Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Craterkhan_1

Lets talk about a few things

16 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

18
[BNC]
Members
23 posts
9,823 battles

Hello everyone.

 

I'd like to see some debate on some topics that I feel are in need of discussion, hence this thread. The questions are.

 

1. Will Pan-Asian dds phase out Japanese dds in terms of torpedo effectiveness? (The exception being the Akizuki)

 

2. Should radar/hydro go through islands or not? (I feel this is a big no but i've seen lots of debate over this one elsewhere)

 

3. Are the smoke changes that were implemented really that debilitating to cruisers?


4. Should the US's CV loadouts really be reduced to one single loadout? (This is huge no for me and I don't even play American CV)

 

5. Should the HE pen on the British bb's be lowered to 1/6 pen?

 

What do you guys think of these?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
461
[LOU1]
Members
2,890 posts
8,004 battles

What is interesting is that all of these topics have been discussed frequently.  The first topic is new and therefore has relatively few threads.  The others have been discussed  over and over.  If you do a search on the forum or through Google, you will see that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
483
[SW]
Beta Testers
1,886 posts
8,176 battles

First of all, playing style for the PADD will be different, but often I like to shoot torpedoes ahead and in channels where I think DDs will come. IF I use a PADD then this will be a forgotten tactic which has benefited me a number of times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
448 posts
7,474 battles
50 minutes ago, Craterkhan_1 said:

Hello everyone.

 

I'd like to see some debate on some topics that I feel are in need of discussion, hence this thread. The questions are.

 

1. Will Pan-Asian dds phase out Japanese dds in terms of torpedo effectiveness? (The exception being the Akizuki)

 

2. Should radar/hydro go through islands or not? (I feel this is a big no but i've seen lots of debate over this one elsewhere)

 

3. Are the smoke changes that were implemented really that debilitating to cruisers?


4. Should the US's CV loadouts really be reduced to one single loadout? (This is huge no for me and I don't even play American CV)

 

5. Should the HE pen on the British bb's be lowered to 1/6 pen?

 

What do you guys think of these?

 

1) Impossible to say now unless you have been in testing. I will say that no line of ships is completely irrelevant, IJN DDs should still have a role.

2) No. Radar/hydro should not work through islands but WG has indicated that this would be difficult to fix.

3) No. RN CLs are the only ones that rely on smoke, and they for the most part seem to be doing fine.

4) Pass - I don't play CVs but they obviously need some work.

5) Only if RN BBs have been determined to be overperforming, and even then I would prefer to see a reduction in fire chance(or make them easier to citadel).

..

Edited by Dr_Powderfinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
96
[HDR]
[HDR]
Members
1,174 posts
2,197 battles

I don't think Pan asian DDs will really phase out the IJN DDs as they need a different playstyle. But considering raw stats I think they do have quite a bit of an advantages.

Although you can't hit other DDs which you can do using IJN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
423
[1IF]
Alpha Tester
4,252 posts
8,238 battles

1) No  2) should not go thru islands  3) unsure  4) NO!*  & 5) unsure.    

* one US CV plane loadout option? No, absolutely No! (& what do the idiots do? = make the situation even worse)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
845
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,378 posts
7,974 battles
43 minutes ago, Craterkhan_1 said:

Hello everyone.

 

I'd like to see some debate on some topics that I feel are in need of discussion, hence this thread. The questions are.

 

1. Will Pan-Asian dds phase out Japanese dds in terms of torpedo effectiveness? (The exception being the Akizuki)

 

2. Should radar/hydro go through islands or not? (I feel this is a big no but i've seen lots of debate over this one elsewhere)

 

3. Are the smoke changes that were implemented really that debilitating to cruisers?


4. Should the US's CV loadouts really be reduced to one single loadout? (This is huge no for me and I don't even play American CV)

 

5. Should the HE pen on the British bb's be lowered to 1/6 pen?

 

What do you guys think of these?

 

1. Too early to tell.

2. No, not unless a proper counter is created to it.

3. Honestly, they kinda are to all ships. I get smoke firing, as it was, was an issue, and I think one way to solve that would have been to make it ships firing AA at anything are spotted again, but I think as is it's a tad harsh. When I'd play a DD I'd drop smoke so BB's under heavy fire could retreat, maybe fire a shot or two, now they time it wrong they still just get hammered. pick the wrong side to go your screwed. And it hurt cruisers with bad detection (Pensacola) that would try and use it for some cover while shooting since they tend to be big, easily citadeled by BB's targets.

4. Absolutely not, If they aren't going to just give us the 3 options, they should remove pure strike for the new setup's. And, y'know, just fix the fighter situation they've left broken for 2 years now.

5. eh... not sure, haven't made it past QE yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
174
[KENT]
Members
480 posts
3,037 battles
55 minutes ago, Craterkhan_1 said:

Hello everyone.

 

I'd like to see some debate on some topics that I feel are in need of discussion, hence this thread. The questions are.

 

1. Will Pan-Asian dds phase out Japanese dds in terms of torpedo effectiveness? (The exception being the Akizuki)

 

2. Should radar/hydro go through islands or not? (I feel this is a big no but i've seen lots of debate over this one elsewhere)

 

3. Are the smoke changes that were implemented really that debilitating to cruisers?


4. Should the US's CV loadouts really be reduced to one single loadout? (This is huge no for me and I don't even play American CV)

 

5. Should the HE pen on the British bb's be lowered to 1/6 pen?

 

What do you guys think of these?

1. No, up until tier 9 IJN has better torpedoes in every fashion but detectability, damage, and speed.  However, the IJN DDs get TRB, which is hella good, range, reload, and (tiers 6, 7, and 10) get better launcher setups.  

 

2. Yes, because historical value shouldn't impede on game balance.  Cruisers were made to hunt DDs, and as much of a DD main I may be, I'd rather keep RPS going.  

 

3. I haven't seen much of a change, but I don't play RN CLs.

 

4. On one hand, strike took a lot of skill and had a high reward.  But on the other hand, AS is pure cancer.  I'd say it should be done on a by module basis.  

 

5. Yes.

Edited by Slntreaper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
974 posts
1,871 battles
1 hour ago, Craterkhan_1 said:

2. Should radar/hydro go through islands or not? (I feel this is a big no but i've seen lots of debate over this one elsewhere)

Radar yes it has to great a range as for Hydro I say yes its range is low enough that it really doesn't matter (6km compared to 11km for radar) though I may be bias.

Edited by skull_122_steel
I suck at spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
378
[PROJX]
Members
967 posts
15,492 battles
1 hour ago, Craterkhan_1 said:

Hello everyone.

 

I'd like to see some debate on some topics that I feel are in need of discussion, hence this thread. The questions are.

 

1. Will Pan-Asian dds phase out Japanese dds in terms of torpedo effectiveness? (The exception being the Akizuki)

 

3. Are the smoke changes that were implemented really that debilitating to cruisers?

 

What do you guys think of these?

 

Hey Craterkhan_1 - will comment on the 2 topics that are of most interest to me in your list:

 

I don't believe the Pan-Asians will phase out the IJN DDs - I'm assmuming this comment is based on the torpedo detection ranges being reduced at the mid-high tiers to levels where reaction time will increase their effectiveness against Cruisers & BBs (since the IJN torp detection ranges kept getting worse & worse).  I think this DD line will have the following effect:

  • Because you can't hit DDs w/ your torps, it will lead to an interesting line where gunboat play will be necessary to deal w/ DDs, but you'll also have really nice torp mechanics against anything else.
  • The smoke mechanics will lead to an increased "all smoke all the time" meta - if you take premium smoke, these DDs can stay in smoke almost continuously w/ a very small cooldown time (tho the smoke duration is short).
  • Because the line is a mix of ships built or designed by more traditional naval powers (e.g. US, Japan, Germany, Russia, Netherlands...), it's a bit of an interesting "sampler platter" of certain national DD characteristics that is appealing.
  • The DWT's detection characteristics will make things very unpleasant for non-DDs and will lead to a increased incentive to predictively maneuver when you're in a situation that you're likely being hunted by a DD.  The game will be unpleasant for those who are newer players (i.e. rely on reacting before maneuvering) or those who engage in more stationary tactics.  Similarly, BB drivers who aren't familiar w/ DD tactics and don't maneuver in preemptively in anticipation may find their game impacted.

I think the IJN DDs will still have it's stealth and ability to torp anything in smoke, be early cap contesters, etc. The Pan-Asians represent a situational adaption to gameplay for their DD class and a bit of a national sampler platter, so I don't think of it as a replacement.  An anecdotal example of why I say this is that the for the recent Pan-Asian DD missions, I probably played more DDs than I had in a while.   I used the Leningrad and my IJN DDs (e.g Kami-R, Fubuki, Shinonome, Akatsuki) even tho I had the full T5-10 tiers of USN, IJN, Russian, German DDs to choose from to complete these missions - so situationally, there should still be room for the IJN DDs.

 

The smoke changes to cruisers mainly affected you if you had a habit of shooting while hiding in smoke when you were closer than 6-8ish kms from your target (the detection bloom from in/behind smoke when your fire in most Cruisers).  I normally don't division so I'm more used to maneuvering w/ my cruisers and cover to protect myself so this mechanic didn't significantly affect how I play my cruisers.  I do have the Belfast & Kutuzov & it only gave me one additional item to think about - "is there a hidden ship between my target > 8 km away?" - when I use their smoke abilities. I play the Kutuzov pretty much like I always did and have to be more aware w/ the Belfast, but I chose to keep both ships when the return policy was announced.

 

 

 

Edited by hangglide42

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31
[WOLF4]
Members
173 posts
1,280 battles
2 hours ago, Craterkhan_1 said:

Hello everyone.

 

I'd like to see some debate on some topics that I feel are in need of discussion, hence this thread. The questions are.

 

1. Will Pan-Asian dds phase out Japanese dds in terms of torpedo effectiveness? (The exception being the Akizuki)

 

2. Should radar/hydro go through islands or not? (I feel this is a big no but i've seen lots of debate over this one elsewhere)

 

3. Are the smoke changes that were implemented really that debilitating to cruisers?


4. Should the US's CV loadouts really be reduced to one single loadout? (This is huge no for me and I don't even play American CV)

 

5. Should the HE pen on the British bb's be lowered to 1/6 pen?

 

What do you guys think of these?

1.  I feel that they are going to be more effective all-round especially after watching Nosters reviews. They have better guns it seems, radar or smoke, and Japanese torps are to slow and easily spotted imo.

 

2. No definitely not I find it infuriating.

 

3. I haven't really noticed any change from it my self.

 

4. Yes only because Japanese are next and its going to make balancing much easier.

 

5. I wish they could have found a way to make the British BBs stand out a different way that didn't change the play style of BBs.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
273
[RUST]
Beta Testers
932 posts
10,350 battles
3 hours ago, Craterkhan_1 said:


4. Should the US's CV loadouts really be reduced to one single loadout? (This is huge no for me and I don't even play American CV)

 

It's a huge no for you only because you don't play USN CVs and don't understand why having min-max loadouts is bad. IJN CV are considered to be straight up better than USN CV at every tier except 4,9 & 10 because IJN loadouts have flexibility and more map coverage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,029
[PVE]
Members
5,320 posts
17,834 battles

I don't care one way or another about anything other than the new USN CV changes. I like the idea of a 1/1/1 Bogue, I hate the idea of not having a choice for load outs though. Pretty much lost interest in them because of the crappy UI and the fact the designers can not manage to figure out how to get 8 signal flags mounted on them. It is all just so pitiful. I almost forgot, the incredibly stupid mechanic of not being able to switch between AP and HE bombs during battle like every other ship is capable of is just disgusting. 

Edited by Taylor3006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×