New Devblog, nerfs to popular ships, buffs to PA DDs and...

[Hades_warrior]

7 hours ago, Vasya_Nyasha said:

This balance changes kinda hurts me as Chkalov main

[invicta2012]

5 hours ago, lafeel said:

Given that I already like the Hsiengyang enough for her having earned a permanent port slot, I am  certainly not complaining about this buff, no sirree.

I like her too, but poor old Benson. She's sitting at the back of the class singing "What Do I Get?" by the Buzzcocks. Not only is she the only ship in the game worse than *herself* (Benson is LoYang) but she has to watch her little sister being given a TRB.

[Nibenay78]

6 hours ago, Seraphice said:

so you suggest we should let ships that are (far) over/underperforming stay unnerfed/buffed and just let them run it's course?

 

Usually this is left for a few years usually. To "gather data" I assume. Zao no doubts kicks [edited]now with 2k more hp. Its so popular now I hardly see any other ships in T10.

[ChatBanForSayingTruth]

Is it really overperforming that much WG? Is it?

I guess Hornet will be next so hurry up kids, buy it and wait for a nerfhammer.

 

I did read the disclaimer before buying Chkalov and i didn't buy it because it was strong in good hands as it is.

 

Didn't Chkalov already received silent nerf to it's bombs accuracy making it more RNG not skill based as it was too accurate vs DDs?

 

But just like in the past, if it would be overperforming i was expecting WG would do as they did with Enterprice, Thunderer, Smolensk and other ships - they will remove it from sales and will "balance out" with global nerfs or even stronger new ships. Or at least allow players to get the refund.

 

This was literally my last premium ship i bought for money if they allowed to do this. Why do we even have a supertesters?

This will open a money milking scheme where they can sell ANY ship which clearly overperforms it's competitors and nerf to the ground months later.

[invicta2012]

 

26 minutes ago, ChatBanForSayingTruth said:

Is it really overperforming that much WG? Is it?

Yes. You should thank Hornet for existing because it's the only thing taking the shine off Chkalov, which in all other respects was outperforming Enterprise and was completely OP. 

[SodaBubbles]

They nerfed a Russian CV. Still stunned by that. 

 

[Hades_warrior]

1 minute ago, SodaBubbles said:

They nerfed a Russian CV. Still stunned by that. 

Indeed. Its like adding water into Vodtka.

[SodaBubbles]

6 hours ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

Oh come now. Was the Chkalov really that broken compared to all the other OP ships that still sail those seas untouched? 

 

I can understand a ship having way over the top errors that need to be fixed but this tinkering BS that goes on while others are left in their broken state is just senseless. I see waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more complaints about other ships than I do the Chkalov. 

 

The Russian CVs are all broken. If other ships need nerfing -- and I can think of many -- it doesnt mean that WG shouldn't do the right thing and nerf the obnoxious Russian cheatbotes. 

[Redcap375]

9 hours ago, Jethro_Grey said:

DM radar nerfed (40-35secs), same for Buffalo and Baltimore.

 

How long has the radar stood for and NOW they nerf it? Because? Underlaying reason. 

 

9 hours ago, Jethro_Grey said:

Petropavlosk deck and casemate armor nerfed to 40mm (from 50).

 

Doesn't effect much.

 

9 hours ago, Jethro_Grey said:

Chkalov nerfes include fire chance nerf, torp and skip bomb damage nerfs (10-15%).

 

Needed, so nice one 

 

9 hours ago, Jethro_Grey said:

Hipper and Tallin reload buffs (0.5secs).

 

Ok, nice one, needed 

 

9 hours ago, Jethro_Grey said:

Ragnar reload nerf by 0.2 secs.

 

Not much difference but wasn't really needed.  It's a gun only boat without torps...It needs those faster firing guns?

 

9 hours ago, Jethro_Grey said:

Pan Asian DDs from TVIII to TX get torpedo reload booster as a separate consumeable(!).

 

Ok, but underlaying reason 

 

9 hours ago, Jethro_Grey said:

Grozo torp range buffed to 12Km.

 

Again, underlaying reason 

 

9 hours ago, Jethro_Grey said:

USS Sus and Eagle receive minimal nerfs to attack squads.

 

Nice one, needed 

 

Thanks for the info @Jethro_Grey.

 

Standard WG stuff this.  Buffing lines and ships that are underplayed/unpopular and nerfing ships and lines that are overplayed...Remember, 7 years of balancing by popularity.  Standard industry stuff. 

[tocqueville8]

When is this going to come into effect?

[Verblonde]

3 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

When is this going to come into effect?

Looks like 0.11.4: https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/public-test/public-test-0114/

[ReDiR20]

16 hours ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

Imagine if car dealerships started doing that on their cars? They decide the car you bought goes too fast so they show up and program the onboard computer to only allow your top speed to be 100 kph.

 

Quite a stupid comparison. Car like any physical item wears in time, so basically gets nerfed a little every day

[anonym_cwVecOS6ecVy]

11 hours ago, Nibenay78 said:

Usually this is left for a few years usually. To "gather data" I assume. Zao no doubts kicks [edited]now with 2k more hp. Its so popular now I hardly see any other ships in T10.

Add to that all the "overly common" premiums that were not nerfed or removed completely, but put inside loot boxes as rare OP vessels, right? T-61, Loewenhardt, Smolensk...

[The_Angry_Admiral]

37 minutes ago, ReDiR20 said:

 

Quite a stupid comparison. Car like any physical item wears in time, so basically gets nerfed a little every day

Mmmmmm no my 6 year old car still goes the same speed as on the day I bought it. 

 

Clearly that went way over your head. 

[The_Angry_Admiral]

34 minutes ago, Von_Pruss said:

Add to that all the "overly common" premiums that were not nerfed or removed completely, but put inside loot boxes as rare OP vessels, right? T-61, Loewenhardt, Smolensk...

I believe we are going to see a trend of introducing OP ships, selling them by the load, then nerfing them later. 

[Atris2nd]

Following the nerf of Chkalov, I will cease to purchase premium ships.

I am not upset that they nerfed Chkalov. I am upset that I will not be receiving an option to refund it. They could just offer the option to refund it for the in-game currency that it costs in doubloons but no, the lot of us idiots who bought it now have to keep it even though 1/5th of its damage has been taken away. I don't need a Lexington with flimsier, slower planes. Why would I ever play Chkalov over Lexi if they're gonna do roughly the same amount of damage in a semi-competent player's hand with Lexington having none of the flaws that come with Chkalov? I'm not against the nerfing of premium ships and, hell, I'm happy they nerfed it if it was overperforming. But I'm not happy I have no option to refund it now that it'll be practically useless.

I buy premium ships with the specific intent to play them over the rest. If you're just gonna nerf them, then give me the option to refund the ship. I don't need dust collectors in my port. That's 40 EUR effectively down the drain. Less damage also means less credits earned.

To hell with it all, what a great surprise to come to after a 2 month break. 

[Karasu_Browarszky]

Yes, buying any of the nerfiums is a calculated risk, in a sense. Old timers have those true premiums, but even they are subject to power creeping and universal changes. I'd still buy some of them myself, especially ones that belong to nations that I have very few or none previously, mostly because I expect all of these balance and meta changes to have only a marginal effect on my perfomance. For the most part, at least; subs are highly detrimental for this game, much more than anything else they've been doing, and is probably one of the bigger reasons for me right now not to spend on this game.

[The_Angry_Admiral]

37 minutes ago, Atris2nd said:

Following the nerf of Chkalov, I will cease to purchase premium ships.

I am not upset that they nerfed Chkalov. I am upset that I will not be receiving an option to refund it. They could just offer the option to refund it for the in-game currency that it costs in doubloons but no, the lot of us idiots who bought it now have to keep it even though 1/5th of its damage has been taken away. I don't need a Lexington with flimsier, slower planes. Why would I ever play Chkalov over Lexi if they're gonna do roughly the same amount of damage in a semi-competent player's hand with Lexington having none of the flaws that come with Chkalov? I'm not against the nerfing of premium ships and, hell, I'm happy they nerfed it if it was overperforming. But I'm not happy I have no option to refund it now that it'll be practically useless.

I buy premium ships with the specific intent to play them over the rest. If you're just gonna nerf them, then give me the option to refund the ship. I don't need dust collectors in my port. That's 40 EUR effectively down the drain. Less damage also means less credits earned.

To hell with it all, what a great surprise to come to after a 2 month break. 

This ^^^

 

I hate it when certain people come doing their typical poor defending the rich type of thing saying "oh well it said so in the fine print" blah blah blah. There are ships in this game that are broken and the Chkalov was not one of them. Was it a powerful ship? Yes it is but look at the Eagle and the United States who got a nerf that is so insignificant that you would only notice it on the spreadsheet. There are far more problems in the game that need attending to over ships that people paid money for. 

[RuruushuVuiBuritania]

1 hour ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

I believe we are going to see a trend of introducing OP ships, selling them by the load, then nerfing them later. 

The sad truth is that this has been the case since Flandre, and in the tech tree ever since Early Access became a credit card swiping exercise.

Release ship in strong state -> make people waste money on it -> balance through nerfs -> repeat.

And remember: people still bought out the dockyard, the greediest of all events, for ships that are not even that good.

Are WG the idiots for nerfing ships we payed for or are we the idiots for buying ships they will nerf?

[The_Angry_Admiral]

3 minutes ago, RuruushuVuiBuritania said:

The sad truth is that this has been the case since Flandre, and in the tech tree ever since Early Access became a credit card swiping exercise.

Release ship in strong state -> make people waste money on it -> balance through nerfs -> repeat.

And remember: people still bought out the dockyard, the greediest of all events, for ships that are not even that good.

Are WG the idiots for nerfing ships we payed for or are we the idiots for buying ships they will nerf?

What we have here is just a case of WG not wanting people to be able to just pop into the shop and purchase a good ship. They either decide to nerf it or remove it and put it in a container.

 

Or we get stuff like this: 

 

62 quid for a Tier VII ship. It's a balance the finances move not one to balance the game because they couldn't care less about that.

[RuruushuVuiBuritania]

7 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

What we have here is just a case of WG not wanting people to be able to just pop into the shop and purchase a good ship. They either decide to nerf it or remove it and put it in a container.

 

Or we get stuff like this: 

 

62 quid for a Tier VII ship. It's a balance the finances move not one to balance the game because they couldn't care less about that.

That is what I'm saying, it is basically a bait and switch for people who enjoyed the original iteration of a ship and bought it for that reason. Although people should really consider how much money they are willing to spend on a pixel boat.

[The_Angry_Admiral]

3 minutes ago, RuruushuVuiBuritania said:

That is what I'm saying, it is basically a bait and switch for people who enjoyed the original iteration of a ship and bought it for that reason. Although people should really consider how much money they are willing to spend on a pixel boat.

Well the problem with these F2P games is if people don't buy anything then the game won't exist. I like the game minus it's flaws but that is part of the psychological trap of F2P games. They know if you don't purchase stuff then you can't have the game that you like. 

[ItsEyeJasper]

19 hours ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

Imagine if car dealerships started doing that on their cars? They decide the car you bought goes too fast so they show up and program the onboard computer to only allow your top speed to be 100 kph.

or like somebody decided that you need to invest in a new phone so they programmed the phones battery to fail so you decide to invest in the new one.

 

[The_Angry_Admiral]

3 minutes ago, ItsEyeJasper said:

or like somebody decided that you need to invest in a new phone so they programmed the phones battery to fail so you decide to invest in the new one.

 

Even more so now that you can't just open the back and replace said battery like you could a few years ago. 

[PeteEarthling]

 

23 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

Even more so now that you can't just open the back and replace said battery like you could a few years ago. 

Really? I can change the power supply of my Samsung GTE-E1205 within 5 seconds. On the other hand, it have to charge it maybe once a month. Smart people don't buy smart phones, but reliable phones.