Clan Wars - DD Limit?

[admiralgpt]

Coming up against this....

 

 

Isnt fun

 

It happened in the tier 8 season with the Russian DDs - and it set a bit of a president. We have limits on the number of BB's for clan battles, isnt it about time we did the same for DDs? YES/NO

[Lootboxer]

We should have balanced ships rather then limits,  any clan running more then 3 would be stupid. The same applies to BBs, instead of hard limit they should be balanced vs other classes but then it's main target of WG Sales Department so no chance. I thought keber spam is a past now after nerf?

[novents]

Agree 100%. So many people, incl. from top competitive clans on EU server, want this restriction. Akizuki spam completely changed the meta in T8 season to the point that everyone spammed DDs to have a chance. Kleber spam nearly ruined the season before. This season (whether due to cyclone mechanic or what) the DD spam was less common but still extremely unfun to play against when it happened. 

 

Next CB season - if CVs are allowed - maybe this won’t be an issue? Or maybe worse - 7x Kleber lineup will be common place. Because good luck killing 7 scattering cockroaches with your midway before they yolo rush your ships, and eventually the CV. 

 

@Crysantos @MrConway - excuse the ping gents, but can this be looked into please? Maybe there’s a useful way to gather broader community feedback or do a poll on KotS or CC server? 

 

There’s currently a limit on number of BBs in clan wars and KotS. Why not limit the number of DDs to max 2 per side? 

[novents]

@Gebe_ would you like to share with the forum why you think limiting the number of DDs in clan wars is a “bad” idea as per your reaction above? Let’s have a constructive discussion. 

[GulvkluderGuld]

Havn't seen anybody running this (but then my clan hangs out in low storm).

If the issue is with a specific ship, maybe nerf the ship instead of changing the rules just for that?

 

Anyhow, why is this a problem? 

I'm assuming the klebers use the shima as scout and mob one target after the other like kleberovsk (or simply yolo)?

 

In that case, grouping up instead of isolating ships should mitigate the effect quite a bit. Or if it gets popular, there are spammy ships that deal well with Klebers.

 

[novents]

29 minutes ago, GulvkluderGuld said:

Havn't seen anybody running this (but then my clan hangs out in low storm).

If the issue is with a specific ship, maybe nerf the ship instead of changing the rules just for that?

 

Anyhow, why is this a problem? 

I'm assuming the klebers use the shima as scout and mob one target after the other like kleberovsk (or simply yolo)?

 

In that case, grouping up instead of isolating ships should mitigate the effect quite a bit. Or if it gets popular, there are spammy ships that deal well with Klebers.

 

I think the main reason why it’s “unfun” to play against DD spam is not because it’s impossible to counter or unbeatable. Even tho I’ve seen Klebers overrun DMs, Stalingrads, Kremlins and reload boost or torp them out of existence in 30-40 seconds. And no, they don’t need Shima to spot. 

 

The main reason it’s “unfun” is because there’s no strategy, no tactics, no smart positioning, no crossfires. Just an Area-51 naruto run and all out 2 min dpm war that decides the battle outcome. And it’s kinda making a meme out of the battle mode which enough people take seriously. 

 

Nerfing a ship outright to discourage excessive use has impact on other areas of the game outside of CB like randoms and ranked so probably not the smartest solution. 

 

Idk, we’re just exchanging ideas here. I mean there’s probably a reason why CBs have a hard limit on BBs. Probably to discourage BB spam (imagine 7 Kremlins just charging a cap protected by 2 radar cruisers, or 7 conquerors). What’s wrong with looking into pros and cons of DD limit? It doesn’t have to be a 1 per team. 2? 3? But not 6!!

[novents]

Imagine people opposed a hard limit on number of CVs in competitive modes like Clan Battles, ranked or KotS (if / when WG decides to “bless” us with CVs in competitive). 5 CVs per team. Enjoy! There would be a riot, no?

 

So why do people oppose a potential discussion on the merits of limiting the number of DDs per team? We can debate what the limit is. 

 

If the argument is - some clans play CB for phun and we don’t want to impose hard limits... ok. My clan screwed around with our lower rating a bit by taking meme ships like Colbert, Khaba, 8km torp shima with torp acceleration, spotter plane DM. You can have phun without creating a negative meta like 6 Kleber. 

[Afghanicus]

So far... according the the poll.... DDs should be limited, to more than 4 per team.

 

I'm confused.

 

Or people are just trolls?

 

Hmmmm      

[novents]

6 minutes ago, Palubarac said:

So far... according the the poll.... DDs should be limited, to more than 4 per team.

 

I'm confused.

 

Or people are just trolls?

 

Hmmmm      

Lol, I know a lot of people (myself included) often enjoy the forums for that popcorn and salt. Also the forums aren’t representative of the wider community (and thank god for that). Imagine WG would nerf/buff or remove a ship every time someone’s unhappy or types “buff CV” for lulz. 

 

But OP raised a very valid subject. I think this needs to be looked into by WG. The mighty spreadsheet might hold the answer

[GulvkluderGuld]

38 minutes ago, novents said:

I think the main reason why it’s “unfun” to play against DD spam is not because it’s impossible to counter or unbeatable. Even tho I’ve seen Klebers overrun DMs, Stalingrads, Kremlins and reload boost or torp them out of existence in 30-40 seconds. And no, they don’t need Shima to spot. 

 

The main reason it’s “unfun” is because there’s no strategy, no tactics, no smart positioning, no crossfires. Just an Area-51 naruto run and all out 2 min dpm war that decides the battle outcome. And it’s kinda making a meme out of the battle mode which enough people take seriously. 

 

Nerfing a ship outright to discourage excessive use has impact on other areas of the game outside of CB like randoms and ranked so probably not the smartest solution. 

 

Idk, we’re just exchanging ideas here. I mean there’s probably a reason why CBs have a hard limit on BBs. Probably to discourage BB spam (imagine 7 Kremlins just charging a cap protected by 2 radar cruisers, or 7 conquerors). What’s wrong with looking into pros and cons of DD limit? It doesn’t have to be a 1 per team. 2? 3? But not 6!!

Thank for the explaination. I think the kleber setup is pretty rare outside the top clans.

 

Second, we're probably never going to agree on what we consider interesting.

I find CB meta extremely stale and boring with bowtanking russian cruisers everywhere. Anything that breaks that situation and turns it into a mobile battle gets my vote.

 

Third, dont tell me Kleber couldn't use a pretty hefty nerf to bring it in line with Khaba (or khaba buffs).
 

22 minutes ago, novents said:

Imagine people opposed a hard limit on number of CVs in competitive modes like Clan Battles, ranked or KotS (if / when WG decides to “bless” us with CVs in competitive). 5 CVs per team. Enjoy! There would be a riot, no?

 

So why do people oppose a potential discussion on the merits of limiting the number of DDs per team? We can debate what the limit is. 

If there is a need to limit certain classes, that is generally indicative of balace problems that need adressing, since bringing multiple classes should synergize and increase winning chances.

If that isn't the case, some of those classes are obsolete or redundant. In that case (like CVs) one should go back to the drawing board.

 

In this case (and in the case of BBs in ranked) adding a limit is just strapping a bandaid on instead of dealing with the real issue.

Second, if you want to limit DDs, what about limiting cruisers too? Especially supercruisers like Stalingrad?

[novents]

1 minute ago, GulvkluderGuld said:

 Third, dont tell me Kleber couldn't use a pretty hefty nerf to bring it in line with Khaba (or khaba buffs).

I’m generally cautious when it comes to saying anything here that might give WeeGee ideas for further buffs / nerfs given the horrid precedents like Henri and Yueyang lol.

 

But I agree - Khaba needs a slight buff or rebalancing. This ship has been obsolete and dead for a few years now and only enjoyed by a few true connoisseurs like smelly cheese. Kleber “nerf” was horrid too because it encouraged another long range HE spammer playstyle (for 90% of casual Kleber captains that is, yes good players still play it as an ambush assassin which was the original and intended flavour of the line). If you ask me - Kleber needed a speed nerf or longer cooldown of reload booster or reworked dmg saturation mechanic or smth. Not concealment. But WG don’t care for individual opinions and that’s fine. 

 

Back on topic - your other suggestions are interesting but all “broken” ships like Smolensk, Stalin, Kremlin have counters in one way or another in CB. For example some of the easiest wins my clan had this season was against “Russian Bias” lineups like Kremlin + 5/6 Stalins. Ez wins. No hydro. Our DD had fun. Also Venezias / Hindens eat these Russians for breakfast

[GulvkluderGuld]

 

Quote

If you ask me - Kleber needed a speed nerf or longer cooldown of reload booster or reworked dmg saturation mechanic or smth. Not concealment. But WG don’t care for individual opinions and that’s fine. 

Nah, just cut torp range to 4 km or remove one launcher on each side. 

Having 4x3 almostF3-shima torps on top of super strong guns is ridiculous. 

Quote

Back on topic - your other suggestions are interesting but all “broken” ships like Smolensk, Stalin, Kremlin have counters in one way or another in CB. For example some of the easiest wins my clan had this season was against “Russian Bias” lineups like Kremlin + 5/6 Stalins. Ez wins. No hydro. Our DD had fun. Also Venezias / Hindens eat these Russians for breakfast

I was actually half-joking there, because the point i was leaving out is that too many limits will eventually define only 1 viable class distribution. Eventually diversity takes a hit and the gameplay gets too repetitive which is also un-fun. This is the main reason i prefer Ranked over CBs, it's the variation. Limiting CBs to specific class distributions would make it even less variable and reduce the surprise and enjoyment factor where you can keep facing (variations of) new strategies. 

[Saltface]

@admiralgpt

This poll is broken.

You can't vote No. You have to vote both. (answers the question of @Palubarac)

 

This is the first part of my statement.

 

Second part now.

 

NO

No restrictions, as restrictions establish a think right uniformity that I dislike. Field any kind of line up that you want. That's part of the game. The selection of the line-up, the strategy and the tactics. Only cheating should be restricted. (this is a preemptive anti troll statement)

 

A second preemptive statement is that swarm tactics are a thing.

 

So long the playing field is level I don't find any reason not to field a line up of 7 Klebers (or any line up for that matter). The choice is yours and yours alone. If you can make 7 Klebers work, fine.

 

The only reason to put limits is to avoid the one and only solution that might break the game. So, if 7 Klebers would make an unbeatable line up, and, at the end it wasn't Clan Wars but instead Kleber Wars (because everybody would field 7 Klebers) I 'd consider a limit. But this is not the case. Klebers are still marginal line ups. Find a way to overcome them.

 

4 hours ago, novents said:

The main reason it’s “unfun” is because there’s no strategy, no tactics, no smart positioning, no crossfires.

What I get from the above statement is that you find "unfun" (and you are afraid of) anything different from what you know. This is a form of conditioning of thought. You know how to handle a specific situation in a specific way and you are afraid of something that obliges you to change and adapt to a new situation. You know how to solve one problem in a specific way and once you encounter something different you get frustrated and can't adapt. 

 

As I said above Swarm Tactics are a thing. If you encounter an opponent that applies swarm tactics find the solution and overcome your opponent. 

 

4 hours ago, novents said:

So why do people oppose a potential discussion on the merits of limiting the number of DDs per team? We can debate what the limit is. 

In my book there is no merit in limiting the number of DDs per team. But I am open to any debate. Debating with arguments is a wonderful thing. However, I must mention that the issue is a camouflaged opposition to the use of many Klebers not many DDs. The question is not raised because you cant handle 5 Gearings or 5 YY or 5 any kind of DD. The issue comes when you have to face a meme lineup with many Klebers and you short circuit and you lose your marbles.

 

If we are to debate lets be at least honest.

 

7 hours ago, novents said:

Next CB season - if CVs are allowed - maybe this won’t be an issue? Or maybe worse - 7x Kleber lineup will be common place. Because good luck killing 7 scattering cockroaches with your midway before they yolo rush your ships, and eventually the CV. 

Here is the gist of the matter. A clan (like yours) with strong CV mains opposes a lineup of ships that might (or might not) threaten them.

 

Lets forbid anything that can oppose us. That's what I read.

 

What I also find ironic is that the problem exists with a silver line ship. Which is rather annoying. Just as an example I could argue that Stalingrad could be more of an issue. It is a special ship that you can get only if you have enough steel (a rare special resource). Guess what, new clans don't have enough steel among their members. In contrast, anyone can get a Kleber so long they grind the line of French DDs. A bit unfair isn't it? 

 

In conclusion. No limits. Do not restrict people's imagination. Unless it breaks the game. And so far Kleber has not broken the game. We rarely see more than 1 DD per side let alone multiple Kleber lineups. 

 

 

 

 

[Cambera_1]

There is nothing wrong with fielding a team of DDs in Clan Battles. 

They can be defeated.

 

Whether it is fun playing against a team of destroyers is neither here or there. It is a valid competition strategy. Your team could have run with a team of DDs. Therefore it is fair.

 

Changing the rules to limit this is beginning to fossilise the Meta and begin to kill the game.

 

You will have to select a starting line up that reflects the possibility that you may face a team of destroyers. If your team make up doesn't have the ability to counter their team, then that is your responsibility. There are more than enough DD killing ships in the game.

 

Sorry. 

 

[Excavatus]

I'm against to any kind of limitation in CB and I believe it actually shows the balancing issues of the game or balanz department's inability to create good balance.

CB is the most tactical and teamplaywise game mod. There should not be a limitation in there.

The game should be balanced like that any kind of line-up should have a counter line-up or tactic to deal with.

when the tactic becomes extreme like 7 Kremlins, counter should be so strong that it would be able to deal with them like a walk in the park.

But that counter should have its own counter. So the balance should force people into their own limitations.

Right now, the game makes the tactics, line-ups for teams and peoples.. If you ask me, it is not ok..

 

[GarrusBrutus]

We faced a kleber lineup a couple of times and won most of them. I found it fun because it forces you to play differently. If it was the main tactic for the season like the T8 season then I'd agree with a limit but right now I do not see a problem.

 

[Yedwy]

Poll cannot be answered becouse the second question implies you answered yes in the first

[admiralgpt]

2 hours ago, Saltface said:

 

 

NO

No restrictions, as restrictions establish a think right uniformity that I dislike. Field any kind of line up that you want. That's part of the game.

 

 

 

 

Except it isn't part of the game - because we limit the number of bbs - If we can have 7 dds, why cant we have 7 bbs?

 

We all know 7 kemlins would beat 7 Des, or 7 shimas would beat 7 montanas - but WG doesnt allow us the option to choose 7 montanas - Why? because it is an extreme setup that nobody is ever going to field - Just like these kleber setups, it is down to luck half the time if you have the right setup to counter this particular tactic. If it is about luck rather than strategy - whats the point?

[admiralgpt]

34 minutes ago, Yedwy said:

Poll xanmot be answered becouse the second question implies you answered yes in the first

Ok so [edited] up with the question - but answering 4+ (ie "+" - No limit) is pretty much the same thing

[admiralgpt]

1 hour ago, GarrusBrutus said:

We faced a kleber lineup a couple of times and won most of them. I found it fun because it forces you to play differently. If it was the main tactic for the season like the T8 season then I'd agree with a limit but right now I do not see a problem.

 

Weve won a couple and lost a couple - but i cant say i find it fun. 

 

1 hour ago, Excavatus said:

 

The game should be balanced like that any kind of line-up should have a counter line-up or tactic to deal with.

when the tactic becomes extreme like 7 Kremlins, counter should be so strong that it would be able to deal with them like a walk in the park.

But that counter should have its own counter. So the balance should force people into their own limitations.

Right now, the game makes the tactics, line-ups for teams and peoples.. If you ask me, it is not ok..

 

As Excavatus mentions, the lineup largely chooses itself. But i dont think this is a bad thing. There are small variations in lineup and the rest comes down to the tactical play, individual skill and a teams ability to work together. But the best team in the world with 7 montanas as i mentioned above, isnt going to beat 7 shimas. This is my problem with the kleber setup, i think the skill and tactical work is taken out of it and it becomes a little about luck - which I dont like. There will be a counter for this setup, but you cant play that one particular counter setup on the chance that you will walk into 4/5 klebers. The only reason i dont think we see more of this setup, is that many people still dont have kleber. and those that do tend to be the stronger players in the game

 

Im starting to get into the "CV for clan wars" camp when  see this sort of stuff - Which could lead down a very dark path 

 

 

[Jethro_Grey]

8 hours ago, novents said:

I think the main reason why it’s “unfun” to play against DD spam is not because it’s impossible to counter or unbeatable. Even tho I’ve seen Klebers overrun DMs, Stalingrads, Kremlins and reload boost or torp them out of existence in 30-40 seconds. And no, they don’t need Shima to spot. 

 

The main reason it’s “unfun” is because there’s no strategy, no tactics, no smart positioning, no crossfires. Just an Area-51 naruto run and all out 2 min dpm war that decides the battle outcome. And it’s kinda making a meme out of the battle mode which enough people take seriously. 

 

Nerfing a ship outright to discourage excessive use has impact on other areas of the game outside of CB like randoms and ranked so probably not the smartest solution. 

 

Idk, we’re just exchanging ideas here. I mean there’s probably a reason why CBs have a hard limit on BBs. Probably to discourage BB spam (imagine 7 Kremlins just charging a cap protected by 2 radar cruisers, or 7 conquerors). What’s wrong with looking into pros and cons of DD limit? It doesn’t have to be a 1 per team. 2? 3? But not 6!!

Well, I assume that a lot of clans want to rise up the ranks for prestige and rewards, but lack the skill to do so without resorting to troll lineups. And yes, WG should have a hard limit per class. 

8 hours ago, Palubarac said:

So far... according the the poll.... DDs should be limited, to more than 4 per team.

 

I'm confused.

 

Or people are just trolls?

 

Hmmmm      

Trolls and people who might run these lineups. 

[Yedwy]

Well CB beeing the pinnacle of the standard game mods (not counting KoTS and private tournaments for obvious reasons) ideally there should be no restrictions other then no CVs and less then say 3 BBs per side, every clan should be allowed to train with and field any setup they want and take their chances, however this "no cv & 1 bb" is sort of a theme that has been accepted and it works quite well IMHO so it should be continued and as some already wrote - proper individual ship balance should be sought instead...

 

Only thing I would change in the current CB format is more tier diversity although I can undetstand why WG prefers T10

[T0byJug]

8 hours ago, Palubarac said:

So far... according the the poll.... DDs should be limited, to more than 4 per team.

 

I'm confused.

 

Or people are just trolls?

 

Hmmmm      

No its simple... People have voted in both Questions 42 on each at time of posting. Most players think there should be no ristriction so vot for 4+ DD

[Molly_Delaney]

In Real World navies a roving pack of Destroyers or Frigates is a 'thing', so the equivalent should apply to WoWs.

Whereas BBs and CVs were always escorted by smaller ships to spot the above mentioned 'WolfPacks' and to deal with those pesky subs.....

 

A Cruiser squadron could operate independently or as part of a large formation.

 

Battleships without a screen of smaller, faster ships is just a target waiting to be sunk from outside spotting range.....

 

[ForlornSailor]

34 minutes ago, admiralgpt said:

If we can have 7 dds, why cant we have 7 bbs?

 

Well, you kinda know the answer yourself, when I read the rest of your post. However the best answer to all of this, is this:

 

11 hours ago, DariusJacek said:

We should have balanced ships rather then limits,  any clan running more then 3 would be stupid. The same applies to BBs, instead of hard limit they should be balanced vs other classes

 

and if that where so, we wouldnt have any discussion like that (or even artificial limits). You see, if a certain class or ship is heavily favoured, thats a sign, that it just performs better then others. Ofc, with the different formats that we have, rangng from 12x12 randoms over 7x7 ranked or clan battles, this is shifting the balance between ships so its not that easy to achieve real balance. But yea, WG would need to try in the first place...