Some balancing thoughts

[superdashi]

Ahoy skippers,

 

well, i haven't played all classes equally, but i have nearly 3000 matches and i want to discuss some of my experiences with you. First of

Destroyers:

I have only played 14% of my matches with dd's and basically only JPN up to Kagero (the rest is tier5), but actually i think they are just fine. When i fail with them, i know it's my fault and failure. JPN DD's aren't matched vs the other nations in terms of close range cap fights cause of the guns/rate of fire, so i learned to better stay out of there. DD's are pretty strong vs. BB, mediocre vs. CV and weak vs CA. The only change i would advice, to make them stronger against CV's, repsectively make CV's more prone to them. CV's can make a dd's captains life pretty messy by spotting. A concentrated attack by 4 squadrons of bombers or spotting in a cap zone so CA's can fire upon you can absolutely be devastating. But that's ok. What i would change here is the speed of CV's. A couple of battle ago, i managed to find my way with Kagero to a solo Taiho. She detected me at 13 km range and naturaly threw everything against me. Avoiding torp and dive bombers, i never managed to get close enough for my guns. Given the fact that she was running straight away, my torps of course didn't hit her once. I just died after 3 combined bomber raids. Taiho has really short reload times for her squads ...

 

Cruisers:

They are the jack of all trades. I haven't played them much, and i must say that i don't play them very well i guess. Still, when facing them with a battleship, they are quite nasty. Way to nasty if you ask me. Cruisers are manouverable and mostly with decent AA, making them pretty well suited agains air raids. They are the arch enemy of dd's. So their weakness should imho be against BB, as BB usually don't blaze vs. dd's or cv's, right?

But think of it. A cruiser has more speed and manouverability. He can better dodge shells and dictate fighting range. His high rate of fire compared to the bigger target a BB is makes it way more easier to find it's mark, while a BB can only shoot every ~30 secs. At a smaller target, with better excelleration and manoverability. Sure, you can land a cita and devestate that cruiser. But it's much RNG if the cruiser captain is not going a straight line givin you full broadside. Even if the CA doesn't constantly set you ablaze from ranges about 15 - 17 km, dodging your shells which he can pretty much predigt if he knows your slow reload times nagging your HP pool off, when he gets close he also has his Torps. The only thing the BB can imho bring up against a CA is his HP pool. That's ridiculous! I would first try to reduce the chance of fire on their HE shells tbh. A Mogami or Hipper can easlily make 4000-8000 damage with a well aimed AP salvo. But at least i can try to angle my BB vs. such. Against HE, i just burn to hell and get modules incapped every 2 seconds ...

Battleships:

Played them the most. I would wish for better accuracy of their secondary batteries, if a skipper decides to skill his captain in this branch. Even with all mods, flags and skills for manuall control, only every 3rd shell hits. And only HE. If a DD manages to get 4-5km to you, and then heads towards you frontally, you have only one salvo of your primaries until he is in point blank shoot range for his torps. You will be sunk. If you decide to skill your captain in this regard and therefore don't improve his AA for example, you should have a decent defense against really close range attackers. If CA's would get nerfed like stated above, i think BBs would be fine.

Carriers:

They deal the most damage in every game, so they can't be to weak. Granted. Still, i would tweak a little.

1) BB's should be the main prey for CV's. In that regard, i find US AA on BB way to strong. If they sail together with CA's, you really don't stand much chances of scoring nice hits. US BB AA should be nerfed.

2) MM. Like in reality, carriers are unmatched at sea warefare. Hence, there are only allowed 2 CV's per side. Good! What i don't like is, that these figures are even in any match. 1vs1, 2vs2. Why? If you play your Range with a pure bomber setup, and you get caught in a match with 4 CV's, you can just go afk. Imho there should be the possibilty to find matches without enemy CV, or with 2 vs 1.

3) I would nerf some CV's in terms of speed.

 

discuss

[Sub_Eleven]

Wait, you want to NERF cruisers and BUFF battleships? Wow, just wow.

[robihr]

cause he plays mostly BB

[cro_pwr]

Wait, you want to NERF cruisers and BUFF battleships? Wow, just wow.

 

tnx for TL;DR version, now i don't have to loose my time to read that wall

[superdashi]

Wait, you want to NERF cruisers and BUFF battleships? Wow, just wow.

 

That's right! And to make things worse for you, i have argmuments. You don't ;)

[Sub_Eleven]

 

That's right! And to make things worse for you, i have argmuments. ignorance You don't ;)

 

 

Fixed it for you.

[Kann_Nix_Extreme]

Can people please stop spreading this BS spam post across the forums? It's f*cking annoying!

[cro_pwr]

 

That's right! And to make things worse for you, i have argmuments. You don't ;)

 

what arguments do you seriously want?

It was discussed 100 times allready, and everyone with any knowledge and common sense about this game agrees that currently BBs are OP / CAs are UP.

yet here we have a special snowflake that wants to further buff BBs and nerf CAs, and he has ARGUMENTS!

[Joergensen]

Agree, i did like to use CV,DD and BB and had cruisers as a non important ship on the list i enjoys using. Totally agree that BBs are to weak at current state BUT, the majority of BB players suck donkey balls and stay at max range and there aint much u can do if u try get to medium range and ur team of cruisers dont support you. So if u want nice damage you have to stay at max range.

Parially because cruisers will rip a BB apart from their max range or worse at close range... I cant say CV/CL  are directly OP but they tends to be too powerfull against battle ships, and to few cruiser players actually try get the other cruisers and destroyers.

Today the CVs are nerfed (or AA buffed) to such a degree that only the real fans of CVs still use em at tier 5+, that results in very good players in CVs hwo know how to pick their targets. The only thing they should fix is the US carrier strike load out, its not real that u do 50% to 60% more average damage in a air superiority carrier when used as a strike carrier, as the pure strike carrier the IJN line. Also this is bad for the team, because u might have a goon in a strike fitted US carrier, but as long as he cant defend hes team agains say a IJN carrier the IJN will in 99% of the cases gets lot more damage, just because he has fighters to harass the US CV with. In my opinion it should not be allowed to choose a pure strike setup outside a division.

 

Destroyers are nicly ballanced as you says

 

Battle ships are a bit to weak against cruisers.

[Exocet6951]

 

That's right! And to make things worse for you, i have argmuments. You don't ;)

 

*looks at stats, sees his 45-50% WR on average with his BB*

 

Yeah, brilliant arguments like "a cruiser can just use his torps at close range" really makes your point that BBs are underpowered completely valid. Because using torpedoes very agressively is totally a valid option with the IJN butt launchers, and the mighty German 6km torpedoes. That alone should warrant BBs having secondaries that melt DDs and CAs alike.

 

Also, if you decrease the fire chance on BBs, you might as well just remove cruisers from the game.

You thought 3-4 DDs per battle was bad? Wait until you see 2 CVs and 5 DDs per match on average, waiting to pick apart your floating e-peen extension.

 

 

Lastly, if you truly think that the only thing BBs can bring to the fight against CAs is health, you are truly a lost cause.

[loppantorkel]

The ship lines seem fairly balanced atm to me. Maybe the Russian ships need a slight nerf and perhaps a few Japanese ships a slight boost. A few US cruisers are perhaps on the weak side too.

[robihr]

 

what arguments do you seriously want?

It was discussed 100 times allready, and everyone with any knowledge and common sense about this game agrees that currently BBs are OP / CAs are UP.

yet here we have a special snowflake that wants to further buff BBs and nerf CAs, and he has ARGUMENTS!

 

list of WOWS updates:

DD nerf - done

CV nerf - done

CA nerf - pending

DD nerf - pending

CV nerf - pending

CA nerf - pending

DD nerf - pending

CV nerf - pending

CA nerf - pending

DD nerf - pending

CV nerf - pending

[cro_pwr]

 

list of WOWS updates:

DD nerf - done

CV nerf - done

CA nerf - pending

DD nerf - pending

CV nerf - pending

CA nerf - pending

DD nerf - pending

CV nerf - pending

CA nerf - pending

DD nerf - pending

CV nerf - pending

 

You Forgot

BB buff - done

BB buff - pending

[DJ_Die]

Agree, i did like to use CV,DD and BB and had cruisers as a non important ship on the list i enjoys using. Totally agree that BBs are to weak at current state BUT, the majority of BB players suck donkey balls and stay at max range and there aint much u can do if u try get to medium range and ur team of cruisers dont support you. So if u want nice damage you have to stay at max range.

Parially because cruisers will rip a BB apart from their max range or worse at close range... I cant say CV/CL  are directly OP but they tends to be too powerfull against battle ships, and to few cruiser players actually try get the other cruisers and destroyers.

Today the CVs are nerfed (or AA buffed) to such a degree that only the real fans of CVs still use em at tier 5+, that results in very good players in CVs hwo know how to pick their targets. The only thing they should fix is the US carrier strike load out, its not real that u do 50% to 60% more average damage in a air superiority carrier when used as a strike carrier, as the pure strike carrier the IJN line. Also this is bad for the team, because u might have a goon in a strike fitted US carrier, but as long as he cant defend hes team agains say a IJN carrier the IJN will in 99% of the cases gets lot more damage, just because he has fighters to harass the US CV with. In my opinion it should not be allowed to choose a pure strike setup outside a division.

 

Destroyers are nicly ballanced as you says

 

Battle ships are a bit to weak against cruisers.

 

You dont even have any high tier cruisers...You have 2 T6 cruisers and thats it...and you have pretty bad stats in most of your cruisers too... So how can you claim cruisers are too good against battleships? High tier cruisers are simply in a bad spot in the current meta because they are too squishy while at the same too sluggish to evade shells most of the time... Thats why the most successful cruisers are the ones that can invisi-fire thus getting around this by simply not being shot at at all....

[superdashi]

 

 

Fixed it for you.

No Sir, you didn't. Google "discussion" or "having an argument"

[Exocet6951]

No Sir, you didn't. Google "discussion" or "having an argument"

 

As for you:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=legs+to+stand+on

 

 

[superdashi]

 

what arguments do you seriously want?

It was discussed 100 times allready, and everyone with any knowledge and common sense about this game agrees that currently BBs are OP / CAs are UP.

yet here we have a special snowflake that wants to further buff BBs and nerf CAs, and he has ARGUMENTS!

 

Well well dear Captain,

 

stating that EVERYONE will agree to your point of view is hardly an argument (at least without sources). Having that said, even if mother and her dog would think it is ok wouldn't be a viable argument in any form.

 

PS: Yes, i am a very very special snowflake and pretty proud of it. Cause stock vanilla snowflakes like yourself, who only pick on a single point which gives even the slightest contact surface, in any thread and in any posting with the solo purpose of making the proposition look totaly stupid and yourself so cool and clever, are found in any forum in any thread. So yes, i'm special. You are not.

[superdashi]

 

*looks at stats, sees his 45-50% WR on average with his BB*

 

Yeah, brilliant arguments like "a cruiser can just use his torps at close range" really makes your point that BBs are underpowered completely valid. Because using torpedoes very agressively is totally a valid option with the IJN butt launchers, and the mighty German 6km torpedoes. That alone should warrant BBs having secondaries that melt DDs and CAs alike.

 

Also, if you decrease the fire chance on BBs, you might as well just remove cruisers from the game.

You thought 3-4 DDs per battle was bad? Wait until you see 2 CVs and 5 DDs per match on average, waiting to pick apart your floating e-peen extension.

 

 

Lastly, if you truly think that the only thing BBs can bring to the fight against CAs is health, you are truly a lost cause.

 

And here we go again with the stats and picking out a single argument, distorting it in the process.

 

Dear Captain Sir,

 

i have stated my stats in my opening. I have also written that i haven't played much dd and CV, and suck @ CA. Right? Nothing new here. Also dear Sir Captain, i haven't said BB's should generally get buffed. I also didn't say, CAs should only attack close range. And i also did not say, secondary bat should get THAT strong that it alphas dds in range, did i? Read comprehensive or get out of my awesome™ fred!

[loppantorkel]

I think I agree on the cv speed nerf. It should be possible to catch a running cv in a dd. High tier cvs can be pretty fast...

[cro_pwr]

Ahoy skippers,

 

well, i haven't played all classes equally, but i have nearly 3000 matches and i want to discuss some of my experiences with you. First of

 

Destroyers:

 

I have only played 14% of my matches with dd's and basically only JPN up to Kagero (the rest is tier5), but actually i think they are just fine. When i fail with them, i know it's my fault and failure. JPN DD's aren't matched vs the other nations in terms of close range cap fights cause of the guns/rate of fire, so i learned to better stay out of there. DD's are pretty strong vs. BB, mediocre vs. CV ( nope, they are not mediocre vs CV, CV are their hardest counter that can perma spot them and ruin whole game for them)and weak vs CA. The only change i would advice, to make them stronger against CV's, repsectively make CV's more prone to them. CV's can make a dd's captains life pretty messy by spotting. A concentrated attack by 4 squadrons of bombers or spotting in a cap zone so CA's can fire upon you can absolutely be devastating. But that's ok. What i would change here is the speed of CV's. A couple of battle ago, i managed to find my way with Kagero to a solo Taiho. She detected me at 13 km range and naturaly threw everything against me. Avoiding torp and dive bombers, i never managed to get close enough for my guns. Given the fact that she was running straight away, my torps of course didn't hit her once. I just died after 3 combined bomber raids. Taiho has really short reload times for her squads ...

 

Cruisers:

 

They are the jack of all trades. I haven't played them much, and i must say that i don't play them very well i guess. Still, when facing them with a battleship, they are quite nasty. Way to nasty if you ask me. Cruisers are manouverable and mostly with decent AA, making them pretty well suited agains air raids. They are the arch enemy of dd's. So their weakness should imho be against BB, (and they are weak against BBs, or do you actually think getting half of your hp removed with every BB salvo is not a weakness) as BB usually don't blaze vs. dd's or cv's, right?

 

But think of it. A cruiser has more speed and manouverability. (duh)  He can better dodge shells and dictate fighting range.(no, he cannot dictate fighting range, he has to come into 14km radius to even get a shot at BB, while BB can use his range to his advantage and delete a cruiser from 20km away) His high rate of fire compared to the bigger target a BB is makes it way more easier to find it's mark, while a BB can only shoot every ~30 secs. (cruiser is hitting BB every 15 sec for 1k damage, while BB is hitting cruiser every 30 sec for 10k dmg. yup, cruiser has an advantage here lol)At a smaller target, with better excelleration and manoverability. Sure, you can land a cita and devestate that cruiser. But it's much RNG if the cruiser captain is not going a straight line givin you full broadside.(you dont need a broadside to score 10k salvo against cruiser) Even if the CA doesn't constantly set you ablaze from ranges about 15 - 17 km, dodging your shells which he can pretty much predigt if he knows your slow reload times nagging your HP pool off, when he gets close he also has his Torps. (if you allowed cruiser to get 3km away from you to torp you, then by all means you should die, its your fault)The only thing the BB can imho bring up against a CA is his HP pool.(LOL. simply LOL. you forgot biggest, hardest hitting guns, best armor in the game that will bounce off 80% of things cruiser can throw at you, etc) That's ridiculous! I would first try to reduce the chance of fire on their HE shells tbh.  (because thats the only way a cruiser can fight BB, so lets remove that option, why not) A Mogami or Hipper can easlily make 4000-8000 damage with a well aimed AP salvo. But at least i can try to angle my BB vs. such. Against HE, i just burn to hell and get modules incapped every 2 seconds ... (use repair, use heal, and you are fine. and what modules are you talking about??? you aren't freaking DD that is loosing engine every time cruiser hits you...)

 

Battleships:

 

Played them the most. I would wish for better accuracy of their secondary batteries, if a skipper decides to skill his captain in this branch. Even with all mods, flags and skills for manuall control, only every 3rd shell hits. And only HE. If a DD manages to get 4-5km to you,(you failed) and then heads towards you frontally, you have only one salvo of your primaries (which is in 90% of cases enough to delete that DD) until he is in point blank shoot range for his torps. You will be sunk.(not if you play it right, and even if you do get sunk, well played by a DD that spent his last 10 mins getting into position to torp you) If you decide to skill your captain in this regard and therefore don't improve his AA for example, you should have a decent defense against really close range attackers.(you allready do) If CA's would get nerfed like stated above, i think BBs would be fine. (nope, they would be even more OP then they are atm)

 

Carriers:

 

They deal the most damage in every game, so they can't be to weak. Granted. Still, i would tweak a little.

1) BB's should be the main prey for CV's. In that regard, i find US AA on BB way to strong. If they sail together with CA's, you really don't stand much chances of scoring nice hits. US BB AA should be nerfed.

2) MM. Like in reality, carriers are unmatched at sea warefare. Hence, there are only allowed 2 CV's per side. Good! What i don't like is, that these figures are even in any match. 1vs1, 2vs2. Why? If you play your Range with a pure bomber setup, and you get caught in a match with 4 CV's, you can just go afk. (nope, played a lot of strike ranger in 2v2 cv matchups, and some of my best matches were in such a case. even had a match where i sniped both of them) Imho there should be the possibilty to find matches without enemy CV, or with 2 vs 1. (allready was, people saw that its bad for the game balance and they removed it. you are crying about 2v2 cv matches but would like to get into 1v2 match? much logic, such wow)

3) I would nerf some CV's in terms of speed.

 

discuss

 

 

 

No Sir, you didn't. Google "discussion" or "having an argument"

 

Ok, you want to have an argument. lets have one.

(had too much free time)

and i allready know how this "argument" will end, but lets have a go

 

 

 

 

 

[Vogel]

 

. I also didn't say, CAs should only attack close range. And i also did not say, secondary bat should get THAT strong that it alphas dds in range, did i? 

That is a death warrant of CAs. At close ranges, BBs can not miss with most of their shells, and then your survival only depends on how good the BB player is.

[aboomination]

At close ranges, BBs can not miss with most of their shells

 

Yes we can 

[DJ_Die]

 

And here we go again with the stats and picking out a single argument, distorting it in the process.

 

Dear Captain Sir,

 

i have stated my stats in my opening. I have also written that i haven't played much dd and CV, and suck @ CA. Right? Nothing new here. Also dear Sir Captain, i haven't said BB's should generally get buffed. I also didn't say, CAs should only attack close range. And i also did not say, secondary bat should get THAT strong that it alphas dds in range, did i? Read comprehensive or get out of my awesome™ fred!

 

So if you dont play CAs all that much why do you want to claim you know how strong they are? Because, let's face it, your stats in cruisers are much worse than in BBs having lower survival rate and much worse average damage per battle.. In fact its the same for most cruisers in the game because they are too fragile when shot at by BBs

[Exocet6951]

 

And here we go again with the stats and picking out a single argument, distorting it in the process.

 

 

Stats are important in determining how you view your most played class.

 

If you have below average stats in a class and don't take a few steps back to admit that maybe you're not great, asking for buffs is narrow-minded.

Which is exactly what's happening with you.

 

 

As for a single argument, I used 2.

 

FIrst of all, I destroyed your argument that cruisers "can just use torpedoes", because as it stands, only 2 lines of CAs can use torpedoes. Both of which can only do so in specific situations. IJN cruisers use them defensively, and KM cruisers have so little range that it's mostly a last-hope-ambush and DD deterrent.

 

Fire chance? Remove that, and BBs would only be weak to other BBs. Amazing balance, a class that counters itself, and it resistant to everything else.

 

AP on BBs? Only works if they're perfectly broadside, with guns that have good AP shells. In short, USN and KM ships. But oh look, Ap shells were nerfed not too long ago! A bit of angling, and Ap shells become worthless.

 

 

So no, your arguments are bad, and considering your stats with BBs and complete lack of high tier CAs, you don't have any legs to stand on. Especially since you consider that all BBs have over cruisers is HP.

[Msiiek]

My highest cruiser is Atago. I have both t10 bbs. I don't have experience in high tier dds. Have t10 CV.

I do feel t10 bbs are really strong but they don't face weak ships. t10 cruisers aren't weak. Zao can set you on fire every salvo without you spoting him. You can only run then (wait, bb is running from cruiser?). Des Moines have higher rof and also had the ability to stealth fire (not as good as Zao due to shells arcs, i dont know if he can stealth shoot now). Time when i can citadel cruisers with my bbs is if they are not turning. If the cruisers is aware, he will dodge your shells. Sometimes the cruiser will get citadeled by random shell that got such bad dispersion it hit the target and sometimes the cruiser is sailing broadside 10km and you will do only overpens and 0 citadels. Dont forget the cruisers are more agile and have easier time with torps than bbs. They also have no skill remove planes option that bbs don't have. They have strenghts and weakness but they arent weak. Remember that cruisers werent make to be able to take hits from bbs and its actually possible to dodge bb shells.

 (no, he cannot dictate fighting range, he has to come into 14km radius to even get a shot at BB, while BB can use his range to his advantage and delete a cruiser from 20km away)

He can, you are the one with lower spoting range and faster speed. Also if you get hit from 20 km (which you wont get deleted most of the time from that distance becouse dispersion) you deserve to be punished. You had 15 seconds at least to make your turn and avoid the shells. Cruisers are not meant to take hits from bbs!

 

But back to lower tiers. BBs are much more potent at lower tier becouse they dont have rudder shift of 23 seconds and aren't 280m in lenght. They also don't get set on fire as much becouse cruisers fire chances are much lower. Cruisers don't have the repair ability there and have armor as weak that can't bounce bbs shells if angled and will take massive damage. Yes cruisers are weak, but in every tier. But still, you can dodge bb shells, and it's really hard to hit good a cruiser that uses WASD hax and don't make your job easy by sailing in straight line. Everyone tells the bbs, don't sail in a straight line. I tell you that this rule applies to everyone if you want to live longer.

 

On the US AA. I wouldn't nerf it. I would buff planes hitpoints at tiers 6-8. US CVs setups are stupid, and why the hell Hiryu have tier 6 torpedo bombers? They melt from everything in seconds. Tier 9-10 planes are somewhat ok becouse they can have hp upgrade and will not melt fast vs single ships (if they aren't cruisers with much skill involved aa ability).

 

DDs seems fine.

 

Also don't tell the whole game it's only been nerfs to every class and buffs to bbs. Cruisers got ability to heal 33% damage from citadels from 10%. DDs where once buffed with the torps and their detection. Some cruisers got radar. BBs had a nerf that increased their rudder shifts significantly. Only CVs are nerfed and nerfed and nerfed. One good thing that happend for them is defensive fire tier8+.