Cruiser Rework??

[The_Chiv]

So after watching the Flamu cv rework video I noticed in every single slide Cruisers were always at the bottom of the list yet they tend to make up 33% or more of the ship distribution in a random match, less so after deadeye. The only list they were not at the bottom was population. There is a very important reason for this. There are 168 cruisers listed on the wiki with many more being developed that are not on the wiki. Compared to 128 BBS, 139 DDs, and  27Cvs with one more being developed. Cruisers tend to be the most diverse class in the game having a range of playstyle that is greater then any other class, yet tend to have the least impact as a class to the game. Sure we could look at some examples like the Smolensk, Belfast, Petro and get some amazing performances but as a whole the class seems to meander below BBS in terms of performance. So what would a Cruiser rework look like?

 

Commander Skill tree

Lets be frank the commander rework has been less kind to cruisers and has made them less impactful and less engaging to play. Yes I am pointing to the meta effects of deadeye, but also the nerfs that were felt across the three distinct sub types of cruisers. A universal skill tree for all cruisers tends to fall flat on its face as each sub class tends to need a bit from other classes skill trees to be effective. I propose a change to the Cruiser tree as a built in class trait to add flexibility and build diversity. For every 10 points a cruiser captain has they are able to take a skill from another class of ship. This solution tends to be the most simple and elegant as it does not require a complete rebuild of the skill trees to have 2 extra skill trees. This concept would allow CLs to take DD skills to stay combat effective like MBAAS and MBAAE. It would also allow Super cruisers the ability to take BB survivability skills if they wanted or build for secondary . It would also allow cruisers wishing to play a more AA themed cruiser to get more aa and be a better deterrent to CVS as well as allow Hybrid CA's to take from the cv tree. This concept would allow a greater freedom of design choices for the player while require very little from the developers. The added bonus to this concept is many cruisers that are premium that no one wants will instantly get a nice boost and thus increase sales, THIS IS IMPORTANT.

 

Survivability

Probably the biggest thing that deadeye reinforced into the community was that BBs decimate cruisers. This has always been the case, but deadeye made it more obvious. Even with the skill going to be changed it still does not take away from the fact that overmatch and the proliferation of 457mm or greater bbs has made playing a cruiser nothing short of stressful. Every shot a cruiser takes is a gamble as it gives away position and trying to support ships like a DD becomes a near suicidal task.  Trying to come up with a universal catch all for this problem also comes with some massive problems as it will do too much for some, and not enough for others. What i would suggest, as this is an opinion and should be taken as such, is the following. 

1. Spotting delay against cruisers. If a ship is over 10km from a cruiser that is spotted they will suffer a similar penalty to radar spotting. This would greatly increase cruiser survivability in the  early stages(does not apply to Super cruisers)
2. Light cruiser can no longer be citadel by bbs but instead take increased AP pen damage. (40%-50%) Testing needed. HE citadels still possible.
3. Rebalancing of AA. Right now CVs have no counter play outside of grouping up. Cruisers historically were the outer most defense in a naval formation against Aircraft attacks. 
4. All cruiser get heals from t7-t10. How effective those heals are is where WG can apply their own brand of balancing based on national traits.

 

I wanted to come up with a new balancing scheme where Cruiser did more damage to DDs and less to BBs but no matter how I tried to argue the merits of such a plan it became a bit too convoluted and complicated. While I do feel there needs to be a greater focus of effort against DDs, changes in survivability would probably make this more likely then rebalancing class specific damage interactions. There is also another matter in classification that needs to be addressed. What is a light cruiser, Heavy cruiser, and Super cruiser. Simple answer is to base it off of gun caliber. If the ship has less then 160mm guns and a cruiser it is a light cruiser. If it has 161mm -240mm it is a heavy cruiser, 241mm-380mm and a cruiser it is a super cruiser. 

 

 

Again this is an opinion piece and kind of a pie in the sky sorta dream. I am bias as I have loved playing cruisers since alpha and if I was to pick 10 of my favorite ships 5 would be cruisers. It is important to the games health and longevity as a whole that Cruisers get some QOL love from the Devs at WG. If Cruisers do not get any sort of QOL love what you will end up seeing is the population of cruiser play drop, we have already begun to see this in rank play thanks to Deadeye and even with a change to deadeye the likelihood this will instantly rebound is unlikely. If this continues then the meta will boil down to a BB/DD show down with the occasional CV getting yelled at constantly to hunt dds. Gun boat and hybrid DDs will become the mainstay for compositions and the age old problem of whoever loses their dds first will lose the match will become even more problematic. Now you may think I am being a bit dramatic but as more skilled veterans are leaving this game and being replaced by newer players with less skill the problems will only grow. A new player trying a cruiser for the first time and getting decimated over and over again by bb fire will quickly stop playing the class and will gravitate strongly to one of the other 3 classes. Now in the not so distant future we are going to have subs. This will add a whole new level of class interactions that frankly without cruisers will be extremely polarizing. Cruiser represent balance and stability in the meta, yet with every change we have seen from wg in the past 3 years this balance has been eroded and the shift in the meta has become ever more one sided. Something has to change if WG cares about sustaining their game. 

 

Now I know many of you are gonna respond with WG doesn't care. You are probably right.

[159Hunter]

1 hour ago, The_Chiv said:

Commander Skill tree

[...]

I really like your proposal here.

Quote

 

Survivability

 proliferation of 457mm

Agreed.

Quote

1. Spotting delay against cruisers. If a ship is over 10km from a cruiser that is spotted they will suffer a similar penalty to radar spotting. This would greatly increase cruiser survivability in the  early stages(does not apply to Super cruisers)

10 km is too low imo, for many BB this is already "brawling range". I'd prefer 15 km ( still [edge of] combat range for most cruisers, mostly medium range for BB), I don't have issues with BBs pushing to 15 km, it's those behind this limit that annoy me with their deadeye sniping ( as they usually don't sit at 15,5 km but always more around 20+km. )

Quote

1. Light cruiser can no longer be citadel by bbs but instead take increased AP pen damage. (40%-50%) Testing needed. HE citadels still possible.

That would create even more dumb CL gameplay, sailing full broadside to get all guns dakka dakka. Plus, allowing HE citadels is not really a good sign to give to a BB population that is already resorting way to much to HE imo.

So, don't really like this.

Quote

1. Rebalancing of AA. Right now CVs have no counter play outside of grouping up. Cruisers historically were the outer most defense in a naval formation against Aircraft attacks. 

I like, but well.... one can dream I guess?

Quote

1. All cruiser get heals from t7-t10. How effective those heals are is where WG can apply their own brand of balancing based on national traits.

I guess because T7 are in such a terrible state: yes. Then again, when you match tier V and tier VI cruisers in with VII and VIII resp. they will suffer a lot.

So I like the idea, but needs finetuning imo.

 

[The_Chiv]

1 hour ago, 159Hunter said:

I really like your proposal here.

Agreed.

10 km is too low imo, for many BB this is already "brawling range". I'd prefer 15 km ( still [edge of] combat range for most cruisers, mostly medium range for BB), I don't have issues with BBs pushing to 15 km, it's those behind this limit that annoy me with their deadeye sniping ( as they usually don't sit at 15,5 km but always more around 20+km. )

That would create even more dumb CL gameplay, sailing full broadside to get all guns dakka dakka. Plus, allowing HE citadels is not really a good sign to give to a BB population that is already resorting way to much to HE imo.

So, don't really like this.

I like, but well.... one can dream I guess?

I guess because T7 are in such a terrible state: yes. Then again, when you match tier V and tier VI cruisers in with VII and VIII resp. they will suffer a lot.

So I like the idea, but needs finetuning imo.

 

1. Thank you figured the concept of jack of all trade should have some actual merit, and it is rather simple and elegant.

2. Can not get around the fact that 457+ is kind of toxic to the game.

3. I chose 10km out of habit as this was the metric I used when looking at ways to mitigate the spotting that cv planes can do. 15km seems a bit fair actually and discourages camping.

4. Disagree. Ships like the Worcester, Cleveland, Atlanta are so damn reliant on terrain that getting spotted before you get to terrain or being on a map like OCEAN tends to be one of the most punishing things ever. There were a few other ways that greater survivability could be baked in but that would be a bit problematic as there are realistically 2 available options. Smoke or greater agility. Smoke would turn the usn line into the greatest cancer line ever and would require a removal of Radar or make it a either or like the UK cl lines(come to think of it I am ok with the either or concept). Agility would have a lesser impact than say smoke, but in the hands of many would make most cls like the colbert. Both are not horrible ideas but rather then recycling old content I thought to invent something a bit different. FYI 6.5k-7k damage per pen is a lot and any bb with 12 guns could still nuke 50% or more with a salvo they would just be unlikely to get a full dev strike. Now will this encourage more bad CL play. Well yeah. Cl has a massive learning curve that requires a ton of trial and error.

5. My idea of rebalance is swap the LR and MR constant damage values while making flak less predictable. Yeah I know pipe dream.

6. I chose 7 because of how often a 7 is in a 9 game. This is a huge problem in this game as the power difference between 7-9 is extreme to say the least. I mean I had an analogy involving Disable people but it felt a bit cruel and tasteless, but I think you get the point.

7. Nothing is ever perfect and ideas tend to always need testing and refinement.

8. Thank you for the input. 

[captain_lef]

as an ex cruiser main, i would like to say that for me survivability is not such a huge issue, wasd hacks need to be used in cruisers. my suggestion would be just fix detectability (reduce it) and buff AA

[Camperdown]

Interesting post 

I think the overmatch BS is the biggest problem. Next comes high citadels that can be devastated at will by BBs. In short, cruisers are too vulnerable.

Reduce vulnerability and suddenly cruisers are viable again. So, reduce overmatch and citadel exposure and things are already a lot more balanced.

[The_Chiv]

12 minutes ago, Camperdown said:

Interesting post 

I think the overmatch BS is the biggest problem. Next comes high citadels that can be devastated at will by BBs. In short, cruisers are too vulnerable.

Reduce vulnerability and suddenly cruisers are viable again. So, reduce overmatch and citadel exposure and things are already a lot more balanced.

While I would agree that would require remodeling armor on 168+ ships. This would take a ton of time as you would have to balance test each iteration. My suggestions are a bit more achievable and require the least amount of effort for WG. They also have the added advantage of fixing the massive wrongs of the Commander rework, as well as giving a bit of flavor to the class.

[Camperdown]

3 minutes ago, The_Chiv said:

While I would agree that would require remodeling armor on 168+ ships. This would take a ton of time as you would have to balance test each iteration. My suggestions are a bit more achievable and require the least amount of effort for WG. They also have the added advantage of fixing the massive wrongs of the Commander rework, as well as giving a bit of flavor to the class.

I can understand it would be a lot of work.

My point is really quite fundamental. WG has made big mistakes by a combination of decisions fueled by greed and opportunistic tinkering which screws up the fundamental balance of the game. So some more drastic changes are now needed to restore the game to health. Cruisers imo are most urgently in need of some fundamental tlc. And I am not thinking of the Soviet balanz cruisers in this context, but some of the others that have been fatally powercrept.

[anonym_FDOLXpxOfXXq]

Agree with the general idea, cruisers feel too fragile / stressful.

Overmatch may be tweaked so as to give a reduction in bounce chance instead of negating it entirely ?

Probably wont happen anyway since blapping cruisers across the map is kinda the main appeal for the BBabies hordes :D

Incidentally, limiting further the number of BBs in battle would help a lot, but given the state of the queue ...

[Asatori]

The captain rework has certainly been detrimental to cruisers. Less options for good builds, counter to the stated objectives of the rework. And consider that the aircraft carrying cruisers aren't even in the game, they will have even shittier options for captain skills. Not that I care since they are basicly CV's... 

[Maris_Piper]

For such a Diverse class of ships ranging from Oversize Destroyers to Baby Battleships also Guns from around 4 inch to 15 inch and armour from Tin Foil to Battleship Plate, The skill set on offer is pretty pathetic and that's being kind. The OP is right on so many points, iChace touched on this subject saying cruisers should have a way of borrowing some skills from other lines although this would probably take a bit of effort on WG's part so It's probably a none starter and the rework will blunder on being a cash generator like it was designed to be, Oh Well 

[invicta2012]

57 minutes ago, The_Chiv said:

While I would agree that would require remodeling armor on 168+ ships. This would take a ton of time as you would have to balance test each iteration.

Well... didn't they do that during the IFHE rework? 

 

TBH I wouldn't expect WG to do too much to cruiser design at the moment. They are still very much working along the lines that BBs are the most profitable area for the game, and that HE spam (a cruiser forte) makes BB players cry and close their wallets. So they let BB players pay for the tools to easily devastate cruisers and the spreadsheet says it's a positive outcome.  Where you might get some movement is on the Cruiser section of the Captain skills tree, because that's still a work in progress and can be adjusted without losing too much face. 

[Prophecy82]

Pls not another rework! Especially not from WG quality devs!

[DFens_666]

6 hours ago, The_Chiv said:

that overmatch and the proliferation of 457mm or greater bbs has made playing a cruiser nothing short of stressful.

 

Maybe overmatching shells should deal reduced damage - like 50% less than they would normaly do. Making Cruisers too tanky against BBs is not something id personaly agree with, because it will create a CV-like environement, where bad Cruiser players will still get devstruck because they show broadside, and good Cruiser players would just easily tank BBs and would just rush them down in 1v1 engagements. Only getting half the damage through overmatch would atleast make some aggressive play possible, as the chance of getting suddenly deleted is basicly 0 then. And angling would actually migitate damage.

Whether this should apply to all classes is up for debate i suppose. But i dont think Yamato would need such a huge nerf when shooting other BBs, so maybe just Cruisers only.

[invicta2012]

21 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

Maybe overmatching shells should deal reduced damage - like 50% less than they would normaly do.

The problem for many cruisers with overmatch is that the second layer of armour that an overmatching shell hits is almost always thick enough not to be overmatched and inevitably makes the shell detonate. As that's usually the citadel plating, it usually means catastrophic damage. 

 

What impact does Overmatch have on fuse timings? I had always presumed that the fuse of a shell wouldn't be activated if a layer of armour was overmatched, is that right? What would happen if it did activate the fuse? Surely that would a certain Penetrating hit and a possible Citadel, rather than an inevitable Cit?

[Itwastuesday]

I'm kinda torn on overmatch, on one hand angling should be rewarded, on the other BB is supposed to counter cruiser and you can see just how ineffective ships like Montana and Kurfurst are at everything largely because of their inability to even screw cruisers. I'd just probably make it a function of penetration (and with that, of course, distance).

 

I feel like all cruisers regardless of tier could have heals and nothing would be broken.

[DFens_666]

15 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

What impact does Overmatch have on fuse timings? I had always presumed that the fuse of a shell wouldn't be activated if a layer of armour was overmatched, is that right? What would happen if it did activate the fuse? Surely that would a certain Penetrating hit and a possible Citadel, rather than an inevitable Cit?

 

Overmatching shells should always trigger the fuse from what i know, basicly resulting in a penetration. The normal fuse timer still applies ofc, which is 0.033 sec for most ships. So if the shell stays inside of the ship, it will cause penetration damage, or if it still reaches the citadel, it will deal citadel damage (bow/stern overmatch). You can see this when 2 Yamatos shoot each others bow, sometimes you can get a citadel, but often you will get pens. The overmatch causes the shell to arm and it detonates before it reaches the frontal citadel plating.

 

Thats basicly the problem with Cruisers and angling, went to the training room to showcase what i mean:

 

47° angle, so its outside of autobounce. 2 Shells hit the thinner parts = 2 overpens. 2 Shells hit the citadel.

 

30° angle, which is guarateed to bounce unless it overmatches. 1 Shell passes through bow into the citadel. So we have 2 overpens and 2 pens. So atleast 2 shells got pens somewhere, not on the turrets tho, as they wouldnt have dealt full damage in that case i believe? (think turret pens give only overpen damage right? cant remember everything WG is changing...) I assume same happens with barbette pens.

 

 

Fully bow on neptune, 1 shell hits the citadel, 3 penetrat somewhere, 2 overpen somewhere. Incidently, im short 1480 damage, not sure how that works out.

[Ashardalon_Dragnipur]

how horrible

a ship class counter counters the ship class instead of just being a damage farm 

quick change it!

[The_Chiv]

6 minutes ago, Ashardalon_Dragnipur said:

how horrible

a ship class counter counters the ship class instead of just being a damage farm 

quick change it!

ok sir pls tell me what class does a cruiser counter and I will give you at least 5 reason you are wrong.

[Skurfa]

4 minutes ago, The_Chiv said:

ok sir pls tell me what class does a cruiser counter and I will give you at least 5 reason you are wrong.

 

It was supposed to be DD’s, and they still do.

[The_Chiv]

2 minutes ago, Skurfa said:

 

It was supposed to be DD’s, and they still do.

A dd can counter a bb and not suffer a counter attack due to its ability to steath fire torps.

 

1. The only real tool a Cruiser has for dealing with dd is Radar. Radar is a limited use consumable with a cool down. So for 20-48 seconds they can expose a dd. The dd however will most likely be near max range and due to its agility and speed will be able to escape the radar bubble.
2. Not all cruisers have radar, in fact from t8-10 it makes up about 33% of cruisers.
3. Without radar a cruiser requires vision from other ships, mostly dd's.
4. When a dd torps a bb it can do so with out fear of reprisal fire from the bb, the moment a cruiser shoots at a spotted dd they become the target of every bb.
5. A bb can 1v1 a cruiser and win 9 times out of 10, a dd can 1v1 a bb and win 9 times out of ten. A cruiser can not 1v1 a dd as the cruiser requires vision and or a consumable to even have a chance at trying.

[invicta2012]

1 hour ago, DFens_666 said:

Overmatching shells should always trigger the fuse from what i know, basicly resulting in a penetration. The normal fuse timer still applies ofc, which is 0.033 sec for most ships. So if the shell stays inside of the ship, it will cause penetration damage, or if it still reaches the citadel, it will deal citadel damage (bow/stern overmatch). You can see this when 2 Yamatos shoot each others bow, sometimes you can get a citadel, but often you will get pens. The overmatch causes the shell to arm and it detonates before it reaches the frontal citadel plating.

Thanks for going to all that trouble, it's appreciated. I suppose the point with reference to cruisers, is whether the Overmatch mechanic could be tweaked (fuse time lengthening as a result of an overmatch?  to provide something which increases the number of over penetrations on cruisers, but which *might* result in large calibre guns having increased citadel efficacy on BBs. 

[Skurfa]

21 minutes ago, The_Chiv said:

A dd can counter a bb and not suffer a counter attack due to its ability to steath fire torps.

 

1. The only real tool a Cruiser has for dealing with dd is Radar. Radar is a limited use consumable with a cool down. So for 20-48 seconds they can expose a dd. The dd however will most likely be near max range and due to its agility and speed will be able to escape the radar bubble.
2. Not all cruisers have radar, in fact from t8-10 it makes up about 33% of cruisers.
3. Without radar a cruiser requires vision from other ships, mostly dd's.
4. When a dd torps a bb it can do so with out fear of reprisal fire from the bb, the moment a cruiser shoots at a spotted dd they become the target of every bb.
5. A bb can 1v1 a cruiser and win 9 times out of 10, a dd can 1v1 a bb and win 9 times out of ten. A cruiser can not 1v1 a dd as the cruiser requires vision and or a consumable to even have a chance at trying.

 

1. The tool a cruiser has for dealing with DD’s are guns..... most cruisers outgun DD’s just fine. If range is a problem, you move closer in your cruiser.... use cover and RPF.

2. Yes, and?? Move closer in cover, use RPF.

3. Yes, and?? Move closer in cover, use RPF.

4. That’s a problem of cruiser vs. BB, not that the cruiser cannot counter a DD.

5. That’s a problem of cruiser vs. BB, not that the cruiser cannot counter a DD.

 

None of the 5 reasons actually proved a cruiser cannot counter a DD.... They have a hard time because of BB’s.... yes, but they will still rip a DD out of the water if catching one.

 

But most people do not use their cruisers like that, they claim it’s too hard, and on top of that “require” DD’s to kill other DD’s themselves.

 

And yes, cruiserplay is hard, it requires a lot of considerations while gaming...... and isn’t for everybody (which is a shame).

[The_Chiv]

1 minute ago, Skurfa said:

 

1. The tool a cruiser has for dealing with DD’s are guns..... most cruisers outgun DD’s just fine. If range is a problem, you move closer in your cruiser.... use cover and RPF.

2. Yes, and?? Move closer in cover, use RPF.

3. Yes, and?? Move closer in cover, use RPF.

4. That’s a problem of cruiser vs. BB, not that the cruiser cannot counter a DD.

5. That’s a problem of cruiser vs. BB, not that the cruiser cannot counter a DD.

 

None of the 5 reasons actually proved a cruiser cannot counter a DD.... They have a hard time because of BB’s.... yes, but they will still rip a DD out of the water if catching one.

 

But most people do not use their cruisers like that, they claim it’s too hard, and on top of that “require” DD’s to kill other DD’s themselves.

 

And yes, cruiserplay is hard, it requires a lot of considerations while gaming...... and isn’t for everybody (which is a shame).

HAHAHAHAHAHA funny and wrong.

[Prophecy82]

14 minutes ago, Skurfa said:

 

2. Yes, and?? Move closer in cover, use RPF.

3. Yes, and?? Move closer in cover, use RPF.

 

Sure, NP. Since DDs are known to be stationary and/or pretty sluggish. 

 

And you really see how good CA/CL work in CB when more and more Clans go for the Morgadurrrp Murdertrain setup.

 

[Exocet6951]

Considering WG's track record with rework quality in concept and execution...no thanks