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

Is secondary skills getting a rework as well?

32 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
2,201 posts
12,848 battles

@MrConway @Crysantos etc

 

We heard you are taking Dead eye back to the drawing board to "tweak/nerf" it because of the new stupid Meta. You said that the goal with the whole captain rework (the official at least) was to make more optional builds for ships so it wouldn't be just one go-to build for one class which Dead eye pretty much resulted in. Does this mean you will take another look at the now days very nerfed and un-viable secondary build and make them more worthwhile to actually take? It's not fun to try and play a bit more aggressive, supportive, brawling playstyle in your secondary build BB when you have 1500 secondary shells fired in a game and only 300 hits and 2 fires. 

 

Did you actually considered the secondary builds pre-work to be so OP that they needed this nerf?

 

Maybe it has drowned in the background of all the noise regarding the Dead eye skill but be sure that many BB players are upset of the current efficiency of secondary specced BBs 

 

What is your plan going forward? What build will be viable in your minds?

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Weekend Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,222 posts
9,992 battles

Doubt that Secondaries will get Reworked that Quickly.

 

To begin with DeadEye is likely more something they are Changing due to Community Pressure. Not because they actually think it needs to be Changed.

 

 

That being Said. The Goal of getting Optional Builds was Impossible to begin with.

No matter what you do. There will always be 1 or 2 Meta Builds for a Ship. With anything else being Meme or Trash.

Because there will always be 1 Build which is Objectively Better and then maybe 1 other Build which can be Objectively Stronger in Certain Situations.

 

You could in Theory try to Offer 2-3 Completely Different Skill Trees for each Ship Specializing the Ship to different Jobs and make these Skills so Powerful for that Job that there is no way that another Build can Compete in that Situation. But even then every Ship would due to its Base Values be Bound to that Skilltree Buffing these Abilities as other Builds would just not provide as much effect thus still having at best 1 Meta Build and 1 or 2 Situational Builds.

 

 

So I doubt anything will Change on that Front.

Manual Secondaries was just not something the Average Players used that much as it wouldnt fire on anything but the Manual Target.

Which many Players Failed to Select or werent capable of changing efficiently if needed etc.

So they wanted that gone and Replaced with a Skill that is easier to use for the Average Player.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHEFT]
Players
12,664 posts
9,841 battles
6 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

You could in Theory try to Offer 2-3 Completely Different Skill Trees for each Ship Specializing the Ship to different Jobs and make these Skills so Powerful for that Job that there is no way that another Build can Compete in that Situation. But even then every Ship would due to its Base Values be Bound to that Skilltree Buffing these Abilities as other Builds would just not provide as much effect thus still having at best 1 Meta Build and 1 or 2 Situational Builds.

 

Or they could just make skill/modules which are mutual exclusive. F.e. you take skill A but then you cant use module B with it.

Or you need skilltrees so you progress down a certain path.

Or synergies between skills/modules, to get a bigger benefit, making certain builds worthwhile, because of the boni you get.

 

There are options, but that would require WG putting effort into it... which we know wont happen, because the money they can make of it is rather small.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Weekend Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,222 posts
9,992 battles
6 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Or they could just make skill/modules which are mutual exclusive. F.e. you take skill A but then you cant use module B with it.

Or you need skilltrees so you progress down a certain path.

Or synergies between skills/modules, to get a bigger benefit, making certain builds worthwhile, because of the boni you get.

 

There are options, but that would require WG putting effort into it... which we know wont happen, because the money they can make of it is rather small.

 

The Problem is. Even with that you still have the Confines of the Ship. So at Best you get some halfwat Decent Builds for any Job on every Ship. But each Ship still has certain Qualities meaning each of the Ships still has only 1 Meta Build.

 

Its not about Work. There is just no realy way to offer Several Meta Builds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,201 posts
12,848 battles
20 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

Doubt that Secondaries will get Reworked that Quickly.

 

To begin with DeadEye is likely more something they are Changing due to Community Pressure. Not because they actually think it needs to be Changed.

 

 

That being Said. The Goal of getting Optional Builds was Impossible to begin with.

No matter what you do. There will always be 1 or 2 Meta Builds for a Ship. With anything else being Meme or Trash.

Because there will always be 1 Build which is Objectively Better and then maybe 1 other Build which can be Objectively Stronger in Certain Situations.

 

You could in Theory try to Offer 2-3 Completely Different Skill Trees for each Ship Specializing the Ship to different Jobs and make these Skills so Powerful for that Job that there is no way that another Build can Compete in that Situation. But even then every Ship would due to its Base Values be Bound to that Skilltree Buffing these Abilities as other Builds would just not provide as much effect thus still having at best 1 Meta Build and 1 or 2 Situational Builds.

 

 

So I doubt anything will Change on that Front.

Manual Secondaries was just not something the Average Players used that much as it wouldnt fire on anything but the Manual Target.

Which many Players Failed to Select or werent capable of changing efficiently if needed etc.

So they wanted that gone and Replaced with a Skill that is easier to use for the Average Player.

 

 

Problem with this is that we currently only have 1 viable Meta build and that's Dead Eye. If WG tweaks/nerfs that we have no viable builds at all for BBs compared to what we had before rework. So then its just a Epic fail. Its not really rocket science for them to just nerf Dead Eye a bit to not make it mandatory for all BBs and all nations. Buff secondary's a bit so they don't just look like "lawn watering sprinklers" that sprays shells in all different directions except the target you are going for, and then maybe a tweaked-up tank build.

 

I think this would satisfy most players and also make WG reach their goal with the whole rework.

 

If they pay me with a Benham I can fix this in 2 days, even do some testing this time around.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Weekend Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,222 posts
9,992 battles
9 minutes ago, OldschoolGaming_YouTube said:

Problem with this is that we currently only have 1 viable Meta build and that's Dead Eye. If WG tweaks/nerfs that we have no viable builds at all for BBs compared to what we had before rework. So then its just a Epic fail. Its not really rocket science for them to just nerf Dead Eye a bit to not make it mandatory for all BBs and all nations. Buff secondary's a bit so they don't just look like "lawn watering sprinklers" that sprays shells in all different directions except the target you are going for, and then maybe a tweaked-up tank build.

 

I think this would satisfy most players and also make WG reach their goal with the whole rework.

 

If they pay me with a Benham I can fix this in 2 days, even do some testing this time around.

 

That I deny

Standard Tank Build is still my Skillset of Choice.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
924 posts
20,267 battles

Honestly, I can't say Dead Eye has changed the meta as much as the withrawal of the Thunderer, which prompted tons of players to get one and start sniping from 24 km.

 

I'm seeing plenty of games lately where BBs rush in, often one by one and mindlessly, so I wouldn't say the meta has changed much: backline campers have always existed, and brawlers seem to be as common as ever. Until some data miner shows me otherwise, I reckon most of the "new meta" complaints are due to selection bias.

 

Imho Dead Eye is fine: it allows inaccurate, tradionally brawlers BBs to be played like a "normal" BB, at least on some occasions. That way it offers some build variety.

It certainly makes more sense than some skills with horrid tradeoffs (5% more AP damage for 30% worse fires and floodings? what am I, insane?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SPURD]
Players
869 posts
6,596 battles

It's just too expensive for a memebuild. The skills are 3, 4 and 4 points (and 2 if you need ifhe). A cruiser torp memebuild is 1, 2 and 3...

 

Alternatively all surface ship classes have dead or horrible skills at the 4 slot and that's by design because... ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAD]
Players
3,804 posts
15,184 battles
8 hours ago, tocqueville8 said:

Honestly, I can't say Dead Eye has changed the meta as much as the withrawal of the Thunderer, which prompted tons of players to get one and start sniping from 24 km.

 

I'm seeing plenty of games lately where BBs rush in, often one by one and mindlessly, so I wouldn't say the meta has changed much: backline campers have always existed, and brawlers seem to be as common as ever. Until some data miner shows me otherwise, I reckon most of the "new meta" complaints are due to selection bias.

 

Imho Dead Eye is fine: it allows inaccurate, tradionally brawlers BBs to be played like a "normal" BB, at least on some occasions. That way it offers some build variety.

It certainly makes more sense than some skills with horrid tradeoffs (5% more AP damage for 30% worse fires and floodings? what am I, insane?)

Unfortunately it did happen at the same time so it's hard to separate the two.

 

I am noticing fewer Thunderers right now but deadeye remains probably the most powerful skill with no downsides at all.

It gives a 19% decrease in actual dispersion ellipse area. 

Et8HufyXAAAsOiq?format=png&name=900x900

 

It's far too strong of a skill and either needs substantial downsides or a nerf. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,008 posts
20,132 battles
9 hours ago, tocqueville8 said:

Honestly, I can't say Dead Eye has changed the meta as much as the withrawal of the Thunderer, which prompted tons of players to get one and start sniping from 24 km.

 

I'm seeing plenty of games lately where BBs rush in, often one by one and mindlessly, so I wouldn't say the meta has changed much: backline campers have always existed, and brawlers seem to be as common as ever. Until some data miner shows me otherwise, I reckon most of the "new meta" complaints are due to selection bias.

 

Imho Dead Eye is fine: it allows inaccurate, tradionally brawlers BBs to be played like a "normal" BB, at least on some occasions. That way it offers some build variety.

It certainly makes more sense than some skills with horrid tradeoffs (5% more AP damage for 30% worse fires and floodings? what am I, insane?)

so, there is nothing wrong with me hitting 8 out of 9 shells from like 24km with a BB? 

:Smile_facepalm: sure, this skill is perfectly fine. such a variety aswell... yeah i would definitely skip the ability of getting insane accuracy and spec something else...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,012 posts
21,128 battles
10 hours ago, tocqueville8 said:

Honestly, I can't say Dead Eye has changed the meta as much as the withrawal of the Thunderer, which prompted tons of players to get one and start sniping from 24 km.

 

I'm seeing plenty of games lately where BBs rush in, often one by one and mindlessly, so I wouldn't say the meta has changed much: backline campers have always existed, and brawlers seem to be as common as ever. Until some data miner shows me otherwise, I reckon most of the "new meta" complaints are due to selection bias.

 

Imho Dead Eye is fine: it allows inaccurate, tradionally brawlers BBs to be played like a "normal" BB, at least on some occasions. That way it offers some build variety.

It certainly makes more sense than some skills with horrid tradeoffs (5% more AP damage for 30% worse fires and floodings? what am I, insane?)

Selection bias? I think you mean confirmation bias? Plz confirm ^^

 

Luckily, we don't have to choose which of the 2 influences made the meta worse: the huge influx of Thundellols and the addition of deadeye together made the game jump to a worse state by a stretch.

 

These one by one mindlessly pushing battleships you keep seeing are punished even more then they already were by the existance of deadeye. Even ships far away (on other flanks) now contribute more damage to pushing individuals. I think what you are witnessing as 'mindlessly' is actually players who are fed up with the camping meta, and are unable or unwilling to contribute anything else other then trying to push in, hopelessly. They are bored out of their skull is what they are.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
924 posts
20,267 battles
1 hour ago, Europizza said:

Selection bias? I think you mean confirmation bias? Plz confirm ^^ 

I meant a post-hoc selection, which you're right, is called confirmation. My bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
924 posts
20,267 battles
2 hours ago, ghostbuster_ said:

so, there is nothing wrong with me hitting 8 out of 9 shells from like 24km with a BB? 

:Smile_facepalm: sure, this skill is perfectly fine. such a variety aswell... yeah i would definitely skip the ability of getting insane accuracy and spec something else...

I dunno, Dead Eye synergizes well with Concealment Expert, and you'd still want to take Fire Prevention as well, unless you have a British superheal. Fire Prevention was pretty much obligatory before the rework, as was Expert Marksman on mod low-mid tier BBs.

 

Seeing more German BBs go for a traditional tank/sniper build is a form of variety, whether we like it or not. The problem, as the OP argues, is that secondaries didn't get better accordingly, so we just get more snipers instead of mixing up nations and playstyles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
924 posts
20,267 battles
3 hours ago, gopher31 said:

I am noticing fewer Thunderers right now but deadeye remains probably the most powerful skill with no downsides at all.

They could nerf it a bit, but still, the idea of allowing inaccurate BBs to perform decently at range is okay, and it shouldn't necessarily carry downsides. I shrug to think of what my Alsace regrind would've been otherwise (1.6 sigma...).

Flanking, crossfiring, pushing in a timely manner: that's what wins games. I don't deliberately stay out of my concealment to use Dead Eye: I do what I'd do anyway, and if Dead Eye is active, then all the better.

 

I mean, there's a module (on most ships) that gives -14% area dispersion, with no conditions: is a -19% area dispersion perk, with a condition that inhibits it completely in pushing situations, so powerful by comparison?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,008 posts
20,132 battles
16 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

I dunno, Dead Eye synergizes well with Concealment Expert, and you'd still want to take Fire Prevention as well, unless you have a British superheal. Fire Prevention was pretty much obligatory before the rework, as was Expert Marksman on mod low-mid tier BBs.

You can get fire prevention, concealment expert and dead eye in the same time. I dont know what you're trying to say here.

Quote

 

Seeing more German BBs go for a traditional tank/sniper build is a form of variety, whether we like it or not. The problem, as the OP argues, is that secondaries didn't get better accordingly, so we just get more snipers instead of mixing up nations and playstyles.

Even if secondaries didnt get nerfed, dead eye would still be the only valuable chioce. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
924 posts
20,267 battles
1 hour ago, Europizza said:

Even ships far away (on other flanks) now contribute more damage to pushing individuals. I think what you are witnessing as 'mindlessly' is actually players who are fed up with the camping meta, and are unable or unwilling to contribute anything else other then trying to push in, hopelessly. They are bored out of their skull is what they are

Yes and no.

 

My last example was a game on Shards: we were even on ships and points, we had C and B, so no need to push, and while my buddy in Soyuz and I in the Alsace were clearing the eastern flank and pushing into B, our Nagato and Bayern (fail div) felt the need to also push out of B, against a Marco Polo, an Izumo and a Bismarck, despite my urging to stay back and let us handle it.

I was the only one who could use Dead Eye (I was being stalked by a DD, so I had to keep turning), so that wasn't it. It all had to do with people not knowing when pushing is going to lose more points than it would get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
924 posts
20,267 battles
7 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

You can get fire prevention, concealment expert and dead eye in the same time. I dont know what you're trying to say here.

That unlike Concealment Expert on most DDs, Dead Eye isn't necessarily the first choice on BBs.

I think Dead Eye is a strong skill, but it's made stronger by comparison by the fact that so many other skills are crap:

 

-10% torpedo damage (only on the belt), for 3 points: it's barely useful on Yamato, Alabama and other BB with a good bulge, where it works out to cutting the damage by 1/5, but it's still overpriced, and on most BBs the benefits are minimal

- slightly more AP damage for much worse fires & floods? makes no sense

- IFHE would make some secondaries worthwhile, but it halves your main guns' fire chance, too, even though you obviously didn't take it for them...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,008 posts
20,132 battles
44 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

That unlike Concealment Expert on most DDs, Dead Eye isn't necessarily the first choice on BBs.

I think Dead Eye is a strong skill, but it's made stronger by comparison by the fact that so many other skills are crap:

independently from other skills, there is no way you can justify having a skill like dead eye in the game. i could somehow understand if it gave better accuracy when there are multiple spotted ships in your base detection range. even then it would be too strong because BBs are already powerful enough. there is no need to buff them. but the way it is, its just dumb. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHEFT]
Players
12,664 posts
9,841 battles
5 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

independently from other skills, there is no way you can justify having a skill like dead eye in the game. i could somehow understand if it gave better accuracy when there are multiple spotted ships in your base detection range. even then it would be too strong because BBs are already powerful enough. there is no need to buff them. but the way it is, its just dumb. 

 

 

And then we look at Outnumbered for Cruisers and can only shake our heads :cap_fainting:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
924 posts
20,267 battles
Just now, ghostbuster_ said:

independently from other skills, there is no way you can justify having a skill like dead eye in the game

But why not?

It's only slightly better than Aiming Systems Mod 1, but it also has a condition that often makes it pointless. No one complains that Aiming Systems Mod 1 breaks the meta, or that it doesn't have good alternatives.

Are you objecting to the accuracy, or the condition it comes attached to (and the playstyle it encourages)? Would Dead Eye be more acceptable if it was a blanket -10% dispersion, regardless of who's spotted inside whose concealment range?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,008 posts
20,132 battles
38 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

But why not?

It's only slightly better than Aiming Systems Mod 1, but it also has a condition that often makes it pointless. No one complains that Aiming Systems Mod 1 breaks the meta, or that it doesn't have good alternatives.

It does stack with asm1 tho. Its not like "if you have asm1, dead eye doesnt work or the other way around". This leads BBs having stupidly good dispersion.

Quote

Are you objecting to the accuracy, or the condition it comes attached to (and the playstyle it encourages)?

Both. The condition doesnt make any sense and the gameplay it encourages is also just beyond bad.

BBs also dont need more accurate guns. They are already way too accurate.

Quote

 Would Dead Eye be more acceptable if it was a blanket -10% dispersion, regardless of who's spotted inside whose concealment range?

Nope. As i said, buffing BB accuracy is a no go anyway.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
4,008 posts
20,132 battles
1 hour ago, DFens_666 said:

 

And then we look at Outnumbered for Cruisers and can only shake our heads :cap_fainting:

Yeah, that skill gotta be a joke. Seriously, i dont believe that the guys who came up with those skill ideas ever played the game. 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VIBES]
Players
924 posts
20,267 battles
Just now, ghostbuster_ said:

It does stack with asm1 tho. Its not like "if you have asm1, dead eye doesnt work or the other way around". This leads BBs having stupidly good dispersion.

I'm not sure I agree.

After all, one can take at least 4 different perks (cpt skills, modules, flags) to reduce fires, for instance. 2 perks for dispersion are fine, imho, though I'd be okay with a nerf. I'd also be okay with a fire chance nerf for BBs in general.

Still, at least we're clear here.

 

What bugs me the most is what the OP said: the secondary accuracy nerf.

Sure, secondary builds in general are now (slightly) cheaper, but they're also crappier, so in a way they're as conventient as before, but worse by comparison to the now-buffed sniper build.
If you're gonna buff these, buff those as well.

 

Cheers :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CHEFT]
Players
12,664 posts
9,841 battles
53 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

After all, one can take at least 4 different perks (cpt skills, modules, flags) to reduce fires, for instance. 2 perks for dispersion are fine, imho, though I'd be okay with a nerf. I'd also be okay with a fire chance nerf for BBs in general. 

 

Dispersion is one balancing factor for BBs, and i disagree that they should get good dispersion, especially from longrange. Imagine a skill/module, which would buff Cruiser armor or shrink their citadel, that would be unfair aswell, because they are kinda balanced around that.

Essentially the arguement for fires is, that BBs should be able to reduce the impact for their downsides. Fires hurt BBs the most, so they can reduce the impact. Dispersion is balancing the larger caliber guns they are using, so they can reduce that aswell. I think its questionable, that BBs are allowed to do that, while others are not. Imagine if DDs would have 4 perks to increase their HP, one of them being a signal :cap_haloween:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SPURD]
Players
869 posts
6,596 battles
15 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

 

Imagine a skill/module, which would buff Cruiser armor

 

I can imagine a "no overmatch" cruiser skill and I'd be perfectly happy if it existed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×