Russian rebalans 2.0

[wargambling_ltd]

Proposed changes:

 

 

BBs (t6+)

Izmail: sigma 1.6 1.5, removal of GFC5 VI mod.2

SinOP: Armor belt 75 26mm, casemate armor 100 26mm, casemate armor 300 200mm, turret side plating 400 220mm, sigma 1.5 1.2, rudder shift time 12.9 16s, Vmax 27 25kts, removal of GFC5 VII mod.2

Poltava: Turret traverse time 45 40s, reload time 28 25s

Vladivostok: rudder shift time 13.7 16.5s

Lenin: rudder shift time 13.5 16.5s, Funnel armor 60 19mm

Sovetsky balans: Turret traverse time 30 45s, rudder shift time 14.9 18s, Deck armor 60 50mm, armor belt 60 32mm, upper armor belt 375 100mm, lower armor belt 375 390 406 420 320mm, sigma 1.7 1.5

Sovietdeathstar (Kremlin): sigma 1.8 1.2, Turret traverse time 30 45s rudder shift time 16.3 20s, Vmax 29.5 28kts, Citadel armor 430 410 350 330mm, Deck armor 60 50mm, Turret front armor 550 400mm, AA: flak bursts 9 6, long range dps 217 160 mid range dps 392 350

 

CLs (t6+)

Budyonny: Flak bursts 2 3

Shchors: rudder shift 8.8 7.5s, Flak bursts 2 4

Chapayev: torp range 4.0 8.0km, abillity to slot spotter plane instead of radar

 

CAs

Dm.Donskoi: stock range 16.2 17km, upgraded range 17.8 18.5km, abillity to slot spotter plane instead of radar

Moskva: radar duration 30 25s, reload time 10.35 10s

BALANSGRAD: radar duration 30 25s (i'd nerf her a bit more, but shes a premium afterall)

 

DDs (t6+)

Gnevny: reload time 5 4.5s, Rudder shift 4.4 4.0

Minsk: gets 53-36 mod. 2 as researchable upgrade (8km torps)

Kiev and tash are fine

Khabarovsk: max gun range 11.2 12.3, gets 53-39 mod. 2 as researchable upgrade (8km tash torps), Rudder shift 11.1  7.5s

Ognevoi: reload time 5 4.5s

Udaloi: torp range 8.0 10km

Grozovoi: AA: flak bursts 4 6, long range dps 70 100, mid range dps 157.5 200

 

Human immunodeficiency virus:

Smolensk: gains hardlimit of one battle played per player per day

 

 

 

[Deckeru_Maiku]

You forgot the spotter plane for the Krispy Kreme in that list... :)

[ColonelPete]

10 minutes ago, wienerkorv said:

SinOP: Armor belt 75 26mm, casemate armor 100 26mm, casemate armor 300 200mm, turret side plating 400 220mm, sigma 1.5 1.2, rudder shift time 12.9 16s, Vmax 27 25kts, removal of GFC5 VII mod.2
Sovetsky balans: Turret traverse time 30 45s, rudder shift time 14.9 18s, Deck armor 60 50mm, armor belt 60 32mm, upper armor belt 375 100mm, lower armor belt 375 390 406 420 320mm, sigma 1.7 1.5

Sovietdeathstar (Kremlin): sigma 1.8 1.2, Turret traverse time 30 45s rudder shift time 16.3 20s, Vmax 29.5 28kts, Citadel armor 430 410 350 330mm, Deck armor 60 50mm, Turret front armor 550 400mm, AA: flak bursts 9 6, long range dps 217 160 mid range dps 392 350

Do you even know what you suggest?

Armor belt of 26mm on a BB?

[CptBarney]

Do the opposite and x3 the stats for all ships for historical accuracy.

[wargambling_ltd]

23 minutes ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

You forgot the spotter plane for the Krispy Kreme in that list... :)

no, because i was only adressing t6+ ships

[ImperialAdmiral]

Poltava could use a buff tbh. 

 

Especially because she is considered as a battlecruiser by WG.

[DFens_666]

Noone could take most of those changes to the BBs seriously...

[Karasu_Browarszky]

1 minute ago, DFens_666 said:

Noone could take those most changes to the BBs seriously...

 

Indeed not, pure stuff and nonsense. The boys back at the Lesta cafeteria know these things much better.

[Riggerby]

51 minutes ago, wienerkorv said:

Smolensk: gains hardlimit of one battle played per player per day

 

Realize this is just exaggerational sh*tposting, But i non ironically believe Smolensk should be hard capped to 1 per team per battle. Make an error message appear when people try to take more than 1 Smolensk in a division.

 

Its not even that i think multiple Smolensk is a guaranteed win, its just simply no longer fun to play the game when there is more than one. If i didn't have the conscience to not leave my team a man down, and didn't have the fact that i'd go pink / get punished for leaving, every time i came up against a triple smolensk team i'd just alt tab and close wows.exe. There's not a single other ship in the game that makes me miserable the way she does.

[wargambling_ltd]

27 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Noone could take most of those changes to the BBs seriously...

 

24 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

 

Indeed not, pure stuff and nonsense. The boys back at the Lesta cafeteria know these things much better.

RU BBs are way too OP they way they are right now and the stats agree with me, RU BBs top the chart for best silver BB at t6-10, diddent check the lower ones.

 

[Captain_Campbell]

3 minutes ago, Riggerby said:

 

Realize this is just exaggerational sh*tposting, But i non ironically believe Smolensk should be hard capped to 1 per team per battle. Make an error message appear when people try to take more than 1 Smolensk in a division.

 

Its not even that i think multiple Smolensk is a guaranteed win, its just simply no longer fun to play the game when there is more than one. If i didn't have the conscience to not leave my team a man down, and didn't have the fact that i'd go pink / get punished for leaving, every time i came up against a triple smolensk team i'd just alt tab and close wows.exe. There's not a single other ship in the game that makes me miserable the way she does.

I would say only one copy of any version of a ship, unless the wait time was two long then allow it to jump to 2 copies. Would like to see more variety and less games where it is 3 GK, 2 Krem, 2 moskva, 2 hindenburg, 3 smol etc.

[wargambling_ltd]

[Karasu_Browarszky]

7 minutes ago, Riggerby said:

 

Realize this is just exaggerational sh*tposting, But i non ironically believe Smolensk should be hard capped to 1 per team per battle. Make an error message appear when people try to take more than 1 Smolensk in a division.

 

Its not even that i think multiple Smolensk is a guaranteed win, its just simply no longer fun to play the game when there is more than one. If i didn't have the conscience to not leave my team a man down, and didn't have the fact that i'd go pink / get punished for leaving, every time i came up against a triple smolensk team i'd just alt tab and close wows.exe. There's not a single other ship in the game that makes me miserable the way she does.

 

It isn't a guaranteed win. Check this out:

 

https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/135908-when-the-map-name-and-the-ships-fit-just-right/

 

5 minutes ago, wienerkorv said:

 

RU BBs are way too OP they way they are right now and the stats agree with me, RU BBs top the chart for best silver BB at t6-10, diddent check the lower ones.

 

 

I can assure you neither the Sinop or any other Soviet BB is anywhere near OP in the right hands, such as mine.

[wargambling_ltd]

2 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

I can assure you neither the Sinop or any other Soviet BB is anywhere near OP in the right hands, such as mine.

see

 

3 minutes ago, wienerkorv said:

 

[Riggerby]

11 minutes ago, Captain_Campbell said:

I would say only one copy of any version of a ship, unless the wait time was two long then allow it to jump to 2 copies. Would like to see more variety and less games where it is 3 GK, 2 Krem, 2 moskva, 2 hindenburg, 3 smol etc.

Personally i don't so much mind the copies. You truly can't make things any more 'balanced' than giving the two teams as much of the same ships as possible, I just mentally don't have it in me to play games where 3 smolensk's who spend almost all the game undetected because theyre sat in their coordinated smoke uses, spamming out 716 HE shells per minute between them. If they use DE and have a 10% fire chance then thats 71 fires per minute. Its just raw toxicity on a scale that counterplay simply ceases to exist. If someone is spotting for them you physically cant get within Radar range to light them up without getting melted, and CV cant go near them because their AA is so insane, and even if he could theyre hiding in smoke anyway.

2 or 3 smolensks on a single team in a single game makes WoWs stop being a game.

[wargambling_ltd]

5 minutes ago, Riggerby said:

2 or 3 smolensks on a single team in a single game makes WoWs stop being a game.

when faced with 3 smolensks you have 4 options

-play conq

-play stalin

-leave the flank they are on

-leave the game

[Karasu_Browarszky]

9 minutes ago, wienerkorv said:

see

 

 

 

Just Tier 7 if I'm reading that right. So this isn't an across the board problem any more than you could say all the BB's in other tiers that top the statistics are OP. Nerf those, and its the next set of BB's topping the stats. Will you need to nerf those in turn?

 

IMO many of the Soviet BB's are not exactly the easiest to play. If I'm right, it's mostly the better sort of players that do exceptionally well in them. Partly I think that because I am not doing well in them, and I'm average at most.

[Zemeritt]

1 hour ago, ColonelPete said:

Do you even know what you suggest?

Armor belt of 26mm on a BB?

 

There are more the one armor belt on the Sinop. Blame WG if you want, they named it this:

 

The the upper part of the side.

[Jethro_Grey]

I think ru BBs should have as much armor thickness, as the paper they were drawn upon. 

 

#IShouldWorkFirWGsBalansDepartment

[wargambling_ltd]

35 minutes ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

 

Just Tier 7 if I'm reading that right. So this isn't an across the board problem any more than you could say all the BB's in other tiers that top the statistics are OP. Nerf those, and its the next set of BB's topping the stats. Will you need to nerf those in turn?

 

IMO many of the Soviet BB's are not exactly the easiest to play. If I'm right, it's mostly the better sort of players that do exceptionally well in them. Partly I think that because I am not doing well in them, and I'm average at most.

The russian BBs are the best tech tree BBs at any tier, the ships you see above  them in the pic are reward ships like Bourgogne and Ohio, which only players with a little bit of skill will be able to get, and some (sometimes rare) premiums.

 

Also in my oppinion the ru BBs are one of the most iddiotproof BB lines out therebecause you dont realy take any HE dmg because of the bs deck armor and lack of superstructure, and fires dont do crap to you because if the consumables. In addition to that most if not all of them have that icebreaker bow which meanes you cant be yamatoed through the bow, and then there are the flat gun arcs which make it way too easy hit anything at any range combined with the bs dispersion pattern.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

3 minutes ago, wienerkorv said:

The russian BBs are the best tech tree BBs at any tier, the ships you see above  them in the pic are reward ships like Bourgogne and Ohio, which only players with a little bit of skill will be able to get, and some (sometimes rare) premiums

 

What I see is Massachusetts B, Bajie, Georgia, Musashi, Bourgogne and Ohio. Those latter two are actually special ships and the players maybe slightly above average in most cases. What actually bothers me now more is that several of those ships are Premium ships....

[Miragetank90]

3 hours ago, wienerkorv said:

Sovietdeathstar (Kremlin): sigma 1.8 1.2

 

 

1 hour ago, wienerkorv said:

In addition to that most if not all of them have that icebreaker bow which meanes you cant be yamatoed through the bow

 

Yes.

Yes they can. 

 

Kurfurst is actually much, much better at not getting Yamatoed through the bow, though it's still possible. 

 

I honestly don't get why people are still clamouring for Kremlin nerfs. With the alpha and sigma nerfs it's in a better spot now. And even if it's AA was the least of everyone's concerns, it's now worthless, thanks to the fragility of the mounts. I don't get why they are actually planning on nerfing it's AA further.

 

For now I find it OK. What you propose would just kill the ship for what it is intended to do.

[DFens_666]

1 hour ago, wienerkorv said:

 

Its quite normal, that ships with less games have superior WR. More games = more players = more bad players to drag down the stats. Even worse for wows.numbers they include all time stats.

 

Those 3 following premiums probably arent that interesting for good players, as they arent really strong. Scharnhorst B is just a copy of Scharnhorst, and Poltava has basicly no battles played and being rather mediocre.

Im not saying that Sinop is weak, but the changes you propose would pretty much make Sinop and Kremlin unplayable. FYI, secondaries have a Sigma of 1,0 so you know what 1,2 sigma would look like to some degree.

 

 

[Furius_Marius]

15 hours ago, wienerkorv said:

Proposed changes:

BBs (t6+)

Lenin: rudder shift time 13.5 16.5s, Funnel armor 60 19mm

Lenin is a very good ship that u don't have. But it already comes with some very very clear weak points:

-One of the easiest BBs to citadel. The broadside is super super weak. I deleted Lenins from 15 km with one salvo. If they catch a little broadside u are dead.

-Very Low HP pool.

-Terrible AA, bugged fighter. They can delete u full HP with one AP squadron.

-Worst sigma than vlad, and not good range. At max range the dispersion is awful

-Combination of meehh torpedo protection and low HP pool make the torpedos hurt a lot. 

 

The ship is good but it already carries a lot of huge weak points. When u know the ship u can punish. 

 

 

 

[Gvozdika]

RU BBs simply don't have enough weaknesses to offset their stupid guns and suspiciously strong armour schemes. See the current state of ranked (Sinops in every game - some of them driven genuinely stupidly but often able to overpower non-RU BBs thanks to overmatch, BS dispersion and magical armour). 

 

Give them excellent durability or raw firepower or accuracy - not all three at the same time.