Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
GreyFox78659

Battleship numbers control, what is next?

151 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

350
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,796 battles

Ok first we get AP bombs no effect on BB numbers despite backlash.

Then deep water torpedoes no effect on BB numbers despite backlash

Then then GZ gets finalized with its OP build no effect on numbers despite backlash

Now Asashio is released and its stated purpose was to control B.B. numbers again no effect despite backlash

You are left with only a couple of option raise BB repair prices or do a hard limit on how many enter a match. Or option three let my people go and set Carriers free from mirrors MM.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,083
[OPG]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
2,922 posts
10,485 battles

I rarely see people complaining about 10 bb games bc everyone gets to farm a bunch of damage. I see people complaining all the time about 10 DD games. 

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
298
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
1,887 posts
8,336 battles
33 minutes ago, GreyFox78659 said:

Ok first we get AP bombs no effect on BB numbers despite backlash.

Then deep water torpedoes no effect on BB numbers despite backlash

Then then GZ gets finalized with its OP build no effect on numbers despite backlash

Now Asashio is released and its stated purpose was to control B.B. numbers again no effect despite backlash

You are left with only a couple of option raise BB repair prices or do a hard limit on how many enter a match. Or option three let my people go and set Carriers free from mirrors MM.

1) Submarines 

No im not joking.

This naval warfare arcade game needa to be complete.

2) mines

3) homing torpedoes (limited arc of course.)

  • Funny 2
  • Bad 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
350
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,796 battles
11 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

1) Submarines 

No im not joking.

This naval warfare arcade game needa to be complete.

2) mines

3) homing torpedoes (limited arc of course.)

Totally agree but not anytime soon.

  • Bad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
298
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
1,887 posts
8,336 battles
2 minutes ago, GreyFox78659 said:

Totally agree but not anytime soon.

Well, at least one of the three. WG introduced contact mines in the Dunkirk scenario, give them a 1km detection range without hydro ank keep them perma spotted like torpedoes? Everyone would be fine.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,179 posts
5,221 battles
17 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

1) Submarines 

No im not joking.

This naval warfare arcade game needa to be complete.

2) mines

3) homing torpedoes (limited arc of course.)

1) no. submarines were never used in fleet vs fleet engagements, nor would they be equipped to do so. they're slow and fragile and have limited payloads. the only role submarines may have in this game would be in operations. i would actually love to see them in operations. but i'd probably quit if they were brought to randoms.

2) no. the only thing mines would do is cause more camping. people would still play the big ships. they just wouldn't move up.

3) no. i'm not even going to begin to explain how bad of an idea that is.


also no.

they don't need to try to scare people away from playing BBs. what they need to do is give incentive to play other types of ships.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
350
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,796 battles
12 minutes ago, Crokodone said:

Well, at least one of the three. WG introduced contact mines in the Dunkirk scenario, give them a 1km detection range without hydro ank keep them perma spotted like torpedoes? Everyone would be fine.

The only problem I see is BBs rarely move far.

  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
350
[GRFOX]
Members
2,242 posts
4,796 battles
Just now, MidnightShamalan said:

1) no. submarines were never used in fleet vs fleet engagements, nor would they be equipped to do so. they're slow and fragile and have limited payloads. the only role submarines may have in this game would be in operations. i would actually love to see them in operations. but i'd probably quit if they were brought to randoms.

2) no. the only thing mines would do is cause more camping. people would still play the big ships. they just wouldn't move up.

3) no. i'm not even going to begin to explain how bad of an idea that is.


also no.

they don't need to try to scare people away from playing BBs. what they need to do is give incentive to play other types of ships.

Yeah see CVs and DDs to see why that won’t work. They already get major bonuses for doing things that BBs want them to do and people aren’t playing them that much. As OP as carriers are touted I have to ask a question why are the CV population numbers so low? OP in the past has ment to many being played (BBs) now it means it competes against BBs for Damage numbers. Carriers when played aggressive can match BBs for Damage numbers but that is it. If the run out of planes in the opening minutes do to up tier AA their match is over.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,998
[SALVO]
Members
17,651 posts
18,478 battles
1 hour ago, GreyFox78659 said:

Ok first we get AP bombs no effect on BB numbers despite backlash.

Then deep water torpedoes no effect on BB numbers despite backlash

Then then GZ gets finalized with its OP build no effect on numbers despite backlash

Now Asashio is released and its stated purpose was to control B.B. numbers again no effect despite backlash

You are left with only a couple of option raise BB repair prices or do a hard limit on how many enter a match. Or option three let my people go and set Carriers free from mirrors MM.

Another option is available.  There is currently a soft limit of 5 on the number of BBs (as well as DDs) per team.  Why not just reduce the soft limit from 5 to 4?  That should be a rather simple adjustment for the devs to make to MM.  (BTW, a "soft limit" is one which is only considered for perhaps 3 minutes before it gets ignored, if MM is unable to form proper teams with what's in the queue.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
134
[WOLF6]
Members
347 posts
4,908 battles
43 minutes ago, SavageTactical said:

Quit [edited] and let people play what they want. 

I'm outta upvotes or you'd get mine , totally agree with you .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
467
[-BRS-]
Members
1,751 posts
14,219 battles

I don't know but I have no problem with the Que being full battleships more damage to farm:cap_rambo:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,311
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,895 posts
15,672 battles
1 hour ago, chewonit said:

Adding radar to more cruisers looks to be the winner:

How does adding radar change BB numbers, other than to make them go up because no one will be playing DDs?

29 minutes ago, MidnightShamalan said:

they don't need to try to scare people away from playing BBs. what they need to do is give incentive to play other types of ships.

Having weapons that could sink BBs faster would be a very good incentive for playing different ships.

20 minutes ago, GreyFox78659 said:

As OP as carriers are touted I have to ask a question why are the CV population numbers so low?

Because of the differences in the ability to farm damage between new and vet CV captains. Few players want to go through the painful learning process involved in honing your kill set to become a good CV player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,311
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,895 posts
15,672 battles
14 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Why not just reduce the soft limit from 5 to 4?

IMHO, Since WoW sells more BBs than any other type of premium ship, and those BBs cost more than any other type of premium ship, they will never set a hard limit the number of BBs in the game, because that would upset BB players, who then might not buy as many BBs. And since BB players are the only ones who see no problem with there being 12 vs 12 BB matches, you gotta know how their votes are going to go.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
769
[POD]
Beta Testers
3,056 posts
4,725 battles

missiles,those tiny guys destroyed the concept of battleship,not aircraft carriers.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
262
[LEGIT]
Members
1,373 posts
21,852 battles
1 hour ago, Crokodone said:

1) Submarines 

No im not joking.

This naval warfare arcade game needa to be complete.

2) mines

3) homing torpedoes (limited arc of course.)

You so funny!  HAhahahahchortlelolol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
118
[MKF]
Members
421 posts
15,467 battles
1 hour ago, chewonit said:

Adding radar to more cruisers looks to be the winner:

http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20180616/na_week/average_class.html

This is the first time I've seen any ship type overtook BB in numbers of players and battles. GG WG!

Makes me play BB more, it's fun to farm dev strikes on all those shiney new cruisers 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
441
[YAN]
Members
1,641 posts
7,769 battles

What battleship problem?

The problem class is cruisers right now, influx of American radar, AA etc. Cruisers are top dog for higher tiers right now. And tbh I think the cruiser meta is pretty good right now, having played all 3 classes at T9-10 with it.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
298
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
1,887 posts
8,336 battles
4 minutes ago, slokill_1 said:

You so funny!  HAhahahahchortlelolol

Yes, very funny for a shima with 15 20km homing torpedoes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
401
[TOG]
Members
2,772 posts
15,761 battles

Well, Asashio was introduced as a hard counter to BB's.

The the introduction of the USN CA split increased the number of radar CA's. Nerfing DD use.

The counter to increased CA's is the use of BB's/BC's and Large CA's.

 

Are the devs aware of the consequences?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,405
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
16,231 posts
9,570 battles
1 hour ago, GreyFox78659 said:

Ok first we get AP bombs no effect on BB numbers despite backlash.

Then deep water torpedoes no effect on BB numbers despite backlash

Then then GZ gets finalized with its OP build no effect on numbers despite backlash

Now Asashio is released and its stated purpose was to control B.B. numbers again no effect despite backlash

You are left with only a couple of option raise BB repair prices or do a hard limit on how many enter a match. Or option three let my people go and set Carriers free from mirrors MM.

Riddle me this, your most played ship type is BB's and you are complaining about BB numbers?

5 minutes ago, Akeno017 said:

What battleship problem?

The problem class is cruisers right now, influx of American radar, AA etc. Cruisers are top dog for higher tiers right now. And tbh I think the cruiser meta is pretty good right now, having played all 3 classes at T9-10 with it.

This, we are currently experiencing the new thing effect along with there only being a single US CL at this time which is the tier 8 Cleveland and the new US CA line so of course the que is overloaded with cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
224
Members
418 posts
15,230 battles
1 hour ago, Komrade_Rylo said:

I rarely see people complaining about 10 bb games bc everyone gets to farm a bunch of damage. I see people complaining all the time about 10 DD games. 

^^ This ^^

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×