The state of the game.

[Captain_Meow]

Look I'm going to start off by saying I love and hate this game in equal measures and I say that because I've been playing since the very start. My issues are this. The current play style is sit behind Islands reverse when spotted and play a nose on style of gameplay. Do you want to know why the static style is the in thing at the moment? It's because of the butchering of the IJN DD line that's why. There's no counter to passive or static play and that is purely WG's fault. I can't be the only one who is getting sick of this play style  can I? I really hope WG buffs the IJN DD line back to a time when they were enjoyable not op they've never been op and back to a time when the game was fun. Before the comments of oh torps ruin the game please think about what we now have in game. We have Radar we have spotter planes we have all sorts of magical items to counter the wall of skill if used correctly so this argument torps need a 1.7 surface detection range really isn't viable anymore. IJN torps should max out at 1.5 at most now and I hope something is done because this game is in serious danger of failing within it's first two years of life and that is sad.

[LetsRockAndRoll]

Be patient.  IJN DD's ( except Kamikaze/Fujin ) aren't in a good place right now. My experience of WG is that they 'balance' things eventually. The good times will return soon™

 

[pra3y]

What you need is a CV to counter static play. You wanna stop behind that island, well here come the planes  

[EmilyFara]

I think that both the IJN DDs need some love (never liked the nerf of those ships, even if I never played them).

But I also think that stopping should have the same disadvantages as in real life. (a stopped ship is at the mercy of the wind and current so it's heading and course will change (ship will start drifting on the current and turning on the wind))

And a reversing ship is rudderless.

Would be interesting to see a BB stopping and then slowly turning into the wind and showing broadside to the enemy team. Or a BB being taken in between islands by the current.

[creamgravy]

WG have designed most maps to incorporate low island camping, everyone hated ocean maps. DDs have never countered that play only CVs.

 

Even if low islands were removed, ship based torpedoes are far less effective these days. A Großer Kurfürst with Vigilance can spot torpedoes at 7.35km and a heavy radar presence makes it almost suicidal getting within a good torpedo range.

 

Island camping is here to stay, get used to it or play low/mid tiers..

[RenamedUser_92906789]

I fail to see how IJN DDs buff will counter camping. If anything people will camp even more.

 

Dont get me wrong, I am not saying that IJN DDs are fine atm. But a buff sure wont eliminate passive play.

Like pra3y said, the only class that can counter this are CV. Like them or not ... that is the truth. 

[mikelight1805]

The current state of the game cannot be fixed with just one change

 

I agree the game has changed a lot since CBT when the game was really, really fun. But back then we only had 2 complete lines. If we look back, how can you for certain say that it is just IJN DD nerfs that have affected the game badly?

 

In my humble opinion, a criminally low CV population, a overly strong KM BB line, and the IJN DD nerf have created a perfect storm to sit in a BB and hug map borders or bow on camp. The recent change to remove stealth fire has not helped anyone but BBs.

 

I feel we have had too many changes, too quickly.

 

 

[Cages01]

Too strong AA is main problem here in my opinion,especially if you are with t6 CV in t8 battle. Planes drop down like a fly's

 

[Exocet6951]

Here's how you fix the game, in my opinion : 

1. More CVs
2. Remove uber armored decks on BBs that can easily tank 203mm IFHE (looking at you Kriegsmarine). 
3. Slow down some of the Russian DDs. Having a tier9 go 42 knots is ok, having a tier5 do it when most ships have low velocity guns is not.
4. Decrease BB maneuverability
5. (optional) if still a major BB overpopulation after a few months, hard cap to 3 per game.
6. Get better servers and better netcode. I'm tired of seeing hits midship at the waterline overpen a BB's belt armor, and tired of seeing shells that landed in front of a ship citpen after a few moments of calculations. server/client synchronisation and sturdy servers is the keystone to a server-side game.
7. Rebalance CVs so tier4/5 don't sealclub but get manual drop back, and rebalance the power curb so CVs get progressly better, not this odd uber power spike at tier9. Tier 9 and 10 needs nerfs, and in the case of USN CVs, buffs in other places to make them competitive.

    

8. Nerf ridiculously overperforming AA on some ships.
9. The most important step of them all: stop trying to rake in money on national pride and the behest of balance. I don't want to see you pandering to the German community by making stronk kruppstahl superior technology battleboats just because they have the largest single nationality community anymore. You're doing more harm than good in the long run. To speak in terms even a drunken Russian exec surrounded by "exotic dancers" can understand (yeah I remember the WG office party pictures) : short term business decisions that unbalances the game will decrease your total profits in the long run. 

[GhostRiderMax123]

The current state of the game cannot be fixed with just one change

 

I agree the game has changed a lot since CBT when the game was really, really fun. But back then we only had 2 complete lines. If we look back, how can you for certain say that it is just IJN DD nerfs that have affected the game badly?

 

In my humble opinion, a criminally low CV population, a overly strong KM BB line, and the IJN DD nerf have created a perfect storm to sit in a BB and hug map borders or bow on camp. The recent change to remove stealth fire has not helped anyone but BBs.

 

I feel we have had too many changes, too quickly.

 

 

 

There have indeed been a lot of changes but I must say the stealth fire nerf was needed for certain ships. 

 

[triumphgt6]

More CVs - clearly the way forward but also reduce BBs AA values so they rely on cruisers to defend them - less camping and a reward for teamwork - would massively improve gameplay

[Ferry_25]

I don't think either the CV or DD suggested solution will solve anything. Indeed: both will promote camping even more. With the 20 km walls of skill people won't dare to move and with CV they will IMO only cower behind islands in groups. I think the problem is the almost removal of Ocean because of the whining: on that map you're forced to move. Now with all the rock maps this game has turned into a Duke Nukem/ Quake/ Unreal clone. Only the fighting players have an encumbering ship around them. I've spend dozens of games trying to outmaneuvre those pussies from behind an island. Quite often succesfull but also often running into a wall of skill that way. Besides that: the CV level is abominable. Only thing they can do (IF) they start is either flying around the map borders/ over the Montana platoon or killsteal an almost dead ship with all their squadrons. OK, not all but an aweful lot of them.

Now I don't se a clear solution: I think I'll be "lynched" if I'd promote a more frequent comeback of Ocean or making maps with not as much Mt Everests are there are now.

[creamgravy]

I think I'll be "lynched" if I'd promote a more frequent comeback of Ocean or making maps with not as much Mt Everests are there are now.

 

Convoy mode!

[triumphgt6]

I liked ocean - except if in the Atlanta!

[rvfharrier]

Here's how you fix the game, in my opinion : 

1. More CVs
2. Remove uber armored decks on BBs that can easily tank 203mm IFHE (looking at you Kriegsmarine). 
3. Slow down some of the Russian DDs. Having a tier9 go 42 knots is ok, having a tier5 do it when most ships have low velocity guns is not.
4. Decrease BB maneuverability
5. (optional) if still a major BB overpopulation after a few months, hard cap to 3 per game.
6. Get better servers and better netcode. I'm tired of seeing hits midship at the waterline overpen a BB's belt armor, and tired of seeing shells that landed in front of a ship citpen after a few moments of calculations. server/client synchronisation and sturdy servers is the keystone to a server-side game.
7. Rebalance CVs so tier4/5 don't sealclub but get manual drop back, and rebalance the power curb so CVs get progressly better, not this odd uber power spike at tier9. Tier 9 and 10 needs nerfs, and in the case of USN CVs, buffs in other places to make them competitive.

    

8. Nerf ridiculously overperforming AA on some ships.
9. The most important step of them all: stop trying to rake in money on national pride and the behest of balance. I don't want to see you pandering to the German community by making stronk kruppstahl superior technology battleboats just because they have the largest single nationality community anymore. You're doing more harm than good in the long run. To speak in terms even a drunken Russian exec surrounded by "exotic dancers" can understand (yeah I remember the WG office party pictures) : short term business decisions that unbalances the game will decrease your total profits in the long run. 

 

These are supposed to discourage camping? The only sensible BB-relevant option there is the cap on numbers in a game, although I would put it at four (and try to make sure cruisers always outnumbered BBs). How is making BBs squishier supposed to encourage them to push? I'm an aggressive BB player, I always try to push the objectives and fight up close whenever I can. What you're suggesting would make me want to sit back with all the rest of them... decreasing their maneuverability and expecting them to push in an environment with more CVs and with them having less AA... really.

 

Buffing the IJN DD line will have the same effect, people will be too afraid to push.

 

I think the best bet for incentivizing more aggressive play is in terms of XP and credit rewards. Find a fair way to give less of it the further back a ship is from the objective. It will have the unintended side effect of unfairly punishing a player who did push but had to fall back from a flank because the team was losing there, but it will be worth it if 9/10 times it punishes the bow-campers who barely move out of the spawn. Borrow a page out of WoT's book perhaps, lower the amount of XP and credits ships get for damaging ships which they're not close enough to be spotting themselves.

[Exocet6951]

 

These are supposed to discourage camping? The only sensible BB-relevant option there is the cap on numbers in a game, although I would put it at four (and try to make sure cruisers always outnumbered BBs). How is making BBs squishier supposed to encourage them to push? I'm an aggressive BB player, I always try to push the objectives and fight up close whenever I can. What you're suggesting would make me want to sit back with all the rest of them... decreasing their maneuverability and expecting them to push in an environment with more CVs and with them having less AA... really.

 

Buffing the IJN DD line will have the same effect, people will be too afraid to push.

 

I think the best bet for incentivizing more aggressive play is in terms of XP and credit rewards. Find a fair way to give less of it the further back a ship is from the objective. It will have the unintended side effect of unfairly punishing a player who did push but had to fall back from a flank because the team was losing there, but it will be worth it if 9/10 times it punishes the bow-campers who barely move out of the spawn. Borrow a page out of WoT's book perhaps, lower the amount of XP and credits ships get for damaging ships which they're not close enough to be spotting themselves.

 

Oh please, the only thing that makes BBs squichier in my list is losing armored decks allowing them to tank cruisers for entire minutes.

Make BBs more vulnerable to CVs, and they'll be encouraged to stick to cruisers. Make them less maneuverable,and they won't basically replace cruisers after a certain tier.

It's gotten to a point where some BBs are simply faster and more maneuverable than large cruisers. That's unacceptable. You simply cannot have the largest, tankiest ships with the most firepower and health potions also have cruiser-grade maneuverability. If they do, what's the damn point of a jack of all trades class?

 

 

I stopped taking "This will make BBs camp more!" claims seriously ever since I realized that every literally single change that doesn't make BBs stronger is met with "I'll camp more with my BB!" reactions.

 

As for trying to get BBs to push based on rewards, sorry, but that doesn't work.

Repair costs are fixed, and camping is still prevalent. It's probably even worse now. There are bots and terrible players completely fine with having below average results, and failing their way to tier10.

Ingame balance simply isn't fixed by out-of-game economy fixes, as brilliantly demonstrated by WoT's gold ammo.

[Venatacia]

More CVs - clearly the way forward but also reduce BBs AA values so they rely on cruisers to defend them - less camping and a reward for teamwork - would massively improve gameplay

 

​That doesn't work unfortunately. This hole mess we have now started right at the point where cruisers steamed off ahead of battleships leaving them unprotected. Cruiser players didn't want to sit around baby sitting Battleships because it was boring for most people to do. Only a few good cruiser players would do it at the risk of the rest of the team shouting at the cruisers not to camp and do nothing plus WG didn't reward you for baby sitting a BB. It was hard for cruiser players because BBs needed them and also DDs needed them, so cruisers were stuck between a rock and a hard place - do you help the DDs or do you stay and protect the BBs from CVs and sneaky DDs, either way one was going to suffer which lead to these problems.

 

This is what cause the BB meta we have now. I don't blame BB players because the cruisers were there to protect them but the cruisers ran off in search of glory - well some if not most only found the wall of torps from ambushing Jap DDs which sent them to the bottom of the ocean.

 

I think WG should of reduced the number of torpedoes on DDs and made protecting a BB with cruiser AA more rewarding. Maybe there should of been another class of ship to protect DD so that cruisers could protect BB. I can see why WG did what they did and give BB more protection to look after themselves. WG couldn't predict how the player base was going to play cruisers but then WG did cause the problem in the first place because random battles and team work hardly exist. There should of been more cruisers to cover both DD and BB but we mainly got teams of DD and BB which both destroy cruisers. Cruisers have always been in the middle of the bad spot.

[loppantorkel]

Maybe if there were submarines around. Can't radar them so you need to enter the ocean to sonar

 

[zappori]

state of the game is that it is full of blithering idiots. Maybe its the WoT crowd that moved on, or something.

[Sarmanil]

State of the game is still the same boring meta that's been going on for 9 months now. Which translates into apart from watching the king of the sea III tournament, I have no interest in wargaming or wows

[tenacious_torps]

The fornicating state of the game? Here you go: 

 

[mikelight1805]

A completely abstract, brain-fart of an idea i know, but how about some kind of de buff to ships far away from cap points, and a buff as you get nearer? the reason i say it is we have all witnessed feckless CAs and BBs chasing reds around the map boarders, sailing away from caps when a simple cap could have won the game.

 

There seems to be no incentive for these potatoes to actually win the game. it seems they are satisfied to sail around with big guns that go boom. If they had accuracy and reload nerfs on the map border, at least they find a reason to stray near a cap point.

[OhMyDiddlyDais]

Maybe change the spawns so ships start as a ''fleet'', change the XP to promote capping in ships other than DD's, maybe make damage scale across tiers, shoot a ship a tier below and only do 80% of the damage you would to same tier (maybe just for cruisers), try ADDING TUTORIALS THAT EXPLAIN HOW TO WORK AS A TEAM WITHIN A FLEET ENVIRONMENT, HAVE THE DAMN GAME WARN PLAYERS WITH KLAXONS AND FLASHING LIGHTS THAT CAPPING THAT ZONE RIGHT THERE IS IMPERATIVE TO WINNING AND WILL REWARD YOU WITH MONIES AND XP! there are sadly loads and loads of possibilities including all those posted like the buffs for cv's above which might help and dozens more which have been suggested in other threads, obviously everything is speculation and I have no idea which combination of suggestions would actually have the desired effect but I'm pretty sure that given everything that's been suggested on this forum there is almost certainly a solution of sorts yet to be even considered by WG. 

[tsounts]

DDs hidding in their own smoke and pew pewing instead of smoking up their team's BBs and cruisers that are actually trying to kill the enemy with big guns.

On several occasions I've had dds camping and snipping in their own smoke sitting far behind while their own team is trying to push.  Of course this leaves enemy torps go unspotted too....

 

Teams that agree on A & B for example and then all rush to A without supporting B..... Resulting in losing by cap points while having full health bbs and cruisers sailing around near the map's border....

 

It's imperative for each ship to know its role....

[ColonelPete]

The best option to reduce camping is the reduction of firing range and maybe an increase of cover.