Get rid of camping BB

[bouncer8409]

I am now on my knee's begging,,,,PLEASE WG, do something, anything to stop the BB campers. I just had 6 straight losses all due to camping BB on my team. All sat at the spawn hardly moving and sniping from long range. No help to team, No help to cap, No use whatsoever, but they all end with great personal scores of course !

For the love of god,,,DO SOMETHING !!!!!!

[fallenkezef]

What can WG do exactly? They can not force players to play how YOU want them to OP. Nor should they.

[triumphgt6]

Make XP score higher if at centre of map and less if on boundary.

[fallenkezef]

Make XP score higher if at centre of map and less if on boundary.

 

Better exp rewards for spotting and capping would help aswell.

[chazwozza]

Better off making XP greater at closer ranges that way you may see some movement 

eg all shots landed  and taken under 10k yeild 100% XP then say up to 15k yeild 75% up to 20k 50% over 20k 30% 

All torps 100% XP as most are launched sub 12k 

You could mess with values depending on ship class for optimal engagement ranges so cruisers for example would keep a 100% XP bonus out to 15k     just a thought

[Tungstonid]

 

Better exp rewards for spotting and capping would help aswell.

 

Not really for BBs, at least not for the "troublemakers".  All you will hear is "I can't spot with BB or I get killed, I can't cap with BB because I am too slow and too big and get killed."

 

Better off making XP greater at closer ranges that way you may see some movement 

 

Rather this, although it is still quesitonable if the players who should be encouraged by this read the patch notes at all and will take notice of the change. And even if they do, another unsure thing is whether they actually change their playstyle or if they continue to "play save".

[fallenkezef]

People are people, some camp, some (like me) go bow in and laugh like a maniac while his secondaries blaze away.

[IamTroublemaker]

 

Not really for BBs, at least not for the "troublemakers".  All you will hear is "I can't spot with BB or I get killed, I can't cap with BB because I am too slow and too big and get killed."

 

 

W00t

I never said that and I always play my BBs really aggressively 

[Capra76]

What can WG do exactly? They can not force players to play how YOU want them to OP. Nor should they.

 

I took the ARP Kongo out this evening, ended up in an epicenter game on new dawn, south spawn, pushed towards SE corner of centre cap trying to create the opportunity for DD/CA to press and cap, other BB sat back and let me get shot to pieces whilst red BB pressed, we won in the end thanks to the team sinking enough ships, I managed to cap the center and eventually all three thanks in large part thanks to a full HP red NY deciding to sail away from the cap and finished second thanks to that plus some decent damage on another BB and a devastating strike on their CV close to the end.

 

I got fireproof, dreadnought and a devastating strike award and finished with a couple of thousand HP after burning through all 4 (premium) repair parties, the Konig that finished top never (AFAIK) went into the outer cap, finished with a good chunk of HP left and just farmed dmg and kills from relative safety.  The message he got from that game was that he was a better player than me and trying to play the objective as a BB is just stupid (TBF better BB player than me isn't saying much but still.........).

 

What to do?  How about making XP/credits scale for BB with proportion of HP lost, so lose 100% of normal HP to get 100% XP and more or less results in more or less.

[ClappingLollies]

Just got devestated by a GKF 20 km away still sitting in spawn. Not showing broadside. Cruiser fun, fun, fun..... 

 

[IceyJones]

seriously:

 

 

no comment

 

i really thinking about stopping to play this game because of THIS playerbase that grows every day.....

players that refuse to take advice from good players.

told here the team to NOT go A because it causes a lemmingtrain through A

what they did? lemming through A, moving up to A line! dying one by one in the process, while i tried to fight the enemy off BC.

 

its getting worse and worse. and now with all the T8 noobs that got a bismarck for free even they would still hang in T4 because useless noobs, its just unplayable

[Spellfire40]

Better off making XP greater at closer ranges that way you may see some movement 

eg all shots landed  and taken under 10k yeild 100% XP then say up to 15k yeild 75% up to 20k 50% over 20k 30% 

All torps 100% XP as most are launched sub 12k 

You could mess with values depending on ship class for optimal engagement ranges so cruisers for example would keep a 100% XP bonus out to 15k     just a thought

 

​If you want rewards give them for ships that dont Play it that way but could. For example it would be ok for US BB or IJN  but german? To get the most out of it you Play that way anyway not more reward needed. In the same way it would be plain stupid to bring that for anyone. Cruisers dont benefit from trying to get exp and being forced into surekill distance (thats allready done by the idiotic cyclone mechanics) Stop giving geral benefits but more specific ones. For example Radar CA could get more spoting Bonus exp . .AA cruisers get more for planekills but BBs dont ( they allready benefiting from taking lower damage as a Target of a Atack) BBs get exp for bouncing BB caliber Shells ect.....

[Tungstonid]

 

W00t

I never said that and I always play my BBs really aggressively 

 

Thanks for the laugh. But I think you got my idea and that I didn't mean every BB player but the one OP actually wants to address.

 

What to do?  How about making XP/credits scale for BB with proportion of HP lost, so lose 100% of normal HP to get 100% XP and more or less results in more or less.

 

If you find similar ways for other classes who don't play the objective I am ok with that. You know, DDs going all around the map so they can find the enemy CV or going from on flank to the other right at the start of the battle although they should care about domination caps.

And CAs who turn tail and run away in sight of a weak force although they should support their team mates or sniping from some 20 km away although they should bring things like radar, hydro and defensive AA fire into play.

[Capra76]

If you find similar ways for other classes who don't play the objective I am ok with that. You know, DDs going all around the map so they can find the enemy CV or going from on flank to the other right at the start of the battle although they should care about domination caps.

And CAs who turn tail and run away in sight of a weak force although they should support their team mates or sniping from some 20 km away although they should bring things like radar, hydro and defensive AA fire into play.

 

Well, WG nerfed the rewards from capping which is not something I approve of, so if you want DD to play objective maybe reward doing so.  It's perhaps harder to measure how well CA are playing the objective but given their numbers perhaps they should get 100% rewards just for turning up.

[IceyJones]

what to do?

INCREASE dispersion on long range

DECREASE penetration of shells on long range so that cruisers angling work again

 

so BBs would be FORCED to go more close

 

but this and many other suggestions i made already a year ago

[BillydSquid]

I am now on my knee's begging,,,,PLEASE WG, do something, anything to stop the BB campers. I just had 6 straight losses all due to camping BB on my team. All sat at the spawn hardly moving and sniping from long range. No help to team, No help to cap, No use whatsoever, but they all end with great personal scores of course !

For the love of god,,,DO SOMETHING !!!!!!

 

Easy, fix CVs. 

 

The camping problem started when WG nerfed CVs into the floor. A BB can sit at the back with impunity and be largely unconcerned given DDs have to run a gauntlet of enemy DDs, CA/CLs, radar, sonar, spotter planes, float planes to even get a chance at getting a shot on a BB camping at the back. 

 

Put CVs back into a decent state again and watch the BBs screech for AA support when they've let themselves get isolated and focused by a CV. 

[Major_Damage225]

I always have the problem in my bb's by plowin into the red's, sometimes others follow and we win, mostly as soon as a red ship shows, everyone slams into full reverse and i get shot to bits by 7+ships. 

 

[avenger121]

Easy, fix CVs. 

 

The camping problem started when WG nerfed CVs into the floor. A BB can sit at the back with impunity and be largely unconcerned given DDs have to run a gauntlet of enemy DDs, CA/CLs, radar, sonar, spotter planes, float planes to even get a chance at getting a shot on a BB camping at the back. 

 

Put CVs back into a decent state again and watch the BBs screech for AA support when they've let themselves get isolated and focused by a CV. 

 

Very smart. Make CVs even more OP.

 

Every good CV captain will attack first the braindead baBBies who sit in the back and hump the blue line. He will not attack the enemy ships that are 20km closer to him and actually decide the match, thus threatening his victory.

 

You are very smart, I am sure you are a great player with a great winrate.

[BillydSquid]

 

Very smart. Make CVs even more OP.

 

Every good CV captain will attack first the braindead baBBies who sit in the back and hump the blue line. He will not attack the enemy ships that are 20km closer to him and actually decide the match, thus threatening his victory.

 

You are very smart, I am sure you are a great player with a great winrate.

 

Yep, CVs have noooooo problems, no issues with crap tutorials, no interface problems, no poor economy, no useless fighter load outs, no bad captain skills and no problems with strike wings looking like they've run into a blender vs even 2 high tier BBS, no issues caused by disabling manual torpedo drop in low tiers so players never learn how to use the tactic. 

 

Yeah, CVs are fine, nothing wrong here, it's why the game is swimming in CVs, that 5% figure of the number of games played in CVs is just a lie, no reason why CVs are rare regardless of their power in T10. BBs are actually not the most powerful class in the game at all, it's all a fantasy that 40% of all games are played in BBs. 

 

If you're going to spout shite, at least do it at someone which hasn't been around long enough to have played the game since the CV nerfs were implemented which lead to the torpedo soup episode, the nerfs to DDs, radar, AA buffs on BBs, removal of stealth fire. Don't try to teach you grandmother how to suck eggs boyo. 

[Kartoffelmos]

 

As for the actual thread, I just had a game in my Amagi where I consistently was the closest battleship to the enemy (until I died after being forced back). The rest of the battleships on my team were all camping at max range. The funny part? They were all German brawlers... 

[Capra76]

 

Yep, CVs have noooooo problems, no issues with crap tutorials, no interface problems, no poor economy, no useless fighter load outs, no bad captain skills and no problems with strike wings looking like they've run into a blender vs even 2 high tier BBS, no issues caused by disabling manual torpedo drop in low tiers so players never learn how to use the tactic. 

 

Yeah, CVs are fine, nothing wrong here, it's why the game is swimming in CVs, that 5% figure of the number of games played in CVs is just a lie, no reason why CVs are rare regardless of their power in T10. BBs are actually not the most powerful class in the game at all, it's all a fantasy that 40% of all games are played in BBs. 

 

If you're going to spout shite, at least do it at someone which hasn't been around long enough to have played the game since the CV nerfs were implemented which lead to the torpedo soup episode, the nerfs to DDs, radar, AA buffs on BBs, removal of stealth fire. Don't try to teach you grandmother how to suck eggs boyo. 

 

He has a point though, you could increase the power of CV by x10 and they'll still go for the ships that are furthest forward (closest) rather than the blob at the back, why do otherwise?  The closest ships are the quickest and easiest to hit and are the ones that have the biggest effect on the match.

[Major_Damage225]

 

As for the actual thread, I just had a game in my Amagi where I consistently was the closest battleship to the enemy (until I died after being forced back). The rest of the battleships on my team were all camping at max range. The funny part? They were all German brawlers... 

 

Sounds like dejavu to me. 

[Capra76]

 

Sounds like dejavu to me. 

 

It's Dejavu all over again.

[Vaderan]

 

Easy, fix CVs. 

 

The camping problem started when WG nerfed CVs into the floor. A BB can sit at the back with impunity and be largely unconcerned given DDs have to run a gauntlet of enemy DDs, CA/CLs, radar, sonar, spotter planes, float planes to even get a chance at getting a shot on a BB camping at the back. 

 

Put CVs back into a decent state again and watch the BBs screech for AA support when they've let themselves get isolated and focused by a CV. 

 

Wrong. Camping started, when (average) BB players figured out, that RNG ruins their shots, no matter the distance to the target. The difference in spread improvement froma 20km range target to a 5km target is very small. Shells still scatter at will. RNG > Skill. However, while BBs have to fear no harm at "sniping" range, every kilometer closer to the target makes them more vulnerable. So, BB players have the choice: stay on range, sacrifice others for lucky hits and stay in game as long as possible to accumulate damage, or move in, expose to HE spam and torpedo soup, get deserted by supporting teammates and die within a few minutes, still relying on RNG.

The logic conclusion: stay out of harms way.

Thats what average BB players do. Do i like it? No! Do i support it? No. But, even i had to learn: if i push in any of my BBs (even Bismarck/Tirpitz), i get removed from the table pretty quickly. The reason for that: too much faith in RNGesus and betrayed in the end. There is just no point for a BB, to fullfill it´s (supposed) roll as a tank, since the tradeoff isn´t worth it.

That´s a fact, that´s the truth. Player behaviour shows this in almost any battle.

WG already changed "reward" mechanics, but it didn´t change anything. Players rather sacrifice progress and reward, than their ships.

Of course, this truth is nothing that DD/cruiser lobbyists want to hear, despite even accept. They just see the thrad of being harmed by accurate BB fire, completly ignoring the fact, that maybe 80% of BB players completly rely on RNG and it´s lucky hits. Without that RNG, evasive maneuvres would become much more valuable for cruisers and DDs, and the demands on marksman skills, especially at long ranges, would increase drastically, forcing BBs to close the range, where cruisers and DDs can return fire and launch torpedos.

But that´s the next fact: DDs and cruisers want BBs within their gun ranges, but please, just as cashcows, not with guns that can return fire reliably...

 

Considering CVs: they are the most skill depending class in the game. Up from tier 6, when manual drops are unlocked, skill makes the difference between fail and domination. That´s the reason, why so many players consider CVs broken: because they lack skill and the ability, to manage their squadrons and/or manual drops. Skilled CV players can be the instant end of any vessel, especially when it is without AAA support. That´s why the good CV players rather speak of "farming damage" than complaining about CVs.

CVs aren´t dead, they just lack competent players.

And exactly this needs to happen to BBs. They have to be changed in a way, that skill > rng/luck. If campers and patato players miss all their shots, because they lack skills in aiming and leading shots, while on the other hand receiving dead accurate AP salvos from skilled BBs, BBs in general and sniping in particular will loose in attraction. Players will either desert the BB class, or try their luck on shorter ranges, where BBs belong (and where they still have to make a stand against other BBs).

In my opinion, this is the only way, how BBs and the broken meta can be reworked, and how quick and nimble ships can get back their advantage by dodging BB salvos...

[Capra76]

They have to be changed in a way, that skill > rng/luck. If campers and patato players miss all their shots, because they lack skills in aiming and leading shots, while on the other hand receiving dead accurate AP salvos from skilled BBs, BBs in general and sniping in particular will loose in attraction. Players will either desert the BB class, or try their luck on shorter ranges, where BBs belong (and where they still have to make a stand against other BBs).

 

Herein lies, I think, the problem, this is the exact opposite of what WG want.  WG seem to want BB to be mostly skill free RNG dependent ships that give potatoes the ability to get good results (from time to time) but don't allow good players to do significantly better.

 

Check out Flamu's review of the Hood to see where I am coming from, it's incredibly tanky but the terrible dispersion makes it almost pure chance whether you have a good game or not, it's the kind of ship where bad players can post 100+ K damage games from time to time whilst the very best can't do much better.