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

BB AP v. DD Armor. What’s the big deal?

291 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,348
[BRZKR]
WoWS Community Contributors
1,493 posts
4,939 battles

I’m going to come out and say it.  As someone who plays BBs and DDs almost equally, I have no problem with the mechanics.  If I’m a DD and mess up and get blapped by BB AP, that’s on me.  I feel that this is more a bandaid for the deeper issue of no fix for radar.  I want to know your thoughts on it.  Why is this an issue now?  Does it bother you?

 

  • Cool 9
  • Bad 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
492
[VW]
Members
2,059 posts
12,980 battles

I think it should mot have been changed. Dds could still yolo torp, eat a full ap salvo and live to see bbs die. Once in a while a bb dev struck them. Now there will be no way to kill tht dd yolo charging a bb especially counting 30 sec wsted reloading, half of which would only knock ou a turret for 0 damage.

Edited by monpetitloup
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
332
[SPUDS]
[SPUDS]
Members
570 posts
3,361 battles

As a DD main, I never asked for a hardline overpen only rule. I just wanted the double dipping bug fixed.
I would appreciate a change to the radar saturation meta, however.

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
186
[CAPGO]
Members
610 posts
3,578 battles

Yea, I agree that the change was not necessary.  AP damage cap is not a good way. WG needs to stop dumbing down the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
215
[ICOP]
Members
992 posts
3,604 battles
1 minute ago, JackBinary said:

As a DD main, I never asked for a hardline overpen only rule. I just wanted the double dipping bug fixed.
I would appreciate a change to the radar saturation meta, however.

It seems most gloss over or forget the double dip bug issue.  If one is going to argue either for or against this change at least mention the double dip bug.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
708
[KP]
Beta Testers
1,891 posts
11,539 battles

I play, I kill, I die, some games you fall victim to BB ap, other times you watch them flood and sink, the double dipping, issue, well to be honest I would never had known about it until I watched a CC video on utube explaining what it was, then started seeing the posts related to the issue.

I am glad tho that BB players are taking the shots on DD's because it shows they're after the win by helping the team without necessary getting high damage for hitting it.

I play DD exclusively, and I don't really care about AP whether they change it or keep it as it is, the BB players need to be more vocal if they don't want to see this change come through 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7,497
[NMKJT]
Beta Testers
21,671 posts
3,895 battles

This is WG's way of fixing double-dipping, which you made a video about already @NoZoupForYou 

 

I seem to recall you weren't a fan of it?

Edited by KiyoSenkan
  • Cool 2
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
439
[S0L0]
Alpha Tester
1,619 posts
2,111 battles

I'm really concerned that this is going to create a real risk/ reward issue for DDs...   Its going to be really rewarding  for DDs to just make a suicide run against a BB now.. a huge pile of HPs for reward and not a lot of penalty with the slow reload of BB mains?     Even if you die.... so much damage to farm.   

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
1,089 posts
14,110 battles

Yeah Zoup, I fail to see a problem here. I agree that if, as a DD, I expose myself to a BB that actually has his guns set and aimed at me then I deserve what I get!

Also in my small circle of friends the " BBLAP problem" has never ever ever come up in conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
62
[TNG]
Members
303 posts
15,742 battles

DD main here too....not asking for this either...don’t get me started on the YY nerf.  

Look if a BB is shooting 9-12 AP shells the size of small cars at DD’s and get hits, then yes the DD should be punished severely.  

Do the Devs play this game or listen to the player base? 

Edited by shoy07
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,182
[DAKI]
WoWS Wiki Editor
7,472 posts
6,810 battles
6 minutes ago, shoy07 said:

Do the Devs play this game or listen to the player base

Yes, and yes.

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
62
[TNG]
Members
303 posts
15,742 battles
Just now, SireneRacker said:

Yes, and yes.

Ok cool- then can someone give me an explanation on the changes to YY that no one wanted? 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,376
[SYN]
[SYN]
Members
7,028 posts
10,708 battles

I play destroyers (33%) more than battleships (30%) but less than cruisers (37%), largely at mid-high tiers, and I think this is a good change for three main reasons:

  • The impact was more RNG than skill driven, given target size, BB dispersion, the angles required and the fairly arbitrary chance of taking a broadside full-pen as the shell armed on the deck or on an internal bulkhead all make it rather more dependent on luck than I'd like, with even a few lucky outcomes having a huge difference in outcome for a DD - going from 1,300 to 3,900 damage is a lot for a ship with <20k hp. While a better BB driver would hit more and thus get more full pens it's not a very skill-scaling mechanic
  • I think the game should include the mini-game of 'ammunition selection', cruisers have to do it (except RN CL which is a shame), destroyers should do it for best results, I think battleships should be encouraged to do so, there are increasing numbers of buffed EL skills out there, and although BB are different to other classes on the basis of reload, it's still a problem for almost all of them - even a Zao with AP loaded has a 14s reload to consider to get back to HE
  • Destroyer survivability at high tiers in particular is pretty low, and it's already a nasty, brutish world for them, in the initial cap-fight encounter losing 5-6k HP to a BB who had AP loaded hunting for the first-spotted cruiser is pretty unfortunate, maybe encouraging BB to start with HE loaded is a good thing for cruisers in turn, improving DD survivability seems laudable

Aside from that, some of the destroyers with lower performance also tend to be the 'fatter' ones which were more susceptible to BB AP and changing this is a step in the right direction for them. Gearing and Z-52 in particular are perceived as being particularly vulnerable thanks to wide beam, Gearing's 21mm plate is an active disadvantage there and there may be other factors less obvious.

Giving Khabarovsk a relative nerf is always good in my book too.

Overall, good change.

  • Cool 10
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
298
[SHOOT]
Beta Testers
1,895 posts
8,380 battles
10 hours ago, NoZoupForYou said:

I’m going to come out and say it.  As someone who plays BBs and DDs almost equally, I have no problem with the mechanics.  If I’m a DD and mess up and get blapped by BB AP, that’s on me.  I feel that this is more a bandaid for the deeper issue of no fix for radar.  I want to know your thoughts on it.  Why is this an issue now?  Does it bother you?

 

It doesn't bother me, I enjoy the mechanic. Imo people who don't enjoy it either:

1] have no respect for naval science

2] have no respect for the game and want to play like its beta

3] make the class an I win buttom.

The above might work for that particular group of people, but it kills the  game for everyone else.

However, if this change must be done, the secondaries of all ships, not just battleships but cruisers, destroyers and Aircraft Carriers should be increased in one spectrum or annother.

The spectrum of:

1] range

2] rate of fire

3] accuracy

4] fire chance

The above would allow ships to at least deter brazen bum rushes by the brazen nuclear armed destroyers.

Edited by Crokodone
  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
264
[NUWES]
Members
1,724 posts
5,924 battles

It isn't just about correcting the double-dipping problem. They also want to change the meta with non-UK BBs sitting on AP all the time for all occasions. They want to make HE a sound option for BBs in some cases. I suspect it won't change much. I think most BBs will still sit on AP and complain about getting sunk, but that's what they are aiming for. I'm a cruiser main with a BB secondary and I'm all for the change. Personally I think they should reduce overpen damage across the board if they want to change the meta, not just to DDs. 

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,779
[OO7]
Members
3,311 posts
9,774 battles
4 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

Yes, and yes.

They have already said they ignore most customer complaints and typically only look at stats... 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,182
[DAKI]
WoWS Wiki Editor
7,472 posts
6,810 battles
3 minutes ago, shoy07 said:

Ok cool- then can someone give me an explanation on the changes to YY that no one wanted? 

To say no one wanted them is a stretch, given how you can only speak for yourself and those you saw talking about the nerf that agreed with you, and for the explanation ask WG. 

  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
43 posts
2,195 battles

I'm not as opposed as some, I  would like to say after that change, I had better not ever see a bounce from a Dd when I hit it with AP. If you have the armor to bounce my shells, you have the armor to arm them

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,182
[DAKI]
WoWS Wiki Editor
7,472 posts
6,810 battles
Just now, Ducky_shot said:

They have already said they ignore most customer complaints and typically only look at stats... 

Because most complaints are in essence a "Weeeee, ship X killed me, nerf immediately" or the other way around.

Do you really think those complaints should be the basis for balance decisions? I don‘t. 

Funny enough, the one time WG left the balancing partially to the community, we got Graf Zeppelin. Her current version was the result of feedback from non-STs, from regular players that were lucky enough to buy her. Wonderful results, don‘t you agree?

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16
[VFW]
Beta Testers
54 posts
2,509 battles

Think about how many BBs now that are loaded with AP waiting for or aiming at a BB or Cruiser shot and a DD pops up and don't take the DD shot because of the poor chance of getting damage compared to taking the BB or Cruiser shot.

Now think after this change, how many BBs will take that shot at the DD. It does not happen enough now, after this change it will almost never happen. Very few BBs that have AP loaded will take a pot shot at a DD if they know they will get little to no damage if they are lucky enough to even hit the damned thing in the first place. This is a very bad change, not for BB players but the meta as a whole. 

  • Cool 5
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
62
[TNG]
Members
303 posts
15,742 battles
6 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

To say no one wanted them is a stretch, given how you can only speak for yourself and those you saw talking about the nerf that agreed with you, and for the explanation ask WG. 

That isn’t accurate- there have been many threads on the forum & redditt disagreeing with the YY nerf.  

I haven’t seen many in favor- if you have please show me the posts. 

In the Dev blog YY nerf statement that was only posted last week- they made it sound as if the ship had the ability to have radar and smoke- which again isn’t accurate- and if the guns are overpowered which btw are the same as Gearings then why aren’t the Gearings guns nerfed? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,779
[OO7]
Members
3,311 posts
9,774 battles
2 minutes ago, SireneRacker said:

Because most complaints are in essence a "Weeeee, ship X killed me, nerf immediately" or the other way around.

Do you really think those complaints should be the basis for balance decisions? I don‘t. 

Funny enough, the one time WG left the balancing partially to the community, we got Graf Zeppelin. Her current version was the result of feedback from non-STs, from regular players that were lucky enough to buy her. Wonderful results, don‘t you agree?

So now you are saying they dont typically listen to their player base? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
708
[KP]
Beta Testers
1,891 posts
11,539 battles

If these changes come through, and my DD becomes an I win button at taking on BB, then of course I will use it to the full extent, bum rushes, yoloing at BB's, sitting there taunting them, with each salvo I take of AP and in chat saying "Ha Ha, you shot me and I have 5 x 460mm holes in my boat but I push R for ARRRRR and I am repaired and now I torp you in the face, now Die BB Die. 

And as I sail away listening to the broken corpse of the BB sinking slowing I am reminded, there's another one, as I scream "Die" while driving straight towards them eating all those shells taking minimal damage from his AP. 

Edited by CriMiNaL__

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,182
[DAKI]
WoWS Wiki Editor
7,472 posts
6,810 battles
10 minutes ago, shoy07 said:

That isn’t accurate- there have been many threads on the forum & redditt disagreeing with the YY nerf.  

I haven’t seen many in favor- if you have please show me the posts. 

Not I have to provide proof in this case. It was you who claimed that no one wanted that change. It‘s up to you to prove that.

9 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

So now you are saying they dont typically listen to their player base? 

Not when the complaints are based on opinions, are biased and lack any sort of substance. There have been enough changes going through that were community-driven, ships that were implemented due to popular community requests and even marketing plans being changed due to community reactions. 

Imagine it like that: If during a strong wind a leaf from your tree crossed several dozen feet and landed on your neighbor‘s lawn, and he, rage-filled, demanded that you chop off the tree. Do you now go and chop the tree?

  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
770
[POD]
Beta Testers
3,059 posts
4,743 battles
36 minutes ago, shoy07 said:

Ok cool- then can someone give me an explanation on the changes to YY that no one wanted? 

they play beta wows and are not up to date. they listen to the playerbase,but if they implement it or not is another story.sometimes they do it,sometimes they don't,that's normal.

Edited by Cruxdei

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×