5.12: Yet another balls up to appease whiners

[Charger76]

 

Dear Wargaming,

 

I note with interest your desire to "fix" the game so that fewer people whine about how the game is not fair because......... blah.......

 

Call me strange, but I would have thought a company with your resources and dedication to "balance" would bother to get ships right in the first place and that testing is pretty comprehensive. Some suck, some rock, such is life. Some rock for some and suck for others. For example, I think the Trashkent (polite version of my name for it, have a guess what the second part changed to) sucked. It was horrible, a big fat, comparatively slow bucket with bad torps and terrible concealment. Quite a lot of people agree with me, but some people who I can only assume are masochists and who staple their balls to planks of wood to get their rocks off love it.

 

Similarly, my experience of the New Orleans was so awful that as soon as I finished grinding it I shelved any desire to get to T10 because the pain of doing it all again in the Balti made me want to vomit on myself as a preferable activity. But here is the thing: these are my failures more than they are those of the ship. I failed to appreciate how better I might play the particular advantages of these ships to maximise my capability with them.

 

Now I would like to argue that these two ships have such glaring deficiencies and underwhelming strengths that this is true for many players and going by the amount of whining about them, I am clearly not a minority. However, I see good players do just fine if not excel in them so they have strengths that a really skilful player can maximise.

 

Every time that you “fix” a ship or “adjust a line” what you are really doing is saying “we cannot design this properly so we will just mess around with it to appease whiners”. Either you got the idea right to begin with or you did not. If you did not, why release the ship / line / game?

 

Destroyers are the best example. IJN DD’s require stealth and planning to get the best out of. I actually get a kick playing them for just this reason. I know that if I get close to the enemy I am toast but maintain best I can an 8Km range & I can spot & shoot my torps just fine thanks.

 

Soviet DD’s are gun platforms, high speed raiders. They lack concealment and they have awful torpedos at anything but effectively 2 - 3Km range at which point you are in dangerous waters anyway.

USN DD’s are much more flexible but not as good at playing the torpedo game nor the gunner game. In short, three distinct lines requiring three distinct play styles. Great, lots to learn, lots to enjoy in the difference.

 

Until that is the whingers from generation snowflake start to whine about how they need a “safe space” in game, a/k/a make all ships so alike that really the differences are marginal because otherwise something is “OP”.

 

Now I read that yet again you are going to warp ships to appease whiners. Battleships are MEANT to fight head on to one another. They are meant to find it hard to beat one another down. Cruisers are MEANT to be fast, flexible and hard hitting if fragile.

 

Russian Destroyers are terrible at just about everything – awful turning circle, slow gun rotation, terrible torpedos, poor concealment but when they line you up & start to shoot they come into their own.

But because so many whiners whine about how they are “OP” and cannot themselves be bothered with doing the hard yards to grind up the line (hence most players of the Uda & Khaba are actually pretty damn good at it) they figure they can just whine until they get what they want: no reward for people who put the time and effort in to grind through hard ships and build their skills.

I have had my backside handed to me by many a Khaba and I never once complained: my fault for getting into their kill zone in the first place. Someone can make that ship work when it can be outspotted by IJN cruisers then hats off.

 

Here is what is wrong with the game:

1. Destroyers that do not cap.
2. CV’s with all strike or all air supremacy load outs. Neither offer the proper flexibility that a CV should have to be able to strike and protect their team.
3. Battleships that cower in groups behind rocks / islands and pretend to “snipe” so they can pad their damage without actually being at all that useful to everyone else.
4. Cyclones – cool idea, needs to be better executed. If a ship on your team can see the enemy and you can see that ship, you should be able to see the enemy too.
5. Sea that is not sea because a rock a full ships’ width away is actually blue in colour and looking just like the sea.

 

So stop messing around with ships. Stop messing around with the national lines. Stop adding maps.

 

Instead, adjust the incentives (the one good part of 5.12), make teamwork more rewarding for credits and XP. Fix the many bugs on the maps you have rather than spend time making new ones.

 

In short:

 

Don’t screw up WoWs like you did WoT by constantly appeasing the lowest common denominator.

 

Change incentives, don't change Ships & don't screw things up to make whiners happy, they will only find something else to whine about.

 

[SkybuckFlying]

I am also slightly getting worried with all these ship changes. But for now I just see how it goes.

 

When I started playing Kiev I pretty much sucked at it... and I didn't know why or what to do about it, but now I pretty much rock with it ! ;) =D

 

It took many games to understand it's strength (and weaknesses) and how to adjust it's captain ! ;) Fortunately the occasional respec came about or so ! ;)

[TycBrum]

[xXx_Blogis_xXx]

even i dont like they nerfed khaba , but its rly not world end,,,

[Mangrey]

The kaba dont need a nerf.... but alle crusiers dont need the new modul that gives 40% less turn time ..... the US ones might but not the rest 

 

 

mang

[jure_eruj]

Amen to OP's post. I get why the snowflakes are crying, they can't do anything else in life, but I am clueless as why Wargaming is actually listen to them. Wargaming, no matter what you do, snowflakes will cry and shed tears. You will end loosing them (now that's a big loss), but you will also lose old players who are getting annoyed with all the crapyou are trying to pull. Get a grip, stop adding shitload of new maps, stop playing with damn villages, wooden boats and damn whale bones on the coasts (nobody gives a flying f*** about them) and figure out how to stimulate idiotic BB campers or yolo morons in Dds.

Nerfing everything is NOT the answer and you will never nerf enough to stop the river of tears.

 

But here are some nerfing tips:

1. Dds are visible in 15 km range, but lower their speed to 12 knots, torpedo range to 3 km and remove smoke - that will make BBs  happy
2. remove all main guns from BBs - that will make cruisers happy
3. Reduce cruisers's turning radius to 8 km, they should reach full speed of 15 knots in 1 minute, also reducing speed from full to stop should take 1 minute, that will make DDs happy.

 

See, it is very easy to make all people happy.

[mtm78]

tl:dr

 

Btw @ OP -> http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/62286-512-changes/page__fromsearch__1 Look an existing topic...  

[ilhilh]

IT WERE TEH B B(ABY) MAFIA. LOLZ. IN YOUR FACE.

[Akula971]

They are a business, and appealing to the kids is what it is about, the biggest possible player base possible equals more sales, equals promotions, pay rises and parties. If you think for a moment that they respect or have any loyalty to the long term player, think again. You are part of the "Churn" the turn over of players. Just look at the EU office and forum? Where do we get the news from? From a guy who reads the Russian forums and translates for us, not a Wargaming employee. They made the guy a community contributor. That tells you all you need to know. They will listen to the largest (Home) market which is Russian. The rest? meh who cares, they don't.

 

Just like in WoT, you get new gimmicks and gadgets to keep you playing and paying. If you want to have fun, then pick a ship or two from any tier that you enjoy, forget the grind to tier X, its a chore, and games should not be chores. I myself love to play my tier 4-7's, just like in WoT, most fun, cheap to run! 

 

Do the daily missions for credits and free XP amounts, and the other missions for free stuff. 

 

If the game changes, which it will, then ditch the ships they wreck. After the torpedo spam "fix" with the Kagero and Shimakaze, I rarely play them now. You just have to adapt.

[Admiral_H_Nelson]

They are a business, and appealing to the kids is what it is about, the biggest possible player base possible equals more sales, equals promotions, pay rises and parties. If you think for a moment that they respect or have any loyalty to the long term player, think again. You are part of the "Churn" the turn over of players. Just look at the EU office and forum? Where do we get the news from? From a guy who reads the Russian forums and translates for us, not a Wargaming employee. They made the guy a community contributor. That tells you all you need to know. They will listen to the largest (Home) market which is Russian. The rest? meh who cares, they don't.

 

Just like in WoT, you get new gimmicks and gadgets to keep you playing and paying. If you want to have fun, then pick a ship or two from any tier that you enjoy, forget the grind to tier X, its a chore, and games should not be chores. I myself love to play my tier 4-7's, just like in WoT, most fun, cheap to run! 

 

Do the daily missions for credits and free XP amounts, and the other missions for free stuff. 

 

If the game changes, which it will, then ditch the ships they wreck. After the torpedo spam "fix" with the Kagero and Shimakaze, I rarely play them now. You just have to adapt.

 

Top post!

One salute is not enough. Have another one.

 

Everything said is true, and this is the best advice for any player IMHO: " If you want to have fun, then pick a ship or two from any tier that you enjoy, forget the grind to tier X, its a chore, and games should not be chores. I myself love to play my tier 4-7's, just like in WoT, most fun, cheap to run! "

[jure_eruj]

They are a business, and appealing to the kids is what it is about, the biggest possible player base possible equals more sales, equals promotions, pay rises and parties. If you think for a moment that they respect or have any loyalty to the long term player, think again. You are part of the "Churn" the turn over of players. Just look at the EU office and forum? Where do we get the news from? From a guy who reads the Russian forums and translates for us, not a Wargaming employee. They made the guy a community contributor. That tells you all you need to know. They will listen to the largest (Home) market which is Russian. The rest? meh who cares, they don't.

 

Just like in WoT, you get new gimmicks and gadgets to keep you playing and paying. If you want to have fun, then pick a ship or two from any tier that you enjoy, forget the grind to tier X, its a chore, and games should not be chores. I myself love to play my tier 4-7's, just like in WoT, most fun, cheap to run! 

 

Do the daily missions for credits and free XP amounts, and the other missions for free stuff. 

 

If the game changes, which it will, then ditch the ships they wreck. After the torpedo spam "fix" with the Kagero and Shimakaze, I rarely play them now. You just have to adapt.

 

Congrats for this post. That is exactly what i will do from now on. Having fun in T4-t8 matches and giving one big middle finger to Wargaming. No more premium account, no more premium ships.

 

I will hit you where it hurt you most, in your wallet.

[it3llig3nc3]

There is the commercial view and there is the warship/gamer enthusiast side. The two must be balanced because a lots of average Joes are needed to populate the server (i.e. cannon fodder) and also there is a need for paying customers to keep the development and profit going. Enthusiasts are coming into the picture when they can represent something valuable either by $$$ or game reputation (competitions, marketing).

I have a feeling that WG has decided somewhere to "low ball" the WoWs game by moving the balance towards the average Joes in both game-play experience and also purchase power (release a lot of premium ships).

 

I'm extremely worried about the announced change of the Tier VII-X battleship bow armor schemes. 

WG continuously say that they are careful with premium ships as those "have to perform well" as paying customers invested money into it and it is to be respected.

 

Now. touching the Tier VIII-X BBs in such wide scale way as the DEVs announced is a significant change in their battle performance - and we are talking about the most expensive ships both in terms of time investment to get them / especially Tier IX and X, but also in-game resources or hard $$$ spent (i.e. FreeXP conversions).  I do not know why on Earth the DEVs concluded that a high tier BB charging "bow in" is bad. To be honest I have heard very little whining about it compared to many other matters (i.e. carrier problems, DD torp spam, HE shells and fire mechanism). So why pick on something that is a 

VALID STRATEGY IN A NAVAL GAME?????

 

...and have they thought through the impacts? For example: A bow-in strategy for a Yamato is a crucial survival issue as it's sides can be penetrated and citadelled even by a Tier VIII BB.  Take out the bow-in strategy for Yama and what will left to play?

My say is that if WG takes out the bow-in strategy it must reconsider the German BB turtle-back armor (i.e. no citadel for a german BB) as after this change nothing else will happen that instead of the Yamato the German Tier X BB becomes the new "toughest ship" in the game and after the payers and game meta takes the adjustment we will get back to square one!

 

...unless if this is exactly what WG wants:inflate the good old ships so they relatively perform worse and propagate the new ones so more people start spending money grinding / getting them...

 

???

 

 

[jure_eruj]

...unless if this is exactly what WG wants:inflate the good old ships so they relatively perform worse and propagate the new ones so more people start spending money grinding / getting them...

 

Words of wisdom here. This is the tactics of all "FREE" online games. Release a slightly OP weapon/ship, sell a shitload of them, watch snowflakes crying about everything beeing OP, ride in like a knight in shinning armor, kiss the butts of snowflakes and nerf the oh-my-god-this-ship-is-so-OP-because-I-keep-showing-my-broadside-and-I-am-getting-rekt-for-it  and then repeat the whole thing in a month or two.

[damo74]

 

Top post!

One salute is not enough. Have another one.

 

Everything said is true, and this is the best advice for any player IMHO: " If you want to have fun, then pick a ship or two from any tier that you enjoy, forget the grind to tier X, its a chore, and games should not be chores. I myself love to play my tier 4-7's, just like in WoT, most fun, cheap to run! "

 

i have to say I don't like they way things have been going recently. What with these "strange" changes and the on-going fiasco with British cruisers, my enthusiasm for the game is waning. I'm going to give Fractured Space a try.

[DreadArchangel]

In history it was never a good idea to go bow onto a enemy specilly one crossing it as they could bring all their guns to bear on you where as you could only bring the front one's it was called crossing the T

[Lord_WC]

1. Destroyers that do not cap.

Most battleships I met and wanted a DD to cap were 20km behind the DD while 3 enemy BBs were in the cap.

 

Grow up - if an enemy ship is in the cap it's a BBs job to cap. Not a destroyer's with the lowest amount of HP and less armor than your intelligence level.

[it3llig3nc3]

In history it was never a good idea to go bow onto a enemy specilly one crossing it as they could bring all their guns to bear on you where as you could only bring the front one's it was called crossing the T

 

I respectfully disagree. The real sea battle doctrines are far more complex than we would think, but the concept of "Crossing the T" is only one (but important) element and for obvious reasons in real life battles it never plays out clean.

The "Bow-In" strategy was an essential element in order to quickly reach the effective gun fire-range.

Best example I can give you is if you study the famous story of Bismarck vs. Hood. 

In the early stage of the battle (after spotting) Hood followed the Brit Navy doctrine to go full speed ahead (bow in) to close the gap between itself and the enemy to get into optimal gun range. Only after that it started to turn (angle) to bear all its guns into the right direction... but then we know how the story ended.

 

All in all - bow-in is a valid in-game strategy and was a real warship doctrine during WW2 - it was used to maximize gun performance by maneuvering the ship into its most effective range vs. enemy. Especially in cases where the own gun's effective range was SHORTER than the enemy's the bow-in strategy was critical in getting a chance to win the duel (reduce the time to get hit while can't effectively hit back)

 

BTW: about the crossing the T you must always remember that it came from the SAIL SHIP age. Crossing the T meant then that the ship crossing the enemy's T was able to hit the enemy with half power (one side of the ship's guns) while the other had minimal means to retaliate. Whichever sail-ship managed to cross the T (typically from behind) was able to render the other ship unmaneuverable (destroying rudder) and thus drastically increasing it's own chances to win.

 

BTW2:

In WW2 amongst the rare occasions when battleships fought against each other the last event in which a battleship group managed to cross the enemy's T was in the Battle of the Suriago Strait, but that was a static situation, quasi an ambush of enemy forces. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leyte_Gulf#Battle_off_Samar_.2825_October.29

 

---history lesson ends---

 

 

[Dragnorak]

They are a business, and appealing to the kids is what it is about, the biggest possible player base possible equals more sales, equals promotions, pay rises and parties. If you think for a moment that they respect or have any loyalty to the long term player, think again. You are part of the "Churn" the turn over of players. Just look at the EU office and forum? Where do we get the news from? From a guy who reads the Russian forums and translates for us, not a Wargaming employee. They made the guy a community contributor. That tells you all you need to know. They will listen to the largest (Home) market which is Russian. The rest? meh who cares, they don't.

 

Just like in WoT, you get new gimmicks and gadgets to keep you playing and paying. If you want to have fun, then pick a ship or two from any tier that you enjoy, forget the grind to tier X, its a chore, and games should not be chores. I myself love to play my tier 4-7's, just like in WoT, most fun, cheap to run! 

 

Do the daily missions for credits and free XP amounts, and the other missions for free stuff. 

 

If the game changes, which it will, then ditch the ships they wreck. After the torpedo spam "fix" with the Kagero and Shimakaze, I rarely play them now. You just have to adapt.

 

Could not agree more with this.

 

I have a port full of T10 and never ever play them now. I'm always in my Mini or my Nassau or Iowa occasionally and sometimes my new Gneisenau but not much so far in her. I Never play my Shima and never ever my Yama which I was total toilet in anyways. They can stick T10 where the sun don't shine.

 

Ive said this before but games are only for fun unless you're a pro and getting paid which none of us are. I'm having all mine in my humble Minekaze at the moment.

[Elenortirion]

@it3llig3nc3 and the a "little bit before" in the battle of tsushima japanese fleet have rekt russian fleet and showed their superior maneuverability by crossing the T not once but TWICE [and by thus showing 2x of the firepower to the russians than they could possibly throw back - not to mention both fleets at that point being in the line formation meaning quite much that while japanese had al lthe guns on the enemy formation, only the first ship of said formation have any reliable guns on them]

 

but then we again hit the wall or rl guns being pretty accurate when it comes to bearing onto enemy fleet, but due to physics of a floating brick on the water firing stuff from its above staiblising elevation was problematic leading into lack of range accuracy on salvos meaning that it was easier to score any hit on a ship sailing bow on than on the ship showing broadside and the wall is that in WoWs for some reason is it oposite puttign us in al lthe awkward situations....

 

[for example tactic meant to fast close into prefered range used as main way of minimising enemy damage on you]

 

end then - in the end - all of these sums up into one big "It's arcade game not naval simulation" so if everyone kept that in mind forums and chats woudl be much less toxic I think.....

[Charger76]

tl:dr

 

Btw @ OP -> http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/62286-512-changes/page__fromsearch__1 Look an existing topic...  

 

Actually, no. This is not the same issue, my point here is that all such updates are wrong that change the ships & mess with ship lines.

 

Yours is specific to 5.12

[Charger76]

Most battleships I met and wanted a DD to cap were 20km behind the DD while 3 enemy BBs were in the cap.

 

Grow up - if an enemy ship is in the cap it's a BBs job to cap. Not a destroyer's with the lowest amount of HP and less armor than your intelligence level.

 

I drive DD's, well aware of the issue. If you look at point 3. I specifically go against such Battleship players.

 

Which do you find more difficult, reading or manners? It is not me that needs to "grow up" it is you who needs to read and comprehend before you run your mouth off.

[Charger76]

There is the commercial view and there is the warship/gamer enthusiast side. The two must be balanced because a lots of average Joes are needed to populate the server (i.e. cannon fodder) and also there is a need for paying customers to keep the development and profit going. Enthusiasts are coming into the picture when they can represent something valuable either by $$$ or game reputation (competitions, marketing).

I have a feeling that WG has decided somewhere to "low ball" the WoWs game by moving the balance towards the average Joes in both game-play experience and also purchase power (release a lot of premium ships).

 

I'm extremely worried about the announced change of the Tier VII-X battleship bow armor schemes. 

WG continuously say that they are careful with premium ships as those "have to perform well" as paying customers invested money into it and it is to be respected.

 

Now. touching the Tier VIII-X BBs in such wide scale way as the DEVs announced is a significant change in their battle performance - and we are talking about the most expensive ships both in terms of time investment to get them / especially Tier IX and X, but also in-game resources or hard $$$ spent (i.e. FreeXP conversions).  I do not know why on Earth the DEVs concluded that a high tier BB charging "bow in" is bad. To be honest I have heard very little whining about it compared to many other matters (i.e. carrier problems, DD torp spam, HE shells and fire mechanism). So why pick on something that is a 

VALID STRATEGY IN A NAVAL GAME?????

 

...and have they thought through the impacts? For example: A bow-in strategy for a Yamato is a crucial survival issue as it's sides can be penetrated and citadelled even by a Tier VIII BB.  Take out the bow-in strategy for Yama and what will left to play?

My say is that if WG takes out the bow-in strategy it must reconsider the German BB turtle-back armor (i.e. no citadel for a german BB) as after this change nothing else will happen that instead of the Yamato the German Tier X BB becomes the new "toughest ship" in the game and after the payers and game meta takes the adjustment we will get back to square one!

 

...unless if this is exactly what WG wants:inflate the good old ships so they relatively perform worse and propagate the new ones so more people start spending money grinding / getting them...

 

???

 

 

 

An excellent post and one I largely agree with.

 

One caveat though: WoWs has a much lower player base and as such those who are loyal and stay are more valuable than such people in WoT where the churn is king and loyal players are the ugly scullary maid.

 

It is I think for this reason (plus potential to spin off as a separate game to another business) that WoWs has doubloons not common gold and has, compartively, so many premium ships.

 

One other point I would make is that in WoWs I am bottom end of average. So when I say that I have no issue with any ship because really good players will get the best out of any ship and if you give the enemy what he needs to beat you (i.e. getting within 5Km in a Kagero against a Udaloi) you deserve to be beaten I say so without an agenda.

 

So if I as a distinctly average player (essentially canon fodder) in WoWs cannot find cause to whine about "OP", perhaps its a valid perspective that WG ought to take note of?

[mtm78]

 

Actually, no. This is not the same issue, my point here is that all such updates are wrong that change the ships & mess with ship lines.

 

Yours is specific to 5.12

 

I don't think it's a surprise I don't disagree with the notion that things aren't as they should be ;)

[philjd]

 

I respectfully disagree. The real sea battle doctrines are far more complex than we would think, but the concept of "Crossing the T" is only one (but important) element and for obvious reasons in real life battles it never plays out clean.

The "Bow-In" strategy was an essential element in order to quickly reach the effective gun fire-range.

Best example I can give you is if you study the famous story of Bismarck vs. Hood. 

In the early stage of the battle (after spotting) Hood followed the Brit Navy doctrine to go full speed ahead (bow in) to close the gap between itself and the enemy to get into optimal gun range. Only after that it started to turn (angle) to bear all its guns into the right direction... but then we know how the story ended.

 

All in all - bow-in is a valid in-game strategy and was a real warship doctrine during WW2 - it was used to maximize gun performance by maneuvering the ship into its most effective range vs. enemy. Especially in cases where the own gun's effective range was SHORTER than the enemy's the bow-in strategy was critical in getting a chance to win the duel (reduce the time to get hit while can't effectively hit back)

 

BTW: about the crossing the T you must always remember that it came from the SAIL SHIP age. Crossing the T meant then that the ship crossing the enemy's T was able to hit the enemy with half power (one side of the ship's guns) while the other had minimal means to retaliate. Whichever sail-ship managed to cross the T (typically from behind) was able to render the other ship unmaneuverable (destroying rudder) and thus drastically increasing it's own chances to win.

 

BTW2:

In WW2 amongst the rare occasions when battleships fought against each other the last event in which a battleship group managed to cross the enemy's T was in the Battle of the Suriago Strait, but that was a static situation, quasi an ambush of enemy forces. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Leyte_Gulf#Battle_off_Samar_.2825_October.29

 

---history lesson ends---

 

 

 

Not quite correct.

 

Age of sail - shooting the stern (preferred) or bow allowed the canon balls to travel the complete length of the targets interior, thus doing a lot more damage to the squishy 'bits' (people) enfilading the target, with rudder and also masts vulnerable, plus the ends tended to have less plank thickness to go through, so less 'armour'. Also less guns to fire back.

Age of steam - crossing the T was all about number of 'friendly' ships firing at the lonesome lead hostile, N squared rule - so this is still fleet based and not so much ship to ship. In regards to number of guns bearing, the early Dreadnoughts had design criteria stating the number of guns able to bear in all directions (eg Dreadnought herself could field 6 main calibre guns in all directions. As you state, in WW2, there were no real fleet actions (gunnery), Surigao being the only possible exception (squadron sized though), the advantage of being broadside on against bow on targets are there in the results, although surprise and also radar gunnery contributed hugely.

[it3llig3nc3]

Thanks for the corrections. Even with those, the main point remains valid: the bow-in strategy made sense in real life sea warfare and also in this game - so anybody worried about WG messing with the bow armor with the passive play reasoning has some valid worries...

 

One more addition to the age of sail: while I can see why shooting the stern had advantages of shooting through the entire length of the ship, it is still to be noted that 

A) disabling the rudder was still a key point (read accounts about Battle of Trafalgar for example)

B) especially for Brits the doctrine said the first they aimed at the main (and other) masts of the enemy ship to reduce maneuverability and then they went for the personnel and other targets. French for example had a different approach in which you comment is more applicable.

 

age of steam - the principle you describe that is all friendly ships targets the same enemy is also a valid doctrine but in my mind it is parallel to the crossing the T concept. Concentration of firepower of fleets / multiple units is a very strong and critical idea that is more or less true for all weapons systems not only for ships/guns. 

I would be glad if more WoWs players could understand this principle - so enemy ships low on HP can take out faster....