Caulton

British battleships incoming

  • You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.

1,696 posts in this topic

Rule Britainia should be the requisite theme song, followed by Hearts of Oak 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New consumable for all other Nations - 'case of Marshmallows'.....your crews have a sing along and toast Marshmallows over the Raging fires!  +5% to Morale   LOL


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KurtVonSteiger said:

New consumable for all other Nations - 'case of Marshmallows'.....your crews have a sing along and toast Marshmallows over the Raging fires!  +5% to Morale   LOL

Unsinkable Sam - Reduces hit points by 99.99% lol


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/public-test/your-feedback-matters/

Quote

While the British battleships are at the final phase of testing and are almost ready to be released in Update 0.6.10, you are invited to have a look at battle encounters in a different light! The Tier IX Battleship Lion will be available for testing before the line is officially released through a special mission below, and we will also have two missions allowing you to unlock Tirpitz and Atago on the Public Test.

well im glad this is finally confirmed.


1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

*Edited

personally I see this. KGV guns are odd to balance and not easy to use at t8. 

 

yes  granted but use the right ammo at the right time and it's fine. the rest of the ship and I do mean all of it other than main guns is tier 8 all day. 

 

 It should not have gimped armour to fit into tier 7 as it's protection was second only to Yamato and is at least t8. It has t7 /t8 speed, t8 AA (gimped to t7) she should have t8 hp pool (and that's gimped to t7).   To be a true representation of the real ship all of the above shows tier 8 placement.  

 

Frankly tiering a ship down  

on ONE point only (gun size) where everything else is a tier up is plainly just Insulting to the ship. 

 

KGVs armour should be very strong as it was in history. Removing this fact (one of the main strengths of the class) just to fit ONE stat into t7 is nonsense. 

Edited by Nohe21
*This post has been edited by the moderation team due to Off-Topic content.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The to add to the madness the "monarch" that is exactly the same hull EXACTLY has t8 armour when KGV doesn't. 

 

What is that about it's the same ship with different turrets and guns. The entire ships is and was designed the same. So why the hell are the armour values different. They should both be 32 or 25. Thay can't be different that just makes no sence at all there the same ship!


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, shockinhockin said:

 

Frankly tiering a ship down  

on ONE point only (gun size) where everything else is a tier up is plainly just Insulting to the ship. 

 

 

And the worst part of that?
The guns are still the weakest of tier7.
It's a ship with guns that still can't overmatch 25mm armor, only now it's facing ships that can overmatch its bow in EVERY.SINGLE.BATTLE.

Tiering a ship down because of its lacking firepower only to make her still lacking firepower, and losing her armor in the process.
Honestly, someone from WG will have to explain to me point by point how that's beneficial to the ship and to the players.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, shockinhockin said:

The to add to the madness the "monarch" that is exactly the same hull EXACTLY has t8 armour when KGV doesn't. 

 

What is that about it's the same ship with different turrets and guns. The entire ships is and was designed the same. So why the hell are the armour values different. They should both be 32 or 25. Thay can't be different that just makes no sence at all there the same ship!

Unfortunately, due to the game mechanics that seem to be set in stone the guns are deemed to weak for the tier gameplay and so the rest is 'Ballance' for gameplay purposes - of course, stats can be tweaked to put any ship at any tier.

The only reason so many of us are unhappy is that what started out as a really good warship simulator has started creatively adjusting things to make ships fit in predetermined tiers and has chosen various blueprint / concepts where perhaps a more viable / real ship could have been placed.

 

Ultimately we have to go with the flow and enjoy what we get - but human nature is such that we all have our own ideas of what / how it should be done.

It's just a shame that WG did not go with the Tier/year route - i.e grouping ships by construction date so you would always be fighting your contemporaries - but as been said before - 'don't like it? then Make your own game!'  :-) 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

 

And the worst part of that?
The guns are still the weakest of tier7.
It's a ship with guns that still can't overmatch 25mm armor, only now it's facing ships that can overmatch its bow in EVERY.SINGLE.BATTLE.

Tiering a ship down because of its lacking firepower only to make her still lacking firepower, and losing her armor in the process.
Honestly, someone from WG will have to explain to me point by point how that's beneficial to the ship and to the players.

The balancing could have been done far better, even without nerfing the armour the ship can still be balanced for Tier 7. This is just WG doing it the lazy way instead of doing it properly.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Exocet6951 said:

 

And the worst part of that?
The guns are still the weakest of tier7.
It's a ship with guns that still can't overmatch 25mm armor, only now it's facing ships that can overmatch its bow in EVERY.SINGLE.BATTLE.

Tiering a ship down because of its lacking firepower only to make her still lacking firepower, and losing her armor in the process.
Honestly, someone from WG will have to explain to me point by point how that's beneficial to the ship and to the players.

I agree I have no idea at all.

 

i believe that the best possible outcome for a final KGV in this games mechanics is as follows 

 

leave KGV at tier 7 due to its guns requiring some skill and positional awareness to get results from 

 

but override the amour scaling and give the KGV 32mms of amour around the ship like the tier 8s 

 

its that simple what you then get is a  very well armoured but under gunned ship for her tier. And what do you know that's how she really was and that I think will make most people happy with her and make her fit in the game as well as possible. 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KurtVonSteiger said:

 

It's just a shame that WG did not go with the Tier/year route - i.e grouping ships by construction date so you would always be fighting your contemporaries - but as been said before - 'don't like it? then Make your own game!'  :-) 

 

Enjoy your Yamato being on the same tier as a North Carolina, and the Myoko on the same tier as the Omaha.
Or perhaps a Lexington on the same tier as Kongo, that should be fun...

There's a reason why the game isn't done by when ships are built.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep I'm sold at this point having read a lot on the KGV issues. 

 

I persnally think we should get.

 

KGV tier 7 

14"guns (weakness of teir)

32mm armour deck / fwd aft ends (strength of tier) 

 All other stats hold as they are. 

 

 

I cant see a better set up to get the ship working in this game and make it close to its real strengths and weaknesses of guns / armour combo. 

 

Works in game and as close to the true historical layout as possible in this games set up. 

 

WG please consider this idea. I think it's fair to the ship and the game 


1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are other ways to balance games - however in the simplest mirror matchmaking form you still get the same thing - the top tier ship on either side has the advantage and the lower tiers need to be good to counter this.

It should be by teamplay but quite often that is non existent, also most players go for the most OP ship they can get their hands on!

 

Using WoT as an example, hordes went for the Japanese Heavies as they were pretty much invulnerable to front pens  and another, Historical battles showed great promise, however it was killed by dreadful waiting times as most players (you guessed it) were wanting to play the top tanks!

Yamato was built to have no peers at the time of her construction - so put asymmetrical teams in play - same mix of cruisers and DD's but only 1 Yamato vs 2 North Carolinas!    Hopefully we might see this sort of thing if WG ever introduces Historical Battles for WoWS .

 

We are off to a good start with the Weekly P vs E co op missions and Dunkirk was great! - so quite happy to see that expanded!    Of course, we all have our own views and I appreciate your point is every bit as valid, but sometimes I would just like things to be mixed up a bit more - A squadron of cruisers vs 2 BB's and destroyer escort and others along that line rather than the 'same old, same old ' every game - but that's just me!

 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, shockinhockin said:

i believe that the best possible outcome for a final KGV in this games mechanics is as follows 

 

leave KGV at tier 7 due to its guns requiring some skill and positional awareness to get results from 

 

To be honest I don't think KGV's guns would be any worse at T8 than they are at T7.

 

I mean what does she gain from being T7?  The ability to overmatch the bows of same tier cruisers plus T5 BB, but she can do that with HE anyway, and in return she gets overmatched by some T6 and all other T7 BB, not a great trade IMO.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact this whole KG5 argument is stemming from a similar premise - other nations did not play fair and follow the Washington Naval treaty hence the KG5 being tweaked to fit the resulting power creep :cap_yes:


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Capra76 said:

 

To be honest I don't think KGV's guns would be any worse at T8 than they are at T7.

 

I mean what does she gain from being T7?  The ability to overmatch the bows of same tier cruisers plus T5 BB, but she can do that with HE anyway, and in return she gets overmatched by some T6 and all other T7 BB, not a great trade IMO.

Her main gun would be near useless against Tier 9 and 10 BBs, Armour and gun wise she'd be very weirdly matched at Tier 8 were at tier 7 she is not going to be meeting Yamato but doesn't stop her meeting Izumo.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, redundant arguments as we are pretty much set in stone on this - after general release we will see the outcome via any Nerfs or Buffs then we can say 'I told you so' vis a vis T7 or 8  (still think there will be a LOT of rage over the HE fires though!)


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, KurtVonSteiger said:

Anyway, redundant arguments as we are pretty much set in stone on this - after general release we will see the outcome via any Nerfs or Buffs then we can say 'I told you so' vis a vis T7 or 8  (still think there will be a LOT of rage over the HE fires though!)

I really don't like the idea of the HE myself, would rather they kept the AP as it should be with 0.033 second fuse time.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Chipmunk_of_Vengeance said:

Her main gun would be near useless against Tier 9 and 10 BBs

 

Really?

 

I mean first off everything can be balanced if WG wants it to be, if they want to give it shells that'll go straight through the belt armour of a Yamato at any range then really that's just adjusting a number or two.  The only thing the caliber affects is the overmatch rule and 14" will overmatch T10 BB armour just as well as it'll overmatch T6 BB armour (which is to say not at all).

 

More to the point she's likely to fire mostly HE anyway, which is just as effective against T10 ships as any other ship (in fact probably more effective against bow in T8+ BB than any non-Yamato T10 ship).


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Capra76 said:

 

Really?

 

I mean first off everything can be balanced if WG wants it to be, if they want to give it shells that'll go straight through the belt armour of a Yamato at any range then really that's just adjusting a number or two.  The only thing the caliber affects is the overmatch rule and 14" will overmatch T10 BB armour just as well as it'll overmatch T6 BB armour (which is to say not at all).

 

More to the point she's likely to fire mostly HE anyway, which is just as effective against T10 ships as any other ship (in fact probably more effective against bow in T8+ BB than any non-Yamato T10 ship).

There is far more to it than that, if you change the 14" guns to act like they are not 14" guns then you might as well give it 15" guns or 16" guns, either way you look at it, whether it is over buffing the 14" gun, or giving it guns that it was planned to use but was never equipped with, it will not be the same KGV that fought in WWII, in fact it wouldn't really be KGV at all, just a ship with Overclocked guns that just so happens to look like and share the same name as that famous British Battleship. It is also much easier to just give it another gun, whether 15" or 16", if you wanted to add immersion to the game without super-unrealistic gun parameters.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chipmunk_of_Vengeance said:

There is far more to it than that, if you change the 14" guns to act like they are not 14" guns then you might as well give it 15" guns or 16" guns,

 

Why?

 

 

3 minutes ago, Chipmunk_of_Vengeance said:

either way you look at it, whether it is over buffing the 14" gun, or giving it guns that it was planned to use but was never equipped with, it will not be the same KGV that fought in WWII,

 

but then the uber-fragile ship we've been given isn't the KGV that fought in WWII either.

 

 

6 minutes ago, Chipmunk_of_Vengeance said:

in fact it wouldn't really be KGV at all, just a ship with Overclocked guns that just so happens to look like and share the same name as that famous British Battleship. It is also much easier to just give it another gun, whether 15" or 16", if you wanted to add immersion to the game without super-unrealistic gun parameters.

 

Yeah, because WG's overmatch and penetration rules are a near-perfect relection of reality and must be obeyed slavishly, whilst trivial matters such as how much armour the ship had and everything else that went into balancing the design can be ignored.

 

And you're ignoring the HE point as well.


1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Capra76 said:

 

Why? Because 14" Guns you just overbuffed no longer act like 14" guns. As for changing the gun itself to a larger caliber, including model, you can create a ship that does not break the immersion, no I don't mean historic immersion but gameplay immersion, there are still some threads of realism in the game too, most guns still behave close to their real life counterparts.

 

 

 

but then the uber-fragile ship we've been given isn't the KGV that fought in WWII either. That can be remedied by giving it the 32mm armour it deserved without the need to change its tier or nerf it in other areas, the gun itself balances out the armour.

 

 

 

Yeah, because WG's overmatch and penetration rules are a near-perfect relection of reality and must be obeyed slavishly, whilst trivial matters such as how much armour the ship had and everything else that went into balancing the design can be ignored. Overmatch mechanics is just a feature of the game, despite this, the guns do perform close to their real life counterparts.

 

And you're ignoring the HE point as well. I did not ignore the HE point, personally I don't not believe the HE should have been touched, and HE only works to a certain extent, and you should not use it as a balancing feature, it only serves to break it rather than actually sustain it.

Reply in blue text


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chipmunk_of_Vengeance said:

Reply in blue text

 

Please stop, I'm starting to agree with Earl_ of_Northesk, and I really don't want to agree with him about anything ever.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Capra76 said:

 

Please stop, I'm starting to agree with Earl_ of_Northesk, and I really don't want to agree with him about anything ever.

In what regard? I gave you an argument for each of your points.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chipmunk_of_Vengeance said:

In what regard? I gave you an argument for each of your points.

 

No you didn't, you gave me your opinion on the points that suited you.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.