Jump to content

WanderingGhost

Alpha Tester
  • Content Сount

    3,370
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    7948
  • Clan

    [SSG]

Community Reputation

842 Excellent

2 Followers

About WanderingGhost

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1,462 profile views
  1. WanderingGhost

    War Effort Wednesday - Cruisers

    Ideally, I'm somewhere a bit far back taking shots at ships, and if I have the tools, hunting destroyers. Usually - the red team has 2/3 or 3/4 caps and no one on the team wants to move up and try to actually win so I try and tank like a BB. Why I've got USN heavt cruisers at tier 9 because I can actually do it and the SHS have helped go toe to toe with BB's.
  2. WanderingGhost

    Changing Models Reflecting Progress

    Yep, unfortunately, some of those former "A hulls" (as much as I went after them on some of the inaccuracies such as missing AA guns and all I liked when they told you the refit year) were just straight up not competitive when against players that had a fully upgraded ship 2 tiers higher. So, to make peoples lives easier, they opted to go with later refits at several tiers. Which means few real hull changes. Albeit tiers 5-7 need to have some later refits added that brings them more to mid-early war standards at the minimum. Dealing with CV's, they and the other classes need their upgrades when they had to deal with CV's.
  3. WanderingGhost

    IFHE on Massachusetts

    You can take it, however, 127 mm USN guns only buff to enough to pen 27 mm of armour - so while that covers several cruisers and lower tier BB's - it's of minimum use. And the Main Battery only goes from 67-87mm which, most things you pen at 87 you still pen with the 67. Most of the damage from those secondaries is going to be fires anyway. As the guns aim more toward ship center and most have more protection broadside. Only place it makes any real sense, as insane as it may sound, is German BB's, and that's only cause your talking around getting to 40 mm of armour (some USN BB's have a 38 mm strip on the side, and I think there's a DD that has a section that requires over 40 mm) and especially the higher tiers with options over 400 mm your talking auto pen of barbettes, turrets, and maybe even a citadel or two. Many DD's with IFHE still lack pen and have to aim at super structure on BB's, but gives them better help against angled cruisers, but they are way more accurate than secondary guns so it's still useful. And light cruisers, the skill truly borderlines on broken. Better off investing really in either Manual Secondaries to increase accuracy against destroyers, CE cause stealth never hurts, or even Manual AA to ruin the day of any CV player that you run into. Or more of the lower tier skills, as with skipping a 4 point you can get say 2 2 point skills extra. Maybe get HA, JoaT, EM and AR - speed up the already fast heals and DCP a bit, a little extra rotation speed and any hitpoints you lose ramps up secondary RoF.
  4. WanderingGhost

    CV Rework Feedback

    I did not get nearly as much testing as I would have liked in due to work and other obligations but dear god what I played was actually WORSE than the first iteration. - The first iteration, as sketchy as it was trying to "dodge" flak felt like it did something, not much, but something. This time it felt like it did jack . This actually felt more RNG than the pure RNG system we have now, as opposed to this RNG/fixed DPS hybrid you have where cause RNG sucks despite dodging one blast destroys 3 planes and damages 2 or 3 others, and I'm not going to get into how much [edited] one flak burst taking out that many planes is on historical levels, but is straight garbage gameplay wise. Seriously this borderlines on strafing 2.0. So I'm going to be blunter then a sledgehammer here - if you can't make Flak, the one part were supposed to be able to dodge, PURE damage based - and I mean more similar to the depth charges you have in the operation where they aim in your direction and while a burst can do damage, is only catastrophic on more direct hits and by changing speed and course actually throw the aim off, no actual RNG involved - then you need to abandon this system because this is just thoroughly trash through and through. I would rather know that flying straight in to whatever guns at x range yields y chance per second that I just straight lose a plane this nonsense where even when your supposed to be able to dodge RNG gives you the finger and you lose 25-30% of your planes in a run. - ALL of the aim points were off in this test run. I managed to adjust for it but Rockets did not start there attack where they should have, putting me short of my target. Dive bombers were a whole other level of bad, because not only did they have the same problem, but when I had a perfect drop lined up on a BATTLESHIP they missed it entirely. Max accuracy, right down the middle AND THEY MISSED. I have had better luck hitting battleships with IJN's current DB's when engaged by fighters/DF AA. Hell, I've had better luck hitting DESTROYERS under the circumstances, then this unescorted battleship. The TB's would also start a bit short, which was less of an issue. However on multiple occasions, despite little, if any, movement, the indicator for a more accurate drop would not narrow, at all. While at other times, same conditions, with possibly more movement, it would. and DF AA was not a factor as it was not activated unless there's a Battleship with DF AA in the test I don't know about, and the indicator didn't go off. - Fighters are still useless garbage. This system for fighter defense does not work, it is flawed, frustrating and bloody pointless. We need actual control of fighters, even if it's a pair of consumables you have to click a ship to defend or something. But this is just asinine. - The gameplay is still incredibly dull and boring, and this Noah's Ark two by two crap is annoying. You wanna split up USN's 6 TB's to 3 and 3 fine, but otherwise, let us do 3x runs with IJN TB's with 4 planes per group, Runs with 6 DB's per group with USN, etc. And most frustrating of all - your goal of trying to get more CV players and interest, already seems to have failed. Most matches in iteration 1 most teams were players with maybe 4 or 5 slots max being actual bots and usually 2 CV's per side. Every match I played, in the same time frames as iteration 1, in iteration 2 only 1 battle had 2 CV's, and there were maybe 4-6 human players TOTAL. People should be clambering and playing the hell out of this test if they have access if it's fun and interesting, even the so called "tourists", early especially them, as they are there just to get a look, not really test, but should be so sucked in by it that they keep playing and coming back. Which, if this is the case, you have far from closed the skill gap, not made any real improvements on gameplay, you have failed to draw interest and retain players, while adding a series of other issues and have basically managed to fail on EVERY SINGLE GOAL YOU STATED AND THEN SOME. While if anything driving away what dedicated players you have. And at that point - better the devils you know then the ones you don't. You know you have a dedicated base of CV players - even through all the crap of balance and problems, despite YEARS of broken promises, despite the crap we get from other players in the playerbase - we are still here. We still buy up every premium CV we can, we still want to see lines represented, still have ideas and still hold out that maybe, one day, you people will make the RIGHT changes for a change. Not trying to nerf manual drops by buffing AA, Not fix people going to USN strike because AS and mix don't have enough striking power due to highly inaccurate DB's and a lack of reserves against the overbuffed AA by buffing fighters, and every other change where you didn't addressed the problem you needed to directly, or the back handed buffs, or the outright nerfs that weren't needed as opposed to the ones that are. If you guys would take the time to listen to ALL OF US, we can fix CV's we have now. Not just the guys that brought GZ while the rest of told you it was OP and look where that is. Not just us CV players, not just the BB players, not just the DD's, not just USN, IJN, or the guys looking for UK CV's to be kings of the seas, all of us. Because while there are some like me who have a more balanced mix of what we play (though admittedly with many mission requirements and CV issues have switched more to BB's) and so look at a bigger picture, many focus more on 1 class, 1 nation, maybe even both 1 class and nation, so they have a viewpoint from that one angle, lets say an IJN DD, then the guy that plays just USN CV's. And as the saying goes - the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. If we want balanced CV's, everyone is going to have to compromise. I personally, have been spending some of my free time working out numbers to try and fix RTS because almost every single issue, from the skill gap, to the alpha doom strikes, to fighter imbalance, is simply numbers and math. And while I've slacked off a bit come up with so far in the last couple weeks changes to attack plane damage at all tiers for not just USN and IJN, but UK and German CV lines as well, along with both basic AS and Strike loadouts and potential options beyond the basics, and calculated the absolute maximum damage they can do (every single torp/AP bomb hitting for max damage, and every HE bomb the 33% damage which is the true max as they can't citadel ships) even with AS changed to add a TB to groups - which is still well less damage than current CV strikes which gets you your shift away from Alpha strikes being their main thing and DoT their better option. I'm not as sure on the numbers I have for fighters, as I still used some base elements of the current systems numbers, but at least have so far a baseline for tiers 4-8 entirely, and the USN and IJN tier 9's, with just the tier 9 German and UK numbers, the tier 10 numbers, and for grins and giggles tier 10 jet interceptors (and I use the word interceptors and not fighters for a very specific reason) to do that at it's worse, can easily form the basis of tweaking fighters. A bit of time - I'll have an "average" AA DPS and Attack Plane HP chart that for any line you want to add, based on it's "flavour" when it comes to durability, such as IJN being weaker, though maybe faster with USN being slower tanks basically, all you have to do is add or subtract HP within a range, and the same for AA DPS except at levels that a +2 ship isn't going to butcher a lower tier CV's planes, but a -2 ship isn't going to be easily harassed and feel defenseless against the higher tier CV unless it's a ship like Ark Beta or Kron where you intentionally make the AA abysmal for reasons. A bunch of other changes need to happen too, but it's a long list why my intent is a separate thread post elsewhere when I'm done, but you guys want the raw numbers now I'll give them to you as I finish these last couple.
  5. WanderingGhost

    Now its time for the UK Aircraft Carriers

    Thank you, I try to keep things shorter but sometimes, saying it well or good means having to just unleash the text wall.
  6. You get an upvote just for using your brain. Seriously, more players did that there'd be less "CV OP" nonsense and if they are on my team I could maybe have a match I'm not a glorified babysitter.
  7. WanderingGhost

    Now its time for the UK Aircraft Carriers

    Except the problem is they WANT tourists - they want hype, they want to be told "yeah, this is great", etc. Which, isn't really what they are getting. NDA means it can't be shown, talked about, etc which pretty much ruins all they want to do with it, which if it means they abandon this a win in my book, so that's not happening. I admittedly only got a few games of testing in because I had to work the Eagles/Cowboys game yesterday so that was basically my day blown for testing, plus Saturday I was busy and that was the first I could get it downloaded. It's also still technically a holiday weekend so people are doing things. So, part of it is just bad timing. If by that you mean growing frustration at the fact that this was all being done completely top secret with 0 communication about what they are changing or input from players, after 2 other years of "oh yeah, year of the CV, CV players will enjoy this" in reality being "Yeah were directly and indirectly nerfing you and making balance worse" and even then, if there's any truth to the statements, that in fact the only reason we got the "reveal" when we did was because while bits and pieces had leaked as rumors there was likely about to be a major leak and they were trying to get out ahead of it with a positive spin - Yeah, I think this is trying to be transparent, which I give them credit on that much. GZ sarcasm aside - yes actually. As someone who has actually used one - they do remind me more of a wooden marionette who's joints are not working right for any number of reasons. There's a certain smoothness the current planes have that these do not. GZ is a separate issue and why it hasn't been released to the public again because Wargaming won't change what needs to be at this time. And yeah, because while strafing needs to be fixed, and some work on lag and bugs would be nice, you actually can command and redeploy the fighters as is and make use of things like speed and some minimal level of tactics even in the worst case scenarios, while this you have to fly your bombers at the enemy bombers to summon planes to hopefully engage them, while the red CV does the same, or hope the enemy flies his bombers at your fighters so they engage. Fighters are borderline ineffective in the rework - at least the actual fighters and not the rocket equipped ones like the mockery of history that is A6M2's attacking ships with rockets. And yes, it is, because staying behind an island and being as far back as possible when not necessary are rookie mistakes that get a CV killed and hurt their ability to fight. Staying behind an island means a stationary target that the red CV can hit easier, or any ship that has guns range and an angle because a plane is spotting you and your fighters are babysitting teammates on the other side of the map, let alone the issue of if that flank falls. And tying into that fighters bit, range is time in both directions. I don't have any flawless numbers with some equation at this point, but just using the ingame clock at higher tier CV's as the center of the icon crosses the grid lines, it's about 10 seconds to cover a square. So take sea of fortune, a 48x48 km map. Making each square 4.8 km. 30 km away basically means about 63 seconds to get to the target, and about as long back, plus landing, rearm, takeoff, etc. Manage to get within 20 km even, that's 40 seconds off strike time. Now, instead of near 3 minutes, meaning maybe 6-7 strikes in the match, you can get it closer to 2 minutes, meaning 9-10 strikes in a match. And while the current CV damage does require a nerf, on a Midway, without AS, your talking about 155-160k damage per strike left on the board currently. We need to be able to dodge incoming fire like any other ship, especially the other CV's attacks. Anymore BB's are playing at max gun range which for some is around that same 30 km range - should we strip them of their WASD for individual turret control where they select a turret and fire each barrel separately? They and cruisers both are hiding behind Islands and shooting - shall we do it to cruisers too? Because make no mistake while in some ways the planes act as an "ammo limit" - they planes are in fact our main battery and torpedo tubes. And doing this to us is the same as doing what I just described to the other 3 classes. A long time ago - yes, they were. However, strafing became an issue at low tiers in particular, truthfully one in all tiers, due to it's ability to delete an entire strike force and it's fighter escort - as if pressing alt and shooting at a BB temporarily knocked out all it's turrets, and doing it 1-2 more times destroyed them. Which drove away many players who wanted to learn, but gave up because at the time there was no training room, no PvE, and no way to learn when your planes are destroyed. AA changes that were handled poorly and implemented to try and fix a problem that existed without actually fixing the problem, namely manual TB drops, caused more issues as USN's abilities, being reliant on already at times troublesome DB's that were over nerfed in accuracy at one point, were now even worse off, prompting a shift of many to the old strike loadout, which, caused even more issues, at which point again, not fixing the problem buffed USN fighters, that were already OP and destroying IJN, even further, not comprehending the inability of DB's in the AS and mix setups being the issue, further causing issues in both lines, that drove players away. Which also compounded issues such as the ability to spot a ship in smoke when it's AA is on or rather now the lack there of, where you can hide 5 AA build Iowas in a smoke screen to shred planes, let alone a monster like Minotaur that has it's own smoke. Or a DD like Kidd. Strafing becoming an auto delete (originally it was not that powerful and was more just an accuracy debuff) and manual drops caused a ton of balance and gameplay issues that because they were never addressed, made it less and less enjoyable. They can still be fun, when you get a game not based around strafing and if your planes survive the AA onslaught but by who has better tactics and adaptability, setting up strikes and when not using doorstep manual drops, getting that target lead just right so that even when you use the "inferior" auto drops you still hit 6 of 6 torps, when basically, they play as a twist on the other 3 types gameplay - yeah, they are actually fun. Wargaming sold the whole "flying in and dodging thing" as an upside - it's the same, or really - worse, RNG as to if you get hit or not. Difference being in RTS - I can actually hit him from a second side or different angle at least. And attacking 2-3 at a time wash rinse repeat - way less fun. Way less engaging. Especially because now with travel time you literally have nothing to do till you travel that 30 km, whih, you now HAVE to play that far back, because you can't dodge or control your ship, and the fact you can't control the ship AND the planes, is just plain asinine to begin with. Honestly, couldn't have said it better myself, and certainly not in as few words.
  8. WanderingGhost

    Meritorious Service camo

    Which only worked if you were aware of it - which there was no in-game thing saying about it, and only stumbled on it part way through due to someone else's post because at the time - I was using the mod installer to launch the game because the game center the last I had used it had a bad habit of causing the game to slow load more often and worse if not outright crash it. And even then, it's a chance at something, over an extended time, where people are likely to say "screw it, not worth it". Knowing for fact that your going to have a fixed reward, or a multiplier to something over x number of matches, far more enticing and reliable in getting people to play something.
  9. WanderingGhost

    Meritorious Service camo

    I feel like I'm forgetting something because the only thing I remember not related to a collection and all was the Super Containers the last couple years, but that's only for tier 10's which I missed out on last year because while I had a ton of battles - had not reached 10 yet because I was playing every line. If I recall you got x number of signals for y battles played - but, for lack of a better term, a "Weekend Warrior" will have very few battles possibly cause they maybe get 20 in over the weekend they can play and all. There hasn't been anything that actually rewards you for sticking around even if you can't play as much and haven't reached tier 10 for pick a reason. Much as I can agree that those that play more often and all getting some extra bonuses is good, it seemed lacking in rewards for truly just being around even if you don't have the luxury to play 8 hours a day. Still waiting on these camo's though, haven't gotten mine yet. And still think they should introduce "ship anniversaries" to maybe encourage the use of some older ships that are falling out of favour and rarely seen. As well as give even more reason to at least every few months/once a year break out that tier 2 freebie to get some elite commander xp, or some free xp, a nice credit bonus, etc.
  10. WanderingGhost

    Games with 6 carriers? Are you serious?

    Even on live half the time that's the case. People wanna put it all on the CV when half the time it's a team of fools spread out so they have no extra AA, are too far apart for the CV to cover, and other really stupid mistakes. Seriously, they could just nerf alpha damage on live server, which, admittedly, at the very least TB's need unless they remove manual drops, it'd cut down on some whining but some of the same would complain still cause they are off alone away from the team and the CV didn't babysit them. But I have no idea what to give this iteration of the rework cause I gave the last iteration and F and this is actually worse. I think this is at least an H. I can't believe I'm at a point I'd rather see CV's just outright removed if this is their idea of a rework.
  11. WanderingGhost

    WG going do something about HE cheese?

    Easier to say then to be able to do and not even in the sense of just learning. Hard to take up position behind a rock or out of spam range when 10 of 12 ships are sitting as far away from where they need to as they can. When no one moves but the red team to take objectives, to try and win, any of it. Go to get the heck out still have 4 ships spamming auto pen salvo's that can start fires that eat 10.4-18% of your HP away. When as a BB you can heal 14-16.8 every 80+ seconds with only half of the pen damage fixable. When your ship is a 21 knot brick against 30+ knot dragons with maximum agility. I've fought other cruisers and won without never changing rounds even thought they had more health and used AP, I've reduced BB's to smoke and ash, torn apart DD's and had the same done to me. One of the few ships I have no issue on usually is Musashi - cause it actually has deck areas they can't auto pen. And that's the issue. DD's and Cruisers people forget had a similar if not the same burn time and damage as BB's when these changes with IFHE coming out first happened - but then they were lowered. "Well, they don't get a heal" - they said - yeah well, now more and more do get a heal, namely cruisers. "BB's throw out huge Alpha salvo's at long range" - if we can see the target and RNG is on our side sure. Accuracy typically is traded for that damage. But people also forget that that "high damage" Applies to 2 1/2 ship types - Primarily cruisers and other BB's, and on those rare times they are in gun range at the right angle CV's. Other BB's can be difficult to citadel, usually it's the cruisers, who are smaller, more agile and generally faster, targets. Because that super heavy damage applies to hitting a very specific part of the ship. Sure, citadel hits a NC throws out a max 117900 damage per salvo. Take that away, the average normal pens, 38907. Cleveland, with just spamming HE is 34848 without fires in 30 seconds. Akizuki can knock out 31680 damage in that same 30 seconds. Except the AP can be bounced, even by a Cleveland. The AP can overpen these ships for 1310 damage - something Wargaming wants to make a guarantee on DD's. 0 damage pens. And these BB's can straight up miss due to RNG. The ships spamming HE are usually well more accurate then the BB's. And when the HE shell hits there is no overpen, no bounce, you pen or you don't - and with IFHE and most BB's having the ship covered in 32 mm or less armour it usually is a pen, so it's consistent guaranteed damage. And on top of that, it better knocks modules out and even if it his for no damage cause of saturation, a AA gun, a spot with too much armour - it can still start a fire for damage. Even the armour is a double edged sword because while I covered the vs IFHE bit already, it also means AP can more reliably full pen a ship, where as lower armour AP can sail right through the ship. Strip away the fires that are straight up RNG, strip away the citadel hits that require some RNG and are the same kinda bonus as fire damage, or more accurately, the same as the headshot multiplier in most FPS games typically for a sniper rifle, though the other two can benefit from it as well. Which, I might add, while they sometimes have issues citadeling cruisers - DD's and cruisers when using AP, just like a BB, actually deal as much damage, if not more in 30 seconds as that 1 salvo does. But the DPM's are not that greatly separated between the 3, and there HE has fewer issues and is being fired from a faster firing more accurate platform. Meta as is can't be sustained. Play is just going to keep getting more passive -- the opposite of what Wargaming wants - and something needs to change in the mechanics or something. Maybe we need to up at least mid section armour plating, maybe we need to add a chance that a really bad angle can bounce the round, maybe we need to go back to a pre IFHE setup without the skill where you need to hit superstructure or weak areas. I don't know. But fires was always a touchy issue. Because you'd get guys constantly getting set on fire if a red ship looked at them funny while you'd have guys complain that after 300 shell hits they started 1 fire. It was all RNG beyond hitting, and it went both ways, why to some degree, frustrating as it was, it was tolerated. Because HE wasn't doing and real damage usually, it was the fires. Cruisers and DD's weren't constantly stripping away 1,2,3k or more per hit every few seconds when fires were balanced. And the pen and fires combined is an issue.
  12. WanderingGhost

    Should Alask be tier X?

    Lert pretty much covered why
  13. WanderingGhost

    Shima got a buff? Sweet!

    22688 with the buff and I'm aware in a running gun battle theres an edge, but Mahan if it isn't taking advantage of the 7.5 seconds as it dodges to unmask another turret or two is the least of my concerns. It's Jervis with 26928 just on the bow running after it, or Gadjah, or the Mahan or Mass that realizes in the time it takes my shells to fire they can dodge the shot, unmask an additional turret or two, and narrow back up and dodge. When you consider it has 3 smaller launchers as opposed to two larger ones, yes, when you look at the launcher itself Gadjah is getting a torp in a tube every 24 seconds, Akat every 25 and change but that's besides the point. But, even at 62 knots, passive dodging is still a thing. Torpedoes aren't exactly the most accurate for a reason, you have to predict where someone is going to be generally 30 seconds to a minute later instead of even 9 seconds of a USN DD. Akat throws 155k damage plus a possible 28k currently, 34 with the buff. Mahan 92800 with the long range torps, and a possible 44k, assuming it does swing around to launch it's 3rd set, which it can do while firing, adding another 46000 damage. Which, when you add in that 3rd set, makes them just about even, but Mahan has the more reliable DPS in the guns. But being the only ship about as bad as Akatsuki in most stats, again, lowest on my list. It's Maass and it's 152k overall, 37k from guns alone and 115k from faster, harder to spot torps every 90 seconds base, Gadjah, with it's 198k between torps and guns, and Jervis with it's 197k damage. Sure Akat has range but range is a double edged sword because the further out you take the shot, the wider the torp spread, even with a narrow one, meaning a bigger gap a ship can dodge through. Why most decent DD players opt to get in as close as they can without being seen before launching - reducing time till they hit, spread, etc. And most ships once kitted for stealth your talking maybe what, few hundred meters distance in spotting range? You start doing the math over a longer period, Sure, Akat edges out Gadjah in overall launched over 5 minutes - but Gadjah is 200k in gunfire, 396k in torps whereas Akat is 465k in torps and 140k in gunfire. And the gunfire is more reliable than the torps. Same as how Musashi seems terrifying at first with Yamato's guns firing around 130k+ every salvo at your tier 7 ship - till you discover that while he has your speed and range nailed down the rounds are landing everywhere but where your ship is. Same deal as why the HE meta exists - the HE is consistent damage that's reliable. More so than AP. You got IJN designed and relying on a weapon system that is not the most reliable to score hits with in the first place, and gave them an even less reliable version.
  14. WanderingGhost

    IJN BB buff (secondaries will be HE only)

    Against certain broadside cruisers with 150/155 mm guns - pretty effective.
  15. WanderingGhost

    Shima got a buff? Sweet!

    The entire issue with Shima back in the day was the 20 km torps - the 8 and 12 km torps you at least had to be in a range that Radar might pick you up, especially after torp accel, not so much the 20 km skill wall. Up the spotting range of the others .1 km, not the 3-4 they do, lower the alpha a little, whatever, but I think the 20 km's should stay as an option, but not so much an ideal one. Shima needed a nerf, but not quite as hard as it was, especially with Radar and Hydro becoming more and more prevalent. Also, even WITH the HE buff they plan, Gearing gets torps with as much speed and range, if a little less damage, but still deals almost 30k more DPS with it's guns stock. So, as much as it get's one more launcher, I'm not one that's gonna lose sleep given some of the other DD's performance. But that's just my opinion. And don't misunderstand, I'm not one of the dolts that never uses my guns. I think around 1/3rd of my kills in all IJN DD's are guns. But I know typically, I'm not gonna win the full health gun duel against most other DD's. And I wouldn't say Mahan's are due to their speed, takes forever for them to get there - I would, however, say Maass and Gadjah do. Akatsuki's top out at 17233, Maass 14400, and 15867. Gadjah launches slightly more that are harder to spot, with only 1 knot less speed, while sure, Akat launches 40k more damage overall, Maass is 3 knots faster torps with that lower reaction time. Because while some people go about the whole fact of "well they deal more damage" - Sure, so does Musashi - but the key is if it hits. Accuracy is a thing that goes into the whole balance too. At just under 7.5 seconds to react base, a Scharn reacting to Maass torps gets maybe half over on rudder. at 9.6 seconds, there about 2/3 over, and Gadjah they are lucky if they get 1/3 over. Higher damage means nothing when they are not hitting as much, same with flood chance. And you start talking tiers 8+ where you can have TSM and Vig, which the tier 7's can see, and where tier 8 and 9 IJN torp line has had some struggles, your talking the difference that some BB's are maybe halfway into their rudder shift against the likes of Maass, but Akat they can pretty much have the rudder fully shifted. 2 seconds may seem small but it's bigger than some think. Sure, guns are there to be used, not what the line was designed to use as it's true main weapon. The lines damage was supposed to come mostly from the torps, so makes sense they'd be a bit higher, and with ships that DO match their speed with torps, and can come close on damage, have better guns as is and are designed around that gun role. So, I don't think it's exactly unreasonable to expect the line that was meant to be primarily hidden battleship killers, to have some torps that aside from a higher damage, are still roughly on par with others in terms of speed and spotting range. Other than PA, and random exceptions like Khab's electric torps, every other torpedo in the game follows a set range of x speed range = y spotting range, so when it has the worst guns still, even after this buff, why does IJN still have to play by different rules on that front when it's torps are supposed to be the focus? If the damage is seriously that much of an issue, go right ahead and shave some of the alpha off. I'll willingly take an alpha nerf to have less of a damage gap on torps if it means shaving 2 seconds of reaction time off the base timer.
×