Enterprise and German Nerf

[Aussie_Aussie_Aussie]

Someone said recently that Des Moines will make playing the enterprise pointless, Forget about Des Moines... I stopped playing German BB's the day she went on sale I have all the german BB's and love the GK  .. I have paused on them because I got wiped out from full health in Bismarck by 2 squadrons on Big E's dive bombers ( No I wasn't camping but pushing like a true German does ;)). So Jumped on the Prize Eugen AA spec'd I melted 2 full squadrons of her dive bombers before she could get close to the Bismarck 7km behind me. so If your a German BB player and want protection maybe a German cruiser doing what cruisers are supposed to do is the fix. This would require a div mate as "support" in Random is like healthy food from McDonalds .. non existent, yes they claim it has vegetables but such a low percentage and is mainly oil, starch and salt. (so for those who do give support o7)

WG has me confused or the CC's have me confused they all say that we need to stop camping  especially BB's, but they have effectively nerfed the only line in the game that is suited to pushing by implementing these 1000 lb AP bombs that basically nerf German BB's while the main culprits of camping IJN (Yamato) and USN BB's (North Carolina, Iowa, Missouri, Montana) are basically immune to them. USN cause AA and IJN cause deck armour.

So get used to the camping meta being the norm if not more pronounced. So buy the enterprise if you want this to continue and your not a skilled CV captain, If you buy her you have no grounds on which to complain about camping BB's cause you have just supported the meta by buying this ship.

I don't play CV so I might be misinformed but I am disappointed with the way Russians are continually under powering USN ships and making Soviet ships OP.. This is coming from someone who is not biased by merican patriotism or Love for mother Russia I'm Australian don't care much for Bias either way but I want a balanced game that we were supposed to get .. Rock paper scissors.  This is impossible when players play for personal reward and not team play. Once again I refer everyone to Zoups take on WTR..... stats maybe indicative of win rate and damage done but not good play. Anyone can sit back and snipe from range like Arty or hide behind an Island.. but it takes skill to support a fellow team mate, secure objectives and win a match... these things are not shown in WTR except maybe win rate, which I agree does show a players ability to carry potatos like me to a point, by beef is how some players arrive and achieve this win rate. sitting in the back remaining full health while those before have sacrificed themselves and weakened the enemy so all you have to do is fire 1 or 2 salvos to finish them off while remaining bow on is not skill. Yes its a tactic a selfish one I believe, I would like to see stats like High Calibre, dreadnaught,  clear sky maybe a reward for DD's that achieve 2-3 caps call it Domination and reward them with speed flags or a new reward flag that maybe gives 2% concealment implemented into stats, these are stats that show that you have contributed to the win all game not just at the end. Too many players are getting krakens etc and don't even top the team in base XP. eg a kraken "earned" in a win and only getting 1100 base Xp for a BB is well questionable

Just my Dollars worth ( I would say 2 cents but Aussie dollar is pretty weak compared to your green back ;P)

good luck and fair seas

[Umikami]

One of the things I have never understood is WoW telling players they do not want the camping meta to continue, yet every addition and improvement they have brought on since CBT has done nothing but promote camping.

Smoke: Players just spew smoke and start machine gunning everyone they can, pushing teams apart.

Hydro: Don't get close or you will get spotted and deleted.

Radar: Same as Hydro but good for 10K+.

and now AP bombs, which work as if they were designed just for German BB's.

yeah, WoW hates camping.

[aethervox]

 .... no, pls, no nerfing of Ger ships.

....however, pls, get some kind of rationale into Carriers. The premium ones are all broken.

Many say the regular tech tree ones are broken too (but I'm fine with them, personally).

[RipNuN2]

Many German BB's can spec AA and murder the Big E's bombers. If you fear them that much, spec for AA. TBH you wont see that many Enterprises once we get through the initial hype. Stay near other ships for AA as well can help. If you think high caliber and dreadnought etc, comes from camping in the back by finishing off low health ships, you have a lot to learn. Camping in the back does not lead to a higher W/R either. 

[StoneRhino]

58 minutes ago, Umikami said:

One of the things I have never understood is WoW telling players they do not want the camping meta to continue, yet every addition and improvement they have brought on since CBT has done nothing but promote camping.

Smoke: Players just spew smoke and start machine gunning everyone they can, pushing teams apart.

Hydro: Don't get close or you will get spotted and deleted.

Radar: Same as Hydro but good for 10K+.

and now AP bombs, which work as if they were designed just for German BB's.

yeah, WoW hates camping.

No you are just seeing the difference in bb designed by nations with real naval aviation experience vs ones that planned on short range fist fights.  If the let bbs fire at full range long range ap would do the same thing

[TheKrimzonDemon]

I have all my KM BB's spec'd for secondaries and AA. Nothing hits me, so, I'm guessing you need to respec your ships and captains if this is such a huge issue for you. Just saying.

[tugdual]

And i approve this nerf of german BB, i bored by this third line sniper.

[legoboy0401]

1 hour ago, tugdual said:

And i approve this nerf of german BB, i'm bored by this third line sniper.

fixed your grammar.

Also, KMS BBs as snipers? What on earth are you smoking? Or are you totally drunk? KMS BBS ARE THE ULTIMATE BRAWLING BBS. To say otherwise is not just heresy, it's completely wrong

KMS BBs are NOT meant to be snipers. They have relatively poor accuracy, even for a BB. In return they get long range secondaries from the start, but at max their Secondary range is only 10.6 km, not even 11 km.

If you think that 11 km is sniping range by BB standards(or anyone;s standards but DDs), you sir are sorely mistaken.

 

I don't, I don't, I don't even... Just, just, no.

 

<sigh>

[cmdr_raccoon]

something on this matter got me thinking. Is it likely true eventually USN CV line will get AP bombs? Seems this is heavily weighted against German BB's style of protection. Any other nation with similar strength/weakness in battleship design like the germans? would seem odd to put a new game mechanic simply to counter 1 ship line only.

[ReddNekk]

16 minutes ago, cmdr_raccoon said:

something on this matter got me thinking. Is it likely true eventually USN CV line will get AP bombs? Seems this is heavily weighted against German BB's style of protection. Any other nation with similar strength/weakness in battleship design like the germans? would seem odd to put a new game mechanic simply to counter 1 ship line only.

Yeah, the one BB line that doesn't camp.

So much for WG's logic that DB AP is intended to discourage camping. Hell, TBs do that pretty well already.

[Ju87s]

haven't paid much attention to this new CV.  Why is it specifically harmful to German battleships as opposed to other lines?

[Eisennagel]

 

 

Speaking of Ju-87s, any chance the Graf Zeppelin will be armed with Stukas with AP bombs too?  

 

 

[Vaidency]

6 hours ago, Umikami said:

One of the things I have never understood is WoW telling players they do not want the camping meta to continue, yet every addition and improvement they have brought on since CBT has done nothing but promote camping.

Smoke: Players just spew smoke and start machine gunning everyone they can, pushing teams apart.

Hydro: Don't get close or you will get spotted and deleted.

Radar: Same as Hydro but good for 10K+.

and now AP bombs, which work as if they were designed just for German BB's.

yeah, WoW hates camping.

This post is pretty silly.  I can argue that all of those things promote pushing instead.

Smoke:  lets you set up safe areas in open water without needing islands.  Reduces camping.

Hydroaccustic Search:  spots torpedoes, making people less afraid of being island ambushed if they push.  Reduces camping.

Radar:  forces enemy DD's to abandon torpedo runs on pushing BB's.  Reduces camping.

AP bombs:  forces BB's to move and maneuver more to not be easy targets for manual drops.  Reduces camping.

Yeah, WoWS hates camping.

Basically, every time something gets changed in the game, people insist that it will cause more camping.  It doesn't.

What causes camping is a desire to not be the first guy to make a mistake.  If you push and it works?  Great!  Easy win.  But if you push and it doesn't work, you get killed really fast while everyone on both teams calls you an idiot, your team is more likely to lose due to your early death, your stats go down, you lose credits, your ship is unavailable for a while and you just generally feel embarrassed and frustrated.  So you decide instead to wait for an obvious opportunity and hope the enemy team will make a mistake or one of your teammates will make a great play.  THAT is what causes camping.  Not some gimmicky premium CV that you'll see once every 10 games after the first week which can sometimes hurt German BB's really bad.

[zFireWyvern]

1 hour ago, Eisennagel said:

Speaking of Ju-87s, any chance the Graf Zeppelin will be armed with Stukas with AP bombs too?  

As it currently stands, Graf Zeppelin has no dive bombers at all

[Shadeylark]

4 hours ago, cmdr_raccoon said:

something on this matter got me thinking. Is it likely true eventually USN CV line will get AP bombs? Seems this is heavily weighted against German BB's style of protection. Any other nation with similar strength/weakness in battleship design like the germans? would seem odd to put a new game mechanic simply to counter 1 ship line only.

Italian and French bbs aren't in game yet...

 

All that said, the OP mentioned he started playing a cruiser instead of a BB... that is WG goal here.

 

They aren't looking at the camping meta with the ap bomb change, they are looking at getting people like the OP to play other classes.

 

Sorry but the OP sounds like the stereotypical BBaby, and this coming from someone with all three t10 bbs and plays his gk more than the other tree bbs.

[Shadeylark]

3 hours ago, Ju87s said:

haven't paid much attention to this new CV.  Why is it specifically harmful to German battleships as opposed to other lines?

German BB armor scheme is called the Atlantic scheme, I.e. light on deck armor and heavy on belt armor/torpedo protection.

 

All the major Atlantic navies used a similar armor scheme, as it was thought to be better suited to fighting in the relatively close ranged battles of the med and north seas ala jutland.  Basically very good vs guns at "normal" Atlantic ranges, but weak to bombs and Pacific style long range plunging fire.

 

The French and Italian, and to a lesser extent the Brits, will have a similar weakness to the Germans (assuming the devs stick to historical armor schemes).  The Soviet bbs won't likely have the same weakness, as they'll be paper designs that incorporate post ww2 lessons instead of the post ww1 lessons the Brits, French, Italian, and German had in mind when they designed their battlewagons.

[SinqueScheiDeMona]

Different strategies. Brits went with one solid bomb deck. Italians wanted to try to fuse early and contain. UP.41 should have a solid deck as British given midwar tests against SAP bombs pointed to the need to have one solid layer to attempt to defeat SAP bombs. French I don't know about. 

[Pope_Shizzle]

Wait, you mean German BB's actually have a weakness now?  Holy crap!!

[SinqueScheiDeMona]

7 minutes ago, Pope_Shizzle said:

Wait, you mean German BB's actually have a weakness now?  Holy crap!!

 

Secondaries where toned down and Enterprise freedom burgers are specifically greased to harm hamburglers. 

[Hurlbut]

56 minutes ago, Shadeylark said:

German BB armor scheme is called the Atlantic scheme, I.e. light on deck armor and heavy on belt armor/torpedo protection.

 

All the major Atlantic navies used a similar armor scheme, as it was thought to be better suited to fighting in the relatively close ranged battles of the med and north seas ala jutland.  Basically very good vs guns at "normal" Atlantic ranges, but weak to bombs and Pacific style long range plunging fire.

 

The French and Italian, and to a lesser extent the Brits, will have a similar weakness to the Germans (assuming the devs stick to historical armor schemes).  The Soviet bbs won't likely have the same weakness, as they'll be paper designs that incorporate post ww2 lessons instead of the post ww1 lessons the Brits, French, Italian, and German had in mind when they designed their battlewagons.

Incremental Armor Scheme is the name. It wasn't about heavy belt armor or torpedo protection but having everything be armored. Bow and Stern got enough armor to stop HE shells. This means either a lot of weight devoted to armor or the armor is stretched all over.

 

Hence the meaning of the name "All or Nothing" armor scheme, which concentrated all the armor on the truly critical parts of the fighting ship.

[Iridium81]

If Dunkerque is anything to go by, you'll see modern armor layouts from France after T5 at the least.  Italy will similarly have modernized WWI era ships around T5-6 in the form of Conte di Cavour, though it might possess an early hull stock.  The ships with multiple thinner decks rather than a single heavy armor deck will be especially weak to bombs, and plunging fire.  German BBs, Pre-WWI, and even a few interwar designs depending on the nation will possess this weakness.  Most naval design teams that were not disrupted by losing WWI learned the lessons necessary to fight WWII, Germany was not so lucky.

 

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-044.htm

[HazeGrayUnderway]

3 hours ago, Eisennagel said:

 

 

Speaking of Ju-87s, any chance the Graf Zeppelin will be armed with Stukas with AP bombs too?  

 

 

 

Why would you want RNG-fest Dive Bombers when Graf Zeppelin is going to come with FIFTEEN GUARANTEED DAMAGE TORPEDO BOMBERS?

[cmdr_raccoon]

Just now, HazeGrayUnderway said:

 

Why would you want RNG-fest Dive Bombers when Graf Zeppelin is going to come with FIFTEEN GUARANTEED DAMAGE TORPEDO BOMBERS?

heard with slightly shorter arming time...but the planes are weak though... 

[HazeGrayUnderway]

2 minutes ago, cmdr_raccoon said:

heard with slightly shorter arming time...but the planes are weak though... 

Kaga has very weak planes, Tier VI TBs for Tier VII CV, and with TWELVE torps to drop is devastating.  She loses planes fast but she wrecks people.

 

Give me a CV with FIFTEEN torps to drop?...

 

WG's train of thought:

"USN CVs were overpowered when able to drop 12 torpedoes, hence their nerfing."

"IJN CVs dropping 12 is perfectly fine."

"The Germans who had no actual, wartime carrier aviation history will be able to drop 15.  Is balanced and historical."

[Phoenix_jz]

8 minutes ago, Iridium81 said:

If Dunkerque is anything to go by, you'll see modern armor layouts from France after T6 at the least.  Italy will similarly have modernized WWI era ships around T5-6 in the form of Conte di Cavour, though it might possess an early hull stock.  The ships with multiple thinner decks rather than a single heavy armor deck will be especially weak to bombs, and plunging fire.  German BBs, Pre-WWI, and even a few interwar designs depending on the nation will possess this weakness.  Most naval design teams that were not disrupted by losing WWI learned the lessons necessary to fight WWII, Germany was not so lucky.

 

http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-044.htm

 

Cavour, and Duilio as well, are both tier V's in their modernized form, and tier IV's in their WWI form. Tier VI... Caracciolo seems likely, although who knows as her guns are so unlike any of the other Italian guns...

 

France might not go that way, simply because their WWI era designs have a ton of (fairly anemic) 340mm guns. Bretagne at tier IV, Normandie at tier V, and then Lyon as a tier VI? And then perhaps with the right buffs Strasbourg could make tier VII?

 

Ultimately, though, older BBs will be pretty safe, as unless there's a single-thickness plate of 70mm or greater, the bombs won't fuse (resulting in only overpen damage).