People who call austin OP are the same people who call slava OP

[leonport]

Yeah i think this way feel free to have an open discussion.

 

but what i think is just clickbait and making people blindly hate wg is these videos:

 

you can kinda understand why flambass is doing this

-its easy to call austin OP because because just like slava you can show people total bs clips of it doing what its best at but you forget to show the clips when the ship fails to do anything.

-videos that hate wg generate way more views than videos that are un biased normal reviews or montages, flambass videos on austin have more views than the rest of the videos of austin on youtube combined

 

it seems since wg stopped releasing borderline broken ships the ccs are running out of content that generates views

 

[ImperialAdmiral]

I stopped listening to people in WoWs community. I just watch couple of vids and try to make my own judgement based on experience.

[ColonelPete]

• Slava is a bad design for the game (like Dead Eye), no matter her strength, and she is performing very strongly
• Austins design is ridiculous, not sure if she is too strong, but she plays into the hands of good players extremly well, which can be a problem when this is a ship accessible mostly by good players

[22cm]

14 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

• Slava is a bad design for the game (like Dead Eye), no matter her strength, and she is performing very strongly
• Austins design is ridiculous, not sure if she is too strong, but she plays into the hands of good players extremly well, which can be a problem when this is a ship accessible mostly by good players

 

• Slava does not benefit much from playing in a division
• Austin benefits a lot played in a try-hard smoke division including Minotaur, Smolensk, US DDs.

[leonport]

4 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

• Slava is a bad design for the game (like Dead Eye), no matter her strength, and she is performing very strongly
• Austins design is ridiculous, not sure if she is too strong, but she plays into the hands of good players extremly well, which can be a problem when this is a ship accessible mostly by good players

slava performing very strongly? Compared to what? Slava has an alright performance at best compared to other T10 special bbs despite its being the least played one

 

And what is the problem with ships having ridiculous design? Austin is very situational Cruiser according to most people i've seen talking about it and while they called it ridiculous they didn't said its OP. And even if only good players play it austin can get cucked by just getting bad mm which makes it not perform too good even if only very good players play it

[JohnMac79]

35 minutes ago, leonport said:

making people blindly hate wg

To be fair. WG give us plenty of reasons to hate them.

[leonport]

1 minute ago, JohnMac79 said:

To be fair. WG give us plenty of reasons to hate them.

yes true, but in this case i think its just putting gasoline on the already burning garbage

[ColonelPete]

3 minutes ago, leonport said:

slava performing very strongly? Compared to what? Slava has an alright performance at best compared to other T10 special bbs despite its being the least played one

 

And what is the problem with ships having ridiculous design? Austin is very situational Cruiser according to most people i've seen talking about it and while they called it ridiculous they didn't said its OP. And even if only good players play it austin can get cucked by just getting bad mm which makes it not perform too good even if only very good players play it

Compared to all other BB. Main problem is that she is bad at tanking and has to stay back, but her guns are just obliterators.

 

A ridiculous design is something that allows you to do stuff far removed from other ships in the game. Her design scales extremly well with skill and all the influence you can muster on the game (see 22cm explanation), which gives players, who already have an advantage, an even bigger advantage. Not the best design choice. And good players know how to deal with unfavourable situations. I do not expect this to be a significant problem.

[_Kokushibo_]

15 minutes ago, 22cm said:

• Austin benefits a lot played in a try-hard smoke division including Minotaur, Smolensk, US DDs.

Lost a game a few days ago against a division Austin, Worcester and Gearing. I was aware of what that ship can do (I was in a tier 8 DD). My team mate Smaland wasn't, so he went to port first, then its division mate, Moskva, then the entire flank, then the game. The reload booster is absurd on that ship.

[tocqueville8]

54 minutes ago, leonport said:

you can show people total bs clips of it doing what its best at but you forget to show the clips when the ship fails to do anything.

I would agree more if the Austin were a coal ship, as they're more likely to fall into the hands of below-average players, as was the case with the Smolensk.

[Redcap375]

Austin is the ultimate "teamwork" ship and ultimate high skill ceiling. It lives off being within a good div and played by a good player. 

 

If both of those stars are aligned it's OP.  It may not even live long, but in the short space of time is, it can cause huge amounts of damage!  

 

However, when it's sailed by a muppet then it's toast and when not in a div, struggles to work alone. That is what balances it out..

 

The stats are good at the moment because only good players have it. I expect those to drop like a lead balloon when more and more people get their hands on it. 

 

As for the Salva, meh.  It's great at sniping but that doesn't win games.  If it isn't tanking (which they can't do) then some poor Cruiser is and those kinda games normally go south very quickly.  

 

The Slava is a very selfish ship.  There are better ships at tier 10 like the Ohio and Bourg to mention a few.

 

I have enough steel and coal for anything in the game but I haven't fancied anything else yet.  Gonna see what the vampire 2 goes for. 

 

 

[hellhound666]

one needs to be blind not to hate what wg/lesta do with this game ...

[COPlUM]

It's OP in sweaty divisions, pepegas will see that, not look at or understand the armor scheme, buy it and get devastated with overmatch citadels even by HenriIV and supercruisers + be very upset with Flambass.

[Sunleader]

5 hours ago, leonport said:

Yeah i think this way feel free to have an open discussion.

 

but what i think is just clickbait and making people blindly hate wg is these videos:

 

you can kinda understand why flambass is doing this

-its easy to call austin OP because because just like slava you can show people total bs clips of it doing what its best at but you forget to show the clips when the ship fails to do anything.

-videos that hate wg generate way more views than videos that are un biased normal reviews or montages, flambass videos on austin are have more views than the rest of the videos of austin on youtube combined

 

it seems since wg stopped releasing borderline broken ships the ccs are running out of content that generates views

 

 

Actually. Both Austin and Slava are quite OP.

 

Its just that the Playerbase is Split into 3 different Interpretations of what Overpowered means. And so the Judgment of others often make absolutely no Sense to those which follow a different Viewpoint.

 

These 3 Interpretations are.

OP is the Ability to Win Matches in Randoms.  (Prime example being CVs like Enterprise or DDs like Daring)

OP is the Ability to Reliably win Fights against other Ships and thus Achieve Kills and Damage reliably. (Prime example being Ships like Alaska and Thunderer,) 

OP is the Ability to Win Clanbattles. (Prime Example being Ships like Stalingrad or Musashi)

 

And then there is Wargamings Interpretation. Which is Focused on the Average Results a Ship gets throughout the Playerbase. (Prime Example being Ships usually Removed because well. WG goes by WGs Interpretation xD )

 

 

The Reason for that is Fairly Simple.

 

90% of the Players you meet in Randoms. (Which is the Gamemode by which WG Balances) Will be Average and Below Players.

As such. Any Ship that is Capable of Quickly and Efficiently Removing such Players from the Match and thus Create a Numerical Advantage for the own Team. Is a very Dangerous and Game Deciding Weapon.

 

Or Putting it Short.

The Ability to Punish Mistakes Reliably and Decisively. Is one of the Strongest Abilities a Ship can possibly have in Randoms.

At the same time however. This Ability to Punish mistakes. Becomes almost Useless for Top Clans Participating in Clanbattles. Because their Opponents will not often give such Exploitable Mistakes :)

Likewise the Ability to Punish Mistakes will often not Impress Unicum Players as they tend to assume Unicum Enemies and thus will have a Negative Opinion on a Ship which has weaker Abilities in a Fight against another Unicum.

 

 

 

Now. CCs will mostly Cater to the Largest Possible Audience. Which is that 90% of Average and Below Players which tend to be Devstriked by Ships like Slava or get Eradictated by Ships Austin when they Overextended etc.

Meaning that they will Generally Follow the First Interpretation that Ships are OP if they can Win alot of Randoms by Punishing Mistakes. :)

[_HomTanks_]

3 hours ago, Sunleader said:

 

Actually. Both Austin and Slava are quite OP.

No. I don't know Austin, don't have it and it may seem op in divs but div  games don't define a ship op. There can be three-man sunicum division in three Konigs, win the game in 10 minutes with 3 kills each. That doesn't mean Konig is op.

 

Slava definitely isn't op.  I think you'd understand better if you play it.

 

Quote

 

Its just that the Playerbase is Split into 3 different Interpretations of what Overpowered means. And so the Judgment of others often make absolutely no Sense to those which follow a different Viewpoint.

 

These 3 Interpretations are.

OP is the Ability to Win Matches in Randoms.  (Prime example being CVs like Enterprise or DDs like Daring)

OP is the Ability to Reliably win Fights against other Ships and thus Achieve Kills and Damage reliably. (Prime example being Ships like Alaska and Thunderer,) 

OP is the Ability to Win Clanbattles. (Prime Example being Ships like Stalingrad or Musashi)

 

There is op and then there is broken. CVs are broken, meaning beyond op. A 40% wr player in a cv sinking a 70% player in a surface ship without taking any risk, it is not op, it is the state of being broken.

 

To me an op ship is a ship that is very easy to use, easy to deal high amounts of damage and plays safer than other ships in the same time by orange/red stat players. For instance, Smolensk. For instance, old Conqueror. For instance Thunderer, Kremlin before nerfs, Kitakaze before nerfs, T61 a close to be op if not op,

When Conq came out it was op. It couldn't be citadeled, it dealt ridiculous amount of damage in short time, etc. So it had to go thru nerfs. It was much worse than today's Thunderer which everyone complains about. As a matter fact, it is still borderline op.

 

[RenamedUser_92906789]

10 hours ago, leonport said:

Yeah i think this way feel free to have an open discussion.

 

but what i think is just clickbait and making people blindly hate wg is these videos:

 

you can kinda understand why flambass is doing this

-its easy to call austin OP because because just like slava you can show people total bs clips of it doing what its best at but you forget to show the clips when the ship fails to do anything.

-videos that hate wg generate way more views than videos that are un biased normal reviews or montages, flambass videos on austin are have more views than the rest of the videos of austin on youtube combined

 

it seems since wg stopped releasing borderline broken ships the ccs are running out of content that generates views

 

 

EDIT:

 

Never mind. Mistaken for another user.

[Fatal_Ramses]

Absolutely nothing wrong in a cruiser that can melt full HP Hindys and Bridisis in a matter of time it takes to run MBRB.

[_HomTanks_]

2 minutes ago, Fatal_Ramses said:

Absolutely nothing wrong in a cruiser that can melt full HP Hindys and Bridisis in a matter of time it takes to run MBRB.

And what about when you one shot them with a BB?

[Sunleader]

9 minutes ago, Execute0rder66 said:

No. I don't know Austin, don't have it and it may seem op in divs but div  games don't define a ship op. There can be three-man sunicum division in three Konigs, win the game in 10 minutes with 3 kills each. That doesn't mean Konig is op.

 

Slava definitely isn't op.  I think you'd understand better if you play it.

 

 

There is op and then there is broken. CVs are broken, meaning beyond op. A 40% wr player in a cv sinking a 70% player in a surface ship is not op, it is the state of being broken.

 

To me an op ship is a ship that is very easy to use, easy to deal high amounts of damage and plays safer than other ships in the same time by orange/red stat players. For instance, Smolensk. For instance, old Conqueror. For instance Thunderer, Kremlin before nerfs, Kitakaze before nerfs, T61 a close to be op if not op,

When Conq came out it was op. It couldn't be citadeled, it dealt ridiculous amount of damage in short time, etc. So it had to go thru nerfs. It was much worse than today's Thunderer which everyone complains about. As a matter fact, it is still borderline op.

 

 

Sigh....

 

I take the Time to Explain that People have different Opinions and Interpretations of what they Consider.

First Guy answering me. Comes Rolling in. Presents his own Opinion and Interpretation of what he Considers OP. And immediately Demands everyone else Abides by it as the Only Truth in the Universe.....

 

 

1.

You do not get to Decide what makes a Ship OP and what does not :)

So I dont care if you Agree with my Assessment which I made by the Characteristics which I consider relevant :)

 

Moreover your Example is a Fallacy. Because you bring Divisions and S Unicums into it.

These 2 Factors are entirely Irrelevant to Ship Balancing for me.

Because thats Players. Not Ships.

Slavas Penpower and Accuarcy allows it to Devstrike the Average Player in a Random Match very Effectively.

Thats why it can very Quickly Decimate the Enemy Team in a Random Match. And Create a Game Deciding Advantage for its Team.

 

Hence. I consider it Overpowered. :)

 

2.

Broken by my Definition is anything not working as it Should.

That Includes both Overpowered and Underpowered Ships.

 

What it means to you is Irrelevant in this Context.

Because I am not Obliged to use your Interpretation when I make my Judgement :)

 

 

[KillStealBoss]

On 4/3/2021 at 11:27 PM, leonport said:

despite its being the least played one

Because she is obtainable by research points. People don't like to regrind lines and even if they did - they bought the Ohio which was before the Slava. When Slava came they said "oh no again? No way" . Also her playstyle is really boring just sniping from the back, you go too much forward and you get slapped by AP on bow/stern or farmed by HE spammer. But her guns from distance are really scary. Though you need patience to play her and hold your fire until you will be sure you hit the broadside. 

[ForlornSailor]

5 minutes ago, Execute0rder66 said:

And what about when you one shot them with a BB?

 

Hey! No objectivity and facts, ok? This is a rant-topic after all, have some respect!

 

Now on topic: if you follow Flambass for a while - every cruiser in "completly OP" in his book. It has lost all meaning. Aswell as constantly claiming that cruisers are OP, i mean come on. Cruisers of all things.

He lacks the concept and relation between time and damage. When he plays Stalingrad he goes like "OMG OMG DID YOU SEE THAT? 12k ON THAT POOR BATTLESHIP THATS SO OP". Igoring the long reload. Then he plays a ship with fast reload and the perspecive turns - all of a sudden small chunks of damage are "completly OP", when they are dealt in a small time frame. Now you go on and actually calculate the dpm and what will you see? oh, it evens out...

... and at the same time, instant click 40k damage with a BB is ofc ok because reason.

 

That beeing said: the concept of ships like Austin is questionable. SAP is questionable and the reload booster consumable is aswell. Its already crazy what you can do with Henri when you reload boost at the right moment. Now such a CL with SAP reload boost - obviously we needed more stuff that kills DDs, right?

 

8 hours ago, Redcap375 said:

Austin is the ultimate "teamwork" ship and ultimate high skill ceiling. It lives off being within a good div and played by a good player. 

 

And thats one thing, that got me scratching my head. Pretty much every change over the past 3+ years was lowering the impact of teamplay. Introduction of Smoke firing penalty or making CV-AA-divisions useless, just to name the two most obvious that came to my mind. And now they introduce a ship, which just screams to be paired with a Gearing for example?

[Fatal_Ramses]

16 minutes ago, Execute0rder66 said:

And what about when you one shot them with a BB?

Usually that means that the Hindy/Brindisi player made a mistake, but with so many 457mm and dead eyes around...

[_HomTanks_]

1 minute ago, Sunleader said:

 

Sigh....

 

I take the Time to Explain that People have different Opinions and Interpretations of what they Consider.

First Guy answering me. Comes Rolling in. Presents his own Opinion and Interpretation of what he Considers OP. And immediately Demands everyone else Abides by it as the Only Truth in the Universe.....

You have to know before being able to explain in the first place. You have not played neither in Austin nor in Slava but you try to explain others they are op?

Yea, sigh...

 

1 minute ago, Sunleader said:

 

1.

You do not get to Decide what makes a Ship OP and what does not :)

Neither do you.

1 minute ago, Sunleader said:

So I dont care if you Agree with my Assessment which I made by the Characteristics which I consider relevant :)

I don't care if you care or not.

 

4 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

Moreover your Example is a Fallacy. Because you bring Divisions and S Unicums into it.

These 2 Factors are entirely Irrelevant to Ship Balancing for me.

Because thats Players. Not Ships.

Of course it is players since ships can't play themselves alone. No one, esp. the devs care about whether those factors are relevant to you.

 

4 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

Slavas Penpower and Accuarcy allows it to Devstrike the Average Player in a Random Match very Effectively.

Thats why it can very Quickly Decimate the Enemy Team in a Random Match. And Create a Game Deciding Advantage for its Team.

 

Hence. I consider it Overpowered. :)

 

You don't know Slava, never played it. What you wrote is utter nonsense in the most polite way. Slava cannot decimate enemy team effectively.

Slava is a one trick pony. It is extremely dependent on broad sides. No broadside, no damage dealt. That's Slava. You can 200K in a game while in another 70K, totally dependent ship. There are other BBs that can deal more damage, tank more damage and contribute more into to win.

 

Whether you consider it overpowered or not doesn't mean anything, since you have zero experience in it.

[_HomTanks_]

5 minutes ago, Fatal_Ramses said:

Usually that means that the Hindy/Brindisi player made a mistake, but with so many 457mm and dead eyes around...

Yes and their mistake was sailing full broad right? It is the same with Austin. If you don't show broad side to Austin, it can't do anything with its sap, or can deal very insignificant amount of damage. Austin, Yolo Emilio, Slava, Champagne, Petro and maybe some others i can't  remember now, are just one trick ponys.

[Sunleader]

1 minute ago, Execute0rder66 said:

snip

 

Good. So we dont care about each other Opinions anyways.

As far as I am Concerned your Wrong. Because I dont Agree with your Interpretation of what OP means. And you dont Agree on mine and Refuse to Accept that other Interpretations Exist.

Which in turn leads to me Discarding your Opinion as Worthless as its Narrow Minded on your Personal Biasses and thus not worth bothering with.

 

TLDR.

There is Obviously nothing to be Gained from Reading each others Posts.

Have a Nice Day Mate ;)