Lets disable limit for BB participating in battle

[Draconobilis]

I waited 6 min for this battle and it isnt first time , maby it is  time to face the reality and remove cap 6 BB per team per battle.

[El2aZeR]

We had this in CBT.

Lets just say there are good reasons why there is a cap on it now (if there is any at all, really).

 

[waxx25]

We had this in CBT.

Lets just say there are good reasons why there is a cap on it now.

 

I would have creamed my pants if I was that fubuki.

[edited]

[Teralitha]

If they can cap battleships, they can cap anything.

[xXx_Blogis_xXx]

dont see problem, my last 4 games in t10 and each time did get 4-6 dds per side , and few bb only, would say limit dds not bb

[Yaccay]

THe reason for waiting is not the BB's limit.

[ParEx]

I would have creamed my pants if I was that fubuki.

[edited]

[edited]

 

If they can cap battleships, they can cap anything.

Yeah and we get mirrored games every time.

Since there are alwayss plenty of BBs waiting you get 5-6 BBs in almost all games. Plus maybe 3 CAs and 1 CV when you are lucky. Rest DDs.

So even right now when there is only BB and CV hardcap we see almost the same team setups over and over again.

I dont want mirrored teams!

 

And for the Screenshot with BB-Heaven: This Fubuki may have a bad time when the CV concentrates on him.

[Ubertron_X]

My suggestion would be to reduce the limit to 3 or 4 but to enable 12 BB vs 12 BB battles. This way matchmaking would not suffer by long queues despite having more 'normal battles' as well as some Jutland type all-BB/BC battles (same can be done for any class that clogs up the queue, so if there is an abundance of DDs the matchmaker should opt for an 12 vs 12 all-DD battle).

[Zathras_Grimm]

My suggestion would be to reduce the limit to 3 or 4 but to enable 12 BB vs 12 BB battles. This way matchmaking would not suffer by long queues despite having more 'normal battles' as well as some Jutland type all-BB/BC battles (same can be done for any class that clogs up the queue, so if there is an abundance of DDs the matchmaker should opt for an 12 vs 12 all-DD battle).

 

Hell yeah. Please allow BB vs BB matches only WG.

[JapLance]

12 vs 12 BBs on Islands...I want to see that.

[Domin1c]

Lets disable limit for BB participating in battle

 

If [edited] like this doesn't give WG some kind of idea that the game balance is fucked then I don't know what will.

[Akula971]

I would have creamed my pants if I was that fubuki.

[edited]

 

No need for that at all. Perhaps sir would be more comfortable in WoT?

[SinkTheOthersNotMe]

Yes yes please disable BB limit

-> my fubuki, clemson, any DD in fact will be more than happy....

-> BB will cry and whine

.-> WG will nerf further the DD but I don't care because even with 4km range torps against 11 BB I will still have so much fun (after getting usually easily of the opposing enemy DD first)

 

 

[ParEx]

Draconobilis, on 29 November 2016 - 04:49 AM, said:

Lets disable limit for BB participating in battle

 

If [edited] like this doesn't give WG some kind of idea that the game balance is fucked then I don't know what will.

But BBs have to be broken!!!!11111 Look at all those topics in forum about nasty HE, damn Torps and OP CVs!

The poor BB player is suffering! We need buffs, not hardcaps and nurfs!

The whine is stronk in forums!!!!1111

 

[/sarcasm]

[Generalisator]

There is a limit?

Had, before laspatch? a game with one CA, 1 CV, rest BBs.

 

So, since when is there a cap?

[AussieGiant]

I honestly think they should cap all classes of ships.  A range would be perfect for each class.

 

You immediately balance the game.  At least by a large degree. 

 

You can make cruisers relevant again by making them the most prevalent class in any match.  This removes the natural min/maxing that goes on in games that are actually based on historical context.

 

If you are a BB driver then you have to wait more than other classes.  Big deal.  It's not like any player just has BB's.  If you don't like the current wait, then pick a cruiser. 

[Stanton1875]

I waited 6 min for this battle and it isnt first time , maby it is  time to face the reality and remove cap 6 BB per team per battle.

 

Like @Yaccay said, it isn't because of the BB matchmaking that you waited for six minutes but that you played a CV.

 

I thought there was a hard cap of five minutes for any queuing CV and after that, the matchmaker throws together any players it can find into a game for you (the CV player) as quickly as possible.

 

[Niibler]

Who will BaBies blame then? 

Also the battles would be boring with all the ships in the game as far as they can of each other, likely reversing and shooting HE. 

[Teralitha]

What is the least played class?

[ilhilh]

THe reason for waiting is not the BB's limit.

 

This.  Surely you waited for an opponent CV?

[HMS_Antelope]

Hi

 

I play all classes except CV at the moment and I feel the community is starting to split between class types.  I am of the opinion that Cruisers need help in heavy Battleship games to be relevant, if we don't want to address Cruisers then we need to make sure they can at least compete.  Having 8 Battleships and 1 Cruiser on the team would not be worth playing that class, so we either limit the Battleship numbers or give the Cruisers force fields and invisibility cloaks.

 

 I was in a match last night with a Myoko, Kongo and I was in a Belfast, we held the eastern flank against a larger enemy force.  I asked the Kongo to tank as the two Cruisers were in front and taking the damage, his reply was that he didn't trust Cruiser players and continued sitting behind.  The Myoko died and I made it with less than 500hp, we won but it is interesting that the BB responded that way, perhaps we are splitting as a community.

[Fino_93]

in my opinion, we should have a fixed number of four BBs and DDs per battle and the rest cruiser, if one or two CVs are present they will occupy one (or two) slot for BBs or DDs.

 

so, with no cv we will have a 4-4-4-0 team, with a cv a 3-4-4-1 or 4-4-3-1 team and with two cvs 3-4-3-2 team.

[Elenortirion]

hardcap?

I haven't heard of any

and I've seen already matches like 8BBs per team

 

so judging by OPs screenshot, his issue is not any sort of hardcap on battleships, it was forced mirroring on Aircraft Carriers, making him to wait those  minutes for oposing carrier to show up

 

so maybe your efforts could be used better while trying to convince WG that aircraft carriers no longer needs forced mirroring 

[Blue_Bug]

My suggestion would be to reduce the limit to 3 or 4 but to enable 12 BB vs 12 BB battles. This way matchmaking would not suffer by long queues despite having more 'normal battles' as well as some Jutland type all-BB/BC battles (same can be done for any class that clogs up the queue, so if there is an abundance of DDs the matchmaker should opt for an 12 vs 12 all-DD battle).

 

​This ^^^^^^ ! I would also suggest to hardcap DD's to 3 or 4.

 

This will solve a lot of problems. Imho there aren't a lot of balancing problems. Most problems are because of to much BB's in one game. To have some variation in ships MM also puts a lot of DD's in the same game. Because of the many BB's, playing CA isn't much fun anymore. By reducing the number of BB's a game you will see that more people will play CA again.

 

[Eviscerador]

I played a game recently with 1 CV 8 BB 1 CA and 2 DD per side.

 

At tier 10.

 

It was not fun for anyone, with all the Iowas and Yamatos just bowing on going forwards and backwards, eating one or 2 torps of each salvo and firing HE at anyone who was in range.

 

I did 100+k damage in my Benson and still we lost, because it was a matter of who focused fire better and wasted more repair in fires.

 

It was boring even for the BB players. But I understand them, Nobody wants to be the first to run broadside (or even angled) and being citadeled by 8 enemy BB focusing fire.

 

Both the CA were russian so they were doing the same behind the BB line, just firing HE and bow on to avoid show flanks.

 

And you want ALL games to be like that?

 

No sir, thank you sir.