Can we get a hardcap on BBs already?

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

The 50% BB teams are ruining the game and there need to be a hardcap for BBs at max 3 per battle for the game to be balanced especially because BBs appeal to the very worst of the playerbase that ofcourse don't know how to play BBs properly thus losing game after game for their teams.

 

If BB players want to fight other BBs then make a BB only 'Battle of the Line' mode for them so we can have battles where are a max of 2-3 BBs per team and the other all BB mode.

[IanH755]

Despite wanting a cap just as much as yourself, it'll never EVER happen because there's too many BB's now and the queue lengths for BB players would be huge, so the majority would stop playing rather than change class and WG would lose money.

 

Shame really, it's an instant "balance" yet the outcry will prevent it happening.

[maderi]

The 50% BB teams are ruining the game and there need to be a hardcap for BBs at max 3 per battle for the game to be balanced especially because BBs appeal to the very worst of the playerbase that ofcourse don't know how to play BBs properly thus losing game after game for their teams.

 

If BB players want to fight other BBs then make a BB only 'Battle of the Line' mode for them so we can have battles where are a max of 2-3 BBs per team and the other all BB mode.

 

No

[PonyOnSteroids]

I like the idea of dumping all overabundant queueing BB players in one single match. They can't complain about DD's CV's CA's, the only thing they could complain about is BB's.  

[Shirakami_Kon]

Despite wanting a cap just as much as yourself, it'll never EVER happen because there's too many BB's now and the queue lengths for BB players would be huge, so the majority would stop playing rather than change class and WG would lose money.

 

Shame really, it's an instant "balance" yet the outcry will prevent it happening.

 

I'm not a CV player, but from I've read on the forums for quite some time as a CV you need another CV player for the enemy team to be allowed to play a battle with a CV. Plus the complaints they have about AA. Plus even if there are more CV players in high tiers now there's just one CV per team, all this combined made CVs almost dissappear for a long time. Consideing that I don't think that they care about the queue time players of a certain class will have if they are hardcapped or that they consider that a whole class of ships stops being played because of that a problem.

 

And in my opinion we need the BB cap per team. (You can check my stats if you want, the ships I play more are BBs, and yes, I said I want to see a BB cap).

[General_Alexus]

BB cap only does something about the Symptoms, BBs are just OP and WG even admits that. But they dont want to nerf them ( for some reason ) no they nerf the Ships that are Overperforming because they are the only ones left to fight the 10000 BBs that are queing up for games. Yes i am looking at you Khaba and Zao ( nerf´to her was a bit long ago ), of course Khaba overperforms if every other Ships that is supposed to Counter BBs ( DDs / CVs ) cant do the Job anymore.

[Ranyxx]

The whole rock-paper-scissors concept seems to still get regular mention when players discuss various issues with the game.  What I haven't seen since we left CBT and went into OBT was the other part of that equation.  Namely, that WG felt 1 CV = 1 BB = 2 CA/CL = 4 DDs.  To be perfectly honest, I believe that most of the issues WG tries to fix by nerfing popular ships and by making other changes (e.g. - high tier economy) in order to ram some kind of "meta" down the players throat, could all be solved by making a fundamental change to the MM.  They need to cap capital ships at 3 per team and, do the same to DDs as well.  So, you can have either 1 CV and 2 BBs or, 3 BBs.  Maximum 3 DDs....the remaining 6 should be cruisers.  If it means longer queue times, who cares?  The torpedo spam that came about because of 5 shimas per team will be gone, cruisers can be much more aggressive (safety in numbers), etc.  WG, please, get over yourselves....either balance everything so that each ship is equivalent (no RPS, no 1CV=1BB=2CA/CL=4DD...instead 1CV=1BB=1CA/CL=1DD), or give us a MM that churns out a "reasonable" composition for a fleet.  I'm confident you won't "lose players" because of it.

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

 

No

 

Duly noted.

[waxx25]

At OP........heck to the mother loving NO!!!

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

At OP........heck to the mother loving NO!!!

 

Why not, are you afraid that your stats will drop?

[waxx25]

Yes, that's exactly what it is. 

 

Why not, are you afraid that your stats will drop?

 

[Shirakami_Kon]

I have to admit that while I agree that while the game need some sort of BB cap to balance the average amount of BBs that are out there that doesn't make and "all BBs" battle reasonable either, but I'd follow in the idea of put some restrictions in the amount of BBs per battle. 3 maybe it's a bit too low, 4 BBs can be handled and that's the limit per team I would suggest, but it's true that it's not difficult to see battles with 4+ BBs per team and that starts to unbalance the game for the cruisers that are still out there and in high tiers if they know what they are doing and stick together they do the same to the rare CVs that still refuse to dissappear, so I would suggest a cap of 4 BBs.

 

That would allow BBs to still have an impact in the game, but with a bit more of skill involved by BB players (something that not all BB players lack, as much people around here think, but anyways it's true that overall sometimes you get streaks of battles where you kinda miss seeing a bit of that), like situational awareness and positioning in the map, not like now that there are so much BBs that they are all over the place no matter where you go so they don't bother about anything and end up in the weirdest places because there's so much BBs around that they cover all map by range so there's no punishment at all if they are in an awful position in the map. Unless they are the last ship, of course.

[SeaWolf7]

5 BB's per side is too much. That's 10 battleships running around every match. 10!!

That's a lot Period! But WG have just decided to release the most fragile line yet, the RN line (amongst a lot of controversy).

So you design a new line and want it to be a success but put in as many ships as possible that can blow them out of the water with a single round?

[thestaggy]

I'm predominantly a BB player and I can accept this request.

 

I have recently started having fun in the Furataka and I do believe the Yorck may be the funnest ship I have played to date but the number of BBs do make them tricky to play. Not impossible as the cruiser mafia has long tried to make people believe, but you do have to have good real-world situational awareness and think way ahead. 

 

Not just cruisers though, but DDs as well. It is not at all uncommon to see 5/6 BBs and 5/4 DDs per side with 2 lonesome cruisers. The other two classes make life really difficult for cruisers and at the higher tiers the two combined are largely responsible for the camping meta. You have tier 8 - 10 walls of area denying torpedoes if you try and get near a cap and when you invariably have to turn away from the torp soup you run the risk of taking massive damage from the reversing bow-on tankers.

 

BBs and DDs need capping. Or CVs need some love to reduce the influence of them and help make things a little easier for cruisers.

[BCHood]

Capping is a fine idea but it needs to be done in the right way, just outright capping BBs will mean alot of BB players will be stuck waiting for the match, and a good portion will eventually leave if the waiting time is long. Instead, they could add a mode hidden inaide random battle, where theres too many BBs that a map opens with only BBs against only BBs, this would mean both balanced divisions with CA/CLs and DDs and the excess of BBs could still have fun slugging it out against each other.

 

You can take the same idea and apply it to destroyers aa well, ofcourse the MM should favor large maps like Ocean for BB slugfests abd maps with lots of islands for DD torpfests. Just an idea.

[feechbone]

Imo that's like saying there needs to be a hard cap on heavy tanks in WOT and it will increase the queue time to and extend that people rage quit.

[Ishiro32]

Treat the illness not the symptoms.

[_cosmo]

You want fewer battlehips? Bring more torp dds in! ;) (alas, wg is removing them... gee, i wonder how that will affect the meta )

[CLyDeThaMonKeY]

I rather wait a little longer in queue to get more balanced teams. I love playing all classes, including CVs

[G01ngToxicCommand0]

Imo that's like saying there needs to be a hard cap on heavy tanks in WOT and it will increase the queue time to and extend that people rage quit.

 

It wont make the waiting time longer as the surplus BBs will be placed in BBs only battles which I stated in the OP.

[AussieGiant]

I've seen this in other game and it's relevant here.  The main reason Cruisers become irrelevant is that min/maxing is how most "games" develop naturally.  The issue is, in real life cruisers are relevant because of economics.  This is of course not relevant for a "game" but hugely  important for why there are so many "medium" classed weapon systems in real lief and why they were developed in the first place.  This is true for all sorts of platforms.  Tanks, planes, ships etc etc.

 

No game developer will make the economy so extreme as to essentially create that dynamic in game (meaning BBs are so expensive that this limits their existence), therefore what we all get is the ongoing questions about why we have cruisers and whats the point. 

 

Bottom line.  Another game I played tried various economic and other ways to create balance, but in the end had to simply hard cap the numbers of certain classes playing in each match.  This solves soooo many issues it's unbelievable. 

 

So yes...I think it's time for hard caps of all classes, or at least ranges. 1 to 2 Carriers, 1 to 2 BB's, 6 to 8 cruisers and 4 to 6 dds.

[AussieGiant]

Plus if you do that...match making is relatively well managed when all ships types are capped.  If not then you just discriminate against one ship class and not all of them. 

 

I think they should at least try it on a test server and see what happens.

[viceadmiral123]

 Can we get a hardcap on BBs already?

 

Apparently not, but we can keep nerfing CVs. Because WG.

[feechbone]

 

It wont make the waiting time longer as the surplus BBs will be placed in BBs only battles which I stated in the OP.

 

this tells me you have no clue on the MM statistics and how it works. not only that you think that people will just keep playing BB? nope they wont. a better silicon is the one WOT has where if there are to many of one type of class they get put in a match MOSTLY consisting out of that class but making it only able to do a ALL class match will screw with the MM how it currently works. It is also not the fault of the mm but of BB's being OP.

[Pajosaurus]

BBs are OP? Eh, not really. Sure, there are a few that probably are, but that's true of all classes. The problem are their numbers. It's no fun when half the ships in every match are huge beasts that can one-shot cruisers and take forever to sink if played right. Honestly, it's not only a problem for me as a cruiser player (I moved away from them because of this wearying BB-heavy meta), it is also a problem for me as BB player. I just hate sailing around in my precious battleship and running into endless lemming trains of enemy BBs on the way. I had matches where I shoot all day, get insane damage numbers and still feel like I accomplished nothing except whittle down ginormous HP pools little by little.

 

On the flip side, that's why I like DDs! Many WASD-challenged BBs to torp, few cruisers to rain on my parade with their evil hydros and fast reloading guns, and just enough enemy DDs to hunt down mercilessly.