Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Citrusss

The only nerf RN BB need is...

Agree?  

37 members have voted

  1. 1. Should RN BB lose AP?

    • Yes, gimme my bacon!
      11
    • No! I don't want any bacon!
      26

18 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
1,044 posts
8,288 battles

Removal of AP rounds! 

 

Just like their cruisers do fine with AP only, BB will do fine with HE only. 

 

How is it a nerf: RN BB will stop being great at everything, other BBs to match the firepower can turn broadside and shoot back, charge when there are favourable conditions etc. 

How this will not ruin RN BB: they do just fine with HE, still having good national flavour. 

 

9XHl18c.gif

Edited by Citrusss
added poll
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
151
Members
540 posts
2,935 battles

Constant fire spam is cancerous to gameplay and morale. This would make it worse, not better.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
432
[FAE]
Members
2,160 posts
2,617 battles

UHM NO. 

 

What part of not make this ship nicer to braindead folks is hard to understand????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,967
[SYN]
Members
14,439 posts
10,406 battles
1 minute ago, ksix said:

Constant fire spam is cancerous to gameplay and morale. This would make it worse, not better.

not really.

It will prevent RNBBs from outright deleting cruisers.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,044 posts
8,288 battles
9 minutes ago, Lampshade_M1A2 said:

Maybe just make it possible to citadel them?

it is easy to citadel them when they are broadside but it is hard to flank them just like any other BB because you can get a full load of AP rounds if you manage to show your own side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
151
Members
540 posts
2,935 battles
14 minutes ago, MrDeaf said:

not really.

It will prevent RNBBs from outright deleting cruisers.

I take it you've never eaten an HE volley from a Conq then. Destroys every module on the cruiser and rakes half your HP.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,967
[SYN]
Members
14,439 posts
10,406 battles
Just now, ksix said:

I take it you've never eaten an HE volley from a Conq then. Destroys every module on the cruiser and rakes half your HP.

There is that, but a good AP salvo will delete the cruiser outright.

12 guns firing AP is deadly, even if it comes from a GK with wonky accuracy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
147
Members
706 posts

I use AP most of the time in my RN BB.

 

the could always get rid RN HE, and give RN AP a ~10% fire chance and a ~5% flooding chance for hits on the belt they penetrate :Smile_hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,598
[TASH]
Members
5,013 posts
8,069 battles

Removing AP from the 3-5 battleships wouldn't really do anything.  I've shattered that AP on Phoenix and Omahas.  Might as well not use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,044 posts
8,288 battles
20 minutes ago, b101uk said:

 AP a ~10% fire chance and a ~5% flooding chance for hits on the belt they penetrate :Smile_hiding:

AP can't cause any reasonable flooding. One room at most. Moreover, how many shells you land below water line? 1 at most each salvo. 

 

Fire chance for AP is not reasonable as well. 

 

Please stop asking for both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
147
Members
706 posts
27 minutes ago, Citrusss said:

AP can't cause any reasonable flooding. One room at most. Moreover, how many shells you land below water line? 1 at most each salvo. 

 

Fire chance for AP is not reasonable as well. 

 

Please stop asking for both.

 

if you going to argue every room has a water-tight door, then what do you expect to happen when >20kg of explosive detonates in said room just above the water-line, either the internal walls fail &/or the external wall fails and the shell hole gets much bigger, and if it over penetrates its route out of the ship is below the waterline and all the rooms its passes through will have holes.

 

a low fire chance for AP is far more reasonable if HE is removed, given most of the flammable stuff is inside the ship and they are the hardest fires to put out, it's substantially more reasonable than your proposal to remove AP

Edited by b101uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
147
Members
706 posts
Just now, Goodwood_Alpha said:

You cannot cause flooding with shellfire in this game! Jeez!

 

there was a time you could, so it could be reinstated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
1,542 posts
26 battles

Afternoon guys, as always we're working on improving areas like this in our game. We will make note of the suggestions that you have made and will use them in our ongoing investigations! Thank you all for passing along your thoughts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
420
[NATO]
Beta Testers
1,774 posts
5,809 battles
On 10/4/2017 at 9:31 PM, Lampshade_M1A2 said:

Maybe just make it possible to citadel them?

They dont need to be citadelled when an equal tier cruiser using AP can rip them apart in 2 minutes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×