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

Mouse's Morning of Testing

263 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
3,368 posts
2,378 battles
5 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

The anti-torpedo bulge penetration is downright discouraging.  Like, it's actively sapping my want to play.

Agreed.  There's already so few ships that can brawl effectively, and even THEN it's not guaranteed as you often get melted getting into range.
Now even *if* you get into range... well... as you tested.

Let's hope WG will not implement that change.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
754
[NG-NL]
Members
4,974 posts
8,124 battles

If everyone's MB becomes dangerous, that will be problematic. Can see more clamoring for a buff to repair party or rudder or armor, something to limit the damage.

You tested the smallest secondary/MB yet against thick BB armor like Yamato and GK's? Interested in how hard these changes will hit.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,541 posts
704 battles

How many cruisers does this affect?

If they wanted to encourage camping, this would be a way to go.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
190
[-BMV-]
Members
1,187 posts
5,556 battles

The pen for no damage was annoying but this is takes some of my Favorite ships and makes them incredibly easy to kill at short range. Or Mid range for that matter, you don't need to get in to brawl ranges for the torp bulge to soak up damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
378 posts
3,497 battles
14 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

 

  • Her fire angles suck more than an elf on a mailbox.  

Sounds like a very Orc thing to say:cap_hmm:

Buuuut, is there a list somewhere of ships with external Torpedo bulges?

It was interesting that you were able to sink an Iowa and NC spamming into the belt as I thought the Iowa-Class had an internal torpedo defense system that would have meant she and Missouri, and the NC would be protected from this change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,569
[HINON]
Supertester
18,993 posts
12,488 battles
21 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Lert helped me do a side by side comparison:

545w5OP.gif

 

Hard to say 'no' when Mouse asks you to chase her butt around for a while.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
238
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
1,514 posts
8,037 battles
5 minutes ago, Francois424 said:

Agreed.  There's already so few ships that can brawl effectively, and even THEN it's not guaranteed as you often get melted getting into range.
Now even *if* you get into range... well... as you tested.

Let's hope WG will not implement that change.

This change has as great effect on non-brawling ships as brawling ships. Not only is repair party on a CD, it has limited charges. You can't gate survivability behind a CD and call it balance, not with the most visible and least mobile class in the game. 

Whats even worse, this change spells the death knell for low tier battleships, players new to the game. There is no demographic that could be possibly hurt worse.

This reminds me of CB when armor didn't work and every shell did full pen damage. To make matters worse, this change makes cruisers much less survivable. Before you could bait/tank shots with your turrets and survive. Now turret hits might as well be strait into the citadel. 

Even the thought of this change takes us so far back, its like they've gone not back to drawing board but back to formula...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,765
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
9,072 posts
7,618 battles
Just now, DrHolmes52 said:

How many cruisers does this affect?

If they wanted to encourage camping, this would be a way to go.

Not including ships in testing:

  • Japan - The impact here is minor with most belts being at or just slightly above the waterline.
    Aoba, Myoko (and ARP clones), Mogami, Atago, Ibuki, Zao
     
  • Soviet Union - Just one ship affected here and it's borrowed.
    Makarov
     
  • Germany - The minibattleships of the Germans are susceptible.
    Nurnberg, Roon, Hindenburg
     
  • France - France is probably the nation most affected. Not only does she have ships with anti-torpedo bulges, she has a lot of citadel "void" spaces internally.
    Emile Bertin, La Galissonniere, De Grasse, Algerie, Charles Martle, Saint Louis, Henri IV

 

  • Cool 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
100
[WAG]
Members
381 posts
7,288 battles

This is just stupid. Come on Wargaming. Please don't fix something that isn't broken with the minimum 10% damage described.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,541 posts
704 battles
2 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Not including ships in testing:

  • Japan - The impact here is minor with most belts being at or just slightly above the waterline.
    Aoba, Myoko (and ARP clones), Mogami, Atago, Ibuki, Zao
     
  • Soviet Union - Just one ship affected here and it's borrowed.
    Makarov
     
  • Germany - The minibattleships of the Germans are susceptible.
    Nurnberg, Roon, Hindenburg
     
  • France - France is probably the nation most affected. Not only does she have ships with anti-torpedo bulges, she has a lot of citadel "void" spaces internally.
    Emile Bertin, La Galissonniere, De Grasse, Algerie, Charles Martle, Saint Louis, Henri IV

 

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
414
[CUTER]
Members
683 posts
18,626 battles

RIP

This will drive players away in a hurry as BBs are a major sticking point for much of the population.  Throw in the reduced concealment and BBs will be better suited just sitting in port.

Edited by Kongo_Pride
  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
832
[SBS]
Members
2,420 posts
2,253 battles

Thumbs up to you Mouse (and I know Lert is usually your partner in crime).  You guys are troopers. :Smile_great:

2 minutes ago, LittleWhiteMouse said:

Some days testing is very rewarding and a lot of fun.  Others are ... others are like this morning, where there's a lot of problems and I'm left hoping against hope that Wargaming doesn't carry forward with select design elements.  Vanguard isn't fun and I fear that her in-port turning radius may be corrected to 1030m.  The anti-torpedo bulge penetration is downright discouraging.  Like, it's actively sapping my want to play.  That's a sure sign I need a break from testing, at least for the rest of the day.

I've come to realize the game is likely to see some very big changes in the foreseeable future.  I'm hoping for the best.  Keep your chin up and hang in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22,569
[HINON]
Supertester
18,993 posts
12,488 battles
1 minute ago, Slimeball91 said:

Thumbs up to you Mouse (and I know Lert is usually your partner in crime).  You guys are troopers. :Smile_great:

This was 95% Mouse, though. I had other things on my plate. All the props should go to her.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
272
[WOLF5]
Members
608 posts
12,012 battles

So BB's who are type cast as 'camping' now will have more reason to hang back. Do not understand the logic WG is using for the bulge issue. This is the same thing as spaced armor in WoT, it doesn't count against your HP unless it penetrates the interior armor. 

This is one of the problems I have with WG; the games are all separately developed, but they don't compare notes nearly often enough and so they re-invent the wheel and sometimes it comes out an octagon.

Best Practices...live them love them. 

Edited by RevTKS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,523
[OO7]
Alpha Tester
6,706 posts
3,468 battles
5 minutes ago, Lert said:

This was 95% Mouse, though. I had other things on my plate. All the props should go to her.

Catnip?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,368 posts
2,378 battles
1 minute ago, Kongo_Pride said:

RIP

This will drive playera away in a hurry as BBs are a major sticking point for much of the population.  Throw in the reduced concealment and BBs will be better suited just sitting in port.

Well, for sure it makes me want to dust-off my DDs I haven't played since the torpedo nerfs (ie: Most DDs can't do the stealth IJN style I was so found of in CBT/OBT and early game release).
But if I can't brawl effectively in BBs, even Co-OP is out of the window.  If I can't tank yet am slow, unwieldy, get HE spammed...  And now with more pens?  /sadpanda
CV rework just became more appealing as well.  

But in all honesty, I've invested hundred of dollars in this game by now... Not only for myself but to encourage it and for the Texas campaign and all... I like the fluff.
If I can't play my favorite ships (effectively) anymore... Knowing myself this will probably slash my play time.
As for concealment, I never played BB with concealment for 2 reasons:
#1- I like to brawl and get close, hence I fell in love with the WarSpite in CBT. 
#2-My highest captain (german) is only 16 skills, and since I secondary built him there was no room for Concealment.  (Well there are but I'm testing FP right about now and not impressed so far,might switch and try CE later, let me push closer before getting focused.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
423
[FAE]
Members
2,130 posts
2,531 battles

Ho much historical basis does turret traverse and blocked gun angles have now? I know many of these on BBs have been massaged simply based on game comfort. 

It would be nice to have some game comfort massages for DD turret traverses (cough IJN) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23,765
[WG-CC]
WoWS Community Contributors
9,072 posts
7,618 battles

If this anti-torpedo bulge goes through, I have a LOT of reviews to amend.

  • Texas - I'm so sorry.
  • Warspite - vulnerable while brawling.
  • Arizona - nowhere near as well protected against AP as she was.
  • Dunkerque - angling won't save you.
  • Alabama - Stay at range.
  • Massachusetts - getting into secondary range is hella dangerous.
  • Gascogne - I'm sorry.
  • Jean Bart - play her as a sniper only
  • Nelson - I am so sorry.  At least you've got that portable drydock.  Too bad you'll need it for everything now.
  • Missouri - your payday might be compromised if you get too close.
  • Mutsu - tougher than Nagato... and most of the other tier VI BBs.
  • Ashitaka - tougher than Amagi, ironically.
  • Kii - Also tougher than Amagi.
  • Roma - Does this count as a buff?  Finally?
  • Tirpitz - CONGRATULATIONS, you just got buffed by proxy!
  • Scharnhorst - CONGRATULATIONS, you just got buffed by proxy!
  • Musashi - Laughing in overmatch.
  • Cool 10
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
183
[SVF]
Members
909 posts
1,282 battles

The module/TDS changes have broken the armor mechanics (Edit: And many premium BBs as well) it seems.  WG did *not* think this through all the way.  I am not happy about the results, but thanks for doing all that work @LittleWhiteMouse.

Edited by landcollector
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,456
[-K-]
WoWS Wiki Editor, Members, Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers, Supertester, Supertest Coordinator
5,817 posts
5,360 battles
21 minutes ago, RevTKS said:

This is one of the problems I have with WG; the games are all separately developed, but they don't compare notes nearly often enough and so they re-invent the wheel and sometimes it comes out an octagon

Remember the T29's ears?

  • Cool 6
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
272
[WOLF5]
Members
608 posts
12,012 battles
Just now, Tedster_ said:

Remember the T29's ears?

Exactly. WG has already been through this stuff. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34
[ASRN]
Beta Testers
227 posts
2,010 battles

Well,  !@#$.  That pretty much benches Massachusetts.  A secondary-specced ship that can't use her secondaries?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,368 posts
2,378 battles
Just now, Ann_Darrow said:

Well,  !@#$.  That pretty much benches Massachusetts.  A secondary-specced ship that can't use her secondaries?

Mikasa : "Hold my beer !"

  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
238
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
1,514 posts
8,037 battles
1 minute ago, Tedster_ said:

Remember the T29's ears?

That was 1 tank, we are talking about every low tier bb line. Btw, I'm more than sure most wows deverers have played WoT at some point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×