Jump to content
  • 1
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
FireRM

Counter to BB overpopulation

31 comments in this topic

Question

[AAO]
Players
118 posts
12,225 battles

Hello,

 

although I greatly appreciate the counter to BB overpopulation that is the Yamamoto campaign, which incentivises the usage of Cruisers thus making them abundant in numbers, I am thinking of a more permanent measure that disincentivises the usage of battleships themselves, since the campaign although will run indefinitely, will be completed by some of the people at some point, thus bringing us back to square one.

I am thinking not a direct nerf (e.g. increase dispersion 20%) but something less direct, but that will stay, can be easily reverted down the road, will cause people to play a bit better, and maybe prevent them of running to their battleships all the time.

So how about making the economy for battlships unforgiving for all but the good performers? I am not talking super-unicum performers, but rather average to good.

Just as an example, if one causes damage to enemy ships that is less or equal to one's own ship's HP, then one should lose credits, badly. The player will thus turn to other classes to make money. Almost like what the intention with T10 ships was before the introduction of the premium camos.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • -2
Players
49 posts

I was thinking that requiring them to do a set amount of damage (adjusted by tier) before damage started earning credits and rep.

I was also thinking if you reduce the number of repair parties to 2 with a level 2 bring 3 while at the same time give cruisers 1 with a level 2 giving them a 2 starting Tier 5.  

The other change needs to be made to catching fire as BBs do enough damage with HP damage and 49% chance of causing a fire is too much.  I would suggest that only HE penetrating shots would have a low chance of fire and a slow rate of eating hit points! No-penetrating HE rounds act only Modules/ low damage to hitpoints as explosives!   The BB player would then have to chose what ammo for what ship type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • -2
Players
49 posts
1 hour ago, Tuccy said:

@FireRM

Unfortunately the result of harsher economy tends to be more conservative play - "playing it safe". If anything, we tried to rather take the damage taken out of the equation (by changing from Repair to Servicing cost) and it helped a bit, but to be honest while in battle, players do not tend to care about economy (as already a battleship that is pushing actively often gets far better reward than long distance sniper).

 

@Iron_Walls

Do not forget that such mechanics would have to apply over the board - such limit would hurt mostly cruisers and destroyers trying to set fire to battleships. The high chance of fire for battleship main guns is balanced by their low rate of fire and overall firing AP is more effective (and encouraged).

As for limiting the amount of heals available, that would punish more battleships that tend to play risky and as a result take more damage.

 

 

I can see your point in regard to heals, but then again they have armour and most Hps in the game then why do they need so many heals/repair?.  They target cruisers first because they are easier to kill and especially with HE and fire.  You rarely see a BB using AP except for shooting at other BBs and even that has decreased with HE buff for creating fires.  Logic would direct that CAs have more heals/repairs, but by giving them 1 at least they have a chance and not be one shot kills.(1 massive hit followed by fire) which is hurting 1 class by making another class OP and need lower skill to play. Imho if this doesn't change it will become a game of BBs vs BBs. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • -2
[CATS]
Alpha Tester
661 posts
13,213 battles
26 minutes ago, Iron_Walls said:

Perhaps it's you that doesn't understand the game?  How many battles have you seen where even 4 DD's were on a team?  How many have you seen with 7 or 8 BB's on a team?  You may also have noticed that there are usually more BB's in que than all other classes combined!  Why if not BBs are overpopulated?  Perhaps, because risk and skill are not a requirement to do well playing in BBs.

 

I see the problem is to require doing well in BBs requiring more risk and skill.  I have a proposal,  BBs gun range and range of site (pre-radar) are different, so any shots over a ships view range is being spotted by someone else. Now ships have range detectors and even basic tables to shoot accurately.  When a ship is firing on a target reported by radio from the ship or plane spotting, the accuracy is going to drop so why not have that reflected in a large increase in dispersion?   This way you are not forcing BBs to not snipe, but are making it much less effective. 

I do really well in all of my classes, especially CV. Every 3rd to 5th game there are 4 or more DD's - at tier 8 or higher.

You clearly don't understand the game, yet you insist that BB's are the way to go and don't require risk and skill. You have neither the experience nor the skill to make such statements,you do horrible in all ships on all tier levels ---> http://wows-numbers.com/de/player/530028174,Iron_Walls/

So can you all please stop supporting him in his misbeliefs? Thank you!

On 13.8.2017 at 1:05 PM, domen3 said:

 

Except anyone who isn't in the said battleship right?

You should know better, that really hurts to see someone making a statement like that. Who gets hurt by many BB's? The CV's are glad to see them, a DD is glad to see them and a CA is happy to burn them down...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • -2
[THESO]
Beta Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
4,606 posts
3 minutes ago, Panzerschreck1985 said:

I gave arguments, no one of the downvoters has said anything - except you so far. And you gave no arguments, just some empty words and even you have not reacted with arguments. Just because more people "think" something is like "x", its worth NOTHING regarding to arguments and facts. Also, you know very well that the most part of people using forums for "feedback" like iron - who has NO CLUE about the game - are simply people who are more or less like him - bad in the game, ignoring game mechanics and even denying facts and trying to do things that they are not supposed to do. And they tend to make a huge mess about it in the forum about how the game is unfair to them...

 

So, you can either provide some valuable arguments why too much dd's hurt less then too much bb's or think about why you might be wrong. I think about it too, and so far no one has given me anything to show that i might be wrong.

 

Considering the number of people that already made good arguments I don't feel the need to repeat every single thing they've said. If you want you can go read some of them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • -21
[CATS]
Alpha Tester
661 posts
13,213 battles

BB overpopulation? You meant DD overpopulation... no one gets hurt by 5 BB's on both sides, but 4-5 DD's on both sides...

 

*edit* so far, 18 players don't understand this game  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×