Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Redcap375

Limit "Light Cruiser" DD's please

90 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
3,130 posts
8,836 battles

I'm getting slightly cheesed off with seeing nothing but "light cruiser" DD's in my team.  What i mean by this is those DD's that are HE spammer's that generally don't cap contest. DD leaders as you will.

 

Now, people have the right to play what-ever they want to....Fine.  I'm cool with that.  However, having nothing but DD's acting like Light Cruisers is hurting the team they are in.  It's handicapping and frustrating the rest of the team, forcing them to act as a DD.  I saw a poor Henri trying his best to cap something as the other 2 DD's were swanning around the map edges.  He died within seconds by torps from the enemy DD and BB AP. 

 

He didn't wanna do that. He's not designed to do that. But he did and died doing something others should be doing before himself. He is going to have a bitter taste for certain players/ships now and adds to the current toxicity.  Something which inadvertently I have added to.

 

Seeing the only 2 DD's in my team, the Kaba and Harra, I knew from the very start that we were more than likely to lose the game before it even begun. And we did in the same way i thought we would....Points/time.  This is happening more and more and it's got to that level that i feel obliged to voice my concern. 

 

To be brutally honest, I actually flamed the guy.  I felt completely ashamed afterwards but i was so frustrated with it all that i wasn't seeing reason.  You know, a bad day in the office moment.  "why is he playing a light cruiser DD that's been nerfed to the hilt and refusing to spot, be a DD for god sake"!. 

 

Now I look back, I realised that it's not HIS fault that he picked that kinda ship.  It's also not his fault that the team was screaming at him to grab a cap or we lose (by that time the enemy had ALL caps) something that it's not really designed to do. It is also not his fault that he hasn't got an actual DD to support! Lol.  That has a knock on effect to teamwork because that Des that COULD/WOULD have supported them in that cap, well...He's now swapped with the DD and is now in the front line DD territory about to be blown to pieces.

 

Support cruisers arnt gonna swan off down the side of the map supporting a one-man-band DD. Not in a vital radar ship anyway. Now that's just one example but there are many.  Some ships rely on DD's to spot to function at their peaks and they too get frustrated when DD's arnt doing that.

 

So....

 

I propose something which i already know will probably get rejected.:Smile_amazed:  I know it will because they would have already implemented it on the "Supercrusiers" and they haven't for some reason.

 

That is:

 

1) Put them into sub-classes within their class. So "DD leader (or something like that)" and "General DD" (Or something like that)

2) Have a limit on those sub-class ship types.

 

So we don't have 3 DD's like a Harra, Frie and Kaba in the same team against sometime like a gearing, Daring and Shimmy.  Because 9/10 the latter is gonna win and i feel quite confident saying that. Please disagree by all means. 

 

@MrConway

 

Is their scope for this to happen in the future?

 

It will stop the problems I have mentioned above and will also have the knock-on effect with other things, like limiting a certain sub-class within CB's. Supercrusiers are all coal/Steel/premium so it could give an unfair advantage. I'm not saying that they all do now (expect for the Grad) but it COULD in the future with WG bring out more and more supercrusiers.  We don't want CB's being ruled by Steel/Coal/Premium ships which 3/4 of the teams already are. 

 

Now we could also sub-class Battlercrusier and Battleships but they don't quite have have the effect on the games that DD's do. DD's win game.  Well, IMHO and i'm sure others will differ. 

 

Please, this is not a DD hate thread what-so-ever, let me make that very clear and i am trying to be as constructive as i can with my personal observations and proposed solution.  I'm a born again DD player :cap_like:, but i believe we need some change in this department.  We don't need anymore toxicity in this game, including at times shamefully, from myself. :cap_cool:

 

  • Cool 15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
21,251 posts
12,929 battles

No. 

Players should adapt and not wait for training wheels.

The problem are not the DD leaders, but the people playing them.

  • Cool 7
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OGHF]
Players
937 posts
15,630 battles

Why put the whole of this onto the DD???! You seem to forget that other DD’s are no longer the DD’s main threat, it is CV’s  rocket planes and radar CA’s, CL’s, DD and not for getting the Missouri, radar ranges from 7.5 to 12 km’s so do I as a DD go straight for the cap in this new Meta, do I hell, I scout and spot first, find out where the Gunboat DD, radar ships are first, and as for CV’s I stay close to good AA ships till I know where the CV is targeting. The days of a DD rushing a cap are GONE.

We do not have MM for the different types of CA/CL and heavy cruisers so why do we need it for different styles of DD? 

  • Cool 3
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,252 posts
9,079 battles
4 minutes ago, Cyclops_ said:

We do not have MM for the different types of CA/CL and heavy cruisers so why do we need it for different styles of DD? 

 

So if we would get different mm for CA/CL your answer would be yes? or could one bring the argument "we dont have different mm for DDs so why do we need it for CA/CLs?" aswell? you see, we have to start somewhere.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
120 posts

Problem is when even Shimakaze guys think they are tactical geniuses, go flanking and refuse to fight for the cap.

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NED]
Players
4,385 posts
12,087 battles

I get your idea OP and partially I agree to it. For me however I don't see much point anymore in playing "regular DD's" anymore. Yeah I know LTP etc but I don't see them as much fun anymore. Main function I feel is being a floating persicope for others to harvest dmg and an occasional torp hit. Together with radar and HE spammers combined with CV's the fun of being the first blood donor quickly wore off when trying to grab a cap. And I have the feeling there are more players thinking the same thing. At least the "heavy DD"s" can fight back in gun fights or accidentally know down a plane or 2.

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,130 posts
8,836 battles
3 minutes ago, Cyclops_ said:

Why put the whole of this onto the DD???! You seem to forget that other DD’s are no longer the DD’s main threat, it is CV’s  rocket planes and radar CA’s, CL’s, DD and not for getting the Missouri, radar ranges from 7.5 to 12 km’s so do I as a DD go straight for the cap in this new Meta, do I hell, I scout and spot first, find out where the Gunboat DD, radar ships are first, and as for CV’s I stay close to good AA ships till I know where the CV is targeting. The days of a DD rushing a cap are GONE.

We do not have MM for the different types of CA/CL and heavy cruisers so why do we need it for different styles of DD? 

 

So you have a no CV and 1-2 radar ship game. You gonna avoid all the caps in the first 3 mins because of those 2 radar ships?

 

No you are not, I wouldn't in my Jutland and just grab the caps under their noses.

 

Please remember that i am ALSO a DD player. So i know the score when and when not to go into caps.   But the though is always there to get the caps, because that is one of the main functions of a dedicated DD player.  At some point you need caps unless you go for the murder, death, kill kinda game which seldom wins. 

 

In most DD leaders minds, capping the actual caps isn't in their minds, farming damage or supporting other DD's is.  Which is fine if you have a dedicated DD to support but crap if you don't!

 

Like i have said, it's not a DD bashing thread and i understand why those types of ships play like that.  Hell i love the Harra, but it's not good having nothing but harra's in the team.

 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,130 posts
8,836 battles
3 minutes ago, Ferry_25 said:

I get your idea OP and partially I agree to it. For me however I don't see much point anymore in playing "regular DD's" anymore. Yeah I know LTP etc but I don't see them as much fun anymore. Main function I feel is being a floating persicope for others to harvest dmg and an occasional torp hit. Together with radar and HE spammers combined with CV's the fun of being the first blood donor quickly wore off when trying to grab a cap. And I have the feeling there are more players thinking the same thing. At least the "heavy DD"s" can fight back in gun fights or accidentally know down a plane or 2.

 

So shall we just take away the caps?:cap_cool:

 

No really, shall we just take away all the gamemodes with caps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NED]
Players
4,385 posts
12,087 battles
3 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

 

So shall we just take away the caps?:cap_cool:

 

No really, shall we just take away all the gamemodes with caps?

That's not what I meant to propose. Frankly the only solution I see is removing CV's. I know: that's probably not going to happen. So for me the fun for playing "regular DD"s"' is pretty much gone in Randoms. And if my guestimate is right probably for others as well. So I guess there will be less competent to barely competent (my lvl) DD players in queue, thus making your proposal harder to implement.

  • Cool 5
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,155 posts
5,488 battles

Sometimes it is just impossible to cap with any destroyer. I don't see how this will solve your problem, since it is a team problem. Sure, sneaky destroyers can take a cap in front of the reds, where gunboat destroyers can stop an entire push alone. Both have advantages and both disadvantages. 

Khaba needs a buff and Harugumo needs an overhaul so that both can get rid of the BB AP pen.
 

38 minutes ago, Redcap375 said:

So we don't have 3 DD's like a Harra, Frie and Kaba in the same team against sometime like a gearing, Daring and Shimmy.  Because 9/10 the latter is gonna win and i feel quite confident saying that. Please disagree by all means. 

TBH Daring craps on Harugumo's... Luckily WG buffed it with the latest concealment mechanic patch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
118 posts
2,637 battles

The limit for DDs should have always been 3; light cruisers, gunboats or torpboat that is. More pleasant for those who use them and more manageable for those who find them against.
Now with all these gunboats or "light cruisers" it's even more important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
68 posts
3,923 battles

It really depend on the player I would say, when we play in a Div, me in Kleber, and a clan mate in Daring, we basically never lose, it's just to easy to win caps quickly with the amount of firepower and tactical advantages you can get... But yeah I can agree that when gunboat DD player are alone, and not very good, most of the time it end up bad... Trying to hard limit the number of gunboat per side would be nice... Actually the best would be to make two separate classes... But I doubt we'll ever see that! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,130 posts
8,836 battles
15 minutes ago, StalkerSoC said:

It really depend on the player I would say, when we play in a Div, me in Kleber, and a clan mate in Daring, we basically never lose..

 

Nail on the head, precisely and that's how we play most games.  Daring/Kleber, Daring/Smol.

 

But having a team of 3 Klebers isn't good. Having a team of 3 darings is from a cap contesting point of view. 

 

Having a mix is SOOO much better. 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
148 posts
3,217 battles

I have absolutely no issue with DDs being reluctant to cap and indeed playing as light cruisers when CVs are in the battle.

 

But, some do seem to have forgotten that it's a major part of the game that they cap, particularly if their are no radars on the opposition.

 

However, in saying that, I play Minotaur a lot and in a lot of games try to be "the best DD in the game," because the DDs have gone wide or try and chase distant BBs and CVs, but far too often I spot for the heavier cruisers and BBs behind me, maybe then smoke up to deal some damage or complete the capping process, and when I turn around, the support has high tailed it back towards the spawn and the opposition can push me, meaning I have to drive like I stole the thing!!!

 

Good DD players need to be valued as, even if they die fairly quickly, they cap they may have secured can allow your team to grab a lead and defending it is much easier than trying to overcome a deficit.

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,051 posts
10,090 battles
1 hour ago, Redcap375 said:
Spoiler

 

I'm getting slightly cheesed off with seeing nothing but "light cruiser" DD's in my team.  What i mean by this is those DD's that are HE spammer's that generally don't cap contest. DD leaders as you will.

 

Now, people have the right to play what-ever they want to....Fine.  I'm cool with that.  However, having nothing but DD's acting like Light Cruisers is hurting the team they are in.  It's handicapping and frustrating the rest of the team, forcing them to act as a DD.  I saw a poor Henri trying his best to cap something as the other 2 DD's were swanning around the map edges.  He died within seconds by torps from the enemy DD and BB AP. 

 

He didn't wanna do that. He's not designed to do that. But he did and died doing something others should be doing before himself. He is going to have a bitter taste for certain players/ships now and adds to the current toxicity.  Something which inadvertently I have added to.

 

Seeing the only 2 DD's in my team, the Kaba and Harra, I knew from the very start that we were more than likely to lose the game before it even begun. And we did in the same way i thought we wound....Points/time.  This is happening more and more and it's got that the level i feel obliged to voice my concern. 

 

To be brutally honest, I actually flamed the guy.  I felt completely ashamed afterwards but i was so frustrated with it all that i wasn't seeing reason.  You know, a bad day in the office moment.  "why is he playing a light cruiser DD that's been nerfed to the hilt and refusing to spot, be a DD for god sake"!. 

 

Now I look back, I realised that it's not HIS fault that he picked that kinda ship.  It's also not his fault that the team was screaming at him to grab a cap or we lose (by that time the enemy had ALL caps) something that it's not really designed to do. It is also not his fault that he hasn't got an actual DD to support! Lol.  That has a knock on effect to teamwork because that Des that COULD/WOULD have supported them in that cap, well...He's now swapped with the DD and is now in the front line DD territory about to be blown to pieces.

 

Support cruisers arnt gonna swan off down the side of the map supporting a one-man-band DD. Not in a vital radar ship anyway. Now that's just one example but there are many.  Some ships rely on DD's to spot to function at their peaks and they too get frustrated when DD's arnt doing that.

 

So....

 

I propose something which i already know will get probably get rejected.:Smile_amazed:  I know it will because they would have already implemented it on the "Supercrusiers" and they haven't for some reason.

 

That is:

 

1) Put them into sub-classes within their class. So "DD leader (or something like that)" and "General DD" (Or something like that)

2) Have a limit on those sub-class ship types.

 

So we don't have 3 DD's like a Harra, Frie and Kaba in the same team against sometime like a gearing, Daring and Shimmy.  Because 9/10 the latter is gonna win and i feel quite confident saying that. Please disagree by all means. 

 

@MrConway

 

Is their scope for this to happen in the future?

 

It will stop the problems I have mentioned above and will also have the knock-on effect with other things, like limiting a certain sub-class within CB's. Supercrusiers are all coal/Steel/premium so it could give an unfair advantage. I'm not saying that they all do now (expect for the Grad) but it COULD in the future with WG bring out more and more supercrusiers.  We don't want CB's being ruled by Steel/Coal/Premium ships which 3/4 of the teams already are. 

 

Now we could also sub-class Battlercrusier and Battleships but they don't quite have have the effect on the games that DD's do. DD's win game.  Well, IMHO and i'm sure others will differ. 

 

Please, this is not a DD hate thread what-so-ever, let me make that very clear and i am trying to be as constructive as i can with my personal observations and proposed solution.  I'm a born again DD player :cap_like:, but i believe we need some change in this department.  We don't need anymore toxicity in this game, including at times shamefully, from myself. :cap_cool:

 

 

I think you have a very good point. But I don't think your suggested solution will work in the way that you would want because your solution will make matchmaking a lot more complex.

But still, the way in which these DDs are designed does force them into some certain gameplay which I agree with you is hurting the game.

 

But imo the problem should be solved in a different way: By making DD as a class less influential.

Why make them less influential? Because influence wins games and spotting and conceilment are the greatest influence, along with DDs having devastatingly powerul torps. DDs are not only very well suited to combat BBs, but also to combat the class that is supposed to be their counter.

 

You remember what happened last CB tier 8? DDs outgunning CAs and CLs?

Heck, CLs need a bunch of tools just so they have any actual tools to combat DDs but a 1 vs 1 fight? It's not rock/paper/scissors anymore. But BBs are illequipped to battle destroyers anymore. But looking the other way around DDs are far more designed in wows to combat cruisers. And this is where the balance of power between classes has gone haywire.

 

Games in which 1 team loses 3 or 4 of its DDs within the first 4 minutes of the game (death, along with being AFK or otherwise incompetent making them useless) while the enemy keeps their 4 or maybe still has 3, it turns the rest of the match into a clusterfrack for the remaining teammambers as they lack sufficient tools to effectively combat them and particularly if you don't even have any tools which can ai in spotting DDs.

And Imo the only way to keep games like these somewhat level (compared to disbalances with other ship classes) is to reduce the influence DDs have.

 

The only other somewhat realistic solution I could think of could be to limit the amount of DDs in a game to 2/team at the most, but this won't really work well if those 2 DDs have to put up with 2 (or gods forbid if each team gets 3) CVs because then the DDs would be fracked.

 

My apologies for intervening in this way in your own thread. I had not planned to write this message in this way when I started responding :Smile_hiding:

because I agree with what you say. And I admire you being frank in admitting your own inabilities and mistakes. But personally I don't see your solution as one that is viable enough to actually work in the way that we would hope.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,051 posts
10,090 battles
46 minutes ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

I would rather that sub 50% winrate players being placed on teams of their own - always playing against the above 50% winrate player.

 

Yeeeeeeees :Smile_trollface:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,051 posts
10,090 battles
1 hour ago, Redcap375 said:

 

So you have a no CV and 1-2 radar ship game. You gonna avoid all the caps in the first 3 mins because of those 2 radar ships?


No you are not, I wouldn't in my Jutland and just grab the caps under their noses.

 

Exactly this! :Smile_great:

Ohh Jutland, Ima never selling you! :fish_cute_2:

 

When playing DD, radar is really not much of an issue.

The only radars I really dislike when playing DD are the longer duration 12km ones. 10km is on the edge of what I would feel being a nuisance or a real danger but can be worked around a lot easier compared to 12km radar.

9km radar is barely a thread imo, they can barely cover the entire cap and I know my positioning when playing DD (especially sicne I play basically all other classes of surface combatants so I know what the enemy likes and what their inabilities are).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EST]
Players
1,088 posts
22,615 battles
1 hour ago, Redcap375 said:

So we don't have 3 DD's like a Harra, Frie and Kaba in the same team 

I don't see the reason why first 2(even 3rd) can't cap if they have support. The question ofc is: Do they wanna cap/win or maximize damage, but that's the question with any DD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EST]
Players
1,088 posts
22,615 battles
1 hour ago, G01ngToxicCommand0 said:

I would rather that sub 50% winrate players being placed on teams of their own - always playing against the above 50% winrate player.

 

I would rather see them in both teams evened out. Not 1 team above 50 and other below 50.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SQRL]
Players
352 posts
13,007 battles

Not a bad idea, but no different to balancing out the number of radar cruisers per team. There's more fundamental problems  with WOWs to get sorted out first. *cough* CVs

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,051 posts
10,090 battles
1 hour ago, ColonelPete said:

No. 

Players should adapt and not wait for training wheels.

The problem are not the DD leaders, but the people playing them.

OP has a good point though.

 

I see what you're trying to show, that it's not the shoe but the foot that is doing the walking.

But..the shape of the shoe does influence the shape of the foot and how the foot will behave, depending on what shoe you put around it.

 

I mean, if a certain ship is specifically designed and balanced around being an open water citadellless cruiser with poor conceilment for a DD, it will be hard to go cap in one. Not only because of your bad conceilment but also because of your sluggish controls which makes surprices like surpricetorp dodging or a forgotten radar ship catching you with your pants down a whole lot less effective.

But the other team does get a proper DD and they will often reap the benefits of this.

 

And if it's not the matchmaking, it's the yolokamikazes that can do a team under. And not because that team is lacking in skill compared to the other team, but because they are lacking the proper tools because game changes have helped design it this way.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
7,360 posts
7,993 battles
3 hours ago, LemonadeWarrior said:

Sometimes it is just impossible to cap with any destroyer. I don't see how this will solve your problem, since it is a team problem. Sure, sneaky destroyers can take a cap in front of the reds, where gunboat destroyers can stop an entire push alone. Both have advantages and both disadvantages. 

 

I guess its easier to change the Setup rather than to change how people play. Havent we been all there, getting only gunboat DDs on our side while the enemies get IJN/German/RN DD f.e. They go in, take the cap, and your gunboat DDs sit in smoke waiting for a spot (or "flanking") When they are done with it, game is already lost.

Sure the players are at fault, but that wont change. But WG could change more balanced DD matchups.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
5,051 posts
10,090 battles
21 minutes ago, Beaker71 said:

Not a bad idea, but no different to balancing out the number of radar cruisers per team. There's more fundamental problems  with WOWs to get sorted out first. *cough* CVs

And not only CVs. It's also the sheer amount of them. Same thing with the sheer amount of DDs being a problem. DDs were softcapped from 5 to 4 earlier this year for a good reason.

 

All these ships that are being put on the table right now (the minicruiser DDs for instance), they are all balanced. And yet still there are a lot of people who are not happy with certain aspects of the game.

 

Imo it's not just a question of balance but there's something else missing here.

 

When in a DD, having a double carrier game when being the only DD in your team. Well, I can tell from my own experience that it was quite the challenge! :Smile_sceptic:

So I get that.

 

But otoh CVs are also the best way to prevent DDs from dominating the game too much.

 

Tbf, for me I liked the games with either no CV or bottom tier CV, and the games in which DDs played but a minimal role, the most. Regardless of what ship type I played.

 

6BB and 5CA/CL and 1 something else when I'm playing cruiser? I love it!

But this torp soup is no fun anymore.

 

Today I had one game in which I nosed-in into at least 6 torp salvos while the enemy Sims sailed broadside and got spotted in front of me several times. Switch to HE? Yes there were 2 enemy battleships right behind the gap in B cap broadside and I didn't want to miss the opportunity to be able to blap them.

 

Our DDs? One was on the far side of the map and the other was chasing a Buffalo :Smile_amazed:

Who was doing the torp spotting? I was! In my Mo! :Smile_teethhappy:

 

Well, at least I got the mission done :Smile_trollface:

 

this one:

Spoiler

shot-19_10.22_15_11.29-0326.thumb.jpg.5501455731d322a6beaffeddd1f5367e.jpg

in my Mo

 

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.

×