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

WV1941 - Kudos to WG, But We’re back to Square One

101 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,240
[BRZKR]
WoWS Community Contributors
1,474 posts
4,768 battles

Thank you WG for addressing West Virginia. And while I agree giving us WV41 is a start, there are several more questions left.  Do the players that buy ‘41 get ‘44 at no cost in the future?  That’s just one question.

Essentially this is a wash.  We get what we were going to get, and there is no guarantee ‘44 will ever come.  We’re back at square one.

Also, Little White Mouse has some compelling ways to make ‘44 a T8.  Hope she posts them soon.

 

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,541
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,870 posts
5,255 battles
1 minute ago, NoZoupForYou said:

Thank you WG for addressing West Virginia. And while I agree giving us WV41 is a start, there are several more questions left.  Do the players that buy ‘41 get ‘44 at no cost in the future?  That’s just one question.

Essentially this is a wash.  We get what we were going to get, and there is no guarantee ‘44 will ever come.  We’re back at square one.

Also, Little White Mouse has some compelling ways to make ‘44 a T8.  Hope she posts them soon.

 

You can make whatever fantasy upgrades you want to WV to shoehorn her into Tier 8.   But there are still 2 problems:

1.  20 kts just won't be fun at that tier.  You'll be constantly left behind the flow of battle, and unable to redeploy effectively.

2.  We don't NEED another Tier 8 US premium battleship.  We have two already.  What we NEED is a Tier 7 premium, and West Virginia is perfect for that purpose.

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
196
[SVF]
Members
949 posts
1,286 battles
1 minute ago, TheDreadnought said:

What we NEED is a Tier 7 premium, and West Virginia is perfect for that purpose.

Thing is, will WG provide a T7 rebuild WeeVee that isn't gimped in one or more ways?  I have doubts, given they initially thought 72s traverse on a relatively undergunned T8 BB (Looking at you, Vanguard) was good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,541
[WOLF2]
Beta Testers
3,870 posts
5,255 battles
Just now, landcollector said:

Thing is, will WG provide a T7 rebuild WeeVee that isn't gimped in one or more ways?  I have doubts, given they initially thought 72s traverse on a relatively undergunned T8 BB (Looking at you, Vanguard) was good.

They always nerf the British BBs on turret traverse for some reason.   National flavor I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
184
[DRB]
[DRB]
Beta Testers
852 posts
4,812 battles

I would like to see both at VI & VII with strong secondaries. I would also like to see a US BB split with a focus on secondaries with the quick heals like Massachusetts. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,794
[SALVO]
Members
17,056 posts
17,716 battles

While the idea of using the data of a version in a ship's name is a good one, I think that it should be used sparingly.  In this case, the simple and better solution would be to just name the tier 6 ship Maryland, and save the West Virginia name for later use on a late war version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,459
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,802 posts
7,047 battles

20 knot t8 bb, that will be exciting. I can understand the desire for a USN t7 premium bb, rather than a t6, because there still isn't one available in game (an argument Nozoup does not make), but a tier 8?

As WG has done with their own announcement, Nozoup and other "influencers" are in turn, muddying the waters even further. The only happy customers, will be those that count their view clicks on Youtube, but WOWS players are and will be, losers in this false battle of wills.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,307
[PVE]
[PVE]
Members
4,113 posts
8,680 battles
32 minutes ago, NoZoupForYou said:

Thank you WG for addressing West Virginia. And while I agree giving us WV41 is a start, there are several more questions left.  Do the players that buy ‘41 get ‘44 at no cost in the future?  That’s just one question.

Essentially this is a wash.  We get what we were going to get, and there is no guarantee ‘44 will ever come.  We’re back at square one.

Also, Little White Mouse has some compelling ways to make ‘44 a T8.  Hope she posts them soon.

Well, I am not much of a battleship player, I like my Light and Heavy Cruisers the best. But as a former member of the USN, would prefer to see the "1944" Wee Vee to be released more than the 41. So I will not be buying the Wee Vee 41.

This is the best way for us players to respond to Premium Ships we do not like, just not to buy them. As far as what Tier a 44 Wee Vee should be, I leave that up to BB mains.

Edited by Chaos_EN2
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,262
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,797 posts
15,236 battles
26 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

They always nerf the British BBs on turret traverse for some reason.   National flavor I guess.

Yes, Russian fantasy battlecruisers, which never existed, have killer stats while RN BBs, which did actually exist, get garbage bin stats. Russian Bias? NEVER!!

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
84
[BOOTY]
Beta Testers
377 posts
6,967 battles
40 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

You can make whatever fantasy upgrades you want to WV to shoehorn her into Tier 8.   But there are still 2 problems:

1.  20 kts just won't be fun at that tier.  You'll be constantly left behind the flow of battle, and unable to redeploy effectively.

2.  We don't NEED another Tier 8 US premium battleship.  We have two already.  What we NEED is a Tier 7 premium, and West Virginia is perfect for that purpose.

This right here. I have yet to see a single argument that convinced me WV44 can be fun at tier 8.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,231
[PVE]
Members
9,711 posts
7,466 battles
49 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

You can make whatever fantasy upgrades you want to WV to shoehorn her into Tier 8.   But there are still 2 problems:

1.  20 kts just won't be fun at that tier.  You'll be constantly left behind the flow of battle, and unable to redeploy effectively.

2.  We don't NEED another Tier 8 US premium battleship.  We have two already.  What we NEED is a Tier 7 premium, and West Virginia is perfect for that purpose.

:Smile_honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
196
[SVF]
Members
949 posts
1,286 battles
9 minutes ago, USSWest_Virginia said:

This right here. I have yet to see a single argument that convinced me WV44 can be fun at tier 8.

Is that because the presenters of the arguments have genuinely not made a good case, or because you don't want to believe it can work?  As I stated above, I have significant doubts that WG (when/if they do start working on Rebuild!WeeVee) won't gimp her should she be considered a T7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,409
[HINON]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
7,258 posts
2,029 battles
47 minutes ago, TheDreadnought said:

They always nerf the British BBs on turret traverse for some reason.   National flavor I guess.

Les national flavor, more historical statistics. RN BB turrets pretty much all traversed at about 2º/sec (90 sec), the 16" turrets of Nelson being an exception (4º/sec, or 45 sec). Usually this leads to them being buffed traverse times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
84
[BOOTY]
Beta Testers
377 posts
6,967 battles
2 minutes ago, landcollector said:

Is that because the presenters of the arguments have genuinely not made a good case, or because you don't want to believe it can work?  As I stated above, I have significant doubts that WG (when/if they do start working on Rebuild!WeeVee) won't gimp her should she be considered a T7.

Its more like a complete lack of a case all together. They all just say that putting her in tier 8 will open up all these magical possibilities, but give no explanation in how they will make a 20 knot standard bb perform on par to ships like the Massachusetts or Tirpitz. I want to know how I'm supposed to go up against tier 10 ships on tier 10 maps in at least 30% of my games in it and still average over 80,000 damage a game because I can do that in a Massachusetts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
196
[SVF]
Members
949 posts
1,286 battles
1 minute ago, USSWest_Virginia said:

Its more like a complete lack of a case all together. They all just say that putting her in tier 8 will open up all these magical possibilities, but give no explanation in how they will make a 20 knot standard bb perform on par to ships like the Massachusetts or Tirpitz. I want to know how I'm supposed to go up against tier 10 ships on tier 10 maps in at least 30% of my games in it and still average over 80,000 damage a game because I can do that in a Massachusetts.

I won't deny that would be tough.  That being said.  If you think you'd get a unnerfed WeeVee at T7, that's unlikely.  They'll probably cite the strong AA as an excuse to screw over some other aspect of the ship, likely the main guns; like reload, accuracy, and/or traverse rate.  Do you really want that instead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,998
[ARGSY]
Members
6,306 posts
4,256 battles
2 minutes ago, landcollector said:

They'll probably cite the strong AA as an excuse to screw over some other aspect of the ship, likely the main guns; like reload, accuracy, and/or traverse rate.  Do you really want that instead?

This would be an especially big blow, given that one of the historical grounds Zoup argued on for WV44 was the standard of her shooting at Surigao Strait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
84
[BOOTY]
Beta Testers
377 posts
6,967 battles
8 minutes ago, landcollector said:

I won't deny that would be tough.  That being said.  If you think you'd get a unnerfed WeeVee at T7, that's unlikely.  They'll probably cite the strong AA as an excuse to screw over some other aspect of the ship, likely the main guns; like reload, accuracy, and/or traverse rate.  Do you really want that instead?

I would be perfectly happy with a well balanced WeeVee at tier 7. I would take some minor nerfs at tier 7 over turning her into some under performing gimmick monstrosity at tier 8.

Edited by USSWest_Virginia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,786 posts
795 battles

All the posts show how WG is screwed.

T6 (41) - BORING.

T7 (44) - OP or nerfed to fit.  And lets be honest.  They would get both opinions.

T8(44) - Soft stat buff's to make it, but nuked by same or higher tier.  Different and quirky for some, but probably buyers remorse for those that don't read the fine print.

Listening to the playerbase is going to cause problems no matter what they do now.

 

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
875
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,449 posts
8,107 battles

The only real argument for WV to be a tier 8 has been "she'd drastically out perform Colorado due to newer sensors and all, and is a bit more tier 7.5"

Here's a novel concept -

Colorado is one of the original ships, basically in game 4 years counting pre-release, she's the only sub 50% BB at the tier, even if just barely, she has the lowest damage, the lowest XP, the lowest frags, hell, shooting planes down, the thing that is supposed to be USN's thing, of 10 BB's at that tier she is 6th, SIXTH, Behind Lyon, Gneisenau, DoY, Scharnhorst, and Hood - with Nagato and KGV not exactly far behind it. 

So how about, instead of "nerfing" the WV to not shine CO, or having to try and overbuff it to shoehorn it into tier 8 like Hood, GZ, and others they try and find excuses to up tier them for extra money, and we REALLY do not need ANOTHER tier 8 USN BB premium, the CO appears to already based on the model have her 1944 refit, sans a few AA guns inexplicably missing - let's fully updater her to the 1944 outfitting, I'll even say take it a step further, and do the partial further updates that Maryland got after the Kamikaze strike with the twin 5 inch guns, and any other tweaks it had. Or if they have the info from archives, any further plans as I know they had some but went the cheap route. 

It would close the gap so WV is not vastly supererior CO, and would truly bring it in line with the newer ships that flat out have 44-45 upgrades unabated, maybe some tweaks to Nagato (that's also short some AA guns) as well. 

Power creep is a thing and at some tiers more than others, in the various lines of namely IJN and USN, it's starting to show. It's time for these ships to get a refit.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
86
[PT8TO]
[PT8TO]
Members
160 posts
12,517 battles

Two possible ways to fit the 44 refit at t7 to get around the speed problem at t8. Using the CO as a baseline, we could see either one or both of these:

1. Firepower: Reduced reload and fire angles to compensate for increased AAA and underwater protection. Main battery range might be slightly increased.

2. Survivability: Increased overall health to 61-63k but reduced efficiency on repair party to match other t7 BBs (16% to 18% of max health). Reduced repair party charge from 3 to 2 (max 4 with skill and premium consumable). This puts WV at the slightly worse overall survivability as others in the same tier to compensate for a much stronger AA suite.

Many people have already pointed out that 1944 WV will completely outmatch the CO in her current state and accuse WG of p2w. I don't think WG is willing to tread that path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
474
[WOLF5]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
2,285 posts
25,329 battles

If WV 44 is ever implemented, there's no way that WG will give it free to players who have bought the WV 41.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
86
[PT8TO]
[PT8TO]
Members
160 posts
12,517 battles
8 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

close the gap so WV is not vastly supererior CO,

Maybe add a C hull for the CO to match her late war configuration, similar to how the Furutaka had her modernized C hull upgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
875
[SSG]
Alpha Tester
3,449 posts
8,107 battles
1 hour ago, landcollector said:

I won't deny that would be tough.  That being said.  If you think you'd get a unnerfed WeeVee at T7, that's unlikely.  They'll probably cite the strong AA as an excuse to screw over some other aspect of the ship, likely the main guns; like reload, accuracy, and/or traverse rate.  Do you really want that instead?

I'm a CV player, and I call bull on that.

Lyon has 24 DP guns, 32x 40 mm guns, and 30x 20 mm guns.

Gnei (top plane killer of the tier) - 22 DP guns, 12x 37 mm guns, and 52x 20 mm guns

DoY - 16x DP guns, 96x 40 mm guns, 55x 20 mm guns

Scharn - 14 DP guns, 16x 37 mm, 30x 20 mm.

KGV - 16x DP guns, 56x 40 mm, 22x 20 mm

Colorado - 8x DP, 38x 40 mm, 37x 20 mm.

WV (per Wikipedia) 16x DP, 40x 40 mm, 50x 20 mm guns.

Those first 4 all out class CO as it is. Compared to Gnei, the top killer, it's trading long range for more medium range. It has less guns than DoY - which was over nerfed, AA is USN's thing it should bloody well be better than Scharn, and less DP's, slightly more medium/short range than Lyon.

 

There is no reason to overnerf this ship based on AA. Hell, most of it is 20 mm guns that only have an effect on DB's really. If anything, it'd maybe finally put USN back on top or close to it in plane kills - which USN is supposed to be the top of - not 6th. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
196
[SVF]
Members
949 posts
1,286 battles
1 minute ago, WanderingGhost said:

WV (per Wikipedia) 16x DP, 40x 40 mm, 50x 20 mm guns.

Shortly after she came out of refit, she had another 8x1, 1x2 and 1x4 20mm guns added as well.

 

2 minutes ago, WanderingGhost said:

There is no reason to overnerf this ship based on AA.

Oh, I agree with you, but I am concerned WG won't share the same feelings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×