Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

[Boris_MNE]

Just now, Nechrom said:

The same reason why the two worst performing tier 10 DDs are also the two most played by a substantial margin.

 

People play ships for other reasons than their performance.

 

Apologies but so many stat farmers over here... among 30k regulary active players i would expect at least 1% to abuse OP class.

[Nechrom]

1 minute ago, Boris_MNE said:

Apologies but so many stat farmers over here... among 30k regulary active players i would expect at least 1% to abuse OP class.

And "stat farmers" are a tiny drop in the ocean of "for fun" players. If their numbers would suddenly double, you wouldn't even notice.

Not to mention the much larger number of "stat farmers" who would rather gouge their eyes out than play CV.

It has never been a popular class and the numbers have steadily declined from pre-nerf Midway days until now. It didn't help that the interface just got more and more awkward and buggy as time went on.

[Boris_MNE]

16 minutes ago, Nechrom said:

And "stat farmers" are a tiny drop in the ocean of "for fun" players. If their numbers would suddenly double, you wouldn't even notice.

Not to mention the much larger number of "stat farmers" who would rather gouge their eyes out than play CV.

It has never been a popular class and the numbers have steadily declined from pre-nerf Midway days until now. It didn't help that the interface just got more and more awkward and buggy as time went on.

 

I just think its not so bright as people point out for carriers, but hey thats just me :)

[LilJumpa]

I love the modes and want to bring the topic back up :)

 

https://sketchfab.com/max_romash/models

[44smok]

Uchu senkan grober kurwurst? Isn't that sooo 2014?

[eliastion]

New GZ A.K.A "I can't cross-drop if my life depended on it but WG wanted to let me kill DDs too, so I get 15 dive bombers that drop in circular pattern so their damage can't be mitigated by maneuvering".

I don't know how powerful this thing is against DDs (depends on drop accuracy and damage) but I can see how FUN it's going to be facing this CV with literally nothing to do to mitigate the damage when caught out of smoke - no matter how you might try to maneuver, the only thing that matters is the RNG...

Well. I guess that's one way to mitigate the gap between good and bad CV players: make one with drop you can do against as much as against a well-executed Taiho manual cross-drop. Although - as stated  - I don't know how much damage these bombers would actually be doing to your average DD, so the CV might be braindead and OP or braindead and weak, hard to say without playing it (or at least seeing some replays).

[Aotearas]

33 minutes ago, Verdius said:

 

 

Translation:

We didn't really test the new ballistics very well and it turns out that people showing broadside got wrecked. That was a bug and we're going to have it fixed ASAP. We did notice that many people actually liked the results brought about by the bug as it allowed punishing poor play, we're going to remove it anyway. We are totally, absolutely, pinky-swear going to continue improving the ship damage model and the tweaks are going to be as extensively tested and mindfully implemented as the last time.

 

Translation of the translation:

Can't have you punish poor play. But we're totally going to keep improving the damage model ... as long as it doesn't punish potatoes like that recent bug.

[Klimons]

30 minutes ago, eliastion said:

New GZ A.K.A "I can't cross-drop if my life depended on it but WG wanted to let me kill DDs too, so I get 15 dive bombers that drop in circular pattern so their damage can't be mitigated by maneuvering".

I don't know how powerful this thing is against DDs (depends on drop accuracy and damage) but I can see how FUN it's going to be facing this CV with literally nothing to do to mitigate the damage when caught out of smoke - no matter how you might try to maneuver, the only thing that matters is the RNG...

Well. I guess that's one way to mitigate the gap between good and bad CV players: make one with drop you can do against as much as against a well-executed Taiho manual cross-drop. Although - as stated  - I don't know how much damage these bombers would actually be doing to your average DD, so the CV might be braindead and OP or braindead and weak, hard to say without playing it (or at least seeing some replays).

Check Farazelleths recent GZ YouTube videos and You will see how idiotic it is ...

Edit: DDs are wrecked by broken BB AP for over a year, but when braindead broadside BBs get citadeled WG comes with a solution within days

[AkosJaccik]

17 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

 

 

Translation:

We didn't really test the new ballistics very well and it turns out that people showing broadside got wrecked. That was a bug and we're going to have it fixed ASAP. We did notice that many people actually liked the results brought about by the bug as it allowed punishing poor play, we're going to remove it anyway. We are totally, absolutely, pinky-swear going to continue improving the ship damage model and the tweaks are going to be as extensively tested and mindfully implemented as the last time.

 

Translation of the translation:

Can't have you punish poor play. But we're totally going to keep improving the damage model ... as long as it doesn't punish potatoes like that recent bug.

I laughed a good bit at the statement. It almost sounded something like...

 

"We did try to implement a meaningful penetration mechanic - but we did not expect it to actually work! So sorry, guys!"

[HystericalAccuracy]

13 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

people showing broadside got wrecked.  (...)  We did notice that many people actually liked the results (...) as it allowed punishing poor play, we're going to remove it anyway.

This is a very good of translation what the statement actually means.

 

I am one of those who like the current "nerfed" version of the Missouri. I advocated to raise its cita to pre-nerf Iowa level right after the buff was announced and still do. I was aware of the fact that WG can not/will not do it (because nerfing a premium ship - nope).

 

I had the hope that the recent "softening" of the armor belt was some sort of unofficial nerf, but no...  No weakspots on battleships allowed.

[Verdius]

4 hours ago, Aotearas said:

Translation of the translation:

But we're totally going to keep improving the damage model 

 

I read that as "we will soon lower the citadels on all BBs to be below the waterline" because people complain that Yamato is one of the only T10s with a highly exposed citadel.

[Boris_MNE]

And what is real translation, because 5 ppl of you just misunderstood:

 

We are sick of battleships, we gave them everything and they are not even able to push properly. Prepare for broadside nerfs babies - Sub_Octavian 2k18

 

I think guy just got sick of bbs.

[Darth_Glorious]

Those changes to ballistic model were intended to help DDs to eat less normal pens due to underwater hits. The effects on other classes are their secondary effects.

[Verdius]

1 hour ago, Boris_MNE said:

And what is real translation, because 5 ppl of you just misunderstood:

 

We are sick of battleships, we gave them everything and they are not even able to push properly. Prepare for broadside nerfs babies - Sub_Octavian 2k18

 

I think guy just got sick of bbs.

 

I really hope so. If BBs have to actually learn to play the game or face deletion maybe they will *gasp* have the incentive to *LOUDER GASP* improve their gameplay.

[Aragathor]

The new stats for the test USN cruisers make me wonder whether WG sees the problems the ships are having...

 

At T7 the gun reload of 13s will make the New Orleans very comfortable to play, in fact it will straight up overshadow the Indianapolis which has a 14.3s reload and only radar to compensate.

At T8 the 13s reload is a nerf to the current reload of 12s. New Orleans has currently the worst avg. damage at tier, so the new Baltimore will be even worse with the new longer reload.

At T9 a 13s reload is a joke, unless the old 10s reload is available as a gun upgrade. Otherwise MBM3 will be the only sane slot 6 pick.

The T8 Cleveland guns keep their range of only 14,6. I see some suicide bote memes incoming. Giving the ship a spotter plane won't change much.

 

[Nechrom]

16 minutes ago, Aragathor said:

At T9 a 13s reload is a joke, unless the old 10s reload is available as a gun upgrade. Otherwise MBM3 will be the only sane slot 6 pick.

It has 3 more guns though. With higher alpha you should sacrifice some DPM.

Still has better RPM than Zao, so...

 

19 minutes ago, Aragathor said:

The T8 Cleveland guns keep their range of only 14,6. I see some suicide bote memes incoming. Giving the ship a spotter plane won't change much.

With that visibility I don't see an issue.

It's looking to be a monster anyway.

[HystericalAccuracy]

2 hours ago, Aragathor said:

At T8 the 13s reload is a nerf to the current reload

Is that the reload time of the stock ship or already maxed out? I remeber weeks ago there was a confusion because WG released only the stock stats of the new/reclasified cruisers.

 

 

Edit: ok, now i found the info:

Baltimore (Tier VIII)

Armored extremities reduced to 25 mm.

Main gun reload time reduced from 15 seconds to 13 seconds; in-tech-tree main gun upgrade was removed.

 

Sorry for bothering 

[fumtu]

2 hours ago, Aragathor said:

At T8 the 13s reload is a nerf to the current reload of 12s. New Orleans has currently the worst avg. damage at tier, so the new Baltimore will be even worse with the new longer reload.

 

But it keeps SHS so it would have better broadside than NO. Maybe they could left 27mm armour, if it doesn't have some particularly strong DPM and no torps it could at least be tankier than the rest of T8 CAs.

 

2 hours ago, Aragathor said:

The T8 Cleveland guns keep their range of only 14,6. I see some suicide bote memes incoming. Giving the ship a spotter plane won't change much.

 

Well it trade range for good concealment, RoF and turret rotation buff, and also additional consumable so I think it is fair. Yes open maps like Ocean and Okinawa will be a problem but any other map with some cover should be just fine and it could be a great DD support/hunter ship. At least nobody (I hope) will snipe from far behind with it.

[Aotearas]

9 hours ago, Verdius said:

 

I read that as "we will soon lower the citadels on all BBs to be below the waterline" because people complain that Yamato is one of the only T10s with a highly exposed citadel.

I didn't want to insert my own opinion but yeah, that's the gist of how I feel too. The only damage model they're going to improve is in favour for potatoes and battleships (because that's the class most popular with potatoes).

 

9 hours ago, Boris_MNE said:

And what is real translation, because 5 ppl of you just misunderstood:

 

We are sick of battleships, we gave them everything and they are not even able to push properly. Prepare for broadside nerfs babies - Sub_Octavian 2k18

 

I think guy just got sick of bbs.

 

 

Yeah, that's why they're instantly removing the issue of BBs taking too much broadside damage ... did we read the same announcement?

[Panocek]

1 hour ago, fumtu said:

 

But it keeps SHS so it would have better broadside than NO. Maybe they could left 27mm armour, if it doesn't have some particularly strong DPM and no torps it could at least be tankier than the rest of T8 CAs.

 

 

Well it trade range for good concealment, RoF and turret rotation buff, and also additional consumable so I think it is fair. Yes open maps like Ocean and Okinawa will be a problem but any other map with some cover should be just fine and it could be a great DD support/hunter ship. At least nobody (I hope) will snipe from far behind with it.

Cleve might be workable, though only 1s reload advantage over other CLs for worse ballistics, range and lack of torps. Turret traverse is noice, but other CLs with exception of Mogami have already solid traverse

[Aragathor]

3 hours ago, Nechrom said:

It has 3 more guns though. With higher alpha you should sacrifice some DPM.

Still has better RPM than Zao, so...

 

You're right, I forgot that the new T9 has one extra turret. This makes my point for it invalid, since the ship gets compensated in a way.

 

1 hour ago, fumtu said:

Well it trade range for good concealment, RoF and turret rotation buff, and also additional consumable so I think it is fair.

RoF is only 1s better than it has right now. And I don't think the extra consumable and a better turret rotation are going to compensate for the fact that it has to get really close to fight. Which brings me to the better concealment, it's nice but it only works until you open fire. So unless you camp islands you'll be playing short games in the new Cleve. And let's not forget those rare T10 games the ship will be seeing...

In comparison the Mogami has 3x3 guns up front, so it can angle and fire away without showing side, the Edinburgh has smoke to hide in, the Chapayev has range.

[Aotearas]

21 minutes ago, Panocek said:

Cleve might be workable, though only 1s reload advantage over other CLs for worse ballistics, range and lack of torps. Turret traverse is noice, but other CLs with exception of Mogami have already solid traverse

Let's also not forget that the new Cleveland will have absurdly good concealment.

 

With 11,88km surface detectability, a full stealth build can get her surface detactability down to 8,91km which is tied for the best cruiser concealment with the Minotaur if I'm not mistaken.

Plus if the CLs get the same radar as the CAs, at tier VIII the Cleveland will get a 8,95km radar range, meaning as soon as she gets spotted by a DD, she can counter radar.

And with a DD providing smoke and spotting the Cleveland should be absolutely disgusting with a 5,64km smoke firing detectability.

 

She also gets a free spotter plane in its own slot, so at least as far as bombarding BBs goes, her range should be sufficient. Not going to be of much use shooting other cruisers, let alone DDs at the extended range though.

[Boris_MNE]

43 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

I didn't want to insert my own opinion but yeah, that's the gist of how I feel too. The only damage model they're going to improve is in favour for potatoes and battleships (because that's the class most popular with potatoes).

 

 

 

Yeah, that's why they're instantly removing the issue of BBs taking too much broadside damage ... did we read the same announcement?

 

 

There is difference between:  Being able to citadel some ship without knowing why, and editing files so they know how they did it. It is also closely connected to all future updates because they must know what changed with their patch.

[Aotearas]

Just now, Boris_MNE said:

 

 

There is difference between:  Being able to citadel some ship without knowing why, and editing files so they know how they did it. It is also closely connected to all future updates because they must know what changed with their patch.

 

Assuming they're going to reintroduce the broadside vulnerability is just as much speculation as everyone else's.

 

Fact is they said there's an issue. Fact also is they now understand the issue (they have to in order to remove it). If simply understanding how the citadels came to be was the important part, then they've achieved that already. But they're removing it still.

 

The rest was marketing talk, the usual "we hear you" yadda yadda.

[Boris_MNE]

Just now, Aotearas said:

 

Assuming they're going to reintroduce the broadside vulnerability is just as much speculation as everyone else's.

 

Fact is they said there's an issue. Fact also is they now understand the issue (they have to in order to remove it). If simply understanding how the citadels came to be was the important part, then they've achieved that already. But they're removing it still.

 

The rest was marketing talk, the usual "we hear you" yadda yadda.

 

 

SO reddit: " We considered it even before, still working on it, and we partly like the effect too, but it should be controllable and tweakable feature, not some magic random bug :) "

 

 

idk i trust him, he was frustrated with bbs on russian forum too...

 

 

right @Sub_Octavian? :D