The_Chiv

And the moment the cruiser shoots the dd pops a smoke and the cruiser may get 2-3 salvos on them totaling for about 3-7k where the cruiser takes a salvo from a bb and takes 10-50k. A cruiser can only engage a dd when it can see it which for the most part means it is reliant on other classes thus is not a true counter. If Cruiser shells scaled up against a dd or mitigated their concealment more consistently then I would say they are a true counter. And no radar is not a true counter as it is a limited use consumable with a cooldown that you can play around.

Before the CV rework WG for the most part was ok. a few issues here or there, however after the rework when everyone begged to make the pain stop and were told to learn to adapt it was a pretty big warning. Since then it has just been a rollercoster of anti community actions designed to make money. There is nothing wrong with making money, and I have spent a decent amount on this game. However consistently smacking your customer base and ignoring them is a great way to ensure any possible future projects you seek to make a profit on will be found lacking. Now I could ask how many of you have spent money on Warhammer, Azure lane, transformers, or the Pan asian lunar new years ships, but I am not trying to shame anyone. I will say this though. Since the Cv rework my spending dropped by 50% after the PR it dropped another 50% and after the scam crates and now the commander rework I have closed my wallet. I am probably not alone in this.

If you look at it from just the why is Flamuu doing this then yeah seems sus. When you add in EarlGrey, Ichase, and even how the way the higher ups treated people like Fem you start to see a very different picture. Also this is the same company that scammed loot crates with a unpublished short list, this is the same company that said the Puerto rico could grinded for free while neglecting to say oh yeah enjoy the 180hrs grind over the holidays, this is the same company that changed the torpedo bombers on the Graff Zepplin literally a day before release with no notice, this is the same company that made AA ships non existent yet did nothing to rebalance them(Pls do not give me that NOSTER video BS), This is the same company who forced us all to suffer the CV rework for testing purposes and failed to balance them, and this is the company that decided to completely screw the meta by redoing the command skill tree so they could make more money and increase the grind. Yeah it is not hard to see why people are willing to believe WG is morally bankrupt when all they have shown us is ineptitude, greed, and dishonesty.

HAHAHAHAHAHA funny and wrong.

not new and already posted a few times

A dd can counter a bb and not suffer a counter attack due to its ability to steath fire torps. The only real tool a Cruiser has for dealing with dd is Radar. Radar is a limited use consumable with a cool down. So for 20-48 seconds they can expose a dd. The dd however will most likely be near max range and due to its agility and speed will be able to escape the radar bubble. Not all cruisers have radar, in fact from t8-10 it makes up about 33% of cruisers. Without radar a cruiser requires vision from other ships, mostly dd's. When a dd torps a bb it can do so with out fear of reprisal fire from the bb, the moment a cruiser shoots at a spotted dd they become the target of every bb. A bb can 1v1 a cruiser and win 9 times out of 10, a dd can 1v1 a bb and win 9 times out of ten. A cruiser can not 1v1 a dd as the cruiser requires vision and or a consumable to even have a chance at trying.

YEP. Is trying to make the class enticing to play so the population for it will justify the expense. What they are failing to understand however is they can have a healthy cv population, but it wont mean a thing if there is no other population to play against.

ok sir pls tell me what class does a cruiser counter and I will give you at least 5 reason you are wrong.

While I would agree that would require remodeling armor on 168+ ships. This would take a ton of time as you would have to balance test each iteration. My suggestions are a bit more achievable and require the least amount of effort for WG. They also have the added advantage of fixing the massive wrongs of the Commander rework, as well as giving a bit of flavor to the class.

It had less to do about relevance of those patches and more a look at the mindset and practices they were working off of to make balancing decisions. We however have been at the front lines of those decisions and testing as we have been the lab rats in this grand experiment. If the foundation of your testing is flawed then the results and changes you make to balance future results will also be flawed. Yes I just TLDR; a 23 minute video into 1 sentence.

Thank you, I wanted to say something about the shoe horning of strawman legal bs in this topic but lacked the red color to make the point stick. Cv topic however does have merit as it is one of the prime things Flamu has been highlighting as a failure of design and is the topic of his latest video. Talking about CV in general yeah should not be in this thread, but pulling examples from said video or other works by the former CC should hold a bit of merit to this discussion. I wont even bring up that you are still a filthy cv main.

1. Thank you figured the concept of jack of all trade should have some actual merit, and it is rather simple and elegant. 2. Can not get around the fact that 457+ is kind of toxic to the game. 3. I chose 10km out of habit as this was the metric I used when looking at ways to mitigate the spotting that cv planes can do. 15km seems a bit fair actually and discourages camping. 4. Disagree. Ships like the Worcester, Cleveland, Atlanta are so damn reliant on terrain that getting spotted before you get to terrain or being on a map like OCEAN tends to be one of the most punishing things ever. There were a few other ways that greater survivability could be baked in but that would be a bit problematic as there are realistically 2 available options. Smoke or greater agility. Smoke would turn the usn line into the greatest cancer line ever and would require a removal of Radar or make it a either or like the UK cl lines(come to think of it I am ok with the either or concept). Agility would have a lesser impact than say smoke, but in the hands of many would make most cls like the colbert. Both are not horrible ideas but rather then recycling old content I thought to invent something a bit different. FYI 6.5k-7k damage per pen is a lot and any bb with 12 guns could still nuke 50% or more with a salvo they would just be unlikely to get a full dev strike. Now will this encourage more bad CL play. Well yeah. Cl has a massive learning curve that requires a ton of trial and error. 5. My idea of rebalance is swap the LR and MR constant damage values while making flak less predictable. Yeah I know pipe dream. 6. I chose 7 because of how often a 7 is in a 9 game. This is a huge problem in this game as the power difference between 7-9 is extreme to say the least. I mean I had an analogy involving Disable people but it felt a bit cruel and tasteless, but I think you get the point. 7. Nothing is ever perfect and ideas tend to always need testing and refinement. 8. Thank you for the input.

Yes they added cvs that bypass aa and can nuke aa cruisers even more effective. Great change.

Thank you

There is punishing poor playing, and then there is exploiting a broken system and completely relegating an entire class to port queen status. Now when I started playing this game I quickly learned that if you have a problem fighting against a ship or a class you should play it and learn what it can or can not do. What I found with DEADEYE in ships like Minnesota, Thunderer, Vermont, Yamato, Musashi, Conqueror, Grober Kurfurst, Republique, and Montana was that as long as I led correctly I was taking 50% or more per salvo. Mind you I was not firing all the time when the guns were off cool down and was picking my shots, but still. The point where I realized this was a problem was when I was able to get 5 citadels against a t9 russian bb at 17km in the Minnesota doing 62k damage. Then in the next game got 4 on an atago at 16km(he never had a chance to shoot once). As to why people who play this game complain is because unlike WG we actually have a clue what balance is and should be. DEADEYE should have never been tested live.

I am a cruiser main and I can tell you exactly why this happens. Cruiser get nuked by bbs, yet get yelled at by dds for not supporting them. So guess what now dds can do what they should have been doing the whole time. Dealing with other dds. No matter what sort of warped class role or RPS logic you try to give the fact of the matter is this. Cruisers have never had a significant advantage over a dd. Radar is not an exclusvie CA trait as only 33% have it available. A cruiser can only shoot what it can see thus it needs dds to spot and engage, instead what we get are dds popping smoke the moment they are spotted blinding the team only to eat some torp soup then complain about no support. Cruiser support is a huge risk when supporting a dd. The moment they fire poof they lose half if not more of their life because they have a citadel and overmatch is a thing. Sorry but it is not worth the grief. So to review something I said back in January when the final list for the Commander rework was posted. "Deadeye is going to punish cruisers pretty unjustly and this will in fact lessen support dds can expect in all forms of play. DD players are going to have to step up and learn to fight 1v1 with other dds or accept losing more." Seems I was right.

She started out as a cc and then took a position at WG Austin. She left not to long ago during yet another WG PR disaster. She has never said why, however her tweet to Flamu being free from Sub_Octavian is very telling.

To be fair to CCs commentary about the game. WG balancing has historically been a problem. When a problem continues to be ignored and in many ways made worse it is not a hard assumption of no one is listening. Former ST who left the program have said the same thing. Sure they may listen but they do not hear or have learned a pretty simple and basic fact. THEY SUCK AT BALANCING.

If that was true then can you explain the cv rework?

I see a ton of you trying to act as if Stat shaming is why this all happened. If this was the case Flamu would have lost his cc years ago. So what changed? WG cited tweets and Stat shaming. When we look at those tweets it calls out WG for doing shady stuff. So rather then actually engage with their CC they just remove him because WG has no desire change or do anything that would make the community happy. Its all a money making scam and Flamu exposed and threatened that. If Statshaming was an issue then about 6 cc's I can think of would be gone. The reality is that many CCs have begun to show dissent against WG. Flamu was the most vocal of them. So take down the biggest and remind the rest who they are beholden to and get them back in line of compliance to the WG.

@Hundigo And @Nazgarth Fight in PM. pls keep to topic.

Patch notes also said Puerto Rico would be available to all, never said that it required 180hrs. Patch notes also never said anything about loot crates having a short list but they did. The community has been burned so many times by WG at this point that patch notes tend to hold little to no factual value to us.

lol Wargaming can ban any player and make up whatever reason they want to do it. This however can easily alienate even more of the player base. As for tracking him down, it would not be too hard to figure out. It would be easy to find what ship he is in and who he killed and at approximately what time it happened. They will not ask twitch to do something because in all honesty he hasn't violated the rules of twitch. Having had to deal with WG when it comes to twitch interactions they tend to take a not our responsibility approach.

There is always going to be a level of trash talk in a game where statistics are used as a means of measuring the caliber of your skill. It is simpler to blame others for your failure then to self analyze your failings.