to my advantage, why do you think I focused you so hard to force a disengagement? The radar effectively renders player skill irrelevant, doesn't matter what you do radar hard counters everything you try to do in the CLs and DDs and the Conqueror can't be countered like the Des Moines or Moskva. If you come at me in a Des Moines vs my Minotaur I know you'll also be focused by any ship in support, I also know that I can bounce your AP shells, that you can't delete me in one salvo, you'd also be the priority target and I'd hammer you hard right from the outset to force a disengagement, where you're to afraid to close to radar range incase you get deleted by a BB salvo, not going to happen in a Conqueror. What's your solution? Every time a Conqueror pops up the DD and the RN CLs run? Well if that's the case, we should all revert to the Shima spamming long range walls of torpedoes, use the Zao and Moskava to spam HE from long range, and when that's nerfed, I'll use the Yamato to snipe and over match and the Kurfurst, because I'm detected at 13.5km anyway and invulnerable to citadels. If WG wanted to make DDs more aggressive and make ships engage more, they're doing a brilliant job of screwing it up, why bother using ships which put you at a disadvantage when the easier option is to avoid the issue entirely?

That was actually about 5/10 minutes before the second time I got spotted by your radar. No Radar, I can take on 2 BBs in a Minotaur, providing I have cover. After you pulled back to heal the Iowa was pushing down the outside of the terrain so I moved to intercept and torp him. Popped smoke on the edge of the terrain them move to one side so he'd angle up and I could catch him at an angle. By that point you'd come back, although you dodged the second spread of torpedoes I put round the island only just, by what I saw, because to the Conqueror's rudder shift. So it was either way I was screwed, it was torp the Iowa and slip behind terrain for cover from you or run, you got close enough before the Iowa moved round the terrain and predictably the radar let him blow me to pieces. So yeah, radar is not a good idea on BBs, ever. The entire situation forced me to dance around detection and radar range in the Minotaur, and try to sit in between 10km - 8.9km and avoid radar. I wasn't surprised I got spotted, just irritated that something so clearly broken has been put into a super test. CAs with radar I can take it, they counter the Minotaur, but are hard countered by BBs themselves. A BB with radar. Knocking you down to 21hp and the Conqueror still having the capacity to come back and pick a fight after that level of damage with 21k hp and with radar which stopped me sinking the Iowa pissed me off. Hell the super heal doesn't bother me as much as the radar, I can counter it with torpedoes and smoke. Radar relegates the RN CL line to unusable so long as it's on the Lion and Conqueror. That game I could have raked in 120k damage easy with no radar vs 2 BBs, with radar I got a piddly 65k. Shame the Yamato behind me felt that it was better to sit back passively rather than try and knock you out, if he had that side would have collapsed and the fight between me and the Iowa end very differently before rolling onto B

Just had a game vs a Conqueror, in a Minotaur, it's broken, plain and simple. Putting radar on the RN line was an appalling idea, and "testing" such a consumable was always going to result in something broken you might as well stop playing the RN CL line as if the RN BBs come out with radar the ships are simply unworkable. I managed to block line of sight with an island, but if you don't get lucky with the terrain, to shield you from other ships, you're screwed. knocked it down to 100 hp, came back a couple of minutes later with 21,000 hp. Jesus, seriously, I know it's being tested but that's just ridiculous. Which goes to my point earlier, acknowledgement of the BB over population problem.... put radar on a BB to "test" how it'll work. Who here is surprised by the result that it impacts RN CLs to a degree where it renders them irrelevant?

Great, they're the same people which complain constantly when they're sunk using ships which they can't use properly and are exploited by the better players. There's a reason why you don't balance to the lowest common denominator, because the better players will use the mechanics against everyone else and abuse the hell out of it because you lowered the bar to point where it's like shooting fish in a barrel. It's why Bismarck Hydro got a nerf, why Belfast was used extensively in ranked T7, why stealth fire in the Zao became the go to damage farmer, why the smoke meta has become dominant with the BB over population etc. You lower the bar, the better players will find a way of exploiting it to the detriment of the potatoes which the bar was lowered for, which inevitably leads to them suffering because the situation is abused by players which know the mechanics inside and out. You can't just keep lowering the bar and expect the better players not to exploit the same changes, and they'll do so to a far greater degree than the average player, which puts you back at square one.

Yes it can, clearly you've never used it or encountered it vs someone competent. Having a DD tail you with this skill is a huge pain as you're cornered and sunk. Using it on the Minotaur vs a DD which doesn't have it makes you untouchable vs torpedoes because you know where the torpedoes are coming from without even spotting the DD. Which is the fundamental problem with the skill, it's poorly implemented and gives a significant advantage to any CL/ DD which has the competence to use it. And stop parroting ichase's crap defence, his argument is on shaky ground at best.

Pfffft, we had the same argument with the Bismarck. Because people which are incompetent can't use the Hydro properly with a 6km range it's not OP.... that lasted about as long as the ranked matches, where it was show to be ridiculously powerful and it got nerf'd The same with RPF, because people aren't competent enough to use it, it's not OP. Wait until you get someone in a division using it, as a CL/ DD you're dead, they'll corner you regardless of position and kettle you in or pre aim their guns and blow you to pieces as soon as you fire as it's given way the general area where you are. I've just started using RPF to hunt down DDs in the Minotaur, it's hilariously powerful combined with Hydro and makes you virtually untouchable vs torpedoes when you close with a DD, the DD has two options, fire and get riddled with AP shells or run.

Lies! You're submarine-mafia! But seriously, the key issue is coherent communication, I don't think anyone here expects someone from WG to be chained to his desk to slavishly answer the questions for the forum, but a single point of reference where people from all the internet can refer to is going to make your life easier and diffuse things before they kick off. As a for instance, we've been complaining about the BB over population for a long time, and the statistics back that up, with a significant jump in the number of BBs played at T8 which has spilled out into the other tiers, you've said this yourselves, BBs survive too long. Okay great, we think, it's noted you understand the concerns... and then the data mined information released states that you're testing BBs with radar. Predictably we all fly off the handle because the ongoing problem of BBs and high tier static meta looks to have been ignored completely and you're incorporating greater utility into a class which has significant advantages in firepower, armour and HP with a consumable which directly counters the RN CL line and DDs. Because, we have no idea what you're aiming at, or what even in the broadest possible strokes you're trying to achieve with the RN BB line, it looks like you're ignoring something we know has been an on going issue, even though it was acknowledged to be an issue. I don't think detailed super test information is needed, I certainly don't have the time to read all of it, but some form of coherent and consistent communication as to what you're going for with a line of ships or in broad strokes what you're trying to achieve with their characteristics, to give some context to the information that will get data mined would go some way, I think, to stopping things getting out of control.

WG "Hold my beer..."

Cut to WG design team....

See the thing that annoys me is that there clearly are ways to balance the guns and conqueror step by step, by either adjusting shell arcs, HE penetration, shell dispersion, AP fuse timers etc. so it's not so ridiculously OP. But WG's approach is like using a sledge hammer to crack a nut. Doesn't balance? Get rid of it entirely. But ignore the radar, and Hydro on T10 and T9 which everyone is saying is a problem and is going to skew the meta further. GG guys, well played.

Uh-uh. Wait until you try to take one on in a Minotaur, with fast turning turrets, lower AP fuse for fewer over pens and high accuracy combined with radar, it's going to be a real barrel of laughs. If you've ever had a Missouri rush you with radar, it's not fun, especially if there's another ship in tow, the saving grace is Minotaur's torpedoes and the 406mm guns have a habit of over penetrating the Mino.

Ewwwwww Target acquisition? You want to get rid of that, never take it on the BBs, it's useless, if you're having trouble with torps, vigilance is a better option. DCS2 vs Rudder shift, eh there's an argument for either one here both are a good choice, depends on your play style and build, I prefer rudder shift, namely because I'm way too aggressive and the risk of getting torp'd is higher for me. There are 2 good builds for the Yamato and Kurfurst the tanky kind and the stealthy kind. Flamu has shown his tanky build for the Kurfurst, which revolves around main gun accuracy, fire prevention, DCS2 and has concealment expert (no reason to take TA, useless mod) the stealthy build drops the Kurfurst's detection down to 13.5km, it's what I'm using at the moment. With the Kurfurst, I tend to go for a quasi secondary build with increased rate of fire for the 406/420mm guns, manual secondaries, AFT and concealment expert and the concealment mod. The extra firepower thrown out by the secondaries is good vs DDs and BBs, even without the 20% increase by the secondary armament mod 3, and the ability to keep your secondaries and AA alive with the secondary armament mod 1 is a imo more central to the stealth build if you're going to play aggressively because with a full stealth build you'll be only detected inside 13.5km, frankly at that range the stock dispersion really isn't much of an issue given you are able to dictate the range and time of a fight to greater degree than if you had 15.5km detection, where every man and his dog can spot you as soon as you approach a cap, which allows players to angle against you and makes your job harder when it comes to using terrain to block line of sight and stop yourself getting focus fired by every ship in range.

Stock Izumo is god awful, or at least it was when I grinded through it. The Izumo is a step down from the Amagi in my opinion, which is a far better ship, I still have my Amagi actually. The Izumo gets better as you get to the B hull, in shell penetration, rudder shift, AA and secondaries, but it remains an awkward and cumbersome ship to use effectively, compared to the Amagi and Yamato.

Yes, glorious cruiser master race! But it's more likely that CA numbers are fairly low in T8+ so they're less common and as such "brain dead" behavior gets less attention. Second, such behavior is often short lived and most screw ups being brutally punished in the BB heavy meta. So effective play in a CA/ CL tends to have a higher skill floor, but a higher skill ceiling as well.

Yeah, now try playing the RN inside 10km, or any CA for that matter with that buff, increasing BB accuracy will relegate 12km and below a complete kill zone to high tier CAs given their size and rudder shift. Long range sniping may take a hit, yet no CA in their right mind would ever want to move inside 15km given the time to target and accuracy of the main guns. You will still get long range sniping, and a lot of pissing and moaning about how BBs can't hit targets at long range, namely CAs, because the game is designed and weighted towards rewarding a % of the total HP damage done. So your target of choice is always going to be a CA when playing a BB because the game's reward system skews play towards hitting the easiest and softest target, which they can deal the largest % of hp as damage, which at T8+ is a CA. So you won't actually change anything as the behavior is a partially a result of the game's reward mechanics which make camping a low risk, but high potential reward tactic. Even if the players doing it don't hit crap 50% of the games, hence you also get the huge BB T8 over population where the service costs are not prohibitive and players can scrape by with about 40k damage in a BB and still break even.

Which is odd considering the Stuka is one of the most well known dive bombers in WW2, it's what you associate with the German military in it's invasions. Who here wouldn't want to hear the scream of a Stuka dive bombing your ship in game? (There are issues with Dive Bombers and CVs in general) Just for the cool factor alone.

Lol priority target, whenever I'm playing the Minotaur, as soon as I'm spotted I'm mass targeted by 5/6 enemy ships, it's always useful, but also illustrates just how heavily targeted CAs are. The default position for any T10 CA is, have you fired? Then assume you will be immediately targeted by multiple BBs and other ships. Incoming fire alert is largely redundant given the current amount of focus fire directed at CAs, well at least in my experience of T10 CAs

T10 CVs are the exception and they only account for 3% of games played in T10. Most commonly you get T8 CVs thrown into T10 games and they get absolutely shredded by AA fire from BBs. CVs basically need a rework given they're so underplayed, I said this over a year ago now, WG nerfed CVs into the ground, which lead to DDs becoming out of control which lead to torpedo nerfs, which led to stealth fire which was then nerfed, which created the current dominant BB meta. The problems are of WGs own cack handed balancing decisions, and I saw the solutions some testers provided to reign in CV power, WG ignored it and took the approach of a bull in a China shop, this is the result.

Pfffffft, I think you're looking at the wrong player boyo. Now if you're butt hurt because you've been consistently wrong on your assertions, that's okay, I don't hold it against you so un-bunch your panties and calm down. It still doesn't make you right though.

Well I didn't say bow tanking, I said bow on angling, which the Moskva is good at with it's narrow profile and the auto bounce mechanics, the exception being Yamato Lol pen main guns. If You try bow tanking in the Moskva like a BB, then yeah you're doing it wrong,as you said, you'll simply be over matched and citadel'd. Now if Hindenburg has been buffed as of late with 27mm armour then that's going to change the use compared to when I played her when the meta was heavily geared towards 406mm + guns in T8+ as the German BB line hadn't come out, so any ship at T8 was equipped with 406mm and 410mm guns making the 27mm bow armour largely redundant. But the meta has changed, so maybe that's more effective in the BB heavy meta with German BBs being heavily played now. Yet the problem is, it's still lacking vs the Zao's HE alpha which is easily able to get 5k raw alpha damage per salvo from it's HE and the fire chance, the Moskva also benefits from the high rof (with the reload mod it's 8 seconds) Which is why it was so bizarre that they keep buffing HE, when I used the Hindenburg it had the Semi AP HE, which frankly should have been kept instead of the gimped standard HE. Semi AP for regular penetration and the regular AP for flat targets should have been the move, but then again I've no idea what WG bases their decisions on sometimes. Define T10? Are we talking about the almost pure T10 games, like we had before T8 got completely out of control? Because those ones people know their ships by and large and everyone is more aware of errors being punished brutally, but if we're talking about the games where T8 has spilled into T10 and only a few ships are now top tier, those games yeah, you'll encounter some terrible players which don't have a clue, I've seen T8 BBs fire HE at broadside targets until I have to jump on the chat and tell them to switch their damn shell type. Maybe I should go back to play the Hindenburg again, given the buffs (it boggles the mind why they nerfed the AA and stuck that ridiculous AA mount on the fore turret) yet I'm unconvinced as of yet that it's not outstripped by the other T10 CAs given their specialization for certain roles, where a particular play style yields greater results due to the higher skill ceiling. Looking at my my averages, in the Hindenburg it's 50k, in the Moskva 84k, Zao 82k, Minotaur 68k (and that's with me screwing up and getting myself killed multiple times)

Er no it can't, the Moskva's bow angle allows it to abuse the hell out of the auto bounce mechanics, while it's hp pool allows it to absorb significantly more damage than the other T10, providing you stay angled. Hindenburg suffers the same problem as all other T10 CAs Turtle back makes little difference with BBs as the shells simply plough through the armour at close range and simply over match the armour, it only come into play with CA/ CLs and frankly if you hit T10 in a CA CL you should have a good grasp of angling to mitigate close range AP shells. In the BB heavy metal the biggest threat by far is getting obliterated by concealment based BBs and lucky citadel hits from long range sniping. The Hindenburg has nothing to counter this, particularly having a higher profile than the Zao which has an arguably better armour layout. At 10, no most competent players will angle unless they're unable to due to a torp salvo or another ship targeting them, and that's where the poor AP and angles are most telling. Moskva, Zao and Des Moines can still get penetrations on an angled target depending on gradient, even minimal angles for the Hindenburg cause bounces. As I said, but you ignored, you'll get one broadside salvo off, two if you're lucky, combined with the Hindenburg's poor concealment it means the opening surprise salvo is what does the damage, followed by a sharp damage drop off. It is a terrible carrier, as you are dependent on the enemy presenting a broadside to deal significant damage, it's concealment is the worst after the Moskva, the HE is poor by comparison to other T10s I f you are pushing close range in a Hindenburg in the current meta without correct terrain use, you'll be obliterated, and that goes for any CA, the Hindenburg is no exception. While pushing inevitably leads to fore deck penetrations and the AP angles again become a problem as you're relegated to sub par HE against the bow on targets. It's versatility has come at the price of mediocrity in every area, the only outstanding ability is AP alpha damage, which is mitigated by the poor AP angles. The more specialised CA/ CLs you can see it in the stats, it lags at the bottom of the T10s precisely for that reason. In a meta which priorities specialist CAs/ CLs in either concealment or long range sniping, the jack of all trades is going to lose, which is precisely the case with the Hindenburg.

Not really, while I wouldn't say it's terrible it's decidedly meh. It's a poor man's Moskva in a gun fight, which has greater HP tanking, better angles for bouncing shells, radar and hydro, it's 220mm guns are rail guns have incredible accuracy, good AP penetration angles, better HE and a reload time of 6 seconds. Zao has better concealment, troll armour, better torpedoes, better HE damage and alpha, it's AP angles are better and what it lacks in AP alpha damage it make up for in better penetration. Minotaur, super stealthy, better torpedo arcs, extremely rapid fire guns and turret traverse, incredible AA potential, smoke, hydro, radar, extremely low detection and good maneuverability. It doesn't do anything better than the above, I can't comment on the Des Moines, I don't have it. That's the biggest problem of the Hindenburg and the German line, they're mediocre and don't outclass any other line in a measurable way on anything. So why take the Hindenburg when the Zao is better at HE Alpha and the AP isn't bad, or the Minotaur which has way more flexibility, or the Moskva which has railguns for main armaments, it might lack the raw AP alpha damage, but it's shell arcs, angles and penetration makes it easier to deliver consistent AP damage. The Hindenburg when it came out was the go to for raw AP alpha, but who at T10 doesn't angle? You might get one salvo off, but you'll be lucky to get another broadside salvo off on the same target as most competent players will immediately angle and the damage drops off sharply. HE meh, it doesn't change much nor address the core issue of the rubbish AP penetration angles. I remember when the Hindenburg came out and the KM line had semi HE with low fire chance, personally I'd rather that with better penetration capacity to off set the AP angles than it being a mediocre HE spammer which is outclassed by the ZAO, Moskva and Des Moines.

Step 1: Play CA/CLs Step 2: Get to T10 Step 3: Use Zao, Moskva or Minotaur Step 4: Make BB players cry

New flag of the RN, do want.