Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

[fumtu]

7 minutes ago, Yedwy said:

Agreed, got Black yesterday and its really nice to play (ok i always liked us dds and esp fletchers) and it sort of is worth the 14k steel i shelled out for it but 19k steel for what is basically t9 ogneivoy???

I mean ok it has slighty better guns and torps and that heal (if its still a thing) but grozovoi it aint and never will be and any Fletcher or Jutland should rip him to pieces in a knifefight with better reload and a gun (or two) more to boot heal or no heal

 

Heal is still a thing and sure Neustra can't out DPM Fletcher or Jutland (full health case) in one engagement it could do that by playing smart. With premium consumable and SI you can have three heals and if you use flag for 20% more heal you can get back a 36% per heal or 7k to 8l HP per heal. For three consumables that is, theoretically, 21k to 24k of HP back, basically one complete DD. Watched Flamu playing it and be able to suffer up to 40k of damage and sometimes still survive. You can't do that in any other DD. Was it worth 19k of Steel. Well that is up to you.

 

 

[Yedwy]

I understand what you are saying m8 and if that was a coal or gold ship I d say no problemo, but steel is still a rather rare resource and I for one am just not convinced its worthwile, Black has smoke & radar combo and even with radar cruiser inflation of late that still is a unique thing (apart from belfast the only such combo in game in fact) that can be exploited, meanwhile smoke & heal isnt really an exotic thing, IIRC both ogneivoy and udaloi shoud have smoke and heal now? additionally jutland, daring and kidd have it as well

[fumtu]

Well personally I was surprised when WG announced that they are intending to "sell" Neustra for Steel. I don't know why they did that but they did. Neustra is not a bad ship but is it worth 19k of Steel, assuming that would be a price? That depend on particular player. To me it isn't not because of the ship but because the fact that amount of Steel I could collect and have is quite limited so, naturally, I would like to get for it something that has more value for me. I would like to have Neustra but it definitely won't be my first pick for ship to spend a Steel on it.  

[NothingButTheRain]

23 hours ago, mariouus said:

In player vs player battle it is non-sense. It is not diversity. It is just platantly unfair for players playing other ships.

It's balanced, so it's fair. Or one would assume it to be fair. But is it fair for a BB to have to face a DD? Or a DD having to face a radar CC? Or a carrier? What is fair?

In single 1 on 1 engagements, this game could be described as inherently unfair, even when playing ships 1 on 1 of the same class. How can a Shima outgun a Haru? What about Wooster vs a DM or Salem? How is that fair?

[NothingButTheRain]

On 4/14/2019 at 7:57 AM, fumtu said:

 

 

^^. Not to mention that Conq is also getting a sigma buff for 419mm guns, from 1.8 to 1.9. and that its citadel's upper deck armor is increased from 12 mm to 32 mm.

The sigma buff I knew about as it had been mentioned a couple times, but I was unaware of the citadel upper deck armor also getting a buff. Where is this information to be found?

 

But anyway, the buffed heal doesn't affect citadel damage, so even a single stray hit to your citadel will mean the nerf hit you literally and proverbial.

 

In the end, these "buffs" are nothing except to compensate for the nerfs it's receiving. Not because WG thinks this ship needs the buffs as it is now. If the citadel wouldn't have gotten raised, Conqueror would also have not received either of the buffs mentioned by you. Save to say these buffs are because of the nerfs. So these were nerfs, right?

 

I'm starting to feel like I have to keep repeating myself over and over again. Kinda getting tired of this 

[fumtu]

2 minutes ago, NothingButTheRain said:

The sigma buff I knew about as it had been mentioned a couple times, but I was unaware of the citadel upper deck armor also getting a buff. Where is this information to be found?

 

On 4/10/2019 at 2:00 PM, Sehales said:

British battleship Conqueror_T, tier X:

 

• The restoration of the casemate (non-citadel) damage by Repair party increased from 75% to 85%;
• Sigma value increased from 1.8 to 1.9 for 419-mm guns;
• Citadel's upper deck armor increased from 12 mm to 32 mm.

 

British battleship Monarch_T, tier VIII:

• The restoration of the casemate (non-citadel) damage by Repair party increased from 75% to 85%;
• Citadel's upper deck armor increased from 12 mm to 32 mm.

 

Changes to Monarch_T and Conqueror_T were to rebalance, not to weaken them. But as a result, these ships lost some of their combat efficiency. To compensate for this, both battleships will get improvements for several parameters. Please, pay attention that these are test changes and they don't apply to the basic ships. If testing shows that such balancing is efficient, it may later be applied to the basic versions of the ships.

 

Whole post is here

 

 

[NothingButTheRain]

On 4/14/2019 at 5:32 AM, Aotearas said:

And as I've told you numerous times before in either this thread or another: that rare occasion of you getting a freak citadel despite doing everything right will be more than compensated for by the fact the heal gets considerably more powerful and your ability to use the more powerful heal with much greater quantity than you'd ever catch an unlucky citadel if you simply angle correctly.

 

So who the f*ck cares if you may once in a blue moon catch a citadel if on average you just run around with considerably higher effective HP thanks to the heal buff.

Well, in that case I have given you your answer multiple times as well, haven't I?

It's not just the freak citadels, you are leaving out at least 2 other scenarios (and possibly torps may also affect Conqueror more now as well).

Quote

You're so hung up on the technicality of the term "nerf" that you ignore the purpose and functionality behind it completely simply because it exists. If you're that adamant about no one nerfing your precious toys you can just drop the pretenses of your already hilariously uncontextual argumentation.

Is it so bad to simply not want to jump onto the bandwagon because I don't want to accept something which clearly is a nerf as not being a nerf? Sorry, but I'm not buying dung like that. Now that would be something if I had to start accepting clear untrue facts as true facts. I might as well start believing in that pastagod if it would really come to this.

 

Of course noone wants their favorite ships nerfed, but in your case here, you are assuming this is one of my favorite toys based on...what exactly? Because I'm (in your eyes) simply defending my toy? Is that what you think?

 

To me that is not funny, but just another disappointment. Oh well.

[NothingButTheRain]

On 4/14/2019 at 4:10 AM, Cagliostro_chan said:

Likening it to something that purely is up to chance is however a flawed comparison then.

This one I already read and answered before.

[NothingButTheRain]

8 minutes ago, fumtu said:

 

 

Whole post is here

 

 

For whatever reason, I did not remember that bit.

But as it's merely to compensate for an added weakness these 2 ships received, it's clearly not a buff in itself but to compensate for the raised and widened citadel which is making this ship significantly weaker enough to warrant buffs like this.

 

It also states (for the people who, for whatever reason, still complain about how Conqueror is getting improved instead of merely rebalanced (by their own whinin I might add)) that the goal is to make it easier to punish bad plays on this ship. But of course this will mean that this must include rewarding good play of this ship.

 

Some people seem to simly not want to read that bit.

[fumtu]

3 minutes ago, NothingButTheRain said:

But as it's merely to compensate for an added weakness these 2 ships received, it's clearly not a buff in itself but to compensate for the raised and widened citadel which is making this ship significantly weaker enough to warrant buffs like this.

 

It also states (for the people who, for whatever reason, still complain about how Conqueror is getting improved instead of merely rebalanced (by their own whinin I might add)) that the goal is to make it easier to punish bad plays on this ship. But of course this will mean that this must include rewarding good play of this ship.

 

If you call rising the citadel a nerf than those who call other changes a buff are equally right. Yes all this is just a re-balance of the ship, she loose something, she gain something. Technically we should generally get a ship with similar performance. But to those who already know how to play Conq, or any other BB, correctly, how to angle and when and where to turn those changes are buffs. To those who don't know those changes are either nerfs or simply a change which could make their play harder if not careful but also could benefit them at the same time. 

 

If you know how to angle and when to engage, sigma increase is straight buff just as is the improved heal. So to good players this is a straight buff. The bad players, who don't care how much broadside they are showing are the once that will suffer the most due citadel rising.

 

To me this is a straight buff to ship, while making her less idiot proof. But I guess it is up to player how he see this changes. Also keep in mind that these are still WiP so so many other things could change or WG could in the end discard all the changes.

[NothingButTheRain]

8 minutes ago, fumtu said:

 

If you call rising the citadel a nerf than those who call other changes a buff are equally right. Yes all this is just a re-balance of the ship, she loose something, she gain something. Technically we should generally get a ship with similar performance. But to those who already know how to play Conq, or any other BB, correctly, how to angle and when and where to turn those changes are buffs. To those who don't know those changes are either nerfs or simply a change which could make their play harder if not careful but also could benefit them at the same time. 

 

If you know how to angle and when to engage, sigma increase is straight buff just as is the improved heal. So to good players this is a straight buff. The bad players, who don't care how much broadside they are showing are the once that will suffer the most due citadel rising.

 

To me this is a straight buff to ship, while making her less idiot proof. But I guess it is up to player how he see this changes. Also keep in mind that these are still WiP so so many other things could change or WG could in the end discard all the changes.

No, not equally right. because if they were right, these buffs wouldn't even have been needed and the raising of the citadel would (like these people have said) not be a nerf. But it is a nerf. Anyway, you are pulling things out of context a bit with your coparison. It's not as simple as you make it out to be.

 

The other stuff is never intended to buff the ship, it's merely to try and shoehorn balance into the nerf (which apparently is hitting these ships quite hard to warrant buffs of this order).

 

The point is also that these people you are talking about, are doing something else which you are circumventing: They are saying "the raising of the citadel is not a nerf" AND saying "the Conqueror is getting a heal buff!" and together they conclude "Conq is not getting a nerf, but it is getting a buff, therefore Conqueror is getting buffed". Clearly you see that people with this kind of assumption, are assuming wrong.

 

They are ignoring the nerf, saying that it won't affect you if you play it right. But this is not the case as there are multiple reasons why this nerf is warranting these buffs now.

 

It is not the same Fumtu, also because with your comparison you are leaving out one of the most important bits of my why.

[Aotearas]

33 minutes ago, NothingButTheRain said:

Well, in that case I have given you your answer multiple times as well, haven't I?

It's not just the freak citadels, you are leaving out at least 2 other scenarios (and possibly torps may also affect Conqueror more now as well).

You mean your nonsense about not being able to angle against everything and the oh so dreaded AP DBs?

 

I already gave you the answers to that, you can angle against multiple ships easily as long as you keep an eye on the minimap and not hopelessly expose yourself to a crossfire and a CV will have its ways with a Conqueror anyway, AP DBs or not ... nevermind that you already can citadel Conquerors with AP DBs.

 

And nothing will change in regards to torpedoes because any hit in the midsection would already count as a citadel hit anyway and the length of the citadel isn't getting changed, only its height, ergo no more hit area for torps. Besides, torps are already the bane of the Conqueror due to its relatively low HP and poor torpedo belt.

 

Once more all you do is grasp at straws. And not ONCE have you ever given a scenario where a halfway angled Conqueror player would suffer citadel damage in any form of regularity for it to counteract the benefits the improved heal provides every single time you use it compared to the rare or downright made-up citadel scenarios you keep repeating as if that nonsense would start being a reasonable argument if you just keep spouting those.

 

8 minutes ago, NothingButTheRain said:

They are ignoring the nerf, saying that it won't affect you if you play it right. But this is not the case as there are multiple reasons why this nerf is warranting these buffs now.

 

Give me practical scenarios where a properly angling Conqueror would take citadel damage. Still waiting.

[NothingButTheRain]

5 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

and a CV will have its ways with a Conqueror anyway, AP DBs or not ... nevermind that you already can citadel Conquerors with AP DBs.

Are you saying that widening the citadel (meaning, it gets to become a larger target from the top) will in absolutely no way increase the number of hits the citadel would receive (with AP bombs, but not totally excluding other means for now), provided nothing else is changed?

Yes or so?

 

I will respond to the rest after you answered this question here. Don't worry, I'm just checking your sanity.

[NothingButTheRain]

7 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

and the length of the citadel isn't getting changed, only its height

You are unaware that the citadel is also getting widened? That would (or at least could) explain why you have such a hard time agreeing with me.

[Aotearas]

1 minute ago, NothingButTheRain said:

Are you saying that widening the citadel (meaning, it gets to become a larger target from the top) will in absolutely no way increase the number of hits the citadel would receive (with AP bombs, but not totally excluding other means for now), provided nothing else is changed?

Yes or so?

The Conqueror citadel gets RAISED, not widened.

[NothingButTheRain]

4 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

The Conqueror citadel gets RAISED, not widened.

Quoting this for now.

Flamu showed the changed citadel on his stream. Guess we'll have to figure out what shape the citadel has right now.

[Aotearas]

1 minute ago, NothingButTheRain said:

Quoting this for now.

Flamu showed the changed citadel on his stream. Guess we'll have to figure out what shape the citadel has right now.

I've only ever heard anything about a raised citadel. ST news, DevBlog, WG employee comments/stream QA answer ... all of them only ever said the citadel is going to get raised. Not a single word of widening it.

 

If you can tell me which Flamu stream I'd like to search and see if there's any obvious changes to the citadel width but as it stands right now I'm going to keep arguing based on what's been said to be changed.

[mariouus]

1 hour ago, NothingButTheRain said:

It's balanced, so it's fair. Or one would assume it to be fair. But is it fair for a BB to have to face a DD? Or a DD having to face a radar CC? Or a carrier? What is fair?

In single 1 on 1 engagements, this game could be described as inherently unfair, even when playing ships 1 on 1 of the same class. How can a Shima outgun a Haru? What about Wooster vs a DM or Salem? How is that fair?

No it is not balanced. Its effort vs performance is unbalanced (what is actually thing that WG is considering these days).There is a reason why WG is trying do change it.

[NothingButTheRain]

9 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

I've only ever heard anything about a raised citadel. ST news, DevBlog, WG employee comments/stream QA answer ... all of them only ever said the citadel is going to get raised. Not a single word of widening it.

 

If you can tell me which Flamu stream I'd like to search and see if there's any obvious changes to the citadel width but as it stands right now I'm going to keep arguing based on what's been said to be changed.

I'm downloading Aslains and gonna check for myself. I can't remember when it was but he had throat issues at the time. Have fun hunting it down 

[NothingButTheRain]

7 minutes ago, mariouus said:

No it is not balanced. Its effort vs performance is unbalanced (what is actually thing that WG is considering these days).There is a reason why WG is trying do change it.

Are you saying that every ship in the game is unbalanced because individual fights between different ships are unfair? 

because you are assuming this as it's unfair (in YOUR book) to fight a ship 1 on 1 if the other ship is a Conqueror.

 

I don't feel like having to explain (again ) what 'balance' is.

[NothingButTheRain]

27 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

I've only ever heard anything about a raised citadel. ST news, DevBlog, WG employee comments/stream QA answer ... all of them only ever said the citadel is going to get raised. Not a single word of widening it.

 

If you can tell me which Flamu stream I'd like to search and see if there's any obvious changes to the citadel width but as it stands right now I'm going to keep arguing based on what's been said to be changed.

There we go. I installed Aslains for you  so I could see the extended tech tree.

 

Conqueror citadel before:

Spoiler

Conqueror citadel after:

Spoiler

 

 

[mariouus]

3 minutes ago, NothingButTheRain said:

Are you saying that every ship in the game is unbalanced because individual fights between different ships are unfair? 

because you are assuming this as it's unfair (in YOUR book) to fight a ship 1 on 1 if the other ship is a Conqueror.

 

I don't feel like having to explain (again ) what 'balance' is.

No. I am saying what I have always sayed. 

 

There is bit of a difference of being statistically "Fine" and being Balanced.

 

It is not Balanced due the fact that players playing some other BB have to but mutch more effort and skill into them do achive the same level. Conqurer gets it on the basis of being substantilly dumbed down.

In a top tier player vs player game it is non-sense, you can not have something that defies user-input.

 

That is the reason why WG is saying that they do not want change statistical performance but how it playes.

 

So no, you do not need do explane what balance is. You probably need do learn what it is instead.

[Aotearas]

24 minutes ago, NothingButTheRain said:

I'm downloading Aslains and gonna check for myself. I can't remember when it was but he had throat issues at the time. Have fun hunting it down 

Found the stream, but copyright shenaigans means the actual part when he briefly looked at the test version Conqueror's armour profile was muted.

 

Just installed All Ships in Techtree mod and checked myself and indeed it looks like WG just designated the lower part of the casemate armour segment to just a bit over the waterline as citadel area which means the citadel will de facto be widened to fill that segments volume.

 

I'm still hesitant to make projections how that will interact with AP bombs though, since the widened citadel area isn't very deep. I'm not confident enough in my knowledge of the current AP DB mechanics, but if I were to venture a guess based on my current experience with dropping Conquerors I'd say there's good chances that most AP bombs hitting the widened part of the citadel would still overpen the citadel hitbox and only detonate in the hull hitbox below where the citadel still has its original width and would therefor not count as a citadel penetration, just a regular one. Only hits in the center part (original citadel width) should consistently result in AP DB citadel hits, just as it does now.

 

Can't find a CV rework number on the AP bomb fuze timings to make a more educated guess.

 

 

Overall though the target area even with the widened casemate segment only increase the citadel volume by a very small amount considering the shallow deck height and even IF that would result in halfway regular citadel hits (which I personally would doubt, but as I said, not experienced enough with rework AP drop mechanics) the increase in target area is only around the outer edge of the ship and would thus only account for cases where bombs don't hit the ship square (so either bad drop RNG on a good drop, which imho should be a good hit so practically no change in the expected result, just less lucky misses for the target) or in cases of bad/sloppy drops where only the outer parts of the ships are within the drop pattern envelope (and would thus only sporadically get a damaging hit due to lacking drop accuracy).

[NothingButTheRain]

4 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

Found the stream, but copyright shenaigans means the actual part when he briefly looked at the test version Conqueror's armour profile was muted.

Just installed All Ships in Techtree mod and checked myself and indeed it looks like WG just designated the lower part of the casemate armour segment to just a bit over the waterline as citadel area which means the citadel will de facto be widened to fill that segments volume.

Thank you. So we are clear on this part now, correct?

And I already provided the screenshots so everybody else who is still in doubt can also see (or if they still don't believe me they can install aslains themselves and see).

Quote

 

I'm still hesitant to make projections how that will interact with AP bombs though, since the widened citadel area isn't very deep. I'm not confident enough in my knowledge of the current AP DB mechanics, but if I were to venture a guess based on my current experience with dropping Conquerors I'd say there's good chances that most AP bombs hitting the widened part of the citadel would still overpen the citadel hitbox and only detonate in the hull hitbox below where the citadel still has its original width and would therefor not count as a citadel penetration, just a regular one.

 

Can't find a CV rework number on the AP bomb fuze timings to make a more educated guess.

So it either is a nerf to the widened part of the citadel, or nothing changes, depending on how AP bombs will pen? Is this correct?

[NothingButTheRain]

On 4/14/2019 at 7:57 AM, fumtu said:

 

 

^^. Not to mention that Conq is also getting a sigma buff for 419mm guns, from 1.8 to 1.9. and that its citadel's upper deck armor is increased from 12 mm to 32 mm.

And it looks like (and I only saw this just now) the top of the citadel deck armor in the old Conqueror is actually 63mm front, 19mm center and 63mm back.

Right now the test version of Conqueror has top citadel armor thickness of just 12mm all over. So it's actually already gotten nerfed in the base test version of the ship and they are (what looks like) merely partiallu un-nerfing the citadel armor.

 

If this is just the deck armor, that one is 32mm in the old and new version at this time. Dunno if this was what was meant, but I'd assume not.

 

So you might also be wrong.