BBs and concealment

[RUSSIANBlAS]

First of all this is a poll regarding Random Battles as I can't see competitive play having stealth BBs since they're needed to tank for the team.

 

Looking at the current leak stats for the Conqueror, she looks like she can go very stealthy... So it looks like WG don't feel BBs being to have sub 13km concealment is an issue and here to stay.

 

Now do you think higher tier BB being able to spec for good concealment is a problem? They can rival or even beat some cruisers they might face in the MM. Whilst I personally enjoy deleting oblivious cruisers from stealth, it's probably a little silly that you can hide some of the largest ships in the game in plain sight. Things like the NC can go under 11km and the Tirptiz and Iowa under 13km. At those ranges you can get pretty reliable Devastating Strikes on enemy cruisers and they likely don't have time to do anything about it.

 

Should WG remove the ability to equip the concealment module or nerf BB concealment across the board? Or would that encourage the average player to camp more? Or are Stealth BBs not really a problem at all?

 

 

[Kazomir]

Conqueror is squishy. And not as maneuverable as a cruiser. No concealment and she will be Yamato (soon to be captained by none other than Yamamoto) food.

 

They removed her radar and AA too. Its fine.

[rvfharrier]

As far as being worried about receiving a game-ruining hit in my cruiser from a BB, I'm more worried by the fact there are five of them on the enemy team than I am about their detectability. If there are only three then you can note last spotted positions, bearings etc and keep track of where they're likely to be and so where to angle the ship if you're about to fire and become visible. With five, there's just too much uncertainty.

 

What worries me about significantly increasing their visibility at high tiers is that it may become too risky or simply not possible to disengage or move from the side of the map you started on. May risk increasing the zone of over-extension for a BB and bring about even less mobility from a class that already is played by many like an island. I wouldn't be against the idea of lowering the concealment of cruisers slightly but for the fact that I'd be worried it then risks the balance with DDs, especially as far as radar cruisers are concerned. So I vote no to the poll, but not yes to the status quo. Simply that I think the root issue is more to do with the MM's class distribution.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

Was using the Conqueror as an example but I can recall needing CE when I was grinding USN BB to have any chance of surving in my NC in hard T10 games.

 

 

Maybe it's a MM issue for BB that's the main issue and not stealth ambushes...

[anonym_yHbO7kUt9ZH4]

I voted NO, shame you can only vote once.. that horrible BB stuff needs to end, or just ditch all other classes from the game and call it world of battleships. it's ridiculous imo. All tailored towards the stupidity you see so much off. WG doesn't want players to learn, they just want them to play like donkeys and pay premium to compensate for that.. 

and yes, i'm frustrated right now, it's getting to ridiculous proportions lately, and i can't believe that WG want even more fuckups in their 'balance'..

[GulvkluderGuld]

Voted yes as I think BBs need the stealth to relocate.

Any worse stealth and dds will spot them all from caps 1-2 mins into the game. Am a bit worried about the Conqueror with 10-11 km (?) concealment, but I dont really know much else about it. Radar was removed, so probably it is ok.

 

As others have said, it is more a matter of 5 bbs being too many to play against in any CA.

There will always be one with a shot at your broadside and always one ready too shoot.

Put a hard cap of 3 bb in the MM and use the  surplus to make 12 v 12 BB games.

If WG was really evil they would make it 11 vs 11 and add one CV each side 

9 minutes ago, ItsTheShip said:

I voted NO, shame you can only vote once.. that horrible BB stuff needs to end, or just ditch all other classes from the game and call it world of battleships. it's ridiculous imo. All tailored towards the stupidity you see so much off. WG doesn't want players to learn, they just want them to play like donkeys and pay premium to compensate for that.. 

and yes, i'm frustrated right now, it's getting to ridiculous proportions lately, and i can't believe that WG want even more fuckups in their 'balance'..

 

My Khabarovsk would like to thank all the oblivious Bismarcks lately without whom so many free witherer and High caliber achievements would not have been possible!

[Live85]

Do you usually see high tier battleships popping up miraculously at sub 12km ranges only to land devastating strikes and disappear again? high concealment battleships can be annoying to deal with, but it's not like they will magically appear out of nowhere close to you without getting spotted at all. And this comes from a cruiser main that also specced most of his battleships for concealment. I think that the main advantage of high concealment BB's is the ability to shoot a volley, disappear after 20 seconds if nobody is keeping you spotted, maneuver and do the same again... rather than surprising ships that are already aware of your presence since five minutes earlier while you got closer. If anything, I'd improve the concealment of a couple of cruisers...

[Zemeritt]

2 minutes ago, GulvkluderGuld said:

Voted yes as I think BBs need the stealth to relocate.

Any worse stealth and dds will spot them all from caps 1-2 mins into the game. Am a bit worried about the Conqueror with 10-11 km (?) concealment, but I dont really know much else about it. Radar was removed, so probably it is ok.

 

And CAs do not? There are full speced CAs with worse concealment some BB get! That's in my opinion unacceptable.

[GulvkluderGuld]

6 minutes ago, Zemeritt said:

 

And CAs do not? There are full speced CAs with worse concealment some BB get! That's in my opinion unacceptable.

 

Moskva? Its pretty much the only one I know of, but I dont know about Hinden and the new Frenchie.

Considering Moskva is more or less a BB in its own right (range and partly armor) I isn't really any big deal as long as we talk 13ish km detection range for bb.

 

Old Pensacola was an issue, but that has been fixed.

[Tungstonid]

I voted yes because IMO the detectability of BBs itself is okay. However, I am neither in favour nor a fan of stealth BB builds since I think it beats the purpose (and to an extend the weaknesses/disadvantages) of this class.

I would not increase the base detectability of BBs because as some people before said, sometimes it is needed to disengage and I also don't see a purpose in punishing every BB player because some (ab)use game mechanics made by WG. Instead I would make Concealment Expert and/or the Concealment System Modification less attractive by lowering the bonus up to a point where any BB is still better visible than a(ny) CA of the same tier. Either based on the base detectability or at least on the CA with stealth build.

[Shirakami_Kon]

50 minutes ago, Kazomir said:

They removed her radar and AA too. Its fine.

 

Wait, what? I stopped following the "progress" with Conqueror as I made my mind on leaving the game after the introduction of RN BBs because of BBs having those two consumables. They removed that from Conqueror? They removed that from ALL the RN BBs?

 

Edit: We'll not from Hood, but yeah, every  other of them?

[Zemeritt]

3 minutes ago, GulvkluderGuld said:

 

Moskva? Its pretty much the only one I know of, but I dont know about Hinden the new Frenchie.

Considering Moskva is more or less a BB in its own right (range and partly armor) I isn't really any big deal.

 

Moskwa is 13,8km

The Frenchie sits at 12.7km

The Hiindenburg ar 12,3km

I can drop down my Missouri to 12.2km!

[Shirakami_Kon]

7 minutes ago, Zemeritt said:

 

Moskwa is 13,8km

The Frenchie sits at 12.7km

The Hiindenburg ar 12,3km

I can drop down my Missouri to 12.2km!

 

I think the problem here lies in how CE works, the buff for BBs is 14% and 12% for cruisers. They should change that. My suggestion would be that "at least" they swap that. Buff of 14 % for cruisers and 12% for BBs.

 

Because with how it works now you have things like that, a Missouri that's more stealthy than a Hindenburg, which just feels wrong.

[Zemeritt]

Just now, SHDRKN4792 said:

 

I think the proble here lies in how CE works, the buff for BBs is 14% and 12% for cruisers. They should change that. My suggestion would be tha t "at least" they swap that. Buff of 14 % for cruisers and 12% for BBs.

 

Because how it works now you have things like that, a Missouri that's more stealthy than a Hindenburg, which just feels wrong.

 

Or just have one in general. All classes get 10%. Since BBs have worse base concealment, they still would benefit more from it.

[Shirakami_Kon]

1 minute ago, Zemeritt said:

Or just have one in general. All classes get 10%. Since BBs have worse base concealment, they still would benefit more from it.

 

Yes, that would be ok too.

[GulvkluderGuld]

11 minutes ago, Zemeritt said:

 

Or just have one in general. All classes get 10%. Since BBs have worse base concealment, they still would benefit more from it.

 

I guess this would be fine.

 

Thx for providing stats above. Looking forward to my Missouri, only 100k xp to go! 

Does seem a bit odd for CAs to have a spotting disadvantage, but then I see Flamu in his Hindenburg burning BBs down from 19 km without any chance to fight back. That feels a bit stupid too tbh. BBs need an option to disengage from that BS, but that is wandering a bit too far off-topic.

 

 

[Prospect_b]

21 minutes ago, GulvkluderGuld said:

but then I see Flamu in his Hindenburg burning BBs down from 19 km without any chance to fight back.

Very unlikely since he uses reload mod.

[GulvkluderGuld]

1 minute ago, PzychoPanzer said:

Very unlikely since he uses reload mod.

 

Hmm ok. Was a while back and I could be somewhat wrong about the range - it was long range undetected HE spam and from behind islands. That kind of thing.

 

[cro_pwr]

Yes, they are too stealthy.
And that comes from a guy that plays stealth build on all of his high tier BBs except KM ones.
NCal, Amagi, Missouri, Yamato... They are all full stealth build with ridiculous amounts of 12-13 km concealment.
I said it before they introduced stealth fire nerf, I'll say it again. Nowadays BBs are best stealthfireing ships in the game. Just shoot from stealth, go back into your Romulan cloak before enemy even turns guns towards you, wait till you are (somewhat) safe, shoot again.

[lycea]

Potatoe with stealth build will sail his battleship untill about 12-13km away from the enemy. 

 

Potatoe without stealthbuild will hump the border

 

Which is better? 

 

[Ze_Reckless]

Some cruisers are better with rudder modification instead of concealment. For BBs, concealment is by far the best modification. That's why many BBs are stealthier than some cruisers. Maybe they didn't think it through when they introduced the rudder mod?

I would remove or replace the concealment mod for BBs.

[anonym_MfZ6T7iwWpUC]

I voted no purely based on the North Carolina. I mean, seriously. How can something so big get so close without somebody noticing?

 

[El2aZeR]

I have mixed feelings about this.

On one hand it's absolutely hilarious (in a bad way) that a BB can outspot some cruisers.

On the other hand high tier USN BBs rely on both stealth and cover for survival since their ingame armor scheme is extremely vulnerable to HE fire unlike their contemporaries.

 

In the end, I vote yes. Why? Because air detectability of BBs is much higher than any other class (except CVs ofc) with no way to deny plane scouting. If there'd be enough CVs around this wouldn't be nearly as big of a problem. Basically the same situation with stealth fire (and what ultimately got it removed). I'd rather not break something that would technically speaking work if there'd be a healthy class distribution.

[Unintentional_submarine]

10 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

Why? Because air detectability of BBs is much higher than any other class (except CVs ofc) with no way to deny plane scouting. 

Less of an issue for BBs than it looks given planes can only detect ships out to 11km. Any detection beyond that is wasted. 11km, is still more than the cruisers, but it is hardly a massive gamechanger given the speed the planes move at.

[Kazomir]

8 hours ago, SHDRKN4792 said:

 

Wait, what? I stopped following the "progress" with Conqueror as I made my mind on leaving the game after the introduction of RN BBs because of BBs having those two consumables. They removed that from Conqueror? They removed that from ALL the RN BBs?

 

Edit: We'll not from Hood, but yeah, every  other of them?

 

Yes. You can come back now.