Maybe it's time to stop blaming Subs and CV's on passive gameplay.

[The_Angry_Admiral]

1 minute ago, Viridem said:

 

 

Without the submarine, this was a perfect game-changing agressive move (we lost btw). Because of the sub, the better move would have been to stay at range and play passive.

 

Had you stayed passive that DD you killed could have gone and helped his team win anyway. 

 

This had nothing to do with passive play - this was just the poor mechanics of submarines. Playing passive could have also allowed that submarine to torp you to death without you knowing it until it was too late. 

[Viridem]

26 minutes ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

Had you stayed passive that DD you killed could have gone and helped his team win anyway. 

 

This had nothing to do with passive play - this was just the poor mechanics of submarines. Playing passive could have also allowed that submarine to torp you to death without you knowing it until it was too late. 

So I got punished for playing agressive entirely by a submarine and its poor mechanics, which you aknowledge.

But somehow submarines aren't to blame for making us play passive.

How am I gonna learn to play any differently than passive, if any other way of playing is punished even more severely by a thousand layers of poor mechanics?

[The_Angry_Admiral]

Just now, Viridem said:

 

But somehow submarines aren't to blame for making us play passive.

No because he could have killed you no matter what you were doing. You play as passive as you like but you just give him an even easier target.

[Nibenay78]

1 hour ago, Pikkozoikum said:

Subs and CVs are just a new option for blaming others

Bullcrap.

 

CVs and Subs excel picking off lone targets. Personally I love going alone even with BBs (if possible), but these two elements pretty much removes that option just by being in the game. Especially the CV as he can switch targets from anywhere to you.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

Well, we did have passive game play before... but I'm still not going to reconsider my position.

[Horatio_Hornblaeser]

Am 30.4.2022 um 17:37, Viridem sagte:

It was well calculated, because all of the opposing ships were spotted and none were in a position to shoot me.

[...]

Except there was a sub in B, unspotted. He almost one-shot me from point blank AND stayed undetected.

And there was your mistake. Just like, if you charged in and were surprised and nuked by the one unspotted DD or LC or BB. You took the risk and it might have worked out, but didn't.

 

It's just another class. The only thing, that bothers me about them is: SS don't have any niche: Stealthy torping is already the torpedo-boats job.

 

Am 30.4.2022 um 18:06, Viridem sagte:

How am I gonna learn to play any differently than passive, if any other way of playing is punished even more severely by a thousand layers of poor mechanics?

You mean like against well positioned rail gun ships like Stalingrad or Slawa? There is no counterplay in Random or Ranked against that. Just in CW there might be options.

[tocqueville8]

1 hour ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

Submarines: Let's say you sit in the back all passive. Well you can't see a submarine coming and they can move from their spawn and torp you to death before you know it. The best tactic is to not sit in the same spot and be around your teammates who can help you not only shoot it but also depth charge it.

 

CV's: Same tactic goes here as planes can reach you and target you no problem so the best thing is to keep moving and be around your fellow teammates who can contribute their own AA to taking down the planes. Even more so when you are up against the likes of the Eagle and United States. 

 

So what if my teammates are at the back, what do I do then?

 

In any case, there's a difference between being passive and being at the back, just like there's a difference between pushing and yoloing.

[Horatio_Hornblaeser]

Am 30.4.2022 um 19:04, tocqueville8 sagte:

So what if my teammates are at the back, what do I do then?

 

In any case, there's a difference between being passive and being at the back, just like there's a difference between pushing and yoloing.

Depends, doesn't it? Does 'being in the back' mean: all ships within 1-2 squares bordersurfing or does it mean in defensive positions waiting to counterpush, as soon as there is a possibility.

But to many games these days are lost, because of to many guys hiding to long in the back, leaving all the caps to a few daring reds.

[tocqueville8]

1 hour ago, Viridem said:

Except there was a sub in B, unspotted. He almost one-shot me from point blank AND stayed undetected. I panicked, played stupid and lost the little hp I had left to surface ships.

 

The player was a 48% WR potato

 

That's my problem with subs, as well: they're balanced around the idea that people who play them are incompetent, do they have to be veeeeery forgiving.

 

The other day, in the Austin, I got Dev Struck by a Shikishima *through the nose", but you can't sink a sub if you teabag him with 10 depth charges...

[Horatio_Hornblaeser]

Vor 2 Minuten, tocqueville8 sagte:

 

That's my problem with subs, as well: they're balanced around the idea that people who play them are incompetent, do they have to be veeeeery forgiving. 

 

The other day, in the Austin, I got Dev Struck by a Shikishima *through the nose", but you can't sink a sub if you teabag him with 10 depth charges...

Sounds like your play of a CL or any other small ship versus one of the pampered BBs, the worst of the very forgiving classes for potatos.

[The_Angry_Admiral]

3 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

 

That's my problem with subs, as well: they're balanced around the idea that people who play them are incompetent, do they have to be veeeeery forgiving.

 

The other day, in the Austin, I got Dev Struck by a Shikishima *through the nose", but you can't sink a sub if you teabag him with 10 depth charges...

This is more of a submarine problem overall than a play style one. You can be as aggressive or passive as you want but it doesn't make a difference as really it's down to just how bad the submarine player is that will determine victory over it. 

[SkollUlfr]

i could fix the problem with 5 changes.

 

push the apogee point of the shell arc 20% further to the target. meaning initial firing angle will be lower, and the final angle will be steeper.

that way island humpers will need to be further out to clear islands than any return fire. shifting the optimum behaviour from humping islands, to moving.

 

take all shell velocities ingame, and run them through the sequence -350, -30% of the new numbers, and then +350. this should deal with the newb assist railgun shell velocities enough. players would need to closer to get hits and actually learn to lead targets to get hits. and allowing players to manouver against camping targets who currently hold significant advantage. see any kamp on the sea tournament.

 

change the pen calculation to consider shell velosity in pen calculation much more.  making it easier to bounce shells at range. again shifting the optimum player action advancing and closing.

 

allow minimap aiming and put icons for blind firing guns on the map for players to shoot at, same as in typhoons.

 

remove the nonsense where the dispersion fields are rotated 90 degrees

 

[SkipperCH]

Removed 19 posts.

 

If the thread can't stay civilized and on topic I will put an end to it. The next OT discussion will result in sanctions to all who take a part in it.

[SolanumTuberosumRex]

3 hours ago, Viridem said:

Get in, kill the DD, get out. Perfect plan.

 

Except there was a sub in B, unspotted. He almost one-shot me from point blank AND stayed undetected. I panicked, played stupid and lost the little hp I had left to surface ships.

 

The player was a 48% WR potato.

Yep. This is the dynamics that everyone who denies the brokenness of subs doesn't understand. Yet. It's been demonstrated beyond any doubt, and only ignorance is keeping the rest of subplayers from doing the same thing. I've been devstruck a few times like this already. There is just NO warning until you see the torps from minimum distance.

[Sunleader]

6 hours ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

In my opinion passive gameplay because of submarines and CV's only come from the players who actually understand this game. I think the majority of passive spuds in this game play passive because they don't know what they are doing and because they heard it from Youtube without understanding why. It's mostly from a lack of experience. I see constantly for example 5 ships running away from 2 and when I ask why are you running I'm told they are kiting. Why do you need to kite with full HP and a three ship advantage? By doing that as well.you open up your broadside for a bit to take some preventable damage. Also what I see is people only moving forward when it's either too late or victory is assured. This is in no way a defense of Subs and CV's but I think shifting the blame for the awful playing is just BS. It's WG pushing people to the higher tiers very quickly as well as some Youtubers not giving very good advice. "Oh you are struggling because of subs and CV's". No you are just even easier pickings for subs and CV's because you are just a bad player. I can have ten games in a row where I have no less than 3 of these types of players on my teams and they can easily carry us to a defeat. 

 

The game really needs some proper tutorials and stop blasting people to the higher tiers so quickly. 

 

Problem as so often. Is that Potatoes simply dont have the Means to Employ proper Gameplay.

Its the same as a Player coming to the Forum to ask for Advice and the Unicums basicly tell him to Play his Ship by the Pro Gaming Meta.

Then telling him to Git Gud when he comes back telling them that this Advice only causes him to get Killed.

Because they fail to Understand that the New Player even if he Plays according to Meta just does not have the Understanding and Skills to actually Pull that Meta Gameplay off.

And just Repeatedly Rushing to his Death is not really Helping him.

 

 

People dont Play Tutorials. If you Force them they will just Rush through and then Ignore it.

Likewise People will just Die their way up if they have to and will then just end up Complaining about Meaningless Grind etc.

 

 

But more Importand than that.

None of this really helps the Problem.

 

The Vast Majority of Players is Casuals playing an Hour in the Evening after Work.

They will never invest the amount of time and effort into Learning this Game to the Point where they are capable of actually pursuing Meta Strategies or have Situational Awareness and understand whats happening on the Match.

Meaning they will forever stay at a level where the only thing they can do is concentrate on their Immediate Fight which generally means they will never be capable of knowing when to push or how to deal with Enemies that Ambush them.

 

 

 

My Suggestion would still be to have 2 Random Battle Gamemodes.

 

One where you got no Statistics and where Rewards are mostly Depending on the Current System but with some adjustments to the Victory Multiplier so that Victory and Defeat only make a 20-30% Difference in Reward instead of like now basicly Doubling the Reward.

Which basicly makes it a Free Casual Gamemode for People to Play for Fun. Test Strategies and Play around. And where your Reward is like right now mostly Depending on Damage and where no Statistics are Recorded thus there being no Repercussions for Playing Badly etc.

 

And One where your Statistics are Recorded like they are currently. And where the Reward for Contributions to Victory and the Bonus Multiplier for Victory itself is much higher while Defeat not only gets no Victory Multiplier but actually causes a Cut to your Reward thus making it way lower. Therefore putting a much bigger Emphasis on actually Playing for Victory.

Effectively being a Serious Mode where People actually try to Play good and try to Win and where you will actually end up Losing Money and not really achieve any Progress unless you actually Play Good enough to Win more than 50% of your Games.

 

 

It would also be a Nice Change of Pace as those who dont want to Play Seriously and actually just come to the Game after Work to go play Shooty Shooty Ships without any deeper toughts. Can actually do just that without it ending up getting them hated.

[SolanumTuberosumRex]

4 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

My Suggestion would still be to have 2 Random Battle Gamemodes.

 

One where you got no Statistics and where Rewards are mostly Depending on the Current System but with some adjustments to the Victory Multiplier so that Victory and Defeat only make a 20-30% Difference in Reward instead of like now basicly Doubling the Reward.

Which basicly makes it a Free Casual Gamemode for People to Play for Fun. Test Strategies and Play around. And where your Reward is like right now mostly Depending on Damage and where no Statistics are Recorded thus there being no Repercussions for Playing Badly etc.

 

And One where your Statistics are Recorded like they are currently. And where the Reward for Contributions to Victory and the Bonus Multiplier for Victory itself is much higher while Defeat not only gets no Victory Multiplier but actually causes a Cut to your Reward thus making it way lower. Therefore putting a much bigger Emphasis on actually Playing for Victory.

Effectively being a Serious Mode where People actually try to Play good and try to Win and where you will actually end up Losing Money and not really achieve any Progress unless you actually Play Good enough to Win more than 50% of your Games.

 

 

It would also be a Nice Change of Pace as those who dont want to Play Seriously and actually just come to the Game after Work to go play Shooty Shooty Ships without any deeper toughts. Can actually do just that without it ending up getting them hated.

I like this idea. I would be playing in the sandbox more often than not, kind of a co-op on steroids, and I would be having fun. 👍

[Bear__Necessities]

I have just the replay to prove this thread wrong. I'll post it tomorrow. Can't wait. 

[tocqueville8]

2 hours ago, Horatio_Hornblaeser said:

Sounds like your play of a CL or any other small ship versus one of the pampered BBs, the worst of the very forgiving classes for potatos.

 

Honestly, I don't think BBs are pampered: they get farmed by gunboats, cruisers and CVs, deleted by torps if they're distracted, and they have a harder time disengaging than anyone else.

 

Subs, on the other hand, basically can't get deleted (unless they're rammed, but why would they? they can dodge in 3D....) and disengage at will...

[Hirohito]

9 hours ago, The_Angry_Admiral said:

I think the majority of passive spuds in this game play passive because they don't know what they are doing and because they heard it from Youtube without understanding why. It's mostly from a lack of experience.

You are a really bad player at 48% who doesnt understand basic principles of defender's advantage.
This has been explained to you multiple times before, but you're not willing to listen and thus you'll get these kinds of answers.

[Horatio_Hornblaeser]

Vor 3 Stunden, tocqueville8 sagte:

Honestly, I don't think BBs are pampered: they get farmed by gunboats, cruisers and CVs, deleted by torps if they're distracted, and they have a harder time disengaging than anyone else.

1 vs. 1 BBs are the strongest ships in game, besides CV (acounting the map is big enough for the CV to run and hide the whole time being).

 

BBs get:

• heavy armor
• a lot of hp
• heals
• AP for overmatch and lol zitas
• HE with ludicrous fire chances
• good speed (tier VIII and higher)
• decent stealth (some even lower then 12km)
• gimmicks like hydro, defAA, speedboost, radar, secondarys, torpedoes

If you let get yourself farmed in a BB, you're either doing that on purpose, while you engage several targets simultaniously (which would be instant suicide in a DD or CA/CL), or you don't understand the spotting/concealment system. And yes, if you go in a straight line for many minutes long, you deserve to get deleted. And still, a bb will easily soak up a lot of shells and torps before it gets down.

 

Vor 3 Stunden, tocqueville8 sagte:

Subs, on the other hand, basically can't get deleted (unless they're rammed, but why would they? they can dodge in 3D....) and disengage at will...

Honestly, i've neither played nor fought much SS in the last iteration of the test. In tests before (ca. 0.11.0), they were hard to keep spotted but very easy to sink, when you got them once. Be it with HE-shells or with plane dropped depth charges. I'm not up to date on the recent testing, because i still think the whole idea of bringing them into the game is dull, since torpedo boats were implemented years ago exactly the way subs would/should be done: silent hunters with dangerous torpedoes. So there is not really any point to that, at least gameplay-wise.

 

Yet i see no reason to blame hyper-defensive borderline passive-apathic behaviour on SS or CVs.

Especially on tier III for example, where your ships don't get any AA, it's best not to stay passive vs. 2 red CVs in the MM. Best is to go forth in those moments and do as much as you can to the red team, before they inevitably sink you anyway. Personnaly i would always prefer a blaze of glory vs. a prolonged and pointless struggle to minimize incoming dmg while achieving nothing.

 

Vor 4 Stunden, Sunleader sagte:

My Suggestion would still be to have 2 Random Battle Gamemodes.

 

One where you got no Statistics and where Rewards are mostly Depending on the Current System but with some adjustments to the Victory Multiplier so that Victory and Defeat only make a 20-30% Difference in Reward instead of like now basicly Doubling the Reward.

Which basicly makes it a Free Casual Gamemode for People to Play for Fun. Test Strategies and Play around. And where your Reward is like right now mostly Depending on Damage and where no Statistics are Recorded thus there being no Repercussions for Playing Badly etc.

 

And One where your Statistics are Recorded like they are currently. And where the Reward for Contributions to Victory and the Bonus Multiplier for Victory itself is much higher while Defeat not only gets no Victory Multiplier but actually causes a Cut to your Reward thus making it way lower. Therefore putting a much bigger Emphasis on actually Playing for Victory.

Effectively being a Serious Mode where People actually try to Play good and try to Win and where you will actually end up Losing Money and not really achieve any Progress unless you actually Play Good enough to Win more than 50% of your Games.

 

 

It would also be a Nice Change of Pace as those who dont want to Play Seriously and actually just come to the Game after Work to go play Shooty Shooty Ships without any deeper toughts. Can actually do just that without it ending up getting them hated.

Cute proposal, but i don't think the playerbase would be big enough for such a split of the pool.

I would see the bonus for achieving victory extended to the credit income, not just the bxp. So that, if your team loses - from let's say tier VII upwards - you're gonna make nearly no profit out of it, even if you farmed 100k dmg. The possibility of farming and grinding these days is way to strong of a motivation and winning economicly to less of an encouragement to let players thrive to victory. As long as the economy doesn't encourage placing victory over raw damage, as long nothing will change in the player behaviour. Sugar bread and whip, that's how you could get them to it, there is no other way else to achieve active gameplay and tactical teamplay.

[tocqueville8]

26 minutes ago, Horatio_Hornblaeser said:

1 vs. 1 BBs are the strongest ships in game, besides CV (acounting the map is big enough for the CV to run and hide the whole time being).

 

BBs get:

• heavy armor
• a lot of hp
• heals
• AP for overmatch and lol zitas
• HE with ludicrous fire chances
• good speed (tier VIII and higher)
• decent stealth (some even lower then 12km)
• gimmicks like hydro, speedboost, radar, secondarys, torpedos

 

The strength of BBs is entirely situational:

• in many cases, they get overmatched by AP, melted by HE or both
• they typically have worse concealment than anyone else
• they have much worse rudder than cruisers
• bad rudder and concealment, at times, conspire to make it hard to avoid torps without showing broadside to someone else
• they have worse accuracy than cruisers
• they have worse turret traverse than cruisers/DDs
• lots of other ships get heals at high tiers

 

I'm not saying BBs are weak or anything, but the idea that they're "pampered" seems little more than a meme to me.

 

They have plenty of weaknesses and they often need to run away from enemies. 1v1 fights are rare for most of the game, and even then, with good play on both sides, several ship types will outtrade BBs hp-percentage-wise.

 

26 minutes ago, Horatio_Hornblaeser said:

If you let get yourself farmed in a BB, you're either doing that on purpose, while you engage several targets simultaniously (which would be instant suicide in a DD or CA/CL), or you don't understand the spotting/concealment system. And yes, if you go in a straight line for many minutes long, you deserve to get deleted.

 

Do you seriously think that I go in a straight line for many minutes long?

Or that I don't understand the spotting/concealment system?

Or that I let myself get farmed?

[Horatio_Hornblaeser]

Vor 14 Stunden, tocqueville8 sagte:

The strength of BBs is entirely situational:

• in many cases, they get overmatched by AP, melted by HE or both
• they typically have worse concealment than anyone else
• they have much worse rudder than cruisers
• bad rudder and concealment, at times, conspire to make it hard to avoid torps without showing broadside to someone else
• they have worse accuracy than cruisers
• they have worse turret traverse than cruisers/DDs
• lots of other ships get heals at high tiers 

 

I'm not saying BBs are weak or anything, but the idea that they're "pampered" seems little more than a meme to me.

I have to disagree:

• a possible AP-overmatch vs. BB (Tier VIII+) is just possible by Yamato, Musashi, Shikishima, Satsuma and Hannover. 2 of them being tier XI super-BBs.
• melting a BB with HE takes a long time for a single small calibre ship. Try doing that for example with an japanese gun boat. It literally takes minutes.
• there are by now quite some bb with better concealment than cruisers. If you ran into them you can't get away anymore as a cruiser, if you don't got smoke.
• torpedoes can easily be avoided by frequent changes of speed and heading
• turret traverse is still on most BB fast enough to keep up with the speed of cruisers, if not even DD (Brit BB got recently buffed a lot in turret traverse)
• 40+cm BB can overmatch any cruiser, even 38cm BB can do that with most of them
• BB accurracy plus overmatch plus alpha plus range is deadly to any other ship type, even vs. other BB who show broadside
• cruisers tend to take citadells from BB-AP, even while heavily kiting on max range
• the heals on any other ships are either highly limited or they don't get any usefull armor (brit. CL for example)
• BB are the safest while under attack by CV

I'm sorry, but BBs are the very easiest ship type to play. Not that you can't fail epicly even in those, but it is the hardest. Many hp plus heal plus armor let them take quite a beating. Addionally do bad players benefit from the low sigma and high calibre to get dmg, even if they misaimed royally.

CVs are in contrast the safest ship type to play if you don't misposition, but damage isn't to be done all that easily with them.

Cruisers can be very dangerous dpm-wise, but they require to not getting hit by anything. If they do at all, it's very soon game over.

DDs are the hardest type to play. Quite difficult with the long torpedo-reload (up to 2.5 min) and weak guns, super fragile and without any relevant armor. Even to be detected once might mean sudden death. DDs rely a lot on DoT and some lucky torpedo hits. If their target is clever enough to counteract those, which a skilled BB-player can easily do, they are no big danger besides spotting for their team mates.

 

Vor 14 Stunden, tocqueville8 sagte:

They have plenty of weaknesses and they often need to run away from enemies.

The sad thing is, BBs these days often run off and abandon their flank even without any grave danger for their ship present. Even when facing numerical disadvantages, they are the best of of any ship type. They don't have much of any weakness besides longer reload times of their guns. And that's again something you can outsmart with skill.

Vor 14 Stunden, tocqueville8 sagte:

1v1 fights are rare for most of the game, and even then, with good play on both sides, several ship types will outtrade BBs hp-percentage-wise.

Well if not 1 vs 1 then maybe 3 vs 3. All you have to do then is retreating a bit to heal back up after you've taken some damage and then go back at them again. But bad players tend to run off to the far side of the map or the borderlands after they received a mild first hit. There then they will be highly ineffective, but that's plain misplay of BBs. And yes, some small gun ships have a higher raw dpm on their guns than any BB, but that doesn't mean, this raw damage can manifest as real damage. Try to shoot an BB with small calibre HE. 50-70% will do no damage the rest will soon enough hit just saturated parts which will do just 10% of the possible damage per hit. If you get focused by several (3+ HE-spammers), that might become even dangerous for a BB. but then again, being in range and focus of so many enemies was utter misplay up to that point. Any other ship type would have already been sunk at this moment a BB starts to get in trouble.

Vor 14 Stunden, tocqueville8 sagte:

Do you seriously think that I go in a straight line for many minutes long?

Or that I don't understand the spotting/concealment system?

Or that I let myself get farmed?

Idk. But if you don't, than you should know, how mighty a BB truly is and how easy to play in comparison to the other ship types.

BBs can easily avoid getting farmed or torped and most aren't even badly concealed if fully build and skilled up.

The worst danger to a BB is after all another BB catching it broadsided with a load of AP or just putting it afire from bow to stern with a single salve HE.

 

Over the years WG did everything to make playing BBs the easiest thing:

 

• they nerfed japanese torpedo boats on torpedoes and guns
• they nerfed panasian torpedo boats in the same way
• they nerfed floods and fires in their % of hp per tick
• they got rid of stealth fire
• they got rid of unlimited smoke fire
• they nerfed fire chance with IFHE
• they nerfed the demolition expert (from 3% to 1%)
• they handed hydro, radar, smoke and speedboost out to BB
• they reworked CVs from being possible to nuke any ship with one flight of their squads to the recent state of nibbling and applying dots

 

I can't see, how this isn't pampered.

 

 

And still, i don't think either, that CVs or SSs are the issue to blame for making rounds static and a camper-sniper-fest. Rounds were already static and stale years ago, when there where barely any CVs to find and nobody thought SS would ever come into the game. It's just the players being unwilling to risk anything to win the game. It's easier to blame another defeat on the own team instead of stopping to farm and playing the objective.

[GarrusBrutus]

"Why are you all camping?" -proceeds to yolo into multiple enemy ships- "Noob team no support!"

[Port_Authority]

The answer is both - e.g. remove subs, CVs, and remove ways for noobs to reach high tier so quickly. Take care of all other OP crap across tiers so all tier games are actually playable like they used to be in 2017, then people can stay more on lower tiers and actually learn something by experience in a less lethal environment than high tier, like it used to be.

 

The tutorials are out there - on Youtube. You just need to figure out you're bad, break that mental barrier that you surely know the game, and start working on it.

[tocqueville8]

8 hours ago, Horatio_Hornblaeser said:

a possible AP-overmatch vs. BB (Tier VIII+) is just possible by Yamato, Musashi, Shikishima, Satsuma and Hannover. 2 of them being tier XI super-BBs.

8 hours ago, Horatio_Hornblaeser said:

• the heals on any other ships are either highly limited or they don't get any usefull armor (brit. CL for example)

 

For one, those are very common at high tiers.

For another, you're only considering high tiers to show BBvBB overmatch is rare, but you include the argument "other ships have limited heals", when all cruisers do at Tier 9+. Pick one: you can't have both.

 

8 hours ago, Horatio_Hornblaeser said:

• BB accurracy plus overmatch plus alpha plus range is deadly to any other ship type, even vs. other BB who show broadside

 

8 hours ago, Horatio_Hornblaeser said:

Addionally do bad players benefit from the low sigma and high calibre to get dmg, even if they misaimed royally.

 

Again, which is it? Are they accurate or inaccurate?

 

Let me clear that for you: BBs have the worst accuracy in the game. Again, they have to, or they'd be too strong. The alpha is balanced by the poor accuracy, and BBs are notoriously inconsistent, sometimes frustrating.

 

8 hours ago, Horatio_Hornblaeser said:

• they handed hydro, radar, smoke and speedboost out to BBs

 

There are only a couple of premium radar BBs. Only 2 tech-tree lines have hydro, only 1 has a smoke and only 1 the speedboost.

They're not buffs to BBs: they're national flavors and the line is balanced around them.  It's like saying DDs are strong because "they handed hydro to the German main line them".

 

8 hours ago, Horatio_Hornblaeser said:

• BB are the safest while under attack by CV

They're also, by far, the easiest targets to find and the easiest to strike.

 

8 hours ago, Horatio_Hornblaeser said:

• torpedoes can easily be avoided by frequent changes of speed and heading

 

Not really an option if you're crossfired by another BB: every time you change heading, you're gonna get paddled.

 

8 hours ago, Horatio_Hornblaeser said:

I'm sorry, but BBs are the very easiest ship type to play. Not that you can't fail epicly even in those, but it is the hardest. Many hp plus heal plus armor let them take quite a beating

 

You may be doing a bit better in BBs than in the other classes:

 

 

But I'm doing about the same:

 

 

Because of their bad concealment and bad agility, BBs have the most delicate balance between being too aggressive and too passive. They might be easy to do alright in, but they're still hard to do well in.

 

 

 

Overall, I find this conversation surreal.

You appear to be thinking that you're explaining the game...to someone with 3 times as many battles as you, 25 times as many at Tier 10