dd nerf Huge DD nerf might be coming for patch 0.9.1

[Panocek]

8 minutes ago, Jethro_Grey said:

I know the Sewdish DDs are coming and they have These stupidly fast torps which this module would help to counter, but other DDs will suffer from it massively. 

The only penalty Ikea DDs suffer from new upgrade is mild damage reduction, as they have 1.8km detection already. And then cranked up speed means evading them is easier said than done

[GraySlayer]

Why is it that whenever there is change it always always screws DDs over in some way. 

 

They steadily, inexorably  and consistently become harder to play. 

 

Time I switched to cruisers as my main interest. 

[britinmadrid]

29 minutes ago, MrConway said:

 

After having looked at our test results we didn't see a strong reason not to proceed with the module as planned.

 

We will however be monitoring the live-results closely and if necessary make changes to the module and/or affected torpedoes (Deepwater, USS Black etc.) going forward.

From someone who seems to be likeable on Stream and quite reasonable, this is a surprising statement.

 

I recently helped to pay your wages, MrConway, by buying an Asashio B. It's the proverbial one-trick pony which must be used carefully if you want to deliver the damage and make it a) work, and b) fun to play.

 

How can you possibly say that, "...we didn't see a strong reason not to proceed…", when vessels with Deep Water torps will have their entire raison d'etre removed? 1.8km detection range will hammer these ships' effectiveness and render them useless and I have to put up with this for how many months?

 

As the Ashasio B was a premium, may I ask for a refund in light of this change? A simple yes or no will suffice, MrConway.

[Vbeest]

1 minute ago, Egoleter said:

Considering the glacial speeds of Wargamings balance adjustements:

How many months are the effected DDs supposed to be, let me quote the Hitchhickers Guide to the Galaxy, "mostly harmless"?

 

They will reconsider this just after milking the playerbase free-exping new DD techtree.

[creamgravy]

17 hours ago, Procrastes said:

the concealment upgrade has no serious contender

Well, it's a game based on concealment. They should just remove it for more variation and loose that horrible gap between tier 7 and 8.

[Captain_Newman]

2 minutes ago, britinmadrid said:

From someone who seems to be likeable on Stream and quite reasonable, this is a surprising statement.

 

Seeming likeable and reasonable on stream is a part of his job, as is peddling WG's snake oil "balanced" updates.

[Jethro_Grey]

1 minute ago, creamgravy said:

Well, it's a game based on concealment. They should just remove it for more variation and loose that horrible gap between tier 7 and 8.

I'd rather see a concealment module at TVI with 4% concealment buff, and one at TVII with 7 or 8% concealment bufff for DDs only. 

[Karasu_Browarszky]

On 1/13/2020 at 8:03 PM, kapnobathrac said:

Perfect counter to the asashio? Isn’t it countered By everything other than BBs? I payed real money for that. If BBS can counter it put kitakaze guns on it then or let me hit even cruisers with torps. Jesus Christ this ship bill be pointless ,is it because we have to buy newer DDs?

 

The best three ways to counter the Asashio are.. CV's, radar, and a team that insists you go and cap right away.

 

Hard to say about these changes, as I would normally welcome a chance for further customizing and tinkering, the way we can now do it with captain skills. However, how that will work with the concept of 'balancing', I wonder...

[Nechrom]

Looks like I might be the only one who actually thinks this new upgrade is a positive.

Asashio is fudged obviously, which is bad. The other DW torp DDs also to a lesser extent. But otherwise the fact that it barely affects IJN torps and other already super visible torps is a good thing. With the old upgrade it impacted the big visibility torps the most and the low visibility torps the least, which is backwards imo.

I think they should have two different values for regular and DW torps if they still intend to keep the DW torp concept.

[MrConway]

2 hours ago, britinmadrid said:

From someone who seems to be likeable on Stream and quite reasonable, this is a surprising statement.

  

I recently helped to pay your wages, MrConway, by buying an Asashio B. It's the proverbial one-trick pony which must be used carefully if you want to deliver the damage and make it a) work, and b) fun to play.

 

How can you possibly say that, "...we didn't see a strong reason not to proceed…", when vessels with Deep Water torps will have their entire raison d'etre removed? 1.8km detection range will hammer these ships' effectiveness and render them useless and I have to put up with this for how many months?

  

As the Ashasio B was a premium, may I ask for a refund in light of this change? A simple yes or no will suffice, MrConway.

 

No, we are not planning to offer refunds for Asashio's.

 

I am aware that this can potentially impact her performance, which is one of the special cases we will be monitoring following the release.

 

I suggest you wait until the change has gone live before making your mind up either way, once it is live I would be glad to get your feedback on how the change has affected gameplay either way.

[Beaker71]

To quote someone who now, in retrospect, looks like a genius "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."

 

The only change that (some) people complained about pre-release, that was actually welcomed  (aside from the owners of premium DDs that specialised in it) - was the stealth firing nerf. Everything else so far, seems to be making the game worse. CV rework, HE meta, balancegrad etc etc.

 

With something like the Benham in game, why would any BB not take this new module - i know i will, if I'm still playing

 

 

[Egoleter]

34 minutes ago, MrConway said:

I suggest you wait until the change has gone live before making your mind up either way, once it is live I would be glad to get your feedback on how the change has affected gameplay either way.

To bad that our feedback, our concerns, before it went live has been already overruled by you.

 

I'd like to repeat something I said not so long ago in this very thread:

On 1/15/2020 at 12:37 PM, Egoleter said:

If it is in public test, at best minor adjustments are made before implementation. Historically proven fact.

Only way to influence something in a meaningfull way is to talk about it long before it reaches the public test phase.

To which you replied ...

On 1/15/2020 at 1:27 PM, MrConway said:

This may apply to some major feature releases that can only receive minor changes prior to release, but certainly not for balance changes.

 

We have heard and passed on the concerns regarding the new module and will pay close attention to its effects during testing. 

Also Sehales on the Devblog a day later ...

On 1/16/2020 at 12:00 PM, Sehales said:

Also, many of you have raised concerns about how some of the new upgrades may affect game balance. For example, the upgrade "Torpedo protection system (slot #5)" may be too effective against ships equipped with low-detectability torpedoes. During testing, we will closely monitor the impact of the upgrades on game balance and, if necessary, make additional changes.

Only one week has past since. Plenty of testing and consideration of our feedback and concerns before you decided to bring it to the live servers.

Because I take your statement now as a confirmation that it will go live, no matter what the upcoming public test says. As I correctly predicted.

 

And you wonder why we are disgruntled and feel like our feedback and opinions don't matter to you? When things like that become an everyday occurence for us?

[Captain_Newman]

25 minutes ago, MrConway said:

 

No, we are not planning to offer refunds for Asashio's.

 

I am aware that this can potentially impact her performance, which is one of the special cases we will be monitoring following the release.

 

I suggest you wait until the change has gone live before making your mind up either way, once it is live I would be glad to get your feedback on how the change has affected gameplay either way.

 

"Howdy neighbor, we understand your concerns, but we're still going ahead with adding 3 stories to our house. We understand that this will block your view through the windows as well as sunlight for most of the day, but based on some of our internal tests and projections this shouldn't affect you at all. However, once it's built, we'll be happy to get your feedback on how much this has affected you either way". By which time, ofc, the situation will remain. Now, yes, obviously, a system in a game is changed more easily than adding stories to a building, however...

 

Again, you tested something that can't really be tested short of releasing it on live. Once it's there, it's likely to stay. As for your willingness to nerf that module once torp boat's performance numbers go down even further, color me skeptical. We've seen what your nerfs are like - inadequate where needed (Kremlin), absolutely butchering a ship and the way it's played otherwise (YY, Henri).

 

Again, I ask you - do you (people at WG) consider torp boats as OP and overperforming? And please don't reply with a "it'll rarely be used and if it is they'll be burnt by a smolensk more easily", because:

 

1. you don't know how often it will be used, you can't know this until it's been released for a while;

2. someone else getting the damage will be little consolation to a torp boat that struggles to land a single torp - at that point you may as well switch to play something else, and

3. arguing that a module will rarely be used, and when it is someone else gets the performance numbers you would have normally had is a really, really bad way of trying to justify it's existence.

 

Unless your ultimate goal is to have teams entirely made of CV's and fast-firing high arc HE spammers just farming each other, you need to stop and consider the direction you're taking with the game.

 

 

 

 

[Jethro_Grey]

5 minutes ago, Captain_Newman said:

 

"Howdy neighbor, we understand your concerns, but we're still going ahead with adding 3 stories to our house. We understand that this will block your view through the windows as well as sunlight for most of the day, but based on some of our internal tests and projections this shouldn't affect you at all. However, once it's built, we'll be happy to get your feedback on how much this has affected you either way". By which time, ofc, the situation will remain. Now, yes, obviously, a system in a game is changed more easily than adding stories to a building, however...

 

Again, you tested something that can't really be tested short of releasing it on live. Once it's there, it's likely to stay. As for your willingness to nerf that module once torp boat's performance numbers go down even further, color me skeptical. We've seen what your nerfs are like - inadequate where needed (Kremlin), absolutely butchering a ship and the way it's played otherwise (YY, Henri).

 

Again, I ask you - do you (people at WG) consider torp boats as OP and overperforming? And please don't reply with a "it'll rarely be used and if it is they'll be burnt by a smolensk more easily", because:

 

1. you don't know how often it will be used, you can't know this until it's been released for a while;

2. someone else getting the damage will be little consolation to a torp boat that struggles to land a single torp - at that point you may as well switch to play something else, and

3. arguing that a module will rarely be used, and when it is someone else gets the performance numbers you would have normally had is a really, really bad way of trying to justify it's existence.

 

Unless your ultimate goal is to have teams entirely made of CV's and fast-firing high arc HE spammers just farming each other, you need to stop and consider the direction you're taking with the game.

 

 

 

 

Would it surprise you that BBs are the most played class in WoWS? 

And which class will most likely Benefit the most from this module? 

If you look at the module REEE-work, which class is the one that gets buffed the most directly or indirectly? 

 

 

[genosse]

Hm, a lot of valid concerns in this thread, but I was wondering: Do you plan on using the new module on your BBs?

 

I don't think it will be dethrone the concealment module, to be honest, which has a lot more uses than simple torp detection - at least as far as I am concerned.

Same reason many people don't take vigilance, basically: The alternatives are usually better.

 

I also think that torps are already pretty easy to avoid and even more detection would just be overkill and a waste of a slot.

 

Who knows, maybe it's just a storm in a teacup. And sorry if this was already brought up - I have to admit that I only read the first and last 2 pages ...

 

One thing I'd like to see though (which will probably not be implemented), is that the torps are only spotted early for the ship that's actually mounting the module, so a single ship in a convoy can't protect every other one, so everyone has to sacrifice some concealment for that benefit.

 

-

 

Edit: Okay, it already was brought up ... ;)

VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

[TheBrut3]

35 minutes ago, Beaker71 said:

Everything else so far, seems to be making the game worse. CV rework, HE meta, balancegrad etc etc.

Meh, i don't really see a  gamechanging problem in Stalingrad. Yes it sure is very strong, but it also isn't seen in every random battle. Stalin was release in september 2018 and have been seen in about 550k battles. Smolensk on the other hand has been released this summer and has been seen in over 1.1M battles. That's 2 times more then the Stalin, while the Stalin is 3 times older.

 

38 minutes ago, Beaker71 said:

With something like the Benham in game, why would any BB not take this new module

And we will not stop you sir!  I think it still situational for BB's.

[Egoleter]

20 minutes ago, genosse said:

Hm, a lot of valid concerns in this thread, but I was wondering: Do you plan on using the new module on your BBs?

Definatly.

I already don't use the concealment module on most of my BBs as it is rather useless for my playstyle. Better torp protection (almost immunity) against most DDs and cruisers in the game is a perfectly viable choice for any BB.

 

20 minutes ago, genosse said:

I don't think it will be dethrone the concealment module, to be honest, which has a lot more uses than simple torp detection - at least as far as I am concerned.

Not at first. It will take a few months until the mystical "concealment for everything" dogma might change. It's just years of indoctrination that we need to get rid of. By then it will be to late and WG will not make another change to the module, or even remove it. They will have their statistics telling them that everything is fine.

A BB can already play without the concealment module and still do extremly well.

[Verblonde]

14 minutes ago, genosse said:

Do you plan on using the new module on your BBs?

Dunno yet - I was slightly surprised to find I have the old one on Kii the other day (probably a male-chicken-up on my part, partly informed by my almost never using her in Randoms). That said, as has been observed several times already, forum denizens are not the typical player base.

 

My feeling is that the module will have a disproportionate impact because a lot of players may not understand the vision mechanics (and/or ranges - witness how many hydros get triggered way before there is the slightest possibility of something to detect), so will pick it over concealment. If that happens, anything with DWT (Asashio especially) is a lot more boned than might be expected from reading the forum.

 

I find it bleakly ironic that WG are launching two shiny new ships with DWT (for money) a mere couple of weeks before this module goes live too...

[Capra76]

1 hour ago, Beaker71 said:

With something like the Benham in game, why would any BB not take this new module - i know i will, if I'm still playing

 

Benham's not really affected by this, 1.4 km detection, if you use the existing module that goes up to 1.75, some of the PA's DWT might not be too badly affected if they are fast enough (unlikely that many cruisers will use the module, BB still won't be able to react in time), what this will kill is slower torpedoes that get their low detection because of their speed, so primarily:

• USN mk29 (Black) 0.9 km, 43 knots;
• USN mk15 (Mahan, Benson, Fletcher (stock)); 1.1 km, 55 knots;
• Ognevoi, 1.1 km, 56 knots;
• RN CL/DD, typically 1.3 km at 61 knots;
• Italian cruisers, 1.0 km at 51 knots (Zara & Amalfi) to 1.1 km at 56 knots (Brindisi & Venezia).

Of course this all assumes that players using CE don't switch to the new module in large numbers, if the 5% (or more if WG decide) TPS buff prompts many more players to use it that then becomes a general nerf to all DD.

[Verblonde]

1 hour ago, MrConway said:

No, we are not planning to offer refunds for Asashio's.

I trust there will be an enormous warning in the text trying to persuade people to pay money for aforementioned new DWT ships (launching tomorrow), to the effect of 'you have two weeks or so before a potential nerf hits these things'...?

 

Surely, to do otherwise would be misleading/dishonourable, even by WG's recent standards?

[Capra76]

4 hours ago, MrConway said:

After having looked at our test results we didn't see a strong reason not to proceed with the module as planned.

 

Do you think that the DD population is strong enough to take another nerf?

 

I mean the data sites typically put the DD population at below 20% of games played at the affected tiers, and that population is still dominated by the IJN Shimakaze line (Shima frequently is around 50% of all T10 DD games), so why would you want to nerf lines that collectively account for less than 10% of games at that tier and at the same time potentially buff the one line that is still somewhat alive?

 

We can't see a problem isn't a good reason to do something, and the module is either going to remain unused (why bother then) or will hammer lines that are already at a very low population, I don't see the logic behind that.

[Jethro_Grey]

14 minutes ago, Verblonde said:

I trust there will be an enormous warning in the text trying to persuade people to pay money for aforementioned new DWT ships (launching tomorrow), to the effect of 'you have two weeks or so before a potential nerf hits these things'...?

 

Surely, to do otherwise would be misleading/dishonourable, even by WG's recent standards?

You really think WG would do that? 

 

Besides, the recent standards have taken a dive and are about to reach crush-depth...perfect for the upcoming Subs.

[Verblonde]

3 minutes ago, Jethro_Grey said:

You really think WG would do that? 

Not a chance - a fart would have a greater chance of surviving a hurricane...!

 

You never know though: WG *might* have learned something from the PR debacle vis-a-vis honest communications (although it's most likely "we can be as sketchy as we like and *still* the money rolls in", based on the number of PRs I've seen in game)...!

[genosse]

Regarding Asashio: As the owner of this ship, there is only one possible solution, and I am sure my fellow fans of the ship will agree.

 

Don't let the new module affect her torps at all, then remove her from the shop for balance reasons (see Kamikaze & Fujin) and make her obtainable through containers only.

 

That way nobody can be salty, right? Right?

[elblancogringo]

2 hours ago, MrConway said:

 

No, we are not planning to offer refunds for Asashio's.

 

I am aware that this can potentially impact her performance, which is one of the special cases we will be monitoring following the release.

 

I suggest you wait until the change has gone live before making your mind up either way, once it is live I would be glad to get your feedback on how the change has affected gameplay either way.

Tell me, how are you going to gather data about DW torps DDs once it's live? Nobody will play them after the release of this change. I will certainly not be playing them. 

Good lord, this, combined with the Mogador and Kleber concealment nerf gives 3 choices only remaining:

- French DDs as gunboats 

- New pan-European DDs with their very fast torps

- IJN DDs which will surely come back

 

I see what you did here. The last developments of the game are really bad imo. What about submarine torps next?