1/2 Citadel damage for Cruisers

[ForlornSailor]

Many people complain about cruisers and their survivability/match impact. And I think, in general, people are right about it.

Its not ok, that BBs dev strike cruisers that easily, especially mid tiers.

So I came to think of this: DDs dont have a citadel for a reason. BBs take full damage from citadel hits. Wouldnt it be logic for cruisers to take half citadel damage then? Its still a lot of damage, many cruisers dont carry a heal, which makes it harder for them from the start.

There are some fine tunings to that. It could f.e. only effect the damage from battleships, so cruiser vs. cruiser engagement stays the same. Up for debate I guess. Supercruisers - they could take 2/3 or 3/4 damage from a hit to the citadel? Else they would be buffed too much and it can be used aswell to balance tech-tree Cruisers vs. Supercruisers, which imo is right now out of balance anyway.

 

Edit: I like to add AP Bombs from CVs. They obviously belong in that aswell. IMO - they are way too strong against cruisers. Would be good to reduce their impact against Cruisers. Again, by what margin, is up for discussion.

 

We could also add heals to EVERY Cruisers in the game and let them heal hits to the citadel with a rate of 100%, like BBs can do with fire. Would be another way to go but might make high tier cruisers in some cases really really strong. But thats for another topic to discuss I suppose.

 

Spoiler

and disclaimer: im pretty sure, WG will not pick up on that idea. but we can always brain-storm, have a nice discussion or start a good-old flamewar. + im bored.

 

[Kutfroat]

I voted for option 3. I think cruisers should get a mobility buff (ruddershift/accel/decel), except the russian ones, they are allready the most forgiving to play, either they have real armor or are really agile, comparee to all others.

 

On the other side there should be a global concealment nerf to BB's, so they cant ambush cruisers anymore. E.g. remove "concealment expert" and/or the concealment module. This way cruisers get more time to take evasive actions, get a chance to avoid their predators...🤷‍♂️

[XDukenukemX]

AP bombs and most of the Shells already go through or bounce if fired from 18" and other BBs.

The solution could be ability to better heal (like 50-80%  of the cit) then 10% it is now. so you can return into play after some time, but it can not save you if you are focused/instanted

[Ronchabale]

What would be a solution to a BB hitting the cruiser with 7 out of nine shells at 8 km and getting 7 overpens ?

[dCK_Ad_Hominem]

I also voted option 3. Stupidity should be punished. Hard. What I could envision though is a certain buff to bow and deck armor, though I'm myself a bit critical about that one since it could really turn dm into a monster. 

 

Edit: alternately the overmatch coefficient could be looked at. 

[SkollUlfr]

no ship should have such aim assist that 30 meter clusters as 30k range is an expected thing.

nor should they have 2000m/s+ muzzle velocity for those who need aim assist to lead targets.

 

i would compartmentalise citedels into engines, turbines, boilers, and magazines as applicable to the ship. similarly to WoT.

a hit to turbines reduces top speed.

a hit to boilers reduces accelleration.

a hit to magazines reduces reload.

with associated damage numbers.

[DFens_666]

3 minutes ago, XDukenukemX said:

The solution could be ability to better heal (like 50-80%  of the cit) then 10% it is now. so you can return into play after some time, but it can not save you if you are focused/instanted

 

They can already heal 33% citadel damage. Some even have 50% like RN Cruisers and Colbert. Alaska and PR only get 10% tho, alltho they are harder to citadel anyway.

Maybe 50% for most of them could make sense, so its basicly the same as if you receive pen damage. Then the problem starts to be the low healing capacity. A Hindenburg can retrieve 7252 HP with one heal. If you take a Citadel from a TX BB, that can be 14k or more, so 1 heal = 1 citadel, or maybe not even that. Not sure if that would change much in practice.

[SkollUlfr]

3 minutes ago, dCK_Ad_Hominem said:

I also voted option 3. Stupidity should be punished. Hard. What I could envision though is a certain buff to bow and deck armor, though I'm myself a bit critical about that one since it could really turn dm into a monster. 

 

Edit: alternately the overmatch coefficient could be looked at. 

i have said this myself. overmatch would be vastly improved by changing it to being a fraction of current pen and making final trajectories steeper.

this would mean players had optimum ranges to engage given targets.

be too close and your bow/aft ends can still be overmatched, be too far away and your deck can be overmatched. 

learn the sweet spot for good play, making proper positioning reward practiced and proper manouver, rather than camping islands.

[gabberworld]

9 minutes ago, Ronchabale said:

What would be a solution to a BB hitting the cruiser with 7 out of nine shells at 8 km and getting 7 overpens ?

use he

[Miscommunication_dept]

Fragility is the cost of high dpm. 
 

I would support giving T6-8 cruisers a single use heal though.

[TeaAndTorps]

Playing cruisers would be just fine if it weren't for the BB overpopulation. I'm not sure that halving citadel damage to cruisers is a way of reducing the BB overpopulation. Off the top of my head, it might be more effective to give BBs something of a manoeuverability and/or turret rotation and/or concealment nerf to make them less forgiving when played poorly. Or just give them more easily accessible citadels themselves.

[159Hunter]

To be fair, citadel damage was never really an issue when I played cruisers. What I consider a larger issue is the increasing amount of overmatching BBs. 

[ForlornSailor]

3 minutes ago, 159Hunter said:

What I consider a larger issue is the increasing amount of overmatching BBs. 

 

Yup I agree. And the insane turret traverse on some BBs. I was with chapa all the way alone on the flank not long ago, in the broadside of a Kremlin and Georgia, while they pushed into our team. I couldnt do anything, because everytime I shot, they started to turn their turrets. And before I go dark, I had the shells flying at me. After I did that twice, I had no more health to work with, yet I was in a position, that is concidered to be perfect to farm HE and annoy the BBs.

 

11 minutes ago, TeaAndTorps said:

Playing cruisers would be just fine if it weren't for the BB overpopulation.

 

True aswell. So how do we solve this? BBs are super popular and it gets worse, which makes it even harder for the remaining cruisers. It will shift even more to people dropping cruisers and playing BBs or other class instead. Its a cycle.

 

 

[Dutchy_2019]

1 hour ago, ForlornSailor said:

Many people complain about cruisers and their survivability/match impact. And I think, in general, people are right about it.

Its not ok, that BBs dev strike cruisers that easily, especially mid tiers.

So I came to think of this: DDs dont have a citadel for a reason. BBs take full damage from citadel hits. Wouldnt it be logic for cruisers to take half citadel damage then? Its still a lot of damage, many cruisers dont carry a heal, which makes it harder for them from the start.

There are some fine tunings to that. It could f.e. only effect the damage from battleships, so cruiser vs. cruiser engagement stays the same. Up for debate I guess. Supercruisers - they could take 2/3 or 3/4 damage from a hit to the citadel? Else they would be buffed too much and it can be used aswell to balance tech-tree Cruisers vs. Supercruisers, which imo is right now out of balance anyway.

 

Edit: I like to add AP Bombs from CVs. They obviously belong in that aswell. IMO - they are way too strong against cruisers. Would be good to reduce their impact against Cruisers. Again, by what margin, is up for discussion.

 

We could also add heals to EVERY Cruisers in the game and let them heal hits to the citadel with a rate of 100%, like BBs can do with fire. Would be another way to go but might make high tier cruisers in some cases really really strong. But thats for another topic to discuss I suppose.

 

  Hide contents

and disclaimer: im pretty sure, WG will not pick up on that idea. but we can always brain-storm, have a nice discussion or start a good-old flamewar. + im bored.

 

 

I have voted we need another solution... 

 

I see your point. My problem is that regularly I see cruisers sail broadside, not even attempt to angle at medium and sort range to BB's and NOT get punished, due to the overpen mechanic. As it is, sailing broadside seems to be safer than actually trying to angle. Sailing broad side cruisers SHOULD get punished.

[Ashardalon_Dragnipur]

citadels should come from making mistakes

so those mistakes should be punished, hard

so this suggested solution is the complete opposite of what i would consider a good idea

 

but there are a lot of silly calibers that can penetrate deep inside a cruiser from any angle

that seems like a bigger problem

tho its also not easy to fix as that would easily make already powercreeped ships even less appealing 

 

game is such a mess on every level that solving one problem just shines a light on 15 different problems 

[DFens_666]

3 minutes ago, Dutchy_2019 said:

Sailing broad side cruisers SHOULD get punished.

 

This generally happens, but since we are humans, we tend to forget that it actually happens.

Not long ago i basicly lost 35k HP in my Venezia to an Izumo with only 2 of his frontguns (was a boring roflstomp win so i yoloed another Izumo, which i killed and then i got devstruck). Yesterday lost half my health in a Riga to a JB, but there wasnt really an option since i needed to help my DD kill a DD so i took a gamble that the JB would shoot any of the 4 ships closer to him...

Also yesterday i basicly devstruck 3 flat broadside Cruisers in BBs. Today chunked a Hindi for 35k over 24km in my Yamato. To me, that is very much getting punished when showing broadside.

[Hirohito]

I appreciate the suggestion for cruisers, and I generally support cruiser buffs (even as a DD main).

But I think WG needs to nip the problem in the bud here.
Consecutive buffs to BBs (and their current strength) have been the main culprit to cruiser survivability, so it should imo start at the source - nerfing current BB strength so that cruisers can actually use what they were advertized to have (high dpm).

- Nerf the amount of BBs to 4 per team (down from 5). If you wanna play the "big, bad ship with huge gunz", get in line - everyone else wants to do the same too, so pay the consequences.
- Increase IFHE back to 30% (up from 25%).
- Reduce the fire chance nerf on IFHE (currently -50%), anything higher is good.
- Remove Dead Eye as a skill.
- Reduce 457mm calibre BB guns to something lower (all apart from Yamato/Musashi are fake paper ships anyway. It was done to Conqueror, so it can be done to other paper BBs as well).

- Increase flooding damage (not necessarily to the death sentence it was before, but increasing it by 50% is a good start).

[Hirohito]

39 minutes ago, TeaAndTorps said:

Playing cruisers would be just fine if it weren't for the BB overpopulation. I'm not sure that halving citadel damage to cruisers is a way of reducing the BB overpopulation. Off the top of my head, it might be more effective to give BBs something of a manoeuverability and/or turret rotation and/or concealment nerf to make them less forgiving when played poorly. Or just give them more easily accessible citadels themselves.

You need to make BBs less appealing to begin with, which is why I advocate nerfing BBs.
And if Cruisers are to be punished for misplays, then BBs need to risk the same, hence buffing pen and fire/flooding would be a good place to start.

Anything to reduce the current BB overpopulation would be good, really.

[Hirohito]

I think one problem with halving cruiser citadel damage is that it would encourage even more HE use by BBs, which is a whole other can of worms we shouldn't open.
And generally BB firing HE is often an indirect nerf to cruiser/DD damage output, since a BB firing HE usually takes up valuable fire slots from cruisers and DDs that rely on them for consistent damage.

Had too many games where I torp a BB for a flood, he repairs it, and by the time I try to set a follow-up perma fire, some random BB lights up 2 permafires on the target and my damage output goes to s***.

[Iskarioth]

Remove deadeye -> done. I feel a lot of people wanne use this update as an excuse to have their favorite HE spammers buffed. Sure some ships like flint got a kick in the balls and need love but that's about it. Smolly no longer being able to fire beyond 16km is a good thing in my books. Suck it up

 

Cruiser aren't supposed to counter BBs desptie some on t10 doing just that and it wasn't addressed for a long a** time. Buff some mid tier cruisers individually if necessary ( my prefered change would be giving them a heal or two for thats can angle it's a buff, for dumbos not). NO BUFFS for t9 or t10 cruiser!

[Camperdown]

My suggestion would be to lower excessively high citadels on some cruisers. For example in Neptune the entire high belt is treated as citadel. It would be better to treat the upper part protecting the uptakes as not part of the citadel.

[gabberworld]

 

please dont lower minotaur critatel, i love kill them with moskva

 

[DFens_666]

2 minutes ago, Hirohito said:

I think one problem with halving cruiser citadel damage is that it would encourage even more HE use by BBs, which is a whole other can of worms we shouldn't open.

 

Wouldnt that be even more true if Cruisers could bounce BB shells better?

Basicly if you can bounce BB shells as a Cruiser, you can just rush that BB down and he cant do much about it. Unless he has secondaries or torps which can melt you.

[elblancogringo]

Halving citadel damage is not a good option imo.

Buffing their acceleration/deceleration and rudder shift time a bit should be better. 

 

I'd like a new skill in the cruiser tree "Nimble" with any of this, or two or the three depending on the number of skill points required.

Increase speed by 5%, decrease time to reach max speed by 10%, decrease  rudder shift time by 15%.

[ForlornSailor]

1 minute ago, Iskarioth said:

I feel a lot of people wanne use this update as an excuse to have their favorite HE spammers buffed. Sure some ships like flint got a kick in the balls and need love but that's about it. Smolly no longer being able to fire beyond 16km is a good thing in my books. Suck it up 

 

Cruiser aren't supposed to counter BBs desptie some on t10 doing just that and it wasn't addressed for a long a** time.

 

Well atleast I can say for myself, that its not about buffing my favourite toys. It has rather reached a point, where I feel pity for the cruisers, when I devstrike the 90 sec into the game and they havent even fired a shell yet. It happened WAY too often recently, especially after the patch. And when Cruisers get blown out of the water from ships, they cant even reach, then we are not on the same page regarding your claim of "Cruisers arent suppose to counter BBs". Thing is: everyone should have equal ways of playing and influecing the game, regardless of the class he picks. Different playstyle doesnt mean the difference between "haha I can sit in the open for 10 mins and nothing happens to me" vs "oh god when im spotted, im dead".

 

12 minutes ago, Hirohito said:

You need to make BBs less appealing to begin with, which is why I advocate nerfing BBs.

 

+1

 

Its true for all tiers at this point, starting T4. When im looking at my port, thinking which ship I put to battle, its usualy a BB that makes me think "this could be fun". Take T4 as an example. Karlsruhe vs. Orion? Is that even a question?

 

31 minutes ago, Ashardalon_Dragnipur said:

game is such a mess on every level that solving one problem just shines a light on 15 different problems 

 

Maybe you are right. Most likely you are. All the additions and changes WG made over the years have caused tiny differences to multiply to a level, where they actually become problems. We could gather a list with dozens, maybe hundred of points and examples, where the majority would agree, that it needs adjustment. An maybe thats what actually would be in place to make the game better overall. Prevent roflstomps, give each class level playing ground, balance classes, bring the inter-class-balance in order... stuff like that.

 

5 minutes ago, elblancogringo said:

Halving citadel damage is not a good option imo.

Buffing their acceleration/deceleration and rudder shift time a bit should be better. 

 

I'd like a new skill in the cruiser tree "Nimble" with any of this, or two or the three depending on the number of skill points required.

Increase speed by 5%, decrease time to reach max speed by 10%, decrease  rudder shift time by 15%.

 

Not a bad idea. But do we realisticly think, WG would implement it? After we know, what they did with Henri?