Cruisers need a way to stay alive.

[Andreevson]

Battleships have heals, armor and a big health pool, destroyers have smoke, speed and stealth (and extreme agility and small targets)

 

 

 

Cruisers got nothing (untill tiers 9 and 8, where they get heals aswell). And that is fine untill tier 5, where cruisers are light and agile and can avoid pretty well, but for heavy cruisers its a whole nother deal.  They get decimated pretty quickly the minute they are spotted and any ability to do damage is rendered ineffective because of frantic evasion. If there is no carrier in the battle, there is basically no point in playing a cruiser instead of a BB. Also, not being able to choose your modules based on enemy team composition can leave you with AA panic ability when there are no carriers or a hydrocaustic search where there are no destroyers.

 

IMO The cruiser class is the class that is not implemented into the game very well and Lesta (Wargaming or whatever) are doing very little to ease this, instead on focusing on DD/BB changes.

 

Also, cruisers have a lot of things to avoid. While other classes have direct counters that they need to avoid, like a BB should watch out for destroyers and incoming planes, a Cruiser not only has to watch for destroyer torps, planes, they also have to watch out for enemy cruisers and enemy battleships, making it extremely difficult to maneuver across the map.

 

What are your opinions on this class?

 

 

[22cm]

Maybe reduce the angles of citadel penetration from BBs?

[Andreevson]

Maybe reduce the angles of citadel penetration from BBs?

 

Probably reduce the citadel area too. Especially japanese cruisers suffer for the fact that the whole ship is one big citadel.

[IamTroublemaker]

I think reducing the citadel area would be nice. Or just give T7 and T8 cruisers the ability to heal because lets face it those T6 and below cruisers are fine. Its the higher tiers that people start facing big citadel problems.

[Andreevson]

I think reducing the citadel area would be nice. Or just give T7 and T8 cruisers the ability to heal because lets face it those T6 and below cruisers are fine. Its the higher tiers that people start facing big citadel problems.

 

Also getting your rudder knocked out constantly despite fitting a rudder module does not help.

[IamTroublemaker]

 

Also getting your rudder knocked out constantly despite fitting a rudder module does not help.

 

True, maybe a 10 or 20 sec less cooldown on the repair ability would be nice as well

 

But I face the same problem on IJN BBs as well, and quite often, could be just my bad luck tho..

[Andreevson]

 

True, maybe a 10 or 20 sec less cooldown on the repair ability would be nice as well

 

But I face the same problem on IJN BBs as well, and quite often, could be just my bad luck tho..

 

Only once have I experienced a knocked out rudder on a BB, when i bought the nagato yesturday.

[Spellfire40]

Well armor wont help beond beond 12 plus km since shots become plunging anway. Have citadeled cruisers in my Colerado/Nagato that were very well angled but were at long range. Only ship that is a pain are Clevelands because they dont have as much citadel space as other cruisers. I personally find being weak agist BBs isnt the bigest weakness for CAs at high level its more not having a real role . Fewer CV and high BB self defence AA leaves the AA cooldown useless in many games while trying to shield the fleet from DDs put you in high risk from their torps and BB/CA fire. Perhaps giving them sonar and def fire AA at the same timemight be a way to go to up their utility( thogh in this case smoke should block it or it scews DD totally)

[D7v]

 

True, maybe a 10 or 20 sec less cooldown on the repair ability would be nice as well

 

But I face the same problem on IJN BBs as well, and quite often, could be just my bad luck tho..

Japanese ships are food in this game in general

[Andreevson]

Japanese ships are food in this game in general

 

Quite untrue, BB and CA lines are good comparing them to their competitors from the other nations, but the cruiser class in general, from all nations, is the 'food' IMO.

[IamTroublemaker]

 

Quite untrue, BB and CA lines are good comparing them to their competitors from the other nations, but the cruiser class in general, from all nations, is the 'food' IMO.

 

I dont think IJN cruisers are the food. I quite enjoy playing them, even against all the BBs. They are annoying for every BB player with all the fires, and quite nice damage they can deal per salvo. The main problem for me, now, is that the fire damage doesn't give xp/credits. WG really fucked up with that imo. I think IJN cruisers rely on fire damage the most. In my first battle with Ibuki I did like 60k dmg, almost half of it was from fire and I lost 25k credits, even though I have premium and we won.

[SonofaSailor]

If I could add my impressions as a new player...

 

Cruisers are the biggest casualty of the basic flaw in this game: the merging of different technological eras. In any given match you could have a selection of pre-1918 broadside cruisers squaring off against a team of mostly post-1935 light and heavy cruisers, which is insane.

 

A modern example to prove my point: a WW2 destroyer with 5 inch guns could blow a modern destroyer (with a modern 5 inch gun) to pieces in minutes if the modern destroyer let the WW2 destroyer get too close (think HMAS Sydney vs. Kormoran). But the WW2 destroyer would never get that close without permission: a helicopter or ship-launched anti-ship missile, or an extended range base-bleed round from the modern destroyer's single 5 inch gun, could all disable or destroy the WW2 destroyer long before it got within effective range. Both have 5 inch guns, but a WW2 5 inch gun, with its WW2 ammunition and fire control systems, is nothing compared to its modern descendant.

 

The point is that more modern ships aren't invulnerable to the attacks of older ones, but the effectiveness of their modern weaponry means that old forms of attack simply become obsolete. HMAS Sydney got within point blank range of Kormoran and Kormoran splattered Sydney with an old fashioned close range broadside! This was a form of attack Sydney was never intended to suffer or defend against.

 

The other night the Match Maker put my Kolberg in a fight with a map full of tier IV and V cruisers, tier V battleships and tier VI carriers! The WW1 era Kolberg has zero AA and tiny, ineffective, old-fashioned 4 inch guns. I spent the entire time hiding from dive bombers becuase my Kolberg pre-dated the invention of dive bombers! If I could have got close enough to a carrier I could have killed it, just like Kormoran killed Sydney, but unless the carrier player shut his eyes and started whistling Waltzing Matilda, I never had a hope. What I should have had was a WW2 era 4 inch gunned AAW cruiser or destroyer. Then I would have had AA plus modern weaponry of the same calibre but, thanks to advances in technology, more power.

 

So I guess my point is two-fold:

1. Similar era ships should be grouped together. Sending pre-WW1 designs against late WW2 designs is just insane. Perhaps it shouldn't happen, but then why does the Match Maker keep doing it?

2. This one is actually a question: does the game model the differences in technology of the armaments? Are the 4 inch guns on the Kolberg less accurate and less powerful then 4 inch guns on high tier destroyers? Or does the game simply treat all 4 inch guns as being equal? If not, then this should change, as well.

3. Why is there no distinction between light and heavy cruisers, or at the very least, 6 inch and 8 inch gun cruisers. The Washington Treaty thought the difference was very important, and I thought this game used that document as a major part of its inspiration.

 

Note: I know that the Kolberg guns are something like 4.1 inch. I'm keeping the numbers short and simple, which is another reason for not using metric.

[IamTroublemaker]

So I guess my point is two-fold:

1. Similar era ships should be grouped together. Sending pre-WW1 designs against late WW2 designs is just insane. Perhaps it shouldn't happen, but then why does the Match Maker keep doing it?

2. This one is actually a question: does the game model the differences in technology of the armaments? Are the 4 inch guns on the Kolberg less accurate and less powerful then 4 inch guns on high tier destroyers? Or does the game simply treat all 4 inch guns as being equal? If not, then this should change, as well.

3. Why is there no distinction between light and heavy cruisers, or at the very least, 6 inch and 8 inch gun cruisers. The Washington Treaty thought the difference was very important, and I thought this game used that document as a major part of its inspiration.

 

Note: I know that the Kolberg guns are something like 4.1 inch. I'm keeping the numbers short and simple, which is another reason for not using metric.

 

1) No

2) I think it simply varies from ship to ship. Same type of guns can be different on different ships, just like guns in WoT

3) There is, light cruisers have up to 155mm guns (faster rof, etc) and heavy ones with 203mm guns. There will be US and IJN light cruiser branch.

[Vogel]

Perhaps give them an ability that reduces the targeting accuracy towards them? Such as the camouflages in the game, but works much better, at a limited time. Will help CAs when they have to turn and expose their citadels.

[t0ffik1]

Battleships have heals, armor and a big health pool, destroyers have smoke, speed and stealth (and extreme agility and small targets)

 

 

 

Cruisers got nothing (untill tiers 9 and 8, where they get heals aswell). And that is fine untill tier 5, where cruisers are light and agile and can avoid pretty well, but for heavy cruisers its a whole nother deal.  They get decimated pretty quickly the minute they are spotted and any ability to do damage is rendered ineffective because of frantic evasion. If there is no carrier in the battle, there is basically no point in playing a cruiser instead of a BB. Also, not being able to choose your modules based on enemy team composition can leave you with AA panic ability when there are no carriers or a hydrocaustic search where there are no destroyers.

 

IMO The cruiser class is the class that is not implemented into the game very well and Lesta (Wargaming or whatever) are doing very little to ease this, instead on focusing on DD/BB changes.

 

Also, cruisers have a lot of things to avoid. While other classes have direct counters that they need to avoid, like a BB should watch out for destroyers and incoming planes, a Cruiser not only has to watch for destroyer torps, planes, they also have to watch out for enemy cruisers and enemy battleships, making it extremely difficult to maneuver across the map.

 

What are your opinions on this class?

 

 

 

Dear players... first l2p then try to talk about balancing.

Yeah i know turning OP (and you probably dont know how to do it),also  who would have though that staying over 10-12km range and actually turning 1 time per 30s is so skill needing and hard that its impossible to do...

Currently cruisers have the biggest win rate till tier 10 (after it are dd's with 0.01% less) so you guys should l2p and not cry that the most OP class in game is not OP enough (and the data was pre last patch BB nerf).

 

If something needs a buff its carrier tire 4-7/8 (as midway is still OP) and battleships tier 3-9 so their win rate isnt 3rd lowest (carriers 4th) and the player pool also isnt 3rd lower (carrier 4th) - yes these are data from myplesyrup and from pre last patch (meaning the win rates go even more now in favor of cruisers and dd's)

 

Btw...

Your best cruiser aoba has 40k dmg avarage = its clear you cant use cruisers at all as for example me, as for example my aoba (for a bb player) has 10k more avarage dmg...

So stop using your murmanks with its premium matchmaking that buffs up your win rate artificially and start playing real ships where you can learn something

[NoirLotus]

To survive longer, cruisers need that their BB teammates stop sniping and start using their armor ...

 

Most often cruisers die fast because they are the first targets spotted : DD are stealthy and BB hide far away.

[t3h3th32]

 

I dont think IJN cruisers are the food. I quite enjoy playing them, even against all the BBs. They are annoying for every BB player with all the fires, and quite nice damage they can deal per salvo. The main problem for me, now, is that the fire damage doesn't give xp/credits. WG really fucked up with that imo. I think IJN cruisers rely on fire damage the most. In my first battle with Ibuki I did like 60k dmg, almost half of it was from fire and I lost 25k credits, even though I have premium and we won.

 

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT? Fire damage isn't translated into XP and credits earn? Okay, now my entire belief system got shattered into pieces. Why do I sometimes get a feeling, this game is still at its PRE-ALPHA stage? Well, that's completely nonsensical too and if BETA testers and devs have their own forums, this should be no. 1 priority for the next upcoming patch.

 

Also, reducing the citadel area might shift the balance off completely. I think, far much more elegant solution would be to introduce an angle / damage reduction algorithm, because if I point my IJN cruiser directly at BB at higher tiers, the AP flies in through ship's bow and exits the ship's [edited], which means, no matter how I angle, the result is 100% dependent on RNG spread the enemy BB player gets and that's just wrong. Obviously, IJN got fast ships, weaker armor, I'm not saying, it should bounce, but there should be a certain damage reduction as a result of proper angling. And I'm fine, when this won't apply to Yamato, because those shells are like small trucks, so probably, it's real enough, that close range, even 1 would totally devastate your ship, no matter, where it hits.

 

Also, far bigger problem, than BBs being able to wreck a CA from 20 km away in 1 salvo is the DD problem. Rocker, paper, scissor kind of thing. I've posted about that numerous times. DDs hunt BBs, BBs are "citadelling" CAs and CAs are hunting DDs, while CVs provide overall support and can pretty much engage everyone. CAs have no useful mean to tract down and hunt down DDs and I suggested the sonar thing be tweaked and for instance, increased range would render DDs on your minimap, but not in-game, until they're actually spotted. When DD would be spotted only via minimap, a special indicator would appear on his HUD, telling him, he got sonar'd and that he's appearing on minimap and he'd have to slow below 15 knots for example to counter this or pop smoke or something and also the ability to order your fighter plane around would be nice.

 

Also, looking forward to pwn with you Troublemaker_CRO in game again soon.

 

Cheers,

~t3h'Pâr4d0x

[t3h3th32]

Sorry for doublepost, but I gotta say, everyone's entitled to his own opinion, while expressed in a friendly way. Your pitch, that someone here is crying, because he's a noob and should learn how2play is nothing less, but insulting. This forum is a place, where we all can have a friendly conversation and can hang out together and exchange opinions and ideas and every time so slightly hope, that our pitch might turn into something bigger. It's people like you, who're probably compensating something by attacking other people online and bottomline, a post, where you state, that people should stop crying and learn to play won't really intellectually enriching anyone participating in such discussion.

 

Cheers,

~t3h'Pâr4d0x

[Ragoutrabbit]

 

Dear players... first l2p then try to talk about balancing.

Yeah i know turning OP (and you probably dont know how to do it),also  who would have though that staying over 10-12km range and actually turning 1 time per 30s is so skill needing and hard that its impossible to do...

Currently cruisers have the biggest win rate till tier 10 (after it are dd's with 0.01% less) so you guys should l2p and not cry that the most OP class in game is not OP enough (and the data was pre last patch BB nerf).

 

If something needs a buff its carrier tire 4-7/8 (as midway is still OP) and battleships tier 3-9 so their win rate isnt 3rd lowest (carriers 4th) and the player pool also isnt 3rd lower (carrier 4th) - yes these are data from myplesyrup and from pre last patch (meaning the win rates go even more now in favor of cruisers and dd's)

 

Btw...

Your best cruiser aoba has 40k dmg avarage = its clear you cant use cruisers at all as for example me, as for example my aoba (for a bb player) has 10k more avarage dmg...

So stop using your murmanks with its premium matchmaking that buffs up your win rate artificially and start playing real ships where you can learn something

 

Rofl this comming from a player using T5/6 BB to stat pad lamo.

[Andreevson]

 

Dear players... first l2p then try to talk about balancing.

Yeah i know turning OP (and you probably dont know how to do it),also  who would have though that staying over 10-12km range and actually turning 1 time per 30s is so skill needing and hard that its impossible to do...

Currently cruisers have the biggest win rate till tier 10 (after it are dd's with 0.01% less) so you guys should l2p and not cry that the most OP class in game is not OP enough (and the data was pre last patch BB nerf).

 

If something needs a buff its carrier tire 4-7/8 (as midway is still OP) and battleships tier 3-9 so their win rate isnt 3rd lowest (carriers 4th) and the player pool also isnt 3rd lower (carrier 4th) - yes these are data from myplesyrup and from pre last patch (meaning the win rates go even more now in favor of cruisers and dd's)

 

Btw...

Your best cruiser aoba has 40k dmg avarage = its clear you cant use cruisers at all as for example me, as for example my aoba (for a bb player) has 10k more avarage dmg...

So stop using your murmanks with its premium matchmaking that buffs up your win rate artificially and start playing real ships where you can learn something

 

  Well, If we are going to compare our genitals, your top played ships as a BB player are both very powerfull, more powerfull than the Murmansk by a large margin if I might say so,  Kongo and Fusou, with 53 and 61k damage on average respectively.

My average with them is 65k (kongo) and 76k (fuso)  and I am mainly a cruiser player. Does that feel good to you?

 

But arbitrarily comparing our statistics or skill does NOTHING to contribute to the conversation here. So lets stop doing that and instead focus elsewhere.

 

It is quite baffling how you can compare classes by Win ratio and then go on about comparing average damage. If we compare average damage dealt across classes, we can clearly see cruisers are lagging behind a lot in comparison to BBs, but that is fine, BBs are the heavy hitters and that is that, im just asking for a bit more cruiser survivability, is all.

 

 

 

[t0ffik1]

 

Rofl this comming from a player using T5/6 BB to stat pad lamo.

 

Rotfl said a guy with 50% win rate barely, and tier 5 ship  played  - if you cant win in a ship it means you cant use it, and this shows that you cant talk anything about balancing game since you dont understand it.

Do you even know what stat pad is lmao (or why there is so low player pool on tiers 8+? huh yeah you probably dont know anything about the game over tier 5 ).

if you had any clue about how to even check stats, then you would notice other ships then top 3, and the ranked used ship (i have one of the lowest number of games played to reach rank 1 in EU - and i did it only in tier 7 ship LOL)...

Btw didnt know tier 7-8 ships (for example my nagato has almost 250 games played with ranked games summed up) is low tier what you claim ahahahaha.

Sadly your stats show your still extreamly clueless about the game (since you cant even check stats properly - or notice this account is only for IJN line of ships )

Damn the clueless noobs without any games played crying over balance

 

-------------------------------------

 

  Well, If we are going to compare our genitals, your top played ships as a BB player are both very powerfull, more powerfull than the Murmansk by a large margin if I might say so,  Kongo and Fusou, with 53 and 61k damage on average respectively.

My average with them is 65k (kongo) and 76k (fuso)  and I am mainly a cruiser player. Does that feel good to you?

 

But arbitrarily comparing our statistics or skill does NOTHING to contribute to the conversation here. So lets stop doing that and instead focus elsewhere.

 

It is quite baffling how you can compare classes by Win ratio and then go on about comparing average damage. If we compare average damage dealt across classes, we can clearly see cruisers are lagging behind a lot in comparison to BBs, but that is fine, BBs are the heavy hitters and that is that, im just asking for a bit more cruiser survivability, is all.

 

 

 

 

 

Then how about we compare the ability to cap points, or the ability to move fast, or ability to dodge torps and shots? as i see that bb's are lacking there hugely.

WIN RATE = decisive end score, DMG is only one of the ways to achieve it (or how do you think a DD can have so much lower dmg and still have 0.01% lower win ratio?).

If you think that dmg alone wins the game then you need to learn more, as even more important then dmg is the ability to zone and move fast in last months of the game (thats why my dmg on bb's got lower by around 5-7k per ship avarage).

So a tip dont compare dmg to win ratios as its not the same and not even close to it (there is a reason why my highest win rates are all dd's you know).

 

So i dont see that cruisers lack on anything since their win rate is the highest now = they are the most OP (even when the cruiser noobs cry 24/7/365 as they are to stupid to not afk broadside).

 

Server stats show what they show and thats why practicly every battleship in last patch got extra heal buff ty to premium repair party ability - of the same number of heals with it if you take out superintendant but buffed torpedo aquisition - for the stearing nerf on tier 8+ as yamato was definetly the king on its tier)

 

WG already noticed it that with current fires, and high dispersion they needed more heals and they got it - so they can tank now better and wonder if the win rates will stay the same you can expect more help to bb's (and the fun fact is cryptic actually did what i posted on start buff every bb till tier 8 though not 9).

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

And for ppl who cry about cruisers not being able to hunt dd's - as yes the game is build around rock/paper/scissors = bb's hunt ca's (what they already have problems doing good enough), dd's hunt bb's and ca's hunt dd's.

Stop yachting with the stupid AA consumable and get your self the ACUSTIC one - most ppl in ranked used it, and you will be eable to easy hunt every dd's that try to sneek or torp you, while so or so a gun fight you will win vs them.

You know you have a fighter on your cruiser, and ty to ppl crying carriers are almost extinct - you dont need the aa consumable, it will be enough if you will give normal AA cover to bb's vs planes (when you get to tier X then you might consider AA consumable, in other cases if your sailing with it its your fault you have problems with dd's you shouldnt have).

Btw the last changes in patch were also used to force cruiser noobs to switch partly to acustic - so you dont die self by afk yachting to torps.

[Andreevson]

 

rotfl said a guy with 50% win rate barely, and tier 5 ship max played

if you had any clue about how to even check stats, then you would notice other ships then top 3, and the ranked used ship...

sadly your stats show your still clueless about the game

 

Ugh, see the last post on the previous page and please stop bringing up statistics to the discussion.

It is pointless, and to be honest one does not need to be a pro player to identify problems in the game.

 

Can we move on now? Do cruisers need survivability buff?

I think they do. To take solely tier 10 for example, Des moines and Hindemburg have the lowest win ratio of all classes and lowest damage bar Gearing and Khabarovsk, but the destroyers are not meant to do huge damage atthat tier rather they fight for area control and denial (which can decide the outcome of a game more than damage). Zao stands on its own as it is probably one of the most balanced cruisers

[t0ffik1]

 

Ugh, see the last post on the previous page and please stop bringing up statistics to the discussion.

It is pointless, and to be honest one does not need to be a pro player to identify problems in the game.

 

Can we move on now? Do cruisers need survivability buff?

I think they do. To take solely tier 10 for example, Des moines and Hindemburg have the lowest win ratio of all classes and lowest damage bar Gearing and Khabarovsk, but the destroyers are not meant to do huge damage atthat tier rather they fight for area control and denial (which can decide the outcome of a game more than damage). Zao stands on its own as it is probably one of the most balanced cruisers

 

So if you cry that des moins has weak win rate - it means that special ship needs a buff = not cruisers as whole, as i can say that kawachi needs a buff so we should buff every bb up to tier 10 then.

And guess what, Cruisers arent also meant to do the biggest dmg (they may have the highest DPS but its not meant for them to have total highest game dmg because of their agility and speed).

The biggest game dmg dealers are ment to be the slowest ships - bb's and carriers - so again what do you want? 

You want now that cruisers deal more dmg or get more survi? as looking via stats they are the key to win if you want to buff up your win rates and are most effective in game now. To it if you would buff their survi then you would have to nerf their dmg in responce.

 

And stats are actually very important, as they show if the player is acustomed to the game and how experienced he is about facing different enemies.

[Shaka_D]

Maybe reduce the angles of citadel penetration from BBs?

 

Got citadelled from the rear in my pensacola. Angling not necessary for cruisers, just be in range on a bb and that seems to be enough.

[havaduck]

 

Got citadelled from the rear in my pensacola. Angling not necessary for cruisers, just be in range on a bb and that seems to be enough.

 

That!, and its even worse for german cruisers. If you put also in things like even a stray shell that only got you because of dispersion hit and citadeled you its not getting better.

 

Then there are bugs like the one where you get a normal pen AND a citadell from the SAME shell.  I mean wth that ~ 17 k alone from a single gdamn 40 cm shell ...

 

 

Yep give destroyers a citadel, make them always visible (either by detection range or being spotted by something else) and force them to pretty much fight cruisers with their guns, give cruisers better shell velocity, take smoke away, add useless HE aka HE-Bug, give cruisers roughly the same speed and turning radius on the high tiers as DDs  ...

... and it would be the same carnage for destroyers like the one cruisers are now experiencing against battleships ...

 

... totally would not make such a change for DDs, but I hope something is done for the cruisers also!