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

Built-in manual secondaries for BBs

105 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
1,135 posts
7,085 battles

Hi Captains,

I just watched a video on Youtube from a community contributor in which he speaks about the state of battleships gameplay.

While I don't agree with many things that were said, one thing caught my attention.

What do you guys think about giving all battleships manual secondaries?

I believe many among you agree that secondaries need to be reworked somehow, this is a recurrent message I see here, and I personnaly like this idea.

The captain perk could be tweaked so it doesn't change for cruisers or destroyers but for battleships if you take it, it could be a buff to the secondaries reload for example.

What is your opinion about it?

Cheers

  • Cool 10
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[R3B3L]
Players
537 posts
12,254 battles

I believe that manual secondaries should fire on both sides of the ship, and raise the accuracy to GZ level. WG dissagrees....

  • Cool 5
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAD]
Players
2,922 posts
12,630 battles

I'd rather make is a one or two point skill. Most battleships have a 5km secondary range, non manual secondaries are more effective at that range.

 

I would say just give the Germans the Graf Zeppelin dispersion which is somewhere between the Massachusetts and the current German ships.

 

Germans have lost their secondary edge now and in most situations you would be better off with the USN secondaries.

  • Cool 3
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Beta Tester, In AlfaTesters
1,147 posts
16,279 battles
40 minutes ago, Capra76 said:

More buffs for BB? 

 

Really?

If they had useable secodnaries they might even be pushing in more becasue you would have at least the feeling that you can deal with DD's ... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,544 posts
7,604 battles
7 minutes ago, Corvi said:

If they had useable secodnaries they might even be pushing in more becasue you would have at least the feeling that you can deal with DD's ... 

 

The same claim is trotted out to support every BB buff, we can''t push because...............

 

................and then they still camp.

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
151 posts
1,138 battles
51 minutes ago, Capra76 said:

More buffs for BB? 

 

Really?

What BUFFS Battleships, It isn't so great for a battleship to be out there. getting destroyed by a cruiser hello wake up men what [edited]buffs. BB's are screwed like hell !!!

  • Funny 6
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BATES]
Players
877 posts
11,720 battles

Quite every week htere is a new topic asking a rework on manually secondaries, but WG seems not caring at all.

 

I think letting the other side continuing firing without the precision bonus and giving some additional range depending on tier (in my opinion Sharnhorst/Gneisenau should reach 10 and GK 12.5) could be a starting point

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[R3B3L]
Players
537 posts
12,254 battles

GZ accuracy would make it viable choice, right now it is useless meme built.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,544 posts
7,604 battles
1 hour ago, GrazyC2 said:

What BUFFS Battleships, It isn't so great for a battleship to be out there. getting destroyed by a cruiser hello wake up men what [edited]buffs. BB's are screwed like hell !!!

 

L2P issue detected.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CAIN]
Players
4,658 posts
19,769 battles
2 hours ago, GrazyC2 said:

What BUFFS Battleships, It isn't so great for a battleship to be out there. getting destroyed by a cruiser hello wake up men what [edited]buffs. BB's are screwed like hell !!!

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! 

 

 

BwaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaHahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!

 

Best joke i‘ve read on these forums in 5 years! Kudos! 

 

  • Cool 4
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
5,220 posts
21,421 battles
4 hours ago, elblancogringo said:

What do you guys think about giving all battleships manual secondaries?

If it would work with the same mechanics as now - secondary guns only firing on the side where the targeted ship is - I would probably ragequit, as there's nothing better than to go with a secondary skilled ship - without that stupid manual secondaries skill of course - into the gap between two opposing ships and blasting them both...

Having to concentrate on only one target would reduce my potential secondary total damage...

 

so nay, won't have it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
4 hours ago, elblancogringo said:

Hi Captains,

I just watched a video on Youtube from a community contributor in which he speaks about the state of battleships gameplay.

These kinda videos are the reasons why I don't take NoZoup serious and while he says his is a valid opinion, it is no more valid than mine when I say NO. It's basically two videos now in which he goes and whines about BBs being not fun (a subjective value) and need help to be encouraged to push again, because seemingly cruisers are too powerful, overpens too common, Ohio isn't up to par and cruisers and DDs deserve to die to whatever ammo a BB has loaded if spotted within 10 km, preferably AP.

 

Because guess what, not being able to yolorush in, having to actually keep in mind that a DD could jump around a corner, thinking about what ammo to load, these are things we cannot demand our BB players to do. But getting wiped by AP salvos like in the good old days is something that our DDs deserve. And Zoup one-ups it by just calling the DD complaints whiny about having to learn to play around radar and having to deal with CVs. 

 

Also, I would think if overpens are more common these days, maybe it could be related to the increases in BB gun caliber, as in the good old days a cruiser with 30 mm could just bounce, now it basically gets just wrecked, causing newer designs to either be Stalingrad/Moskva/Petro levels of non-overmatchable, Venezia, Henri or Yoshino types of weird internal cits that give torp protection hit ribbons, or the type of non-armour you see on Smolensk.

  • Cool 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,135 posts
7,085 battles
2 hours ago, Bunny_Lover_Kallen said:

These kinda videos are the reasons why I don't take NoZoup serious and while he says his is a valid opinion, it is no more valid than mine when I say NO. It's basically two videos now in which he goes and whines about BBs being not fun (a subjective value) and need help to be encouraged to push again, because seemingly cruisers are too powerful, overpens too common, Ohio isn't up to par and cruisers and DDs deserve to die to whatever ammo a BB has loaded if spotted within 10 km, preferably AP.

 

Because guess what, not being able to yolorush in, having to actually keep in mind that a DD could jump around a corner, thinking about what ammo to load, these are things we cannot demand our BB players to do. But getting wiped by AP salvos like in the good old days is something that our DDs deserve. And Zoup one-ups it by just calling the DD complaints whiny about having to learn to play around radar and having to deal with CVs. 

 

Also, I would think if overpens are more common these days, maybe it could be related to the increases in BB gun caliber, as in the good old days a cruiser with 30 mm could just bounce, now it basically gets just wrecked, causing newer designs to either be Stalingrad/Moskva/Petro levels of non-overmatchable, Venezia, Henri or Yoshino types of weird internal cits that give torp protection hit ribbons, or the type of non-armour you see on Smolensk.

Indeed; like I said in my OP there are many things he said I don't agree with, but I didn't want to mention that in this post.

Nevertheless, I still found the idea of built-in manual secondaries appealing.

But other people here proposed alternatives that are also interesting, especially both broadsides firing at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NECRO]
Players
1,690 posts

If manual 2ndaries had the same buff at <T7 below as at T7+, it would be nice, but there are still ships that I prefer to just use their massive omnidirectional fire instead of focussing one target. Mikasa comes to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NED]
Players
2,097 posts
8,346 battles

Manual secondaries should just apply the accuracy bonus to the targeted ship and for the rest act the same as it does without the skill.

 

Its absurd that with the skill it no longer fires automatically and when a target is selected the other side does nothing.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SWAMP]
Players
573 posts
3,410 battles
8 hours ago, Bunny_Lover_Kallen said:

These kinda videos are the reasons why I don't take NoZoup serious and while he says his is a valid opinion, it is no more valid than mine when I say NO. It's basically two videos now in which he goes and whines about BBs being not fun (a subjective value) and need help to be encouraged to push again, because seemingly cruisers are too powerful, overpens too common, Ohio isn't up to par and cruisers and DDs deserve to die to whatever ammo a BB has loaded if spotted within 10 km, preferably AP.

 

Because guess what, not being able to yolorush in, having to actually keep in mind that a DD could jump around a corner, thinking about what ammo to load, these are things we cannot demand our BB players to do. But getting wiped by AP salvos like in the good old days is something that our DDs deserve. And Zoup one-ups it by just calling the DD complaints whiny about having to learn to play around radar and having to deal with CVs. 

That was such a pathetic video.
He complained about overpens on cruisers and how he can't delete them if they are close, and as he said it he devstruck a cruiser with AP at close range.
Even worse, he complained about HE spam at range, and said that BBs should be rewarded for pushing by making "fires less effective when the BB is close".
Like, doesn't he realize that this will reinforce ranged HE spam even more?
What cruiser in his right mind would ever get any closer to a BB than 15 km if he gets consistently devstruck and fires don't work when at close range?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
352 posts
11,561 battles

The main issue of a sec build is the amount of points that you have to sink into it. A change like this helps build more diverse builds of a sec / semi tank build.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
11,050 posts
9,472 battles
8 hours ago, Bunny_Lover_Kallen said:

These kinda videos are the reasons why I don't take NoZoup serious

 

I wanted to rant about that video too, but didnt want to do it here since it only covers one part of it :cap_haloween:

Its like a true BBaby speaking... god forbid, those need to use more than 1 braincell to play them. There is one thing i dont disagree with, and that is that BBs are frustrating/unfun to play because of the RNG. Well, thats the price that class has to pay in order to be balanced in my book. And they still produce the highest average damage of all (except CVs), so even while true, they still get more out of it than other classes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-DGH-]
[-DGH-]
Players
146 posts
2,714 battles

Secondaries should in general receive a range improvements. On most BBs and cruisers they are completely irrelevant, because of the range. And even on secondary dedicated BBs you need to invest a lot of captain skill and modules to get a range of around 11 km.

 

Manual secondaries should be buffed, so that you can choose 2 targets for both sides of secondaries. Currently it is sometimes better not to have MFCSA, so that secondaries can fire on targets on both sides.

 

All other buffs in the video: no. BBs are already strong as hell. Some older BBs that got power crept need to be improved, but not BBs in general. Played yesterday some match in my Massy and did some horrible mistakes. Still got each match more than 100.000 K damage and sunk at least one other ship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
117 posts

Well, secondary-related skills need a major overhaul in general, but here's a few ideas of my own:

 

1. Manual Secondaries should not prevent inactive mounts from firing upon the nearest target when possible, right now Manual Secondaries is pretty much a side-grade instead of an upgrade since you trade the ability to engage multiple targets for improved single-target accuracy. 

 

2. Secondaries/AA mounts should be repairable and honestly this should've been introduced with the CV rework. This is a major reason why secondary/AA builds undesirable, what's the point of building for secondaries or AA when 3 HE salvos from a Conqueror will break half of them, permanently. If CVs can restore planes, then I see no reason why surface ships should not be able to recover their secondary/AA mounts. Whether the repair should be full or limited, force the player to burn their DCP or not, is up for debate, but I'm certain that the permanently-destroyable secondaries/AA is one of the most outdated concepts this game still holds to.

 

3. Create a new Consumable akin to DFAA, only one that would temporarily increase the power/accuracy/reload of secondaries. I think this one is pretty self-explanatory, BBs already lack Consumable variety and most of them only have their DCP and a Repair Party, occasionally a Plane.

 

4. Reduce Secondary-related Skill costs, as many people already pointed out it is simply far too expensive to build for secondaries or AA.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,456 posts
9,251 battles
6 hours ago, elblancogringo said:

Indeed; like I said in my OP there are many things he said I don't agree with, but I didn't want to mention that in this post.

Nevertheless, I still found the idea of built-in manual secondaries appealing.

But other people here proposed alternatives that are also interesting, especially both broadsides firing at the same time.

On the point of secondaries, I'm sceptical about buffing secondaries further, given there exist reasons why secondaries are nerfed like this in the first place. Buffing secondaries in general or buffing secondary builds always has to keep in mind:

  • Is this just something that that'd be cool for BB players, or something the game actually needs?
  • Are secondaries overpriced... or is tank build just too cost effective?

To me, no, we don't need some absolute close range death zone, secondaries overall are in an ok spot. The main issue, imo, is that people sink a crapton of skill points into something that never was meant to be some supereffective armament and then complain that they lack "essential" skills. It's as if people who spent all their points in Shima on making the guns better figure out that it might cost them one or more of the essential skills like LS, CE, RPF, SE or torp related skills. Don't overinvest in memes maybe.

7 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Its like a true BBaby speaking... god forbid, those need to use more than 1 braincell to play them. There is one thing i dont disagree with, and that is that BBs are frustrating/unfun to play because of the RNG.

Depends on level of RNG, but fun is subjective. In general I agree, but having spent yesterday grinding through Lyon, I have to say, RNG guns are certainly not my kind of thing. I thought the German line or the British were the noob lines, but I have now discovered, there exists this thing that has good speed, with the turning circle of the 21 knot design it was based on, has stupid armour and a citadel you hardly ever hit and 16 guns that require no aiming, because regardless of how you aim, shells will go wherever. Not saying Lyon is weak, but I feel insulted after thousands of games in BBs to have to play this silly design. Can't wait to get to Richelieu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
7,232 posts
245 battles

Too be honest, buffing secondaries won't do anything if their ranges are still abyssmal. Problem mostly is people failing at map control, rng and people failing at situational awareness etc.

Sure HE spam is annoying, but the reason for said mechanic is so that smaller ships can fight back otherwise death by torpedo would be the only way to kill bigger ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
257 posts
8,196 battles

I think the main idea of this its too have more than one possible and working way to play the ships. If the only realistic way to play Battleships is survival build. Then why we have the other options? Some ships are versatile. But some look like, or you play this way with this build or you are useless. The game needs to be fun. If they have a system to personalize the build of your ship, in general we should have more than one effective way to do it. And at the moment that manual secondaries with all the restrictions cost the same as Fire prevention or Concealment expert. Come on, FP is a yes or yes or yes in BB build today, Without you burn 40k per battle at least. And with it you still burn, but at least not 4 fires.  

 

By the way yesterday Manual secondaries was bugged in some of my ships and wasn't working at all. Shooting as if was deactivated. 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×