Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
DFens_666

Ideas for IFHE change

60 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[NWP]
Players
6,578 posts
7,488 battles

So with all the ships that are currently entering the game, i feel (as ive heard others aswell) that ships, that rely on IFHE are having a maybe too high DPM output with it.

Lets elaborate on that one:

Basicly for certain ships, you HAVE to take IFHE in order to deal damage on most targets other than superstructure. Whether WG is thinking about that when they are balancing those ships - i dont know. But not using IFHE is pretty much dumb on those ships.

IFHE gives a flat out boost. Either you can pen the armor - or you cant. The difference is 0 or x damage.

This gets "balanced" by an RNG mechanic -> starting fires. Overall you might start less fires, but that doesnt prevent you from getting 4 permafires on one ship, its just less likely. Still you get the DPM boost all the time.

 

My thought about this is:

Why not nerf the HE Alpha damage when using IFHE? If the fire chance needs a slight nerf or not with this is a different story, that would need to be tested i guess.

I think when you get 30% more HE pen, then why not lose 30% HE Alpha damage in return? Might aswell add an incentive to use AP when the situation allows it, and not keep spamming HE because its foolproof.

 

What do you guys think about it?

Maybe WG might look into that option aswell?

 

  • Cool 10
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
989 posts
8,105 battles

I can actually wholeheartedly get behind this. IFHE's complete lack of tradeoff should be addressed. (A couple percentage points fire chance reduction is solved via either DE or flags. It's hardly a tradeoff for what is is in some cases almost doubling your alpha.)

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
3,688 posts
14,479 battles

I guess they could try change it. I'm not overly fond of the IFHE skill either. Otoh, a 30% damage nerf might make it less valuable than a 4p captain skill. It also makes it tougher to evaluate. Most players probably wonders about the effectiveness of IFHE as it is. Increasing pen while nerfing damage would make it even tougher.

 

As it is now - yes, IFHE is needed to make some ships effective, but it takes 4 captain skill points and reduces fire chance, so it's not a flat out boost considering you could pick something else. CE is a flat out boost to concealment...

 

Not an important thing to change as it is, imo. Although, I agree, the skill doesn't seem very well thought out. ..can easily mess with balance.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[COMFY]
Players
587 posts
1,492 battles
9 minutes ago, loppantorkel said:

I guess they could try change it. I'm not overly fond of the IFHE skill either. Otoh, a 30% damage nerf might make it less valuable than a 4p captain skill. It also makes it tougher to evaluate. Most players probably wonders about the effectiveness of IFHE as it is. Increasing pen while nerfing damage would make it even tougher.

 

As it is now - yes, IFHE is needed to make some ships effective, but it takes 4 captain skill points and reduces fire chance, so it's not a flat out boost considering you could pick something else. CE is a flat out boost to concealment...

 

Not an important thing to change as it is, imo. Although, I agree, the skill doesn't seem very well thought out. ..can easily mess with balance.

The issue I see is the binary effect of IFHE on certain ships, on CLs they literally must have the skill, no other way, otherwise you are regulated to shoot at other crusiers and DDs, and be useless for most of the battle.

i say we move nerf IFHE by reducing HE alpha by a small amount-something like 10-20% less damage(remove the old fire chance debuff) then move its position to 2-3 point skill and have something else moved up instead(along with buffs if needed)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
3,688 posts
14,479 battles
15 minutes ago, howardxu_23 said:

The issue I see is the binary effect of IFHE on certain ships, on CLs they literally must have the skill, no other way, otherwise you are regulated to shoot at other crusiers and DDs, and be useless for most of the battle.

i say we move nerf IFHE by reducing HE alpha by a small amount-something like 10-20% less damage(remove the old fire chance debuff) then move its position to 2-3 point skill and have something else moved up instead(along with buffs if needed)

...or they could remove the skill altogether, increase pen for these CLs while reducing damage on their HE. Something's wrong with the skill if it's needed, but OP when equipped. I don't have the data to know what's best. Maybe some change is needed, maybe not. I'm not sure.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,529 posts
11,480 battles

Nah. IFHE shouldn't be made even harder to assess viability-wise (and harder to balance - imagine trying to balance damage light cruisers and IJN gunboats do to DDs when they can have or decide against IFHE). With the current state of the game and the way WG handles information both inside and outside of game, IFHE should be removed and all ships should be re-balanced around the assumption that IFHE doesn't exist.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,009 posts
6,188 battles
1 hour ago, DFens_666 said:

So with all the ships that are currently entering the game, i feel (as ive heard others aswell) that ships, that rely on IFHE are having a maybe too high DPM output with it.

Lets elaborate on that one:

Basicly for certain ships, you HAVE to take IFHE in order to deal damage on most targets other than superstructure. Whether WG is thinking about that when they are balancing those ships - i dont know. But not using IFHE is pretty much dumb on those ships.

IFHE gives a flat out boost. Either you can pen the armor - or you cant. The difference is 0 or x damage.

This gets "balanced" by an RNG mechanic -> starting fires. Overall you might start less fires, but that doesnt prevent you from getting 4 permafires on one ship, its just less likely. Still you get the DPM boost all the time.

 

My thought about this is:

Why not nerf the HE Alpha damage when using IFHE? If the fire chance needs a slight nerf or not with this is a different story, that would need to be tested i guess.

I think when you get 30% more HE pen, then why not lose 30% HE Alpha damage in return? Might aswell add an incentive to use AP when the situation allows it, and not keep spamming HE because its foolproof.

 

What do you guys think about it?

Maybe WG might look into that option aswell?

 

Why always wanting to nerf high dpm ifhe ships?

I'm fine with Worcester and Harugumo.

And no, I don't have them.

I think there is no need to touch IFHE skill. If it appears in a few months that the ships overperform then change them, not the captain skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,529 posts
11,480 battles
6 minutes ago, elblancogringo said:

Why always wanting to nerf high dpm ifhe ships?

I'm fine with Worcester and Harugumo.

And no, I don't have them.

I think there is no need to touch IFHE skill. If it appears in a few months that the ships overperform then change them, not the captain skill.

The skill is ridiculous and unsuited for the game from the moment it first appeared. And I say this as someone who's played A LOT of games in old Akizuki (before 100mm IJN HE change, when she needed the skill to damage same tier DDs with HE) and now plays a lot of Kitakaze (I've already grinded through to Harugumo but have yet to put a captain on her and with that terrible concealment I'm likely to keep having much more fun with Kitakaze).

Problem with IFHE isn't the problem of certain ships being overpowered but a problem of the skill being badly designed - and it's made worse when the game doesn't natively inform you what your HE penetration values actually are, making it even harder to assess the actual gains from taking the skill.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
[SCRUB]
Players
2,866 posts
10,704 battles

(cruiser) HE is in this game already is crap and nerfing it via nerfing IFHE  - I cant support that in the least.

 

Its already bad enough that you have to take IFHE so you can pen the overbuffed deck armor on some on those ships - or even the minimal base plating in some cases.

 

Take Izumo for example: Completely bulletproof to less than 33 mm of pen except that tiny bit of SS - and if that is that easy to hit I want cruiser citadels equally small compared to the rest of the ship. That 57 mm of middle-deck armor is even more rétarded - not even the HIV (remember 240 mm!!!) WITH IFHE can pen that. How fúcking WGtarded its this?

 

Ships like the Mogami have to even take IFHE to do damage to ........  ah you are expecting other battleships with 32 mm plating? .... but no!, I am talking about cruisers with 26 or 27 mm  armor (p2w-zov, Hipper etc). Like what the actual fúck?! Look at the new DDs - they get now the improved IFHE for free so they can properly outgun cruisers and pen their own class by default.

 

to much high tier? Ok how about low tiers and 152 mm guns. Considering the tier, those are "heavy guns" for the tier with plenty 75-152 mm guns in between. Now look at stuff like Nassau you need heavy guns AND freaking IFHE to even damage that. Or stuff like OP-erator you can go even fúck yourselves WITH ifhe and 152 mm. epic stuff really.

 

Or Emden: I remember that "OP" 21 mm of IFHE  pen - combinded with 1 % firechance. Like fúck, those poor BBs! Now its even worse because its a mighty 3 % since the chance for DD guns.

 

To much low tier? How about Kaba again: If you shoot that with an IFHE ship that isnt a german heavy cruiser, lets say Chapy, you will not even pen his belt. If you fire AP you will either overpen, or if the Kaba is not completely rétarded and either angles or just dodges (and thus gets angled) only bounces. Much balance really! Better yet heavy cruisers that are not german ones with improved IFHE can go fúck themselves again too - no matter if they spec IFHE.

 

 

Further looking back: low calibre HE is already heavily nerved. They lowered the fire chance massively, the lowered the splash radius, again massively and then there were other more softer nerfs like BFT-nerf, AFT-nerf, EM-nerf. Because remember: "We cant allow cruiser-captains picking actively fights with battleships" - fúcking epic stuff and I dare say they achieved that. The overpopulation of BBs and the often glaring absence of cruisers is a testimony to their success.

 

 

Next thing: HE is crap! It only does 50 % of AP (around that usually), and then only 33 % of that value because there are not many ship you can HE citadel (Britishfuckboats excluded because ...... what else do you expect for a BB-line specifically designed by WG for potatoes) ....... and the fun is not stopping there: Depletion. I have never seen a depleted cruiser citadel, but I have fired on a battleship and thought: Yeah, 8 k good stuff ......... what?! The next 10 salvoes do only 1-2,x k (no matter how many shells hit) each on a BB with 70-110 k hp - and heals ranging from half a Zao to beyond a full Zao. Balanced!

So if something is depleted, shoot something else on the sip? You cant, your AP is garbage and you already needed the IFHE to even deplete that section that is not under even heavier armor ...... so again its time to go fúck yourself and enlist in the shitty fire lottery.

 

 

Finally: IFHE costs something (and reduces your already measly fire chance, its not like you are driving a Monqueror). Given that cruisers already have to take CE just to stay alive basically pts 14 pts are allocated. Now remember that CV counter ofc cruiser hard (I mean, what isnt really?) so at that point you cant even get AFT + Manual + Def.AA. (Ofc on a 10 pts captain you have to give up CE for IFHE - because cant have cruiser not getting outspotted by battleships!) Furthermore there are shittcruisers that need stuff like EM or last stand - so if you want AR (which is basically free pic on all newer BBs/high tier ones) you have to spend additional skill points there - which adds to the skill-pts-starving of cruisers. 

It would be really nice if BalancedBoats would have to take a skill, lets call it "shorter fuses" to even be able to achieve anything but an overpen with AP on a cruiser/DD - "only" 4 skill pts. What? You can even still take CE + another 4 point skill and still be less pressed with skillpoints than cruisers. Ofc that "should have some drawbacks too" - like halving max. AP-damage. The whine would be real .........

 

 

So by all means, go after stupid stuff like Britishbattleship and their ....... you guessed it! ......... free improved!!! IFHE but shitcruisers are in bad spot as it is - and even have to pay to "enjoy" that. 

 

 

tl;dr: Fix the broken ships because, you guessed it, thats whats actually broken.

 

OR:  Design the game without IFHE to beginn with - because the nerf to small calibre HE cruisers is what caused this fuckfest to begin with.

 

/rant.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,556 posts
8,240 battles
12 minutes ago, havaduck said:

tl;dr: Fix the broken ships because, you guessed it, thats whats actually broken.

 

OR:  Design the game without IFHE to beginn with - because the nerf to small calibre HE cruisers is what caused this fuckfest to begin with.

 

15 minutes ago, eliastion said:

The skill is ridiculous and unsuited for the game from the moment it first appeared. And I say this as someone who's played A LOT of games in old Akizuki (before 100mm IJN HE change, when she needed the skill to damage same tier DDs with HE) and now plays a lot of Kitakaze (I've already grinded through to Harugumo but have yet to put a captain on her and with that terrible concealment I'm likely to keep having much more fun with Kitakaze).

Problem with IFHE isn't the problem of certain ships being overpowered but a problem of the skill being badly designed - and it's made worse when the game doesn't natively inform you what your HE penetration values actually are, making it even harder to assess the actual gains from taking the skill.

 

I´d like to add: These examples both show, that with a skill like IFHE around, it gets way harder to balance ships. And yea, the casual gamer has no real information, how valuable IFHE is for which ship (heck, if we listen to some CCs on youtube, they dont even know what IFHE does). There should be something like an armor-model in game, that you can pull up, which lets you check, which parts of ships you can penetrate with your ship (this would be usefull in generell, but to check IFHE even better). A green/red model would be absolutly sufficiant. smth like this (leet paint skills ftw)

 

shot-18_08.31_23_24.12-0094.thumb.jpg.de06b37fafeaeede14cee28e5e01b985.jpg

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
[SCRUB]
Players
2,866 posts
10,704 battles
18 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 There should be something like an armor-model in game, that you can pull up, which lets you check, which parts of ships you can penetrate with your ship (this would be usefull in generell, but to check IFHE even better). A green/red model would be absolutly sufficiant. smth like this (leet paint skills ftw)

 

shot-18_08.31_23_24.12-0094.thumb.jpg.de06b37fafeaeede14cee28e5e01b985.jpg

 

My serious side thinks this is a good idea.

 

My salty side thinks everyone who cant be bothered to do a quick google search/look at the wiki + do some math on their giant calculator capable of millions, billions of operations/sec doesnt deserve this.

 

My combined serious/salty side thinks: Great, more battlships actually rocking useful skills like "fire prevention" or "basics of not burning down" - so the potatoes sitting broadside all day unpunished can crap on every other class even harder.  Even CV wont like to have to deal with more AFT/Manual insteal of "enhanced tailgunner"-equipped spotter planes. :Smile_trollface: ......... and dont forget the famous T10 german SE-Große Kackwurst-BBs - they immediately show up as the tárds you can ignore or exploit/farm for extra salt even without any stats tool. :Smile_trollface: In that sense I would have to be against that.

 

 

........ so I guess thats 1 Yes, 1 No, 1 Salt! from me - and ofc 1 vote goes to........

 

Spoiler

1734540__safe_artist-colon-dvixie_derpy+

 

....... it always does after all! :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[4_0_4]
Players
6,026 posts
12,326 battles
40 minutes ago, havaduck said:

Look at the new DDs - they get now the improved IFHE for free so they can properly outgun cruisers.

 

Without IFHE the 100mm guns of the IJN can not pen 25mm of T8+ cruisers.

Spoiler

shot-18_08.26_00_43.16-0613.thumb.jpg.93f93eb3270b492ca97794b22cacd133.jpg5b8294b089362_wows4.jpg.f2106477c3ae337631a15d7fa1fa1d2c.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,004 posts
7,573 battles
6 minutes ago, Zemeritt said:

 

Without IFHE the 100mm guns of the IJN can not pen 25mm of T8+ cruisers.

  Hide contents

shot-18_08.26_00_43.16-0613.thumb.jpg.93f93eb3270b492ca97794b22cacd133.jpg5b8294b089362_wows4.jpg.f2106477c3ae337631a15d7fa1fa1d2c.jpg

 

Changed in the last patch IIRC, the 100 mm now get the 1/4 pen rule so that they can pen 24 mm armour (i.e. can't pen 25 mm), but the problem is that with IFHE they can pen 32 mm (i.e. everything).

 

I did suggest a 1/5 rule for these and the smaller RN guns but nothing came of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
[SCRUB]
Players
2,866 posts
10,704 battles
17 minutes ago, Zemeritt said:

 

Without IFHE the 100mm guns of the IJN can not pen 25mm of T8+ cruisers.

  Hide contents

shot-18_08.26_00_43.16-0613.thumb.jpg.93f93eb3270b492ca97794b22cacd133.jpg5b8294b089362_wows4.jpg.f2106477c3ae337631a15d7fa1fa1d2c.jpg

 

 

Yes, and never I doubted that but it doesnt infringe on the statement of the free improved IFHE ( /4) and outgunning cruisers. You can now pen other DDs per default with that HE + if you actually spec regular IFHE ontop ( *1,3) of the free improved IFHE? Which al lot of old and already there Aki captains have? And I havent yet seen a cruiser with 33 mm base plating?! And can pen 32 mm BB on top for free too?

 

So you decide in a cruiser: Do I want to take torps? Get HEed down because I have no armor against that and no/shitty heal and a small healthpool? Or is it going to be the good old AP-into-broadside when trying to turn?

 

Meanwhile try penning a Kabas belt with Zaos HE ......... IFHE or not.

 

........and I have actually died quite a few time in co-op because I couldnt pen Umikazes side with AP (bounce, shatter) or HE (+depletion of other sections) .......... yeah.........

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UTW]
Weekend Tester, In AlfaTesters
8,752 posts
7,249 battles

Actually, without IFHE, 152mm cruiser can't even penetrate 25mm of armor. (155 Mogami can however)

So guess what, they can't even penetrate their counterpart.

 

IFHE is fine. Now for individual ship tweaking :

Worcester is a bit broken on the SURVIVABILITY department, not on the DPM. Certainly NOT on the DPM. It just need to be punishable with high-caliber more easily.

Cleveland deserves a slight reload nerf.

Harugumo is completely fine. I don't understand why people are losing their mind about those new IJN DDs. It has so many trade-off to its firepower that saying it's OP is not even funny. The other day after trying a bit to play Harugumo, I went back to Khebab, a ship I usually do complete crap with. I got 23 fires that game. 23. Including an Izumo on which I got three fire, he DCP'd, and got immediately afterward 4 new fire from me.

Khebab ability to output damage is as powerful, it's just not through the same means.

 

Weegee already tried to nerf IFHE, and they couldn't find a better solution than the current one.

 

And I'm 100% against your idea. Nerfing HE damage is terrible. If anything, I think they should reduce the fire chance by a % of the current firechance, so that it impacts ships equally.

Let's say you lose 30% of your current fire chance. Henri with 26% goes down to 18.2%. DD with 6% goes down to 4.2%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[4_0_4]
Players
6,026 posts
12,326 battles
1 minute ago, Capra76 said:

Changed in the last patch IIRC, the 100 mm now get the 1/4 pen rule so that they can pen 24 mm armour (i.e. can't pen 25 mm), but the problem is that with IFHE they can pen 32 mm (i.e. everything).

 

I did suggest a 1/5 rule for these and the smaller RN guns but nothing came of it.

 

With 1/5 the ships would still be able to duel with 25mm plated cruisers, since with IFHE the pen goes up to 25mm

 

1 minute ago, havaduck said:

 

Yes, and never I doubted that but it doesnt infringe on the statement of the free improved IFHE and outgunning cruisers. You can now pen other DDs per default with that HE + if you actually spec regular IFHE ontop of the free improved IFHE? Which al lot of old and already there Aki captains have? And I havent yet seen a cruiser with 33 mm base plating?! And can pen 32 mm BB on top for free too?

 

So you decide: Do I want to take torps? Get HEed down because I have no armor against that and no/shitty heal and a small healthpool? Or is it going to be the good old AP-into-broadside when trying to turn?

 

The problem is: How else you want to the ship work in the current game? With the old 1/6 the need to have IFHE to even pen DDs with HE.

As stated above, a 1/5 pen wouldn't save the 25mm cruisers.

 

The Harugumo basicly only has her guns to work with. ( And 12 torpedos all ~3 mins)

Otherwise she has enough drawback that balance her. That she overperforms currently is still because she is rather new and the playerbase adapts rather slow.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,004 posts
7,573 battles
1 minute ago, Zemeritt said:

With 1/5 the ships would still be able to duel with 25mm plated cruisers, since with IFHE the pen goes up to 25mm

But the point is that with 1/4 and IFHE they can duel wiht 32mm plated BB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[4_0_4]
Players
6,026 posts
12,326 battles
Just now, Capra76 said:

But the point is that with 1/4 and IFHE they can duel wiht 32mm plated BB.

 

Honestly, that's the least of my concern. Since I play her alot recently, I feel really sorry for the cruisers, who get in my way. The BBs take some time to "melt" away, but the cruisers suffer the most from this.

The only HT BB who really suffer are those completly plated in 32mm (Conq and Repu).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
[SCRUB]
Players
2,866 posts
10,704 battles
25 minutes ago, Zemeritt said:

 

With 1/5 the ships would still be able to duel with 25mm plated cruisers, since with IFHE the pen goes up to 25mm

 

 

The problem is: How else you want to the ship work in the current game? With the old 1/6 the need to have IFHE to even pen DDs with HE.

As stated above, a 1/5 pen wouldn't save the 25mm cruisers.

 

The Harugumo basicly only has her guns to work with. ( And 12 torpedos all ~3 mins)

Otherwise she has enough drawback that balance her. That she overperforms currently is still because she is rather new and the playerbase adapts rather slow.

 

 

Basically penning DDs by default and having to pay (for IFHE with captain-pts) for cruisers is fine with me. Its no different than the live in a russian DD if you think of it (22 mm base pen and 28 mm IFHE pen).

 

But

 

25 minutes ago, Zemeritt said:

As stated above, a 1/5 pen wouldn't save the 25mm cruisers.

 

with 1/5 they wouldnt get free 32 mm pen on BBs on top.  I dont mind that too much tough because BBs deserve nothing better.

 

 

However cruisers themselves are shít and literally everything WG has introduced lately (anti-cruiser torps, anti-cruiser bombs, BB bufs, 16 gun battleships, battleships that are faster than them, etc) was a direct nerf to them. If I play a T8 shitcruiser in a division, there can be actually the situation via mm (no enemy T8 shitcruiser) that I CANT pick a fight with a single ship on the enemy team (openly, without ambushes, positioning etc).

 

 

So again: Fix the actually broken ships - in this case cruiser so shít I literally play DDs to once drive an actual durable ship with influence on the outcome that isnt an overbuffed BalancedBoat. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[4_0_4]
Players
6,026 posts
12,326 battles
3 minutes ago, havaduck said:

However cruisers themselves are shít and literally everything WG has introduced lately (anti-cruiser torps, anti-cruiser bombs, BB bufs, 16 gun battleships, battleships that are faster than them, etc) was a direct nerf to them. If I play a T8 shitcruiser in a division, there can be actually the situation via mm (no enemy T8 shitcruiser) that I CANT pick a fight with a single ship on the enemy team (openly, without ambushed, positioning etc).

 

I won't deny that cruisers are in a bad spot (especially those in the T5-8 bracket), but that is another problem and not really related to this HE and IFHE problem. :cap_hmm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
5,930 posts
7,236 battles
11 minutes ago, Zemeritt said:

 

Honestly, that's the least of my concern. Since I play her alot recently, I feel really sorry for the cruisers, who get in my way. The BBs take some time to "melt" away, but the cruisers suffer the most from this.

The only HT BB who really suffer are those completly plated in 32mm (Conq and Repu).

Pretty much this. There are not that many BBs that don't have large sections clad in armour thicker than 32 mm and of the two T10s that have this weakness, it is part of their balancing. Cruisers meanwhile, with their lower hp pool and less armour basically just haemorrhage hp when they meet a 10 cm armed ship (even 6-gun Harekaze can have the HE dpm of a Dallas).

 

But any dpm increase that is effective against BBs is likely going to be even more lethal against cruisers. The only exceptions are torpedoes and fires, but the main torpedo DD line got nerfed and fires only start becoming an issue when you set enough to get your perma fires and with enough dpm to bring the enemy down to a hp level where the fires actually kill them.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[4_0_4]
Players
6,026 posts
12,326 battles
3 minutes ago, Riselotte said:

But any dpm increase that is effective against BBs is likely going to be even more lethal against cruisers.

 

With HE, this certainly is the case. And honestly I don't really see a solution to this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
5,568 posts
11,282 battles

What's the goal of this thread? A buff to BB or a smarter skill tree (eliminating must have skills)?

What exact problem needs solving?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
5,930 posts
7,236 battles
1 minute ago, Zemeritt said:

 

With HE, this certainly is the case. And honestly I don't really see a solution to this.

Less focus on high-dpm and more on other things. The 10 cm buff was introduced to make Harugumo not utter garbage (Harekaze and Akizuki weren't really in need of a buff). As Harugumo is however a design WG made up out of thin air, there is no reason why they couldn't have improved the design in other areas, instead of adding another gun turret. They could as well have improved the maneuverability and made a better torp arrangement (2x4 or 2x5), which would have made it not just more of an evolution out of Akizuki, but also would give it a weapon that is pretty much anti-BB focused. For ships like Worchester there is no real way to change its dpm. But one single cruiser being capable of killing all other cruisers is not too bad, if the ship was still balanced in other regards. I just feel for the cruisers (and kind of whenever I'm in a cruiser) because how many designs that are most effective against cruisers do we need? Cruisers aren't OP, nor are they overpopulated.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×