Hello,

Some of you might have noticed, that recently we had a nice topic to discuss the new changes WG are testing. Namely changes in smoke mechanic, HEAP changes and radar consumable changes. However, I have a strong opinion, that those changes, albeit might be interesting, are much less important then the real changes that aren't even tested. 

So, I just wanted to ask few things and, hopefully, get some answers. So, @Tuccy @MrConway @Ph3lan and @Kandly it would be nice to get your attention to this topic and get your feedback.

Almost year ago we had Sub_Octavian saying on reddit, that he is aware that battleships do too much, survive too much, have too much of an influence on the battle, and that there are too much of them in general. He said you're testing ways and solutions to that problem, but mostly, we named the problem at all. Am I to believe, that it is no longer considered a problem? I don't remember exactly if what he said was before or after the GE BB release (I think it was short before they were introduced, numbers of BB players were oscillating around 31% back then), however situation only grew worse from that point. You removed "stealth firing" mechanic from the game, but didn't compensate ships that relied on it in any way. Therefore, ships like Zao, which was constantly nerfed long time ago, mainly because of this mechanic, now ended overnerfed. And although I said many times that "stealth firing" isn't a good thing to have in game, I expected that small buffs to compensate for lack of it would be introduced. I was wrong. Instead we had constant buffs for BBs with nerfs to other classes. Iowa speed buff, Iowa and Montana armour buff, GE BB secondary buff, AA buffs. Not to mention, that captain skills are being a massive buffs to BB's too, while not really changing anything for most of the cruisers. Fire Prevention skill made BB's even more durable, which is exactly opposite of what we should try to achieve? Advanced Firing Training, is not only buffing the range on AA guns, but also on secondaries, making the synergy effect even stronger on BB's. However, I wasn't complaining that much, since HEAP skills was also a considerable buff for light cruisers, making some of them less painfull to play. Schors, Cleveland, Mogami with 155mm guns, Donskoi - they all profited from the change, and went from very bad cruisers to a nice ships, even fun to play. But now you're testing the change that more or less just make the skill irrelevant and is a big hit to CL damage potential. To give credit, when credit is due tho, you managed to buff high tier US cruisers, after a 1.5 year of being the worst line in WoWs, you managed to make them playable. Reduced the fantasy spotting range of Pensacola, and gave Baltimore some hitting power (although in exchange of it's range, making it more risky to engage targets). So, for cruisers, you often go for "trait" changes. Cruisers often lose something to gain something. This is not the case for battleships. Why? 

You also recently wrote, that you fixed most of the UI problems of CV's, and therefore you can add more of them into the game. This is not true. Many, many, many bugs are still there, a lot of them very old and frustrating, some of them new and no less frustrating. When moving your CV while using waypoints on minimap, game sometime treat your order as you clicked it "through" minimap, therefore your ship is ordered to move to a place where your cursor is currently hovering above. It can be in the middle of the enemy team. And this is a common "bug", the "transparent minimap" bug. Fighters while being ordered to make a strafe from a bit longer distance, often doesn't strafe at all, just fly to the place you placed the strafe marker, and then hover above as inactive. Torpedo and bomber drop circle is very inaccurate, often making planes do another approach although they clearly should drop their payload. When dropping in zoom, if you will hover your cursor over chat bracket, the drop order will not be acknowledged by the game. If you click a lot (and any RTS fan will know how many clicks you do while playing), if you move your cursor it will often treat your action as trying to select multiple groups of planes and the infamous "green frame" will appear. It's super annoying and distracting. It looks like there is a "lag" between clicks, both in using the minimap and on the tactical map. When changing the drop marker planes sometimes will do strange manouvers and drop their payload in unexpected location, like in mid move. All this, coupled with long downtime between strikes, make CV's unfun, boring and entirely dicourageing class to play.   Introduction of GE BB's with their superior armour, as well as popularity of the class and this particular line, made a lot of cruisers struggle. Playing IJN cruisers is now really unfun, with even perfectly placed salvo just crushing 90% of it's shells without doing any damage to it's target. Do you plan to rebalance the IJN shells, which were long considered as their strong point? Cause right now, Zao, Ibuki, Mogami with 203 mm guns and Atago struggle a lot. Will they get the treatment you did with GE cruisers?    But, the most important thing is - do you plan to do anything with battleship dominance at all in World of Warships? Cause instead of curbing the numbers. both in game efficiency and in sheer numbers of BB's played, you managed to do exact opposite during the last few months. You consider changes to smoke, radar and HEAP mechanics, but you don't consider changing fire damage type to not be light damage, fully repairable by battleship. You consider nerfing mechanics that don't need nerfs, and are only abused (if they are abused at all), cause the battleship class dominates everything else? And the only way to reliably defeat BB is by other BB or by staying in smoke. Why are you buffing armour on US BB's when you should do exact opposite? Why you buff GE BB secondaries when you should be doing exactly the opposite. So now you will change the Repair party on IJN BB to have 45s activation time to prevent fires? Why are you increasing the radar range against cruisers, effectively mitigating any teamplay and forcing cruisers to more passive gameplay, when you should be doing exactly opposite. What is the flaw of BB's? Cruisers get citadelled, destroyers are very fragile, CV's are 100% dependant on the team they are facing. What is the flaw of a BB?    So. How about we discuss this, cause RN BB's are very close, and despite super cruiser missions in Yamamoto campaign, we're still looking at 39% for tier VIII, 37% for tier IX and 39% for tier X BB population, while being the least numerous class in the game apart from CV's.