Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Nerf'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Surveys
  • General WoWS Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Team Play
    • Support
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Player Modifications
  • Support
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests
  • Support

Calendars

  • World of Warships Event Calendar



Filter by number of...

Found 101 results

  1. Is the Boise good?

    Hello all, it's me again. I've went and bought the Boise, to have an American cruiser to train my Cleveland captain in. I feel like the $40ish dollars I spent was kinda hefty, but I didn't really grumble, because I was told the Boise was a good ship. So, I bought it, and played a few games, and oh boy, was I disappointed. I thought I'd give the ship the benefit of the doubt, because I probably didn't know how to play it correctly. So I played more games, this time trying different play-styles, including the big DD play-style, the "HE spammer behind the island" style, the DD hunter style, the BB support style, and more, and I was still finding that the ship felt weak, and that I was losing quite a few more games in it than any other ship I had in my port. Everyone always says "it's not the ship, it's the driver/captain", but I don't believe that is the case here. Granted, I am by no means a good player, but I don't feel like I suck either. I could be best described as an average player. When I was playing the Boise in these games I noticed so many different things about the ship that just felt like they were causing me to lose fights that a cruiser shouldn't be losing. I'll list below what I feel like the ship struggles with. - The amount of damage that the guns do. The HE feels underwhelming, especially when I am firing at other cruisers and battleships. It does fine against DD's. The AP on american 152's is naturally not that great, and I accept that; however, in my experience, they just feel worse than the standard 152's. I would get into close range knife-fights with other cruisers at about 5km and less, and even with a full-broadside, I get shatters, overpens, and the occasional pen, usually causing about 1-2k damage with a salvo. Against another cruiser, broadside on, at less than 5km. And yes, I do know where to aim on cruisers to score max damage. I don't know if RNG is screwing me over, or if I'm doing it wrong, or what, but at 5km or less, I'd think that 15 guns would be doing more than that. - The gun range. Granted, it does have 15 guns, but 13.6km for a max range, it just isn't good, and it causes you to have to play a bit too aggressively. I'll touch on this in a second with the ships' overall survivability. - The maneuverability of the ship. Granted, it isn't a destroyer and it isn't meant to have a destroyer's maneuverability, but it feels a bit sluggish to turn, and it feels like it takes a huge distance for the ship to turn 360 degrees. This isn't as much of a gripe as the others, as this one may just be me not turning and changing speed like I should be doing regularly. - The survivability. Oh lord, this is the part of the ship that feels ridiculous to me. Because of the limited range on the ship, you have to get dangerous;y close to the enemy ships in order to do damage, and when you do that, you have to expose some part of your ship, unless you're behind an island. This ship, simply cannot take any hits, whatsoever. HE? it hurts, and this thing burns like dried driftwood. AP? it hurts even worse, no matter the angle it strikes at. Even DD's can shoot this ship with HE, and this thing simply melts when it eats those incoming shells. With 33k health, this thing vaporizes quicker than other cruisers at tier 7, and last time I checked, cruisers aren't meant to sit behind islands and spam HE the entire game. They're supposed to get involved, at some point. This ship, when it gets involved, in my experience, it just melts, bow-on or broadside to the enemy. Now that all that is out of the way, I need some help from the rest of y'all in the community. I need y'all to tell me if I'm just being stupid, not playing it right, and I need to git gud n00b, or if my gripes about the ship are at least, somewhat understandable? Because I don't want to say this ship is a waste of money, but I just can't seem to have a single fun game in it, much less have a good game in it, and every time I see that losing screen or my ship sinking, I can't help but to think about the $40ish dollars I spent on it. PLEASE HELP! Tell me if I am crazy, or if I'm not crazy and I have good points!! -ThePwnageMachine
  2. why!!!!!!!!!!!!!!? seriously he for black swan, cause that leads into the rest of the line how? so much for tier 1 ranked! Game Balance Changes For British Tier I cruiser Black Swan, the guns’ reload time has been increased from 3 to 4 seconds. AP shells have been replaced by HE shells: Initial shell velocity — 811 m/s; maximum damage — 750; chances of causing fire — 6%. Since the cruiser’s shells have typical British ricochet angles and a high firing rate, she has gained the reputation of being the best duel ship of her Tier. The changes are designed to reduce her effectiveness, making her less attractive for experienced players, but maintaining comfort for beginners.
  3. So I got the Roon recently after the nerf and having a bit of trouble with it. All commentaries I found on youtube was before the nerf telling how it has great gun reload. Now with 10 sec reload I am very tempted to get the 6th equip for the buff in reload (to 9.7s ugh) but at a very heavy price in turret traverse. So I want to get the expert marksman instead of 10% reduction in damage control, but wasn't sure if it is worth it. I think the turret traverse is slow but haven't played other heavy cruisers to compare it to or if the ship needs it at all. Any suggestions?
  4. Should WG consider...

    Should WG consider the possibility that some of their customers feel, to various degrees, "cheated" when a ship is "nerfed" after they have purchased "premium camouflage" for the ship? Should WG consider doing something like: If a ship's capabilities are degraded in any manner and there are customers that have purchased (doubloons typically translate to "real money") items for those ships, WG should provide a means to compensate said customer if the customer requests such compensation. e.g., in case of the ALSACE, if premium camo was purchased for the ALSACE, then WG could refund the cost of the camo to the account, and the camo would be removed from the account. I think the above "suggestion" is fair. What do you all think?
  5. Hello all, When I started playing this game in earnest about two years ago I started with the RN cruiser line. I was attracted to this line partly for the smoke and historical value (loved the ROF too). RN cruisers even before the smoke nerf were probably the most unforgiving to new players. I got tired of being squishy, stopped at the Neptune and migrated to other lines that did not depend on smoke so heavily for survival. But while playing up to the Neptune over several months I began to notice how much more effective players became at countering my smoke. And it didn’t seem to matter much if I smoked in open water or behind an island. Standard smoke play for RN cruisers means you smoke up while undetected, deploy hydro and then fire on enemy ships and reap profits. Lately, even in my destroyers players are hitting my ship reliably in smoke while angled or moving back and forth. Combine that with the inevitable torpedoes players send to smoke, Hydro, RADAR, spotter plane and the smoke firing detection nerf and what exactly is the point anymore? Smoke has kind of become a liability. On DDs and CA/CLs that can take anything else in the smoke slot (TRB/RADAR) I take that instead. I have exhausted all mitigation efforts to not get hit in smoke. Smoke screens just don’t seem to matter most times. My theory is that smoke was nerfed right around the time the player base skill had become good enough to overcome the advantages of smoke anyway. Ranked season at T7 with the Belfast fiasco had taught everyone how to deal with smoke ships. Nerfing smoke when WG did only served to further weaken ships that depended on it for survival. Players that experienced Ranked that season came away with new tactics, techniques and procedures to successfully prosecute ships in smoke while players that did not participate were in for a rude surprise if they deployed smoke without factoring in lessons learned. At this point in the game veteran player retention seems to be at an all-time high so this knowledge has been retained. Combine those experiences with the natural progression of player skill at high tier and we start looking at the final nail in the coffin for smoke play. Even I can reliably hit ships in smoke now and I am an average player. I think the solution is that WG should look at evolving the smoke mechanic to reflect the new realities of player skill if they want it to be a useful consumable. Creeping smoke on the Haida and Cossack is a good start but a smoke refresh is overdue. The legendary smoke upgrade for the Minotaur hasn’t been deployed in battle in enough numbers yet for me to form an opinion on that. For clarification, I am not advocating we go back to the days where people could smoke right in front of you and farm you to death but I think we need a change. I know my experiences may be subjective but lately I have seen many players eschew smoke for anything else. Do you think smoke should evolve to match current player skill/meta? Do you think smoke was nerfed too much? Please let me know your observations. Thanks.
  6. Radar. OMG. This has been discussed thoroughly in numerous other threads. Let’s work together to help those experiencing difficulty meet the challenge. Time to get used to it already. First, let’s start using the search function. When someone come on the forum and says they are having a hard time with radar let’s ask them.. “Did you try using the search function?” I think the search function would be faster, caus less controversy and more beneficial to players genuinely interested in finding information on radar than posting another thread with 95% commonality to its predecessors. Honestly, We already have 2354 threads that cover it pretty thoroughly. It would be so much easily to just go to “search” and type in R A D A R than to type out an entire post. I have a few ideas on other topics we could discuss that would be more constructive. Try some of these more creative titles: -Anyone posting radar sucks threads should try using the search function. -Will the search function show you countless threads with all the same information about radar? -Radar information searches need a buff. -Why does wg hate the search function? -I’m not going to use the search function for radar anymore after they buffed the ability to spam radar hate threads. -I play 99% of my games in IJN destroyers and would rather post every complaint I have in general discussion rather than the destroyer sub forum. Anybody else do this? -Lets conduct a poll. Which do you agree with more? 1- search function is OP and needs nerfed 2- search function is underperforming and needs buff 3- what search function? 4- does the forum really benefit from 7 radar hate spam threads a day? 5- bacon Ok. So some of those thread ideas are just like a few of the other thread ideas. See my point? It’s all pretty much the same inflamatory stuff. WG has said no changes planned. It’s futile and destructive to the community to keep throwing gas on a fire that’s not going out. So, why bother unless *that* is the motivation? Come on fellas. Please. These radar threads never go anywhere. They always lapse into personal attacks or the same now- cliche’ positions. We can do so much better talking about tactics and strategies. We could propose ideas for new maps or ship lines. If we didn’t see another radar whine thread for 2 months it wouldn’t be long enough. Let’s stop obsessing about worn out gripes and start talking about other more positive stuff. gl:hf all
  7. Here is a game I had in Roon, no, I don't think it should be nerfed, I just found this battle rather funny (ex: Z-23 on enemy team forgets I am German). I just found the battle funny and intense as we won the battle by coming back in the last 7ish minutes. Enjoy! 20180510_172525_PGSC109-Roon_50_Gold_harbor.wowsreplay
  8. NERF CRUISERS!!!

    Said nobody ever. Well, it's time they got they're own whine thread! So here it is, the one and only, ever. First! Aren't you sick and tired of them machine-gunning their medium-sized shells at you and shooting their 2-4 torps at you? Here is your place to complain!
  9. Graf Zeppelin OP

    I just got insta-delted by a Graf Zeppelin in an Izumo. Despite having full secondary build, maneuvering, being within aa range of a pensy, and him moving his planes over me for the time it took my izmo to complete a full circle, he landed 9 AP bomb hits for 54,560 hp, i took a 5k salvo from an iowa, and he torped me with 2 torps for 12k hp. I only killed 5 planes! The Graf went on to single handedly destroy the rest of the team one by one. This ship is ridiculously OP. I can see ranked right now, get ready for the Grafpocalyse! Seriously a cv insta-deleting a ship 1 tier above it is ridiculously OP. Please nerf this cv back into something that doesn't make all tech tree ships ridiculous.
  10. Clarification: I am not looking for Khaba buffs. She's a blast. I am, however, curious whether or not the stats I see on the WOWS statistics websites reflect the recent nerfs (and yes, I know there are buffs in there, too) or just take all Khaba info. For example, I've seen guys with 168 games in the ship with avg damage of 140k and top damage of 350k. I'm nowhere near that. Best damage is 159 and i've got about 250 battles in khab. avg is in the 50s. Also, I usually place in the top 50% of my team and it isnt unusual to get top 3 or 4. However all my khab stats are below the NA server average. I'm just wondering if there is a lot of old data from back when Khab was super OP and if that is skewing data mining sites making players with nerfed khabs look substandard. Thanks for any replies. Please, don't focus fire me about how strong the Khab is. Again, I'm not asking for buffs, just info. Thx.
  11. dd are too powerful killing battleships, please reduce torpedo damage and add RNG to torpedo detonation. how does it work? battleship main gun suffers from RNGesus, sometimes a well aimed salvo hits water all over the place while torpedo can guarantee 100% detonation and 100% flooding. This is unfair and unbalanced. So in order to have a better experience for all players, the following changed should be implemented to the game: 1. remove flooding completely. 2. reduce torpedo damage by 60% to 80% 3. if hit, give torpedo a probability of 50% to 100% to score zero damage because of malfunction and pure RNGesus. 4. change torpedo damage to healable damage, and give battleships unlimited charge of heal, also buffed to british level heal across all tier and nations. otherwise the game is too in favor of dd players. they are rewarded for no skill gameplay unlike battleships players, who do the heavy lifting and skillful aiming to achieve victory.
  12. Why not put midway at T8?

    Really, why not put midway at T8? T8 fighters T8 torpedo bombers TX rng maybe you gonna hit something drop bombers... Just put the danm ship at T8 in place of lex (another useless usn cv in this game). the TX AA its just gonna melt everthing.
  13. (***) Midway Nerf to T9

    I read USN CV Midway fighters will be nerf to T9 next patch. So new Midway will have the following loadouts. T9 Fighters, T8 Torpedo bombers and T10 Dive Bombers So why are we still calling Midway a T10 CV when most of her planes are T8 and T9??? Why not remove CV tech trees completely if dev are struggling this much to balance the class? Just keep the premiums for both nations and introduce submarines???
  14. As you can see, turret 3 rotated the wrong direction today on my roma. I quickly shifted my guns from left to right and back to left and noticed it doing this. Sorry I don't have a full on replay.
  15. So a few months ago before I quit playing, I was enjoying and almost done with the RN cruiser line. My brother and I came back to the game to find these big smoke changes. I was consistently top 3 in points on my team in the Neptune before the smoke nerf. I have yet to have a good game since returning. Neptune has been hit way too hard by this smoke nerf. The boat can barely hit anything at 10km, but now it's detected at 6.6km in smoke. Why? It usually results in an instant delete since tier 9 is always tier 10 matches. I wasn't happy to find my Kutuzov pooped on either. I mean it has 152mm guns and now can be seen in smoke at 7.7km. How does that make sense? DD's don't have to get close at all and boom, you're gone from their BB pals 20km away. I am more angry about the Neptune though because it has to get so close to the enemy to do ANYTHING, and I'm so close to the Minotaur, but not sure if I even want to spend that kind of credits now. I'm aware it has been a while since the smoke nerf and all of this has probably been said many times by now, but has Wargaming said anything about it? It looks like they need to help the RN cruisers in some way since they crapped on them, Neptune the hardest.
  16. Conqueror Situation...

    For all of those saying that Conqueror doesn't need a nerf... Granted, this was on the PT server, but this is still ridiculous. 110k damage in fires, of which I got 21! Not to mention I got dreadnought, yet still ended up with more than 60% of my health left! 20171217_154422_PBSB110-Conqueror_38_Canada.wowsreplay
  17. The video lays out my feelings. WG is hurting themselves by giving Ships, previewing them then tanking them back for changes ranging from small to large. It kills hype. Personally, I much rather see (and show) a finished product. What are your thoughts? Is the trend good? Or does it sour you to premium ships you might have bought. Keep on mind this happens with regular lines as well. Aka, the German DD debacle.
  18. POINT 1. hello to everyone, since a few days ago I noticed that the nelson used his projectiles HE does not cause more citation on cruise ships. something that before when it was launched was very different and fearful. now it is a simple NY (pathetic) even your main battery is destroyed or incapacitated easily carrying the main battery resitance module. They should study the ship a little more. We all know that it has good healt party but you must also understand that if the boat receives a quote from the health will not work and even if it is impacted by an enemy torpedo, the health only serves to recover from floods or fire or small projectile damage. COLORADO 39% /HP 59300 SCHARNHORTS 24% HP 56300 NELSON 21% HP 59400 NAGATO 27% HP 65000 AND PLEASE UPGRADER VERSION 1945 WITH FULL AA. General characteristics (1945) Class and type: Nelson-class battleship Displacement: 36,000 long tons (37,000 t); 43,358 long tons (44,054 t) full load Armament: 9 × BL 16-inch (406 mm)/45 Mk I guns (3 × 3) 12 × BL 6 in (152 mm)/50 Mk XXII guns (6 × 2) 6 × QF 4.7 in (119 mm)/40 Mk VIII anti-aircraft guns (6 × 1) 48 × QF 2-pdr 40 mm (2 in)/39 Mk VIA anti-aircraft guns (6 × 8) 16 × Bofors 40 mm (2 in)/60 Mk II anti-aircraft guns (4 × 4) 61 × Oerlikon 20 mm (1 in)/70 Mk III anti-aircraft guns POINT 2. WG ALWAYS when it publishes Most of the North American ships are from 1945 to 1946 with full updages examples: WG REAL OF LIFE NELSON 1943 1945 SUVIVER ALL WW2 WITH UPGRADES AA KAGA 1935 SUNK 1942 WITH HANGAR TO 90 WARPLANES SCHARNHORTS 1943 HE IS SUNK 26/12/1943, VERSION CONFIGURATION 1943 IS CORRECT MASSACHUSETTS 1946 FULL OF ALL MISSOURI 1946 FULL OF ALL SAIPAN 1945 FULL OF ALL WARPLANES T9 ENTERPRISE 1944 FULL ALL WITH WAROPLANES T7 BUT WITH ALL MODULES KIDD 1945 FULL ALL I think that all wow ships should be with their last modernization date received during WW2. example kaga vs saipan kaga 10 of T6 figthers vs saipan 12 of T9
  19. US Carriers *Update*

    So it has come to my attention while playing the US carrier line that the new update has limited how a player can, play. The options have been reduced for a generic load out and what I presume is an attempt to stream line the grind. However, this is meant to allow for more flexibility within the battle itself without the need of deciding what load out you want, or expend the XP earned from previous battle to decide on how you'd like to contribute to the teams play style in future battles. On to final part. This has reduced the US carriers effectiveness at dealing with Jap carriers overwhelming number of squads it launches into the air from 2, to 1, for a linear/flexible play though. If this was for balancing reasons, it has shifted the meta of carrier setups and play style to that of only one option, play Jap Carriers to inflict higher damage onto the enemy at less cost to your squads. There is little to be desired for the US carrier line at this stage of the game.
  20. Nerf to Sims? why?

    What is the reason for reduction of deck armour of SIMS? I don't mind the other two destroyers, since they are within the tech tree of their nation. But, SIMS? it being a Premium ship, I think this is rather distasteful.
  21. One of the policies of wg is not to give nerf to the premium ships and I just read that the sims and Julio cesare will be nerfed. It is totally unfair to pay for something that they tell you will not be touched and at the end of the matter they do it. if I spend 1 dollar or 100 dollars they should RESPECT the policies, if they do not have a word, how to believe them and have the desire to continue buying and investing in the game.
  22. Unpopular opinion, yes. First, the link for the Enterprise giveaway: https://gleam.io/0ilFS/uss-enterprise-giveaway Now about conqueror. TL:DW. It’s too soon to say whether it needs nerfing. W/L has normalized and is in line with other T10 BBs. Damage is still very high, but so was Yammie’s when the game went gold. I suspect this will go down as well in time. If not, then we can talk nerf. No need for knee-jerks though.
  23. In my latest romp around the PTS (test for patch 6.12), I neglected to look at the specifics of everything involved. Imagine my surprise when an allied Shimakaze laid a smoke barrier for me, I ducked my Monarch into it, fired my 18km-ranged guns and saw my detection radius shoot to 17km while firmly inside the smoke. Later that exact same match, the same Shima laid a smoke wall for 3 BBs trying to take a cap point. I fired my guns from stealth BEHIND the smoke this time, and somehow still got detected by surface, despite the smoke being between us very firmly. The enemy DDs were more towards the back of their team at that point in the match, and the enemy team was far more than 18km away from me everywhere on the map except for the area blocked by the smoke. Let me preface this by saying that I understand BBs firing from smoke is obnoxious, as would be a ship like the Des Moines or Chapayev in the same position. But the bigger issue I'm looking at here is that the Shimakaze played a very team-focused game, and wasn't rewarded for any of it. With smoke the way it is now, a destroyer can do great things for his team, but if detection shoots up like it does on the PTS, I fear that will totally remove team play for another class and render the game even more passive than it already is (ironically worsening the very issue it's trying to fix) by giving Battleships and most Cruisers very little reason to push ahead early alongside the DDs on their team or Division as they'll just get seen anyways, even without the use of Radar. The only fix for 'passiveness' I see at this point in the game is to rework the Carriers like we were promised earlier this year. Their ability to spot so many ships at once at such great distance is what keeps teams mobile and aggressive, pursuing and claiming kills while the CV itself is chipping in to damage enemies caught out of position. The moment CVs stopped being common, we can see a sudden increase in camping. There's nothing to counteract it anymore, either through scouting or heavy damage on camping ships, and unfortuanately, nerfing smoke like this is just going to promote players to hang back even further than they do already.
  24. 1) I want my Zao to remain as the only fire breather. It's what I have and I don't want competition. 2) I want my Kutozov to be able to sit in smoke and be the only invisible fire breather. 3) I want my Kab to be the fire king as a dd. 4) I want to sit in my Yamoto/Iowa and camp bow on and be impervious to your AP. 5) I don't want to re-spec my ship upgrades to minimize fire damage 6) I don't want to re-spec my captains skills to minimize fire damage 7) I don't want to have to focus fire with my team/div on a Conqueror. 8) I want to be able to use my Damage Control with the very first fire set on me. 9) The game meta should remain static, don't give me something new to deal with. 10) Since the conq is played differently, I feel that it is "bad play" in my opinion. Different is bad.
  25. Can Anyone remember...

    Can anyone remember if, or when, any line was introduced that there was not an immediate call for nerfs to be instituted?
×