Lolz.. I just realized how completely useless cap skills are for cruisers

[Seraphice]

1 minute ago, Andrewbassg said:

Of which there are few ( if not very).

If I understand your point, you said that " Smaller the guns ,the more (...) and useless they are"
Which just isn't really true.

 

2 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

In terms of investment? Ummmm.....

Yeah, there are a lot of skills that are worth the investment, can still easily spec out a 21 points commander with good skills.

3 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

I keep elaborating. There are many.

Well, in that case please feel free to name something more specific. Which skills aren't good? Are there really so few good skills that you can't reliably spec out your commander in a good way on cruisers? You've not mentioned anything specific.

 

Fair seas captain!
~Sera

[Andrewbassg]

9 minutes ago, ItsEyeJasper said:

Personally as a cruiser main. I feel the only lacking part is the Fire duration perk for certain cruisers. Yes there are some ships that the skills are not ideal for  however  this goes both ways, for instance the captain Skills for dds don't necessarily favor the Tromp uniqueness.. While It is very hard to come with a common perk tree that allows you to benefit all ships in the classes, equally  given a bit of time i could come up with a set of skills that would be better than the current ones . which would allow more diversity. 

Well RN Cl's say hi.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

2 minutes ago, Europizza said:

I find the builds part in wows is very uninteresting and poorly done. I hardly ever experiement or change builds around becasue there is little point to it and it's too costly to experiment just to see what happens. I even didn't bother with getting my captains up to 21 points. There's simply no point if you don't play CW.

 

For the most part, except with very few commanders now, I tend to only use 10 pt's to typically get the concealment skill and leave it at that. With some captains I try to get something extra, and then it may happen that I won't pick the concealment skill at all. Depends, and I'm not entirely happy with the results which is why I'm advocating the 10 pt solution as the optimal one, except maybe take the Fire prevention instead of concealment, or if you feel like splashing 14 pts on your build, in addition to Concealment.

[Andrewbassg]

9 minutes ago, invicta2012 said:

<cough> Smolensk. 

 

And to be honest I can see *why* the skills have ended up the way they have... it's because what would be a decent buff to an underperforming ship is something which turns an OP, unfixable premium (like Smolensk, Belfast) into a monster. 

That's a good valid point and people( ze babbies) were complaining about HE spam not without merit.Still it doesn't justify shafting a whole class/type.

[Andrewbassg]

18 minutes ago, Seraphice said:

If I understand your point, you said that " Smaller the guns ,the more (...) and useless they are"
 Which just isn't really true.

Top Grade Gunner, which is one of the more usefuls skills, is. There are whole lines without torps.

 

18 minutes ago, Seraphice said:

Yeah, there are a lot of skills that are worth the investment, can still easily spec out a 21 points commander with good skills.

The problem is in comparison with Cv and/or subs skills. There is an abundance of useful skills for them, permitting the aforementioned diversity as opposed to cruisers. and babbies.

 

18 minutes ago, Seraphice said:

Well, in that case please feel free to name something more specific. Which skills aren't good? Are there really so few good skills that you can't reliably spec out your commander in a good way on cruisers? You've not mentioned anything specific.

PvP builds are really not useful for operations.Then we have Rn Cl's.

 

Then we ave the removal of disp debuff from camo's. It is a pattern.

.

[Andrewbassg]

45 minutes ago, Karasu_Browarszky said:

Apparently there's money to be made there somewhere.

You see that's not a problem from my pov, per se, if doesn't impact negatively the game. Well.....yeeah.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

4 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

There is an abundance of useful skills for them,

You are wrong here. CVs and subs with very little exception all share the same cpt build if you want to play them to their best most versatile. Picking other skills besides those is either because you have to adjust to a bad CV hull or because you don't understand why the options are bad.

 

6 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

as opposed to cruisers. and babbies

BBs have highly diverse build options what are you talking about?

Cruiser builds are hull dependent and there is not a single cruiser for which there isn't a great working build.

7 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

PvP builds are really not useful for operations.

The balancing is for PVP so there is that.

 

8 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

Then we ave the removal of disp debuff from camo's

Its not removed but baked in by default now.

[ColonelPete]

51 minutes ago, Karasu_Browarszky said:

 

I sail many of my ships without captains already. Can't honestly say that there's much difference.

I am sure you feel™ that way

But despite that, there is still a big difference between not "much difference" and "completly useless".

36 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

No, not just that. In fact building into concealment is kinda mandatory in PvP but is actually hampering in PvE (operations)

Why?

I thought you said the skills were completly useless. Did you just start a thread to lie to us all?

[Karasu_Browarszky]

2 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

I am sure you feel™ that way

But despite that, there is still a big difference between not "much difference" and "completly useless".

 

 

Could be, but personally I haven't noticed any shift from being 'completely useless' to anything else with any amount of captain skills picked.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

2 minutes ago, Karasu_Browarszky said:

 

Could be, but personally I haven't noticed any shift from being 'completely useless' to anything else with any amount of captain skills picked.

No one really expects a player like you to notice it anyway. But you can always message me and pick a DM without a captain vs my 21point DM and I can demonstrate the big difference to you 

[Karasu_Browarszky]

10 minutes ago, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

BBs have highly diverse build options what are you talking about?

 

No they don't. They designed in such a way that you cannot use upwards from 10 to 12 points without 'locking' your captain on a single particular ship. Retraining won't solve this, or moving to a premium ship. Basically even moving your captain to the wrong premium ship will gimp his skills. The whole purpose of the captain skill rework seems to have been make us retrain our captains more often. Or just essentially keep them on one ship all the time.

 

Just now, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

No one really expects a player like you to notice it anyway. But you can always message me and pick a DM without a captain vs my 21point DM and I can demonstrate the big difference to you 

 

Thank you humbly for this truly amazing opportunity.

 

 

[Yosha_AtaIante]

2 minutes ago, Karasu_Browarszky said:

 

No they don't

bro

[Andrewbassg]

59 minutes ago, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

You are wrong here. CVs and subs with very little exception all share the same cpt build if you want to play them to their best most versatile. Picking other skills besides those is either because you have to adjust to a bad CV hull or because you don't understand why the options are bad.

 

While I don't play Cv's in PvP and hardly one could call me anything but an outlier...

 

  

Subs not even that buut.....I disagree.

59 minutes ago, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

BBs have highly diverse build options what are you talking about?

.Oooouch.....

 

59 minutes ago, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

 Cruiser builds are hull dependent and there is not a single cruiser for which there isn't a great working build.

Umm.....great and working are not the same.Anything could work , the skills are enhancements. 

 

59 minutes ago, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

The balancing is for PVP so there is that.

Cv's don't face the same choice. 

 

59 minutes ago, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

Its not removed but baked in by default now.

Umm....I think you meant concealment. Ergo, nope.

 

49 minutes ago, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

No one really expects

Yo....play nice.

 

56 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

Why?

I thought you said the skills were completly useless. Did you just start a thread to lie to us all?

In terms of investments? I hate to repeat myself....

[NewHorizons_1]

1 hour ago, Karasu_Browarszky said:

There might be some legitimite concerns over if that would make certain ships too OP, though.

Gib secondary skillz for Napoli.

[Northern_Nightowl]

Vor 31 Minuten, Karasu_Browarszky sagte:

They designed in such a way that you cannot use upwards from 10 to 12 points without 'locking' your captain on a single particular ship. Retraining won't solve this, or moving to a premium ship. Basically even moving your captain to the wrong premium ship will gimp his skills. The whole purpose of the captain skill rework seems to have been make us retrain our captains more often. Or just essentially keep them on one ship all the time.

Okay, let us go through this.

You have the assumption that the captain skill system is build in a way that discourages shuffling commanders around when they have more than 10 to 12 skill points assigned, making a player incur disadvantages if he's doing so.

In sciences, providing one counterexample disproves a theory, so, I'll try to provide said counterexample.

 

I do own a Halsey that has 20 skill points at the time of writing, of which 19 are assigned to BB skills. He gets shuffled around between Texas, Arizona, Alabama, Georgia and Ohio, these are the skills set up:

 

Lately, I've made extensive use of Texas (last season, when you got to play T5 in Bronze) and Alabama (currently in Silver) in Ranked. Both ships have modules for an emphasis on survivability and main battery precision (my usual and personal way to go with BB). I did and do not feel at all that I'm getting disadvantages out of this skill setup, quite the contrary (wows-numbers.com statistics from Ranked, as indicated):

 

The Alabama is a quite recent addition to my fleet (courtesy of birthday coupon, a month ago) and she feels decently powerful.

 

True, some skills are more suited on one ship than on another. The turret rotation skill for example is IMHO mandatory for Texas (and Arizona). But it's also quite useful on Georgia. Even though the turrets have a decent train rate there, buffing it is still handy when switching targets (examples: in games with CV, getting switfly a salvo on the red one when he happens to get spotted early on, or when a broadsiding cruiser happens in your sights while you were tracking some other vessels, or tracking a DD while manoeuvering for torpedo avoidance).

 

So, I do not see at all the points you claimed. You do not get disadvantages for shuffling a commander around as far as my experience goes, quite the contrary, it's rather handy. As far as I can tell, the current iteration of the commander skills is more of an incentive to use premium ships than an encouragement for fixated assignements or commanders or frequent retrainings.

 

Regards, Nightowl

 

[tocqueville8]

2 hours ago, invicta2012 said:

Too many torpedo skills when there aren't that many torpedo focused cruisers, or where cruisers have torps as brawling weapons which don't need captain skills.

I mean...since the captain rework they've introduced two lines of cruisers that are "torpedo focused" (certainly compared to their peers), plus there are brawling modes where the 15% extra damage makes a lot more sense than, say, Superintendent. Same for Coop and Operations, possibly.

 

1 hour ago, Europizza said:

I find the builds part in wows is very uninteresting and poorly done.

Not saying there's a huge variety, but I'm enjoying lighthouse builds, which were not a thing before the rework.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

11 minutes ago, Northern_Nightowl said:

Okay, let us go through this.

You have the assumption that the captain skill system is build in a way that discourages shuffling commanders around when they have more than 10 to 12 skill points assigned, making a player incur disadvantages if he's doing so.

In sciences, providing one counterexample disproves a theory, so, I'll try to provide said counterexample.

 

I do own a Halsey that has 20 skill points at the time of writing, of which 19 are assigned to BB skills. He gets shuffled around between Texas, Arizona, Alabama, Georgia and Ohio, these are the skills set up:

 

Lately, I've made extensive use of Texas (last season, when you got to play T5 in Bronze) and Alabama (currently in Silver) in Ranked. Both ships have modules for an emphasis on survivability and main battery precision (my usual and personal way to go with BB). I did and do not feel at all that I'm getting disadvantages out of this skill setup, quite the contrary (wows-numbers.com statistics from Ranked, as indicated):

 

The Alabama is a quite recent addition to my fleet (courtesy of birthday coupon, a month ago) and she feels decently powerful.

 

True, some skills are more suited on one ship than on another. The turret rotation skill for example is IMHO mandatory for Texas (and Arizona). But it's also quite useful on Georgia. Even though the turrets have a decent train rate there, buffing it is still handy when switching targets (examples: in games with CV, getting switfly a salvo on the red one when he happens to get spotted early on, or when a broadsiding cruiser happens in your sights while you were tracking some other vessels, or tracking a DD while manoeuvering for torpedo avoidance).

 

So, I do not see at all the points you claimed. You do not get disadvantages for shuffling a commander around as far as my experience goes, quite the contrary, it's rather handy. As far as I can tell, the current iteration of the commander skills is more of an incentive to use premium ships than an encouragement for fixated assignements or commanders or frequent retrainings.

 

Regards, Nightowl

 

 

An interesting point of view, thank you. What I had in mind was certain skills that make more sense only on certain ships. There would mostly be those related to the differences in armament the ship's have. Some are generally useful, or useless, on a wide range of BB's. What I now mostly choose to do is pick the ones which I think make universal sense, except with certain special commanders, mostly, and for certain key ships. Probably Massachusetts is a good example of a BB where the captain would be focusing on the use of secondaries.

 

In general, I prefer to have as multipurpose and universal captain skills, I'd rather prefer the ships have distinctive strengths and weakness and customize them through equipment, not through captain skills. That's just my personal preference.

[Andrewbassg]

10 minutes ago, Northern_Nightowl said:

Okay, let us go through this.

You have the assumption that the captain skill system is build in a way that discourages shuffling commanders around when they have more than 10 to 12 skill points assigned, making a player incur disadvantages if he's doing so.

In sciences, providing one counterexample disproves a theory, so, I'll try to provide said counterexample.

 

I do own a Halsey that has 20 skill points at the time of writing, of which 19 are assigned to BB skills. He gets shuffled around between Texas, Arizona, Alabama, Georgia and Ohio, these are the skills set up:

 

Lately, I've made extensive use of Texas (last season, when you got to play T5 in Bronze) and Alabama (currently in Silver) in Ranked. Both ships have modules for an emphasis on survivability and main battery precision (my usual and personal way to go with BB). I did and do not feel at all that I'm getting disadvantages out of this skill setup, quite the contrary (wows-numbers.com statistics from Ranked, as indicated):

 

The Alabama is a quite recent addition to my fleet (courtesy of birthday coupon, a month ago) and she feels decently powerful.

 

True, some skills are more suited on one ship than on another. The turret rotation skill for example is IMHO mandatory for Texas (and Arizona). But it's also quite useful on Georgia. Even though the turrets have a decent train rate there, buffing it is still handy when switching targets (examples: in games with CV, getting switfly a salvo on the red one when he happens to get spotted early on, or when a broadsiding cruiser happens in your sights while you were tracking some other vessels, or tracking a DD while manoeuvering for torpedo avoidance).

 

So, I do not see at all the points you claimed. You do not get disadvantages for shuffling a commander around as far as my experience goes, quite the contrary, it's rather handy. As far as I can tell, the current iteration of the commander skills is more of an incentive to use premium ships than an encouragement for fixated assignements or commanders or frequent retrainings.

 

Regards, Nightowl

 

Those are good points. But we talk about how, generally, operation LFUC favored  Cv's and subs in detriment of cruisers and babbies. While claiming "diversity".Which your point is also disproves.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

I think there's a difference if you see the captain skills as a way of customizing the ship you play, or as a way of customizing the way you play. To make clearer what I wrote earlier, the latter has always been the basis of my approach to the captain skills I picked.

[Andrewbassg]

11 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

I mean...since the captain rework they've introduced two lines of cruisers that are "torpedo focused" (certainly compared to their peers), plus there are brawling modes where the 15% extra damage makes a lot more sense than, say, Superintendent. .

 

Yes, but Superintendent, for example, is kinda mandatory on certain ships (with heal) and also lines.

 

11 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

 Same for Coop and Operations, possibly.

Strictly for those two lines.Otherwise not really, if the goal is to maximize the investment.

 

15 minutes ago, tocqueville8 said:

Not saying there's a huge variety, but I'm enjoying lighthouse builds, which were not a thing before the rework.

The problem is compared to subs and Cv's. And cruisers got yet another  big shaft with the removal of disp debuff from camos.

[Yosha_AtaIante]

5 minutes ago, Andrewbassg said:

removal of disp debuff from camos.

both are baked in.

[Karasu_Browarszky]

17 minutes ago, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

both are baked in.

I don't think so. Sauce?

[ItsEyeJasper]

1 hour ago, Karasu_Browarszky said:

 

Making them more customizable would be my preferred solution. There might be some legitimite concerns over if that would make certain ships too OP, though.

Oh Definatley, I the issue is exactly like that. to make a common skill tree that does not create a blatantly OP Build for a ship  while being a relatively sound build for another. This is why i prefer skill trees that give you choices to go for a specialization.

[Andrewbassg]

47 minutes ago, Zuihou_Kai_Ni said:

both are baked in.

Nope. Only concealment. Unless there is somethin' new.

[invicta2012]

1 hour ago, tocqueville8 said:

I mean...since the captain rework they've introduced two lines of cruisers that are "torpedo focused" (certainly compared to their peers), plus there are brawling modes where the 15% extra damage makes a lot more sense than, say, Superintendent. Same for Coop and Operations, possibly.

Fair points, but I think the lines you're referring to (PA and IJN cruisers) don't need these skills. They have very effective torpedo loads without buffs, especially the PA ones which have those DWTs and TRB, and most players will take skills like IFHE and Heavy HE instead to make their DD calibre main battery effective.  A US CL with no torpedoes and 6 inch guns, though, isn't well served by the options available... 

 

I'd quite like to see torpedo options limited, replaced with a Basics of Survivability 3pt skill for cruisers, an AFT type skill for small cruisers, and the Heavy HE/SAP skill rules flipped so that it *increases* detection on ships with small calibre guns and becomes more of a buff for traditional 6 inch HE cruisers.