does WG want to make the game more campy?

[SovietFury43]

SovietFury43 

• Mostly plays cruisers, especially medium-tier and is excellent in them
• Deals a large amount of damage
• Very often finishes damaged enemies
• Very often uses torpedoes (when in ships that have them)
• Key vehicle - Atlanta

 

Oh, look who is complaining about BBs. Mr. "You shall burn in a constant hail of HE spam" complains about the class designed to counter HIS favourite toy, declaring them OP. Isn´t it just the same like we get all the time from the BB-Kevins, complaining about DDs?

Oh, and to save you from additional work, here you go:

 

Vaderan 

• Plays a mix of battleships (excellent) and cruisers (excellent)
• Deals a large amount of damage
• Very often finishes damaged enemies
• Key vehicle - Tirpitz

 

I know the pain of getting erased by BBs, and more than once, i asked myself "how could that happen?" And in many times, i have to point the finger at myself "well, my fault!" Not because of a plain broadside to the BB, but bad angeling or wrong maneuvres, or just not taking serious the ship, designed to counter me. Then, on the other hand, there are these moments, when my torpedoes strike home, and the ship, designed to counter my cruiser, can´t do anything, because RNG screwed up all his efforts of self-defense.

Yes, we got something like a BB-Kevin plague, and a plague of DDs aswell. The meta is screwed, but the reason are definitly not the BBs.

The reason are the DDs. Not because they are OP, or they do too much damage. No, they are the cause, because they have the biggest psychological impact of all classes. They always had. Invisible, but always capable of a sudden appearance and a deadly ambush.

In addition, BBs, as has been pointed out already, require support, just like any other class. However, BBs just cannot simply turn and run, when they have committed for a push. Something, CAs and DDs will simply do, once the situation becomes too hot.

I consider BBs to be brawlers. The need to push, be the backbone of their fleet. And guess what? Whenever i go for this role, i end up alone and focused down. Why? Because my escorts fled, ran away and left me to die, happy they found someone stupid enough to play the bait.

Regarding their armor and weaponry, one should beleave, a BB would be able to make his stand. But, even without the immediate thread of torpedoes, BBs can´t simply make their stand. Armor is nothing, if your ship burns like a torch, ignited by small calibre shells over and over again. Big guns mean nothing, if you can´t hit a barn from the inside, despite great aiming skills, just because RNG wants to show you the middle-finger. Strong secondary armament means nothing, if ridiculous mechanics reduce them to a nice show-effect.

There is one BIG factor, that seperates BBs from DDs, despite the fact that both classes are intended to be brawlers, and that one is the issue: whenever a DD player is forced into a knife fight, he can have the confidence to either win it, or at least inflict a serious ammount of damage while going down fighting. A DD captain can have the confidence to punch above weight. For a BB-captain, the situation is completly different. He has the psychological handicap, based on experience, that a brawl will most likely be his doom, unless the opponent doesn´t go for a significant mistake, or RNG plays in his favour. CAs have reliable torpedoes for brawlings, so do DDs. BBs, as mentioned, have nothing they can rely on, only powerfull weapons they can pray to work for them.

That´s the difference.

What we need, is a change within the mechanics, that gives BB players confidence, motivation and, in the end, rewards for being brave and leading a charge.

Weaker repair abilities won´t do that. Better tanking abilities won´t do that. Punishment for camping won´t do that. BBs are not played for "hey, at least i can take a beating!", they are played because of their guns. Give BBs within brawling range the same reliability, as torpedo armed ships have, and you will most likey see more BBs in close combat engagements.

It´s just simply not about the numbers, it´s all within the players heads. They are used to experience catastrophic results, when going into brawls. As long as this experience doesn´t change, BB-Kevins won´t change. It´s that simple.

 

As a result, CAs will stay the punching balls for everyone else. They only can take on theis "victim"-class, the DDs, occasionally, due to mechanics, so they have to switch on others CAs and BBs. The same goes for BBs. And since CAs are easier to take on, than BBs, CAs will stay the focus target.

 

Except that stats actually agree with me and not him.

 

What is the most played class? BBs by far, What class deals the most damage? BBs, What class is more survivable? BBs again! German BBs are (on the EU server at least) now played literally twice more then all the DD lines combined! 

 

How can it possibly be my fault when i get citadeled by a BB while angled, zig-zagging and moving away from him at 18km? What more can a CA do to avoid losing 80% hp to a single hit? And that crapis not a rare occasion any more like it used to be, it happens regularly. BBs can´t simply make their stand? The first match i played in a Yamato testing it out on a friends account i took almost a whole salvo of torps from a DD that almost killed me right there, i repaired and still did 150k damage that match. No you name me another ship that is not a BB that can do that. That is not even mentioning German BBs with their immunity to citadel hits, great AA, great speed and manouverability. 

 

"In addition, BBs, as has been pointed out already, require support" Not in the current meta they don't! Currently they have (some of them) hydrophones to spot DDs that dare get close, radar to spot DDs trying to ambush them behind islands, secondary's so they can kill DDs that venture within 10km without the need to aim, AA that is in some cases stronger then cruisers in the same tier so they can defend themselves against air attacks by themselves. And all that on top of the survivability AND guns that can kill in one salvo. Now after the next patch they will have immunity (almost) to fire as well. AND STILL you want more accuracy?! Well then why not also give BBs energy shields as well? BBs are currently the LEAST dependent on support from the team out of all the classes in the game and that is the main problem.

 

Furthermore i would much rather be on fire occasionally then be randomly one shotted by 18km whine not making any mistake. 

[Ubertron_X]

The first match i played in a Yamato testing it out on a friends account i took almost a whole salvo of torps from a DD that almost killed me right there, i repaired and still did 150k damage that match. No you name me another ship that is not a BB that can do that.

 

Any DD with suitable stealth and good torps.

 

Yesterday a friend and I (both using highly visible T7 DDs; Mahan and Maas) brought an enemy Fletcher to like 1k HP during an initial cap fight before he managed to escape. He was never seen again that battle, torped 2 or 3 of our BBs for incredible damage and was #1 on the enemy team when they finally won.

[FaceFisted]

I want to transfer to RU servers to play with real players. All of this constant whining and whining some more really makes me sick.

 

[Culiacan_Mexico]

 

...Not ot mention, for the thousanth time, BB re not OP, they numbers are largely due to them bein BB and it's BB that is the most popular class outside of the game, so no wonder that is the same ingame...

 

EDIT: I forgot: Inb4 this thread turns into thousandth circlejerk whining trip.

So... if BBs got nerfed into the ground the same amount of people would still play them?

[Culiacan_Mexico]

How often do you see cruisers accompany BBs at 5km or closer (the range where their AA would be actually effective).

 

This is a problem with game design and randoms.  Shooting down aircraft isn't reward well and you never know what kind of BB player you are getting.  

[SovietFury43]

 

This is a problem with game design and randoms.  Shooting down aircraft isn't reward well and you never know what kind of BB player you are getting.  

 

I try to stay with BBs as much as i can for AA support and for them to tank damage as much as possible.

 

The problem is, sadly this often happens: 

 

[Ubertron_X]

...snip

 

'Ah look, another n00b CA who yolo'ed into the enemy team on his own...' - your BB players probably (/sarkasm)

[fnord_disc]

Battleships are overpowered. That's not a matter of opinion, that's a matter of statistics. They have much higher average damage than cruisers and destroyers and they have the highest survival rates. Also, most battleships are destroyed by battleships, not cruisers or destroyers.

 

Whether this nerf is the right way to go about it is a different question.

 

Also, I say that as someone who mainly plays battleships...

[Ubertron_X]

That's not a matter of opinion, that's a matter of statistics.

 

And even statistics will most often not provide the full picture. Its all about how to interpret them correctly.

 

For example damage <> damage. A DD having an average damage of 30k while primarily fighting enemy DD over caps is a totally different matter as a BB with 50k average damage fighting mainly CA and other BB.

[SovietFury43]

Battleships are overpowered. That's not a matter of opinion, that's a matter of statistics. They have much higher average damage than cruisers and destroyers and they have the highest survival rates. Also, most battleships are destroyed by battleships, not cruisers or destroyers.

 

Whether this nerf is the right way to go about it is a different question.

 

Exactly this. This nerf is only going to make BBabies cower ever more.

 

What really needs to be done is the accuracy at longer ranges needs to be nerfed considerably, and those stupid angled citadel hits on cruisers need to be fixed. Hopefully when the BBabies realize they can't hit crapat 20+ km they will move in closer.

[SovietFury43]

 

'Ah look, another n00b CA who yolo'ed into the enemy team on his own...' - your BB players probably (/sarkasm)

 

Notice that i even took out the enemy DD for them. Didn't help, they still ran away.

[Dampfboot]

 

well, if the CA is properly angled, the BB has a hard time to erase the CA.

Unfortunately, when you angle against one BB, you end up showing your broadside to another.

And for CL,... just don't get spotted (which means: stay back)

 

That is [edited]  , in most cruisers you will be citalled from any angle, at least at Tier VIII plus and that is where the fun is supposed to be.

[aboomination]

That's not a matter of opinion, that's a matter of statistics.

 

Cruisers are more demanding, maybe that's how WG wants it to be? Cruisers have the same dmg potential as BB, of course it depends on the tier - tier 8 for example is especially hard for cruisers. Well, tech tree cruisers. Atago and MK aren't particularly weak.

 

 That is [edited]  , in most cruisers you will be citalled from any angle, at least at Tier VIII plus 

 

Baltimore, Des Moines, Hindeburg, Moskva and Zao would like to have a word with you.

 

Tier VIII plus   and that is where the fun is supposed to be. 

 

[Ubertron_X]

 

Notice that i even took out the enemy DD for them. Didn't help, they still ran away.

 

To be honest I see 4 players not playing for the objective (which is of course wrong) but I also see one player who is totally overextended (which is also wrong), so the screenshot provided might not be as clear as you might think.

 

It usually is the BBs who call the engagement distance, and if they do not go close for any reason (e.g. Colorado vs Gneisenau) you should adopt your playstyle to the teams playstyle.

[aboomination]

Also in that situation there is no need to push into A, keeping the whole situation in mind. Instead helping at B would be preferable.

[Blue_Bug]

The current developments on the PTS and the usual "BB OP" threads make me worry about the future of the current gameplay.

But let's look at the changes:

RDF is with no doubt a big problem for capping DDs and too much intel, countering the stealthy nature of destroyers. Even at a limited range, this skill would still give to much intel for the first minutes of the game.

Increased cooldown for battleship-consumables: Guess what, a ship that can't repair and heal that often won't be able to push or defend a position close to the enemy as before.

 

Now, before all the people who complain about battleships show up:

Let's imagine, the numbers of battleships are reduced and they will be nerfed in their ability to endure damage.

We might see more cruisers, and thus much more HE-spam, so the remaining battleships will camp even more than now.

Cruisers themselves are still extremely shy of engaging anything closer than their maxrange (maybe except IJN and RN, because of their stealth...but rarely seen)

As much as cruiser or destroyer-captains complain about BBs, they need them at least as distraction for the enemy, if they not support them.

The few BBs will have big trouble to take out cruisers reliably at longer ranges (due to spread and wonky overpen-stuff)

 

Now add the much more careful DDs to that pile, who might even refuse to cap, just because they are targeted by RDF and you might see the current meta shift to 100% island-camping.

 

Any thoughts? Did I miss something that would make the current HE-spam meta better? Or do you guys agree and already start equipping your range-modules?

 

 

It is a pitty you raise two different topics in one.  

 

I agree with your opinion that RDF will lead to more camping. It dumbs the game down a lot, and mainly in the standard batle mode players will camp even more, because a flanking atack with stealth ships will become imposible. This while the game is already too static. It loweres the high risk, high reward principle. The last year we have seen already enough methodes to neutralize steath game play. I see no reason in why this skill has to come in game.   imho there is no room anymore for any game mechanic that has the risk of making the game more static. It is not worth the risk. 

 

The second issue, you raise is the question if BB's are OP or not. Imho these two issues has nothing to do with each other. IMHO a BB isn't OP. imho WG should limit the number of BB's and DD's in batle. Imho when those two are limited the gameplay will be more dynamic and everybody will have more fun in game. Although this is mentioned numerous times WG doesn't listen to this solution, and even doesn't even  want to test this on the PT server. 

 

IMHO more things should be tested on the PT server, things that might not come to the live server, but just to see if players will like some things or not. Now 99% what comes to the life server will be implemented in game.

[SovietFury43]

Also in that situation there is no need to push into A, keeping the whole situation in mind. Instead helping at B would be preferable.

 

Why? We could have easily pushed and taken A and then hit the ships at B from both sides.

 

But that would have required the BBs to have some balls.

[aboomination]

Why? We could have easily pushed and taken A and then hit the ships at B from both sides.

But that would have required the BBs to have some balls.

 

Hitting the enemy at B from both sides would've required less coordination, risk and balls.

[SovietFury43]

 

Hitting the enemy at B from both sides would've required less coordination, risk and balls.

 

It would also have required the Cruisers exposing ourselves to the enemy BBs while we retreated from A.

[Ubertron_X]

BB campiness is all about incentives. So I will put this most figuratively and then ask again.

 

If I am a fat, cumbersome guy with a kevlar vest and a flintlock rifle (BB), who maybe can even take a beating, what however is my incentive to charge into a phone booth (cap) with two fencers (DD) and a guy carrying a flamethrower (CA)?

 

(this is a more or less rethorical question, but one that Joe Average BB players need to be able to answer to themselves in order to have any incentive to play to the objective)

[aboomination]

 

It would also have required the Cruisers exposing ourselves to the enemy BBs while we retreated from A.

 

They were inside A, not really a position to exploit their sides from. I'm sure your cruisers would've managed to deal with this. Kidding, of course that's too much to ask.

[Culiacan_Mexico]

...BB campiness is all about incentives...

A Bismarck camping at max range isn't about incentives... it about poor play.  No decent player does this, because the incentives are for a different type of play style.

[Ubertron_X]

A Bismarck camping at max range isn't about incentives... it about poor play.  No decent player does this, because the incentives are for a different type of play style.

 

As I managed to fully miss enemy BBs (!) in my Friedrich and Tirpitz at ranges in between 5km to 7km this very weekend (shots aimed near waterline either went into the water or way above the enemy ship), what are the incentives to go close again?

[Culiacan_Mexico]

 

As I managed to fully miss enemy BBs (!) in my Friedrich and Tirpitz at ranges in between 5km to 7km this very weekend (shots aimed near waterline either went into the water or way above the enemy ship), what are the incentives to go close again?

For the Bismarck... secondaries, plus the relatively poor dispersion of the German BBs to their peers.

[Lieutenant_Hubert_Gruber]

 

WG tried to support teamplay by rewarding damage taken, capping, etc more than damage.

Capping could still be improved for beeing rewarded for not only caputring points, but also blocking, or just helping cap the point (if you had to move out/get sunk before it finished)

It's difficult to support teamplay more...maybe give rewards for beeing close to other ships? this would make it difficult for RU cruisers, who are the one cruiserline, especially built for long-range spam.

The ebst reward is still winning the game, but most people don't get that.

 

A vicinity bonus could defiantly be a good solution. Something in the line of AA circle giving a passive small bonus and that bonus is increased when the AA consumable is active and/or planes are shot down in the AA circle. CVs could get a small bonus in the same manner, like fighters being close to friendly ships and getting an additional bonus for shooting enemy planes in the vicinity. 

 

One thing I would like to see, but I don't really have an idea of how to implement it, would be a tactical bonus. I had a game a few days ago on ocean, where we ( the BBs) pushed hard towards the enemy fleet. We had DDs in front of us and a few cruisers supporting, but out of nowhere an enemy Shimakaze had launched his wall of death at our starboard side. We were 10-14 km from the enemy main fleet and had the advantage, but that one shima forced most of us to do a 90* turn to starboard. All but one of us managed to dodge the torps, but we took a massive beating from the enemy as you can imagine especially my poor Iowas ( 3 x citadel ). When the game ended, the enemy Shimakaze finished at the bottom of his team, despite his actions led to our diminish.  Of course someone should have covered that flank, but that shima exploited our mistake and we got punished for that. I gave him a "plays well" and I hope a few others did too, but his overall score was not deserved.

 

Like I said, I got no idea of how a rewarding system for the latter issue could be implemented