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

Smoke to powerful or flat our broken????

126 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,901 battles
8 hours ago, Panic512 said:

I don't think that is quite a good analogy for what your comparing, but I'm not arguing that it takes more skill to play a destroyer at a basic understandable level. I completely agree that it does. So what you are saying is that a skilled destroyer player will get beaten by a lesser skilled battleship player because they are in the battleship?

So what your saying is that dds take more skill to perform at a basic level but also take more skill to perform at a higher level, whereas a bb will take less skill to perform at a basic level and also to perform well in the them.

It is actually a very good analogy.

A skilled destroyer player will still get beaten, more times than not, by a much lesser skilled battleship player because they are in a battleship. That is correct. The skill floor and ceiling is there, but the Risk vs Reward (input vs output) is not... the balance is completely broken.

That is exactly what I am saying. The skill required to perform at a basic level in a DD is pretty much at the skill level required to perform almost the best you can in most BBs. However, because the balance is so broken, and not just because BBs even though they are a root cause, playing a BB is like Bowling with those bumpers up to block the gutter, whilst playing a DD is like Bowling without the bumpers using a baseball and a few broken fingers.
As I said, it isn't JUST BBs, but they are the root cause. It is a cascading effect.   Rock is overpowered, Paper suffers and performance deviates negatively as does enjoyment. Scissors already underpowered and continues to get nerfed to make Paper feel more playable. Not just Rock, or BBs. Radar has to get gutted or needs to go completely and DDs have to get buffs to reliable performance. With Rock performing on a balance level, even with a stronger Scissors, Paper will still have more feasibility to skillfully hunt DDs with less Risk without needing a game breaking hard counter (Radar),  from such a large deviation in performance and attribute combination (BB being TANK+SNIPER). Lastly, DDs are further hindered by having the higher internal counter rate. No other ship type has ships like DDs which are inherently weak at killing other ships but specifically tuned to just counter their own ship type. Most of the performance netted for high tier DDs is actually against other DDs, not other ship types. For the sake of balance, DD performance is even lower since its performance against non-DDs is much lower.. The other ship types have a MUCH higher spread in which they actually perform against.

To me, the best solution that would actually appease the most sides, the most parties would be to find a way to decrease BB performance at long range, increase DD performance, gut radar and shift the overall survival dependency from "Invisibility" to "Manueverability"/ Dodging.
The way to specifically go about that? Lower shell velocity for BBs and Cruisers across the board, and not a small amount, but make it the same flat amount for all. (EX: -150). This way the velocity differences would still be retained, for instance Mosvka would still have higher velocity than DM and by the same amount as now. This would make all ships, but DDs the most, able to rely more on their mobility as a survival tool rather than concealment. In turn this has the potential ripple effect of allowing DDs to perform better simply because they can survive longer, and can contribute to the match more openly and consistently (like  constantly firing guns while bobbing and weaving).
Along with that I would make DDs less internally countered and shift that power outward. Make high tier DD torps function more like DWT, with the target limitations, but buff their attributes like speed, range, and detection by a decent amount.
Lastly, a complete Concealment nerf to ALL ship types by the same flat amount and remove Radar. No more complaints of DDs launching torps unseen. No more BBs with massive burst damage able to go dark at will. No more BBs with BETTER concealment than a Cruiser.

Edited by zarth12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,207
[SBS]
Members
4,571 posts
2,408 battles
7 minutes ago, Shadeylark said:

A top bb player can do less than a top dd player.

The data doesn't support that view.  The top players in all ship types top out at about the same point, WR in the 70's and ton of damage and high XP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,135
[SALVO]
Members
21,730 posts
22,053 battles
On ‎8‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 1:57 PM, jags_domain said:

No it has not gone far enough. If a dd is firing at a plane then that dd should be spores and fully seen by the whole map.

If a dd is shooting from smoke it should be seen by everyone else.

 

The DD should be "spores"?  What the heck?  Spores?  Really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,955
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
23,723 posts
3,895 battles
On 8/18/2018 at 10:57 AM, jags_domain said:

No it has not gone far enough. If a dd is firing at a plane then that dd should be spores and fully seen by the whole map.

If a dd is shooting from smoke it should be seen by everyone else.

 

I think you need to play destroyers for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
388
[-BRS-]
Members
1,417 posts
9,161 battles
Just now, KiyoSenkan said:

I think you need to play destroyers for a while.

I endorse that statement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,900
Members
23,232 posts
5,865 battles
4 hours ago, Shadeylark said:

Stupid gets punished; but if you're relying on the other guy being dumber than you you've already screwed up.

True, but conversely, if you treat every opponent as a unicum, you'll waste a lot of time. (and possibly screw up as well, simply because an unskilled opponent has a tendency to do things you didn't see coming, that might be unintentionally effective)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,900
Members
23,232 posts
5,865 battles
32 minutes ago, Crucis said:

The DD should be "spores"?  What the heck?  Spores?  Really?

This is why I don't do autocomplete.

I'll take accuracy over speed any day.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,371
Members
5,202 posts
9,374 battles
12 hours ago, Panic512 said:

I don't think that is quite a good analogy for what your comparing, but I'm not arguing that it takes more skill to play a destroyer at a basic understandable level. I completely agree that it does. So what you are saying is that a skilled destroyer player will get beaten by a lesser skilled battleship player because they are in the battleship?

 

If someone can't admit that a destroyer beats a battleship in a 1 on 1 fight, then they aren't worth debating. 

Barring outliers such as the Missouri or the Khab (because of their niche' playstyle or consumables), a skilled BB player will never win against an equally skilled DD player. The battleship has no way to spot or hurt the destroyer. I had a game yesterday in the Shima where I stalked a Conqueror merely 6km away for 2 minutes. There's was nothing he could do to hurt me and WASD was only marginally useful. 

 

Edited by Kombat_W0MBAT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,413
[-BRS-]
Members
3,165 posts
17,065 battles
17 minutes ago, KiyoSenkan said:

I think you need to play destroyers for a while.

 Yup  There's way too many people that think they're so powerful  But if they actually fly them then they would know their limitations And work around those

when I fly BB now I have a lot of experience in destroyers I know how to beat them or at least limit their effectiveness  Fact it's not that hard

Edited by silverdahc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,135
[SALVO]
Members
21,730 posts
22,053 battles
14 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

This is why I don't do autocomplete.

I'll take accuracy over speed any day.....

I don't mind autocomplete on the first attempt to spell a word.  But if I backspace into that word, I want it to not attempt to autocomplete that same word a second time.  Heck, sometimes one might WANT to knowingly mis-spell a word for some reason.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
947
[TDRB]
Members
2,993 posts
9,002 battles
Quote

Stupid gets punished; but if you're relying on the other guy being dumber than you you've already screwed up.

There is a difference between relying and hoping. One must judge each individual situation, not use a set in stone rule, to determine if it is wise to fire into smoke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,900
Members
23,232 posts
5,865 battles
3 hours ago, Crucis said:

I don't mind autocomplete on the first attempt to spell a word.  But if I backspace into that word, I want it to not attempt to autocomplete that same word a second time.  Heck, sometimes one might WANT to knowingly mis-spell a word for some reason.

 

Heh, might be a Samsung thing too, but I find that half the time, the word I want never comes up anyway, so I just turned it off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
174
[_ARP_]
Beta Testers
631 posts
5,872 battles
3 hours ago, Kombat_W0MBAT said:

 

If someone can't admit that a destroyer beats a battleship in a 1 on 1 fight, then they aren't worth debating. 

Barring outliers such as the Missouri or the Khab (because of their niche' playstyle or consumables), a skilled BB player will never win against an equally skilled DD player. The battleship has no way to spot or hurt the destroyer. I had a game yesterday in the Shima where I stalked a Conqueror merely 6km away for 2 minutes. There's was nothing he could do to hurt me and WASD was only marginally useful. 

 

I completely agree. I have done the same in my Benson against a Yamato. I just constantly hit him with torps and stayed just out of range and he couldn't do anything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,901 battles
1 hour ago, Panic512 said:

I completely agree. I have done the same in my Benson against a Yamato. I just constantly hit him with torps and stayed just out of range and he couldn't do anything

and yet all that matter are the trends and data analytics that go with it. A sample size of one is useless. A sample size of two is useless. The data is clear. DDs have been and are the lowest performer since the game was playable. BBs are attributed quantitatively and inversely so are DDs, that a BB will win in a 1 on 1 fight with a DD. 

If a DD is in a cap and a Cruiser pushes into that cap, the DD has an extreme disadvantage.. If it is a BB that pushes into the cap.. the DD is still at an extreme disadvantage. If a BB pushes into that same cap with just a Cruiser in it, the Cruiser is at an extreme disadvantage.
Let say the BB pushes in on the DD, and the BB just turns broadside... never equipped RPF....doesn't have hydro....moves in a straight line at the same speed....regardless of vigilance....and still fails to maneuver when torps are spotted each time....yes the BB will lose.
Just like an active player will win against an afk player. What possible balance conclusion can be drawn from that? Intelligent answer: None. 

 

Edited by zarth12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
253 posts
7,467 battles

 

10 minutes ago, zarth12 said:

and yet all that matter are the trends and data analytics that go with it. A sample size of one is useless. A sample size of two is useless. The data is clear. DDs have been and are the lowest performer since the game was playable. BBs are attributed quantitatively and inversely so are DDs, that a BB will win in a 1 on 1 fight with a DD. 

If a DD is in a cap and a Cruiser pushes into that cap, the DD has an extreme disadvantage.. If it is a BB that pushes into the cap.. the DD is still at an extreme disadvantage. If a BB pushes into that same cap with just a Cruiser in it, the Cruiser is at an extreme disadvantage.
Let say the BB pushes in on the DD, and the BB just turns broadside... never equipped RPF....doesn't have hydro....moves in a straight line at the same speed....regardless of vigilance....and still fails to maneuver when torps are spotted each time....yes the BB will lose.
Just like an active player will win against an afk player. What possible balance conclusion can be drawn from that? Intelligent answer: None. 

 

The reason DDs are the lowest performer is because they haven't balanced the points that DDs get for capping and spotting. If CAs were removed from the game, I can guarantee that DDs would beat BBs the majority of games and their stats will go up. The problem is the DD-CA-BB mechanic isn't balanced because CAs tend to be more effective at killing DDs than DDs are at killing BBs.

Maybe somebody can run a training room of a mix of TierX BBs versus TierX DDs for 100 battles and gather data from that?

Edited by GambitHG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
366
[WOLF5]
Members
1,330 posts
7,901 battles
15 minutes ago, GambitHG said:

 

The reason DDs are the lowest performer is because they haven't balanced the points that DDs get for capping and spotting. If CAs were removed from the game, I can guarantee that DDs would beat BBs the majority of games and their stats will go up. The problem is the DD-CA-BB mechanic isn't balanced because CAs tend to be more effective at killing DDs than DDs are at killing BBs.

Maybe somebody can run a training room of a mix of TierX BBs versus TierX DDs for 100 battles and gather data from that?

Clearly that is fallacious on multiple counts:

A.) There are multiple times where BBs acquire BETTER spotting points compared to DDs.
B.) The factors and rule-sets of the game mode are not singular, they are always plural. Capping  isn't the only effect on match points, but kills (and deaths) as well.
C.) Back before Radar there was a period of time where CA population was next to nothing in comparison to DDs and BBs. DD performance did not increase.

Sorry, but Correlation does not equal causation

Moving the goal posts. Base Rate fallacy. Denying the antecedent. Retrospective determinism. Appeal to the Stone.
Anything else?

Edited by zarth12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
409 posts
1,503 battles
4 hours ago, Kombat_W0MBAT said:

If someone can't admit that a destroyer beats a battleship in a 1 on 1 fight, then they aren't worth debating. 

Barring outliers such as the Missouri or the Khab (because of their niche' playstyle or consumables), a skilled BB player will never win against an equally skilled DD player. The battleship has no way to spot or hurt the destroyer. I had a game yesterday in the Shima where I stalked a Conqueror merely 6km away for 2 minutes. There's was nothing he could do to hurt me and WASD was only marginally useful.

Given your performance in the Shimakaze, I would be surprised if that Conqueror could be described as equally skilled.

In my experience DDs tend to lose in close combat with high tier BBs and with comparatively less effective torpedoes than their low tier counterparts, the distance where a DD will generally beat a BB (opposed to lose or draw) is extremely thin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,288
[WOLF3]
[WOLF3]
Members
21,273 posts
19,664 battles
6 hours ago, Kombat_W0MBAT said:

 

If someone can't admit that a destroyer beats a battleship in a 1 on 1 fight, then they aren't worth debating. 

Barring outliers such as the Missouri or the Khab (because of their niche' playstyle or consumables), a skilled BB player will never win against an equally skilled DD player. The battleship has no way to spot or hurt the destroyer. I had a game yesterday in the Shima where I stalked a Conqueror merely 6km away for 2 minutes. There's was nothing he could do to hurt me and WASD was only marginally useful. 

 

LOL a while back in my Conqueror, some Fletcher did exactly that for me.  I had high HP late in the game and I should have been able to trash the remaining red BBs & Cruisers, no problem.  But the last DD in the game, a Fletcher, intercepted me.  Stalked me, torped me.  I had no means on finding Fletcher and those fast reloading torps played hell against my Damage Control Party and Repair Party.  It took Fletcher a while to do this, but without anyone helping me find Fletcher, there was nothing I could do to counter, find, and destroy the DD.  All I could do was evade and that only worked so long.  Fletcher wasn't an idiot and maintained his superior concealment.

 

To make matters worse, on top of having to dodge Fletcher's torps, some of the few enemy ships were starting to shell me.  I remember for a fact some Henri IV or Zao was starting to hit me while my DCP was on CD due to stopping the earlier floods.

 

That was a fun moment :Smile_teethhappy:

1 hour ago, Kochira said:

Given your performance in the Shimakaze, I would be surprised if that Conqueror could be described as equally skilled.

In my experience DDs tend to lose in close combat with high tier BBs and with comparatively less effective torpedoes than their low tier counterparts, the distance where a DD will generally beat a BB (opposed to lose or draw) is extremely thin.

A high tier DD that understands concealment and not venturing too close considering the BB threat (catapult fighters / spotter planes, Missouri Radar) literally has the BB by the balls 1-on-1.  There should be no reason the BB should detect a disciplined DD 1-on-1 in high tier.  Conqueror is the most vulnerable of the Tier X BBs to stalking Destroyers because she doesn't even have catapult fighter / spotter planes to help.

 

The BBs in high tier are very large and sluggish in their handling, which gets worse the higher in tier you go.  VIII are the last ones with some measure of agility.  They also eventually have immensely long hulls.  Even a part-time, mediocre DD player like me can hop onto a Fletcher and absolutely devastate a BB there.  Iowa / Missouri for example don't like to turn quickly.  They also have an immensely long hull that is built to catch all the torps someone sends.  Hell, most of my torpedo devastating strikes have been against Iowa / Missouri because of those long hulls that catch all the torps! :Smile_teethhappy:  The funny part is I'm not even a good DD driver :Smile_teethhappy:

 

In contrast are the lower tier BBs that actually can still maneuver some, especially the USN Standard BBs of Tier VII and below.  Even Alabama, Massachusetts at Tier VIII with their agility and very short hulls are annoying targets to try to torpedo.  But IX-X BBs lack the grace prior tiers of BBs have.

Edited by HazeGrayUnderway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,371
Members
5,202 posts
9,374 battles
1 hour ago, Kochira said:

Given your performance in the Shimakaze, I would be surprised if that Conqueror could be described as equally skilled.

In my experience DDs tend to lose in close combat with high tier BBs and with comparatively less effective torpedoes than their low tier counterparts, the distance where a DD will generally beat a BB (opposed to lose or draw) is extremely thin.

Wouldn't have mattered if the Conqueror was the best BB player across all the servers. He literally has no tools to spot me, hurt me, or survive my persistent torpedoing. The best he would be able to do is delay the inevitable a little longer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,413
[-BRS-]
Members
3,165 posts
17,065 battles
37 minutes ago, HazeGrayUnderway said:

LOL a while back in my Conqueror, some Fletcher did exactly that for me.  I had high HP late in the game and I should have been able to trash the remaining red BBs & Cruisers, no problem.  But the last DD in the game, a Fletcher, intercepted me.  Stalked me, torped me.  I had no means on finding Fletcher and those fast reloading torps played hell against my Damage Control Party and Repair Party.  It took Fletcher a while to do this, but without anyone helping me find Fletcher, there was nothing I could do to counter, find, and destroy the DD.  All I could do was evade and that only worked so long.  Fletcher wasn't an idiot and maintained his superior concealment.

 

To make matters worse, on top of having to dodge Fletcher's torps, some of the few enemy ships were starting to shell me.  I remember for a fact some Henri IV or Zao was starting to hit me while my DCP was on CD due to stopping the earlier floods.

 

That was a fun moment :Smile_teethhappy:

A high tier DD that understands concealment and not venturing too close considering the BB threat (catapult fighters / spotter planes, Missouri Radar) literally has the BB by the balls 1-on-1.  There should be no reason the BB should detect a disciplined DD 1-on-1 in high tier.  Conqueror is the most vulnerable of the Tier X BBs to stalking Destroyers because she doesn't even have catapult fighter / spotter planes to help.

 

The BBs in high tier are very large and sluggish in their handling, which gets worse the higher in tier you go.  VIII are the last ones with some measure of agility.  They also eventually have immensely long hulls.  Even a part-time, mediocre DD player like me can hop onto a Fletcher and absolutely devastate a BB there.  Iowa / Missouri for example don't like to turn quickly.  They also have an immensely long hull that is built to catch all the torps someone sends.  Hell, most of my torpedo devastating strikes have been against Iowa / Missouri because of those long hulls that catch all the torps! :Smile_teethhappy:  The funny part is I'm not even a good DD driver :Smile_teethhappy:

 

In contrast are the lower tier BBs that actually can still maneuver some, especially the USN Standard BBs of Tier VII and below.  Even Alabama, Massachusetts at Tier VIII with their agility and very short hulls are annoying targets to try to torpedo.  But IX-X BBs lack the grace prior tiers of BBs have.

 Yep destroyers are meant to counter battleships you have no fleet you should lose every time rock paper scissors

 

That's the game as it is set up to be I don't see a problem

Edited by silverdahc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,207
[SBS]
Members
4,571 posts
2,408 battles
Just now, silverdahc said:

 Yep destroyers are meant to counter battleships you have no fleet you should lose every time rock paper scissors

 

That's the game as it is set up to be I don't see a problem

And the Henri IV or Zao probably finished him off, not the Fletcher, that is if he even was killed.  You can't expect to win a 3v1 so I don't know why anyone try to suggest it as evidence of DDs being strong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
409 posts
1,503 battles
3 hours ago, Kombat_W0MBAT said:

Wouldn't have mattered if the Conqueror was the best BB player across all the servers. He literally has no tools to spot me, hurt me, or survive my persistent torpedoing. The best he would be able to do is delay the inevitable a little longer. 

Islands are a great tool for ambushes and can be used to get an idea where a DD is. Persistent torpedo attacks can be dealt with by subtracting 30 knots from the torpedo speed, and maneuvering, even a sluggish BB has a lot of places they can be in the ~30 seconds it takes the torpedoes to reach them. Besides, on average it will take over a quarter of the time allotted for the match for a DD to sink a BB with torpedoes. And that's not getting into the skills available to make fighting DDs easier like RPF and vigilance.

The tools BBs have to deal with DDs are not as good as cruisers but to say they have none is flat out wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,371
Members
5,202 posts
9,374 battles
6 minutes ago, Kochira said:

Islands are a great tool for ambushes and can be used to get an idea where a DD is. Persistent torpedo attacks can be dealt with by subtracting 30 knots from the torpedo speed, and maneuvering, even a sluggish BB has a lot of places they can be in the ~30 seconds it takes the torpedoes to reach them. Besides, on average it will take over a quarter of the time allotted for the match for a DD to sink a BB with torpedoes. And that's not getting into the skills available to make fighting DDs easier like RPF and vigilance.

The tools BBs have to deal with DDs are not as good as cruisers but to say they have none is flat out wrong.

 

Like I said, all the BB can do in that scenario is delay the inevitable. None of the things you mentioned change the outcome. 

EDIT: You haven't played BBs above tier 6? That explains a lot. 

Edited by Kombat_W0MBAT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
409 posts
1,503 battles
39 minutes ago, Kombat_W0MBAT said:

Like I said, all the BB can do in that scenario is delay the inevitable. None of the things you mentioned change the outcome. 

EDIT: You haven't played BBs above tier 6? That explains a lot. 

For you? Sure. You are unlikely to run into a BB that is better than you are in your DD, but that's not true for the majority of the player population. Our perspectives are different and don't really prove anything without data to back them up.

Concerning your edit: Low tier BBs face comparatively much more vicious DDs than the high tier ones do so I'm not sure what you are alluding to. Besides, I have been out played by BBs in my high tier DDs before, if they had literally no options that would not happen. BBs have tools to use against DDs, most of them are just hard to use.

on a final nitpicky note if you can delay the inevitable past the the game time limit, it does change the outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×