Some interesting info around the world

[Takeda92]

I really think this discussion should be continued when we get the patch notes, then we can see what other changes bring to the table. Don't forget, WG said they will buff RU DDs, not nerf them.

[anonym_gCiyicUsNYGl]

? they said they will nerf IJN destroyers, balance and add limits to classes in matchmaking for 6-7 months and what do we have so far besides them nerfing US/USSR destroyers, killing carriers and not promising their balance to matchmaking

[Takeda92]

? they said they will nerf IJN destroyers, balance and add limits to classes in matchmaking for 6-7 months and what do we have so far besides them nerfing US/USSR destroyers, killing carriers and not promising their balance to matchmaking

 

First, they didn't say they will nerf IJN destroyers, they said they rebalance the high tier ones and that was recent. I've never heard of them promising limits.. ever. They said that they rather make the players want to play something more/less than to enforce limits on DDs and that limits are last resort only.

The matchmaker was rebalanced. Wasn't the nation mirror one of them? I think there was another one that balances the number of DDs on both sides.

And I still don't see how that is related to what I've said "leave the discussion for when the patchnotes come" preferably in another thread.

[anonym_gCiyicUsNYGl]

cmon.. they've promised limits so many times and yes, the nation mirror limitation was the most recent one and they never implemented it

y

[Brett50]

to be honest, I've never had a problem with cruisers or even DD's being able to invisi-fire from range, as usually they have a DD that is a lot closer to them than you are so the second they open fire they are lit up anyway, my gripe has always been with the offensive use of smoke, with DD's rushing up to 5-6km away from you, dropping smoke and sitting there blazing away with very little you can do about it (unless you are a top tier CA or have one around you. I've always thought smoke should be more of a defensive aid to get you out of sticky situations, the only thing gunboat DD's should be able to gun brawl with are other DD's

[Namolis]

i've never seen anyone whine and complain about US/USSR destroyers or cruisers invis firing, don't forget, you only need to get one or two kilometers closer to them and they'll be spotted.

i've also never really cared about it and i am really curious how this Bela-Russian company arrived at this conclusion.

Fortunately they caught this before their relase. During testing they had normal penalty applied to them, and holy @£€/&%(¤ was that OP. When the Soviet DDs had this ability, they were able to invisifire even CAs to death, and whenever someone tried to charge them down, they could just run (because they are faster than everything else) and kite all match with absolutely nothing for the recieving team to do about it. Ships like the Gearing can still invisifire, but thanks to the shell arcs it's more often than not a waste of time. It can work somewhat vs BBs or ships that don't move, but otherwise the shell flight time is too long. The Zao can do it still, and that is why she is probably the strongest non-carrier ship right now (with the caveat that I don't have it yet, but I already feel quite powerful in my Ibuki. Zao improves Ibuki's only real downside: dpm).

 

Now; personally, I think it would be good news if purely range-based invisifire got done away with once and for all - it's not fun for either side when there is nothing the recieving player can do. In a well designed game, all plays should have counterplays, even if some are harder than others. The high tier Soviet DDs showed clearly why invisifire is bad, but WG limited their fix to them only. Seems the proposed change was just a mistranslation. Pity.

[Mister_Greek]

"Uping" this topic again in hope that some people will notice the Q&A's with the Devs....

 

Sorry for the intrusion

[Carnotzet]

A Q&A with devs ? Where, when, how ? I need my dose !

 

On topic. Here are some interesting info from a thread about DD limitation. Source

 

Regarding the rock-paper-scissors system not really being observed, Vallter_ explains that they don't want classes to be locked into one single role. In that regard, cruisers can bring AA cover and hunt destroyers. They won't turn them into a AA platform or DD hunter only.

 

In his opinion, DD's aren't the best class in the game. They are simply more convenient to play than BB's or cruisers for most players.

Balancing the system with hundreds of variables to take into consideration is a difficult process, and it's hard to do it perfectly, especially when taking into account the regular addition of new content.

 

He also recognizes that random battles are not idyllic. And that very rarely do DD's cover their BB's with smoke, or that, when this happens, BB's do stay inside the smoke. However, he believes that some form of cooperation (such as some AA cover, or DD's and cruisers hunting other DD's) is present in random battles.

He is fully aware that full cooperation in random battles is impossible. Devs always took that into account when creating the Rock-Paper-Scissors system, so that the chance to beat your natural prey is about 7 to 3.

 

Moreover, devs are aware of CV sniping and will introduce some sort of limitation at high tier that should prevent this type of behavior.

 

[gr0pah]

Ok I've read through the entire invisifire-scare-of-2016 and everyone is using nerf and debuff. As far as I can understand, TII-IV VMF DD are actually being buffed, no?

[Carnotzet]

Ok I've read through the entire invisifire-scare-of-2016 and everyone is using nerf and debuff. As far as I can understand, TII-IV VMF DD are actually being buffed, no?

 

Yes they are. The penalty they have now (+2km just like 130mm RU DD's) will be reduced to +1km. I don't really see it as a significant buff, but everything helps, I guess.

[genai]

 Devs always took that into account when creating the Rock-Paper-Scissors system, so that the chance to beat your natural prey is about 7 to 3.

 

 

 

 

Somehow i doubt that they did... then they would have obviously knew that it wouldnt work at all.

If rock beats scissors 7:3 why would scissors move in closer (to do its job) and hunt for paper if when he does it it just improves the chance that rock beats it? And if scissors avoids rock like a plague and doesnt hunt paper, what did they think would happen to paper vs rock matchup? Papers natural enemies run away from rock, leaving paper to plague rock... only logical solution is to turn to playing paper

We already said it 1 year ago(at least some of us, others really wanted it... to make it more "real")... they disagreed, made it even worse... Well... boohoo, now you have it as youve made it... the only logically possible solution to their balance and changes theyve made in the past. The shocker... expected happened!

 

I really would love to see someone ask them that question... did they really not know that game would be ruined like this if they insisted on that crap balance? It was bloody obvious... guess not to WG and those that seem to all be supertesters now lol, that argued like crazy in favor of changes

 

But its okay, only dropped from 45k to 22k players(and that is funny, because WoT went up and up after release, not peaked at release and then drop like a rock)... guess its all fine! Maybe when it hits like 10k or less will they get it

[gr0pah]

 

Yes they are. The penalty they have now (+2km just like 130mm RU DD's) will be reduced to +1km. I don't really see it as a significant buff, but everything helps, I guess.

 

Thank you!

[Carnotzet]

Q&A's. Source, Source

 

1. Why is there so much difference between Moskva's and Hindenburg's medium range AA damage? 6x4 45mm give 123 dps and 8 single 55m give almost double dps, 224. And the range difference is huge as well (3.5km against 5km).

A. The Russian 45mm values are correctly calculated. The problem comes from the German guns. We will probably decrease their performance, the difference will thus be reduced.

 

2. Do you plan to release additional Soviet and German cruisers? I think that several World War I or even earlier cruisers are missing (Yorck, Scharnhorst, Askold). 

A. We may add more. However, we're not planning to add parallel branches in the near future.

 

3. Similarly to Torpedo Acceleration, do you plan to add a skill that would decrease torpedo speed in favour of range?

A. No.

 

4. It seems that the report system is useless, do you even look at them?

When will you remove Tirpitz from sale, all the noobs are playing with her?

A. Reports aren't useless. They're very useful for us to fight bots. However, according to our experience, a lot of "bots" are just very bad players.

We won't remove Tirpitz, Warspite and Blyskawica from sale anymore.

 

4. Does the matchmaker take into account players win rate before splitting them in teams?

A. No.

 

5. With Gremyashchy being too powerful, would you consider adding another premium destroyer of the same class (Grom) with slightly weaker characteristics?

A. We're not against adding several ships from a single class, but there's already Anshan as a premium and Gnevny as standard. Adding another one would be too much. Moreover, we don't (and didn't) promise Gremyashchy wouldn't be sold anymore (we said it will be exclusive to pre-orders for a year). We just don't consider it a wise move.

 

6. Do you plan to add cruiser Irian as a premium Panasian ship?

Do you plan to add more Polish ships?

A. Not at the moment.

Not at the moment.

 

7. When do you plan to fix the matchmaking system?

A. I cannot give you a specific date but it's one of our priorities.

 

8. Why Izumo's middle turret doesn't rotate all the way (360°)?

A. It's a structural constraint.

 

9. Would you consider changing BB's accuracy. At the moment, it seems that doing damage is mostly random.

A. I understand your concerns. BB's guns are devastating (as they were in reality) and giving them higher accuracy will be catastrophic for the game (in terms of balance and dynamics). Moreover, even when taking into consideration the high dispersion on BB's guns,  the aforementioned situation is already happening in some cases (that BB guns are devastating). That doesn't mean there's no room for improvement. However, we currently have other critical issues we need to fix first.

 

10. Do you consider invis firing (with full stealth build) a problem since it gives the attacker a considerable advantage? (How is a Montana supposed to fight an invisible Gearing?)

A. We don't think it's a problem. It's simply an option for certain ships and it's hard to be put in practice.

(And how are BB's supposed to fight IJN DD's 1 on 1? It's an unpleasant situation. But if, as a BB, you ended up 1 on 1 with a DD, something went wrong somewhere else.)

 

 

[Takeda92]

That was a good Q&A, although now I'm worried about them selling Grem again.

[TierCTrafficPolice]

Q&A's. Source, Source

10. Do you consider invis firing (with full stealth build) a problem since it gives the attacker a considerable advantage? (How is a Montana supposed to fight an invisible Gearing?)

A. We don't think it's a problem. It's simply an option for certain ships and it's hard to be put in practice.

(And how are BB's supposed to fight IJN DD's 1 on 1? It's an unpleasant situation. But if, as a BB, you ended up 1 on 1 with a DD, something went wrong somewhere else.)

Really ? How about BBs against Zao ?

[Tyrendian89]

Really ? How about BBs against Zao ?

 

same thing really... in that particular case one might argue that something went wrong as early as ship setup if your concealment is considerably higher than Zao's stealth firing radius of 15km (as in, Monty can get her concealment down around 12km)...

[TierCTrafficPolice]

You know something is wrong when BBs need CE skill to avoid being burn to die by Zao - cruiser but cannot even see her face or need team support to spot her

Too much for the 7-3 chance to beat natural prey ...

[Carnotzet]

 

 

You do as everyone does. You adapt. If the meta favors one particular style, then you adapt to it or have a harder time.

[Mayv]

 

You do as everyone does. You adapt. If the meta favors one particular style, then you adapt to it or have a harder time.

 

This is the WoWS forum we cant have sensible ideas here.

[CommissionerJan]

cruisers can bring AA cover and hunt destroyers. They won't turn them into a AA platform or DD hunter only.

 

If any cruiser attempts to hunt any somewhat competent DD, the cruiser in question will get deleted by the BBs on the enemy team in no time.

 

And AA is maybe an option for the DM and Moskva, but we won't ever know because WG decided to just make CVs completely unfun so everybody stopped playing them.

If WG wants cruisers to hunt DDs and provide AA cover, things are not looking up for Zao and Hindenburg.

 

Yeah, yeah, I know. Just spec vigilance and use sonar on HIndenburg, you will be the best antisubmarine DD cruiser in the world.

[Sake78]

 

This is the WoWS forum we cant have sensible ideas here.

 

It appears most ideas gravitate towards nerfing what someone`s ship of choice is weak against and mental gymnastics about sugar-coating said ideas, to appeal to the masses, in order to gather momentum and hopefully be implemented via peer pressure.

 

It`s funny when BBs one shot or two shot a cruiser... that`s balance, but when a cruiser puts up some fight, it`s suddenly bad balance, eh? This and other...ideas.

[Kartoffelmos]

It`s funny when BBs one shot or two shot a Cruiser... that`s balance, but when a cruiser puts up some fight, it`s suddenly bad balance, eh?

 

Well, at least they get countered by destroyers and carriers... Oh, wait... 

Will be fun to see what will happen to battleships after high-tier IJN destroyers get "rebalanced" and they (BBs) start to outperform everyone else again. 

[Crooq_Lionfang]

 

Well, at least they get countered by destroyers and carriers... Oh, wait... 

Will be fun to see what will happen to battleships after high-tier IJN destroyers get "rebalanced" and they (BBs) start to outperform everyone else again. 

 

Exactly. Just bought Yamato last weekend. Captain retraining will take a bit, but it'll be ready when the "rebalance" of its biggest enemy occurs

[Mayv]

 

It appears most ideas gravitate towards nerfing what someone`s ship of choice is weak against and mental gymnastics about sugar-coating said ideas, to appeal to the masses, in order to gather momentum and hopefully be implemented via peer pressure.

 

It`s funny when BBs one shot or two shot a cruiser... that`s balance, but when a cruiser puts up some fight, it`s suddenly bad balance, eh? This and other...ideas.

 

There was a recent enough post (that I cant find at the moment) where the OP asked if high tier BBs are too strong against CAs. The repleis he got were along the lines of "it is your fault for showing broadside", "learn to use WASD and dodge", "BBs are supposed to counter CAs".

[Takeda92]

Not from RU but interesting nonetheless

 

Without further ado.

 

Good news.

Fubuki gets a new torpedo armament - type93 mod.2 (Ibuki's upgraded torpedo).

 

Kagero starts with type93 mod.2 torpedo instead of type90 mod.3 (it is no longer available on Kagero).

 

Both Kagero and Shimakaze get the new torpedo armament - type F3 (Zao's torpedo)

 

Tier 8, 9, 10 CVs get Defensive Barrage.​ 1 charge only (+1 premium, +1 superintendent). Last 2min. CD 6min (4min premium)

It's different from CA's defensive barrage. It last significantly longer but the AA boost is also weaker.

 

All main gun turrets below 130mm (included)  get an HP boost. (4000, was 1500)

Affected: all DDs so far, Atlanta, Svietlana etc.

All main gun turrets between 131 - 155mm (included)  get an HP boost. (7500, was 5000, Mogami's was 4000)

Affected: most CLs except Chapayev (was intentionally left behind or praise the Vodka)

All main gun turrets between 156 - 210mm (included)  get an HP boost. (10000, was 5000)

Affected: all CAs except Moskva ​(which has turret HP of 15000).

 

Bad news.

Nerfs to Shimakaze's (also Kagero's second torpedo set) type93 mod.1 torpedo. -5knot to torp speed (62knot, was 67knot) and +0.8km to detection range (2.5km, was 1.7km)

 

Nerfs to Shimakaze's type93 mod.3 torpedo. -3km to torp distance (12km, was 15km) and +0.2km to detection range (1.9km, was 1.7km)

 

All other DD's torpedoes remain unchanged.

 

Check the news at

http://gamemodels3d.com/worldofwarships

Warning: You have to pay to see all ships' parameters and go back and forth a lot to compare changes.

 

I only did the consolidation work. All changes are subject to change. Anyway.