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

Rant Time

9 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
91 posts
3,205 battles

I'd like to start this by saying I understand that somethings are planned to change but it's still frustrating to deal with some of these bullet points. I am first and foremost a BB main, but I play some cruiser and rarely DD. 
 

  • If battleship AP was dealing too much damage and made battleship gameplay dull and simple then can we please do something about switching shell types? Knowing when to switch shell types is more of a gamble. It's picking the shell for the likely target, pick wrong and potential alpha goes way down to the point where it's rage inducing. Sure, 15 seconds from Expert Loader is nice, but it still remains such a roll of the dice, it's still better to sling nothing but AP. I've tried Montana, she does well with only AP overpens but ships in the German BB line? Secondaries are no excuse as they are CRTL click, the point of the change was to make the game more dynamic but I'm still waiting to see that. Note: I do agree that the damage from AP was too much in most circumstances and I'm more happy that it's been changed. DDs always seemed to have a low population count, this changed help but by shifting BB play into more luck. Which brings me to my next point.
     
  • RNG, I've had some moments with good RNG. However, it's those moments where a broadside cruiser at 7km gets spared while one at 20km doesn't, that is most remembered. I know it's there to give the lower end of the players a better fighting chance and to learn from their mistakes but I've yet to see why I should delete a good player at extreme range while a bad one gets spared. With my luck, this happens too often. One salvo and suddenly three fires, which means ~58% of my health if I do not spec into a tank build. Once again this brings me to my next point.
     
  • Commander skills and builds are so damn linear, it's really not that much of a choice. If a BB is not specialized in stealth and DoT survivability, it's goodbye. Sure, sometimes a secondary or AA build has it's moments but they are so far and few in between it's a waste. I'm not calling for a BB buff or nerf. Making the commander skills more dynamic would be awesome. 
     
  • The National flavors of battleships is such a mess. The German citadel niche is not unique and the secondaries are not unique. Those were the TWO of the three MAIN selling points of that nation. The other being hydro. Not enough to compensate for what happens when they face other battleships from a different nation. 
     
  • If AP pens on DDs were such an unforgiving thing, is it possible to say that flooding is too? 60% for an un-specialized flood is crazy. Too [edited]crazy. A torpedo that does 18k and gets a full flooding on a Yamato is roughly 76k. Or 78% of the ships health. This gets worse the less health you have but is greatly influenced by damage repair. Which is most notably the slowest for battleships. They're suppose to be more survivable than the other classes but how come their damacon is arguably the worst? At this point I'd also argue that citadels are too punishing. I'm not advocating that either flooding or citadels should be removed, just that flooding is the "50 seconds and I'm gonna die no matter what I do because I was on fire in 4 spots" kinda thing. I'd rather take an extra 4k damage that I cannot heal then the 30k of flooding. I understand there is a change in the works.
     
  • I like the addition of HE penetration being listed in port, but by god... how am I suppose to know the penetration of the AP without external sources? The armor viewing mechanic in [edited] is really bloody good, is there any way for that to be mimicked in this game or would that be a copyright horror? Either way, I'd like to get to know all the guns penetration through the game, not the forum.

    Anyway, that's all. Really helps to vent and thank you to whoever got through this rant. 
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,022 posts
13 battles
  1. The changes are for BB players to think which ammo type is best for the situation i.e. no more dumb "Just use AP for everything".
  2. Every ship type deals with RNG all the time. Not sure why BBs should be excluded from that.
  3. There are BB players who run AA spec or Secondary spec and still does fine even with the "HE spam meta". No amount of skill build will save an improperly-positioned BB from burning to death.
  4. German BBs could use a little main battery accuracy. Other than that they're fine.
  5. You do realize death by flooding  doesn't happen often? Good BB players do not blow off their repair party on fires, and will wait until torpedo threats are dealt with, preventing floods from sticking.
  6. That I'd agree with. They'll probably add AP pen values in future patches.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
145
[WLDD]
Beta Testers
359 posts
5,285 battles

Commander skills are inherently flawed just by existing.  Players will always gravitate towards whatever provides the most gain for what they're using, which results in almost everyone using the same builds.  It's even one reason why Wargaming just baked in Situational Awareness to be something that everyone has.  Everyone took the skill no matter what ship they played.  It's now the same thing with skill like Priority Target, Superintendent, or Concealment Expert.  Nearly every build out there uses those skills, which means 8/19 skill points are almost always used on those three skills.  Short of just baking those skills in to the ships and completely redesigning the skill tree, I don't know what Wargaming could do to encourage people to use different builds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,010
[SALVO]
Members
17,709 posts
18,486 battles
On 11/27/2018 at 6:57 AM, AD_MORTEM_INIMICUS said:

I'd like to start this by saying I understand that somethings are planned to change but it's still frustrating to deal with some of these bullet points. I am first and foremost a BB main, but I play some cruiser and rarely DD. 
 

  • (1) If battleship AP was dealing too much damage and made battleship gameplay dull and simple then can we please do something about switching shell types? Knowing when to switch shell types is more of a gamble. It's picking the shell for the likely target, pick wrong and potential alpha goes way down to the point where it's rage inducing. Sure, 15 seconds from Expert Loader is nice, but it still remains such a roll of the dice, it's still better to sling nothing but AP. I've tried Montana, she does well with only AP overpens but ships in the German BB line? Secondaries are no excuse as they are CRTL click, the point of the change was to make the game more dynamic but I'm still waiting to see that. Note: I do agree that the damage from AP was too much in most circumstances and I'm more happy that it's been changed. DDs always seemed to have a low population count, this changed help but by shifting BB play into more luck. Which brings me to my next point.
     
  • (2) RNG, I've had some moments with good RNG. However, it's those moments where a broadside cruiser at 7km gets spared while one at 20km doesn't, that is most remembered. I know it's there to give the lower end of the players a better fighting chance and to learn from their mistakes but I've yet to see why I should delete a good player at extreme range while a bad one gets spared. With my luck, this happens too often. One salvo and suddenly three fires, which means ~58% of my health if I do not spec into a tank build. Once again this brings me to my next point.
     
  • (3) Commander skills and builds are so damn linear, it's really not that much of a choice. If a BB is not specialized in stealth and DoT survivability, it's goodbye. Sure, sometimes a secondary or AA build has it's moments but they are so far and few in between it's a waste. I'm not calling for a BB buff or nerf. Making the commander skills more dynamic would be awesome. 
     
  • (4) The National flavors of battleships is such a mess. The German citadel niche is not unique and the secondaries are not unique. Those were the TWO of the three MAIN selling points of that nation. The other being hydro. Not enough to compensate for what happens when they face other battleships from a different nation. 
     
  • (5) If AP pens on DDs were such an unforgiving thing, is it possible to say that flooding is too? 60% for an un-specialized flood is crazy. Too [edited]crazy. A torpedo that does 18k and gets a full flooding on a Yamato is roughly 76k. Or 78% of the ships health. This gets worse the less health you have but is greatly influenced by damage repair. Which is most notably the slowest for battleships. They're suppose to be more survivable than the other classes but how come their damacon is arguably the worst? At this point I'd also argue that citadels are too punishing. I'm not advocating that either flooding or citadels should be removed, just that flooding is the "50 seconds and I'm gonna die no matter what I do because I was on fire in 4 spots" kinda thing. I'd rather take an extra 4k damage that I cannot heal then the 30k of flooding. I understand there is a change in the works.
     
  • (6) I like the addition of HE penetration being listed in port, but by god... how am I suppose to know the penetration of the AP without external sources? The armor viewing mechanic in [edited] is really bloody good, is there any way for that to be mimicked in this game or would that be a copyright horror? Either way, I'd like to get to know all the guns penetration through the game, not the forum.

    Anyway, that's all. Really helps to vent and thank you to whoever got through this rant. 

1. Covering a lot of ground here. 

a) Expert Loader is a bad skill.  Aside from it being offensively unrealistic, it's a useless skill if all of your guns are not already fully loaded.  if you're in a situation where your fore and aft turrets aren't firing at the same target, or you're bow tanking in something other than an all main guns forward BB (like the Richelieu), you're going to have extreme difficulty getting any value out of this skill.

b) Changing ammo types in BBs definitely is much more of a gamble than for other ship types, when the reloads can be upwards of 30-35 seconds for many BBs.  It's easy to switch ammo types when you're in a DD or a CL.  But it starts getting a little more risky for heavy cruisers.

 

2. RNG evens the playing field.  If shells always landed exactly where they were aimed, unicums would be clubbing lesser players at insane levels.  It's better the way it is.  Deal with it.

3. Not entirely sure what you mean by make commander skills more "dynamic".  I mostly agree with Deno that players tend to min-max skills no matter what.  There will always be some players who are rebels when it comes to skill builds, like building a Montana secondary build, rather than a concealment/survival build.  I think that there are three possible paths WG could take with regard to skills.

Path A: Keep skills mostly as is.  I don't necessarily mean not changing the skills, but keep the basic single skill tree with some skills that favor certain ship types, etc.

Path B: Make skills more complex, sorta.  Make different skill trees for different ship types.  This would probably require captains to use the skill tree that matches their specialization.  But how this would work if you took a captain whose skills were specialized DD skills and put him in a premium cruiser, I don't know.  Heck, if you moved a specialized DD captain into a new ship which was, for example, a cruiser, the same probably would probably arise as well.  There might be room for a lot of interesting skills here, but there'd also be some complexity relating to the skill specialization.

Path C: Do away with all selectable skills. Possibly simply pick a ship type specialization.  And then as you gained captain's XP and reached certain thresholds, you'd gain certain benefits.  This would have the effect of making captains rather bland, though with the possibility of a little differentiation between captains of different ship types.  It's also possible that perhaps there could be, let's say, two different options for each ship type.  For example, for DDs, you might select a torpedo boat DD captain specialization or a gunboat DD specialization, and the benefits each gained over time would be adjusted to be appropriate to each type.

The problem with option C is that it's rather bland and takes away player choice.  The problem with path B is that it doesn't really solve the issue of min-maxing, though it might make the choices more interesting and varied.  As for path A, I'd love to see a complete reworking of the existing skill set.  I'd prefer it to pay a little more attention to realism.  Not hardcore sim-level realism, but arcade realism, where a skill's concept is realism simplified, rather than ignoring realism entirely and being 100% unrealistic (like Expert Loader). Another way to look at whether a skill is "realistic" is to ask yourself the following question.  Is this skill something that a ship's officers can train the crew to improve upon?  If yes, it may be a good and reasonably realistic skill.  If no, then don't use it.  Leave upgrade modules for technical enhancements, and allow skills to be things that are improved by actual training of the crew by a ship's officers and non-coms.

 

4. I dislike the entire national flavor concept.  And would love to see it go away, and just let all ships be what they were.  As for German BBs, this secondary flavor really hinders them, IMO.  BBs simply do not look to their secondaries as the way for them to do massive damage.  Even with German BBs, secondaries are a supplemental damage source, not their primary damage source.  About the only time a BB might get truly massive secondary damage is if they manage to survive a long time and set a lot of fires that enemy ships choose not to put out immediately, or those fires are perma fires.  But generally speaking, in my experience, being too dependent on secondaries for damage production tends to force you into over-extending and dying too easily.  So, quite frankly, German BBs need an accuracy buff, and probably some more than others.  Side note, I found the recent (or is it proposed) FDG main gun buff on her reload rate to be mostly a waste.  IMO, her problem isn't reload speed, but main gun accuracy.

 

5. Flooding.  WG is supposedly working on a change to the flooding mechanic already, so I'll skip this one.

6. Skipping this one too.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
91 posts
3,205 battles
29 minutes ago, RyuuohD_NA said:
  1. The changes are for BB players to think which ammo type is best for the situation i.e. no more dumb "Just use AP for everything".
  2. Every ship type deals with RNG all the time. Not sure why BBs should be excluded from that.
  3. There are BB players who run AA spec or Secondary spec and still does fine even with the "HE spam meta". No amount of skill build will save an improperly-positioned BB from burning to death.
  4. German BBs could use a little main battery accuracy. Other than that they're fine.
  5. You do realize death by flooding  doesn't happen often? Good BB players do not blow off their repair party on fires, and will wait until torpedo threats are dealt with, preventing floods from sticking.
  6. That I'd agree with. They'll probably add AP pen values in future patches.

1. It's still pretty much shoot nothing but AP anyways in nearly all situations unless the only combatant to be faced is a DD. This change hasn't changed much in terms of BB play, but it has with DD play. I can argue that it made them both dumber to play as destroyers no longer have to consider whether bow on or broadside is the better choice. Your point is moot. 
2. Ahh yes, because this whole time I was saying that BBs should have laser like guns and cannot be set on fire or flood. If it wasn't obvious, BBs are the most RNG reliant ships in the game and everyone tends to suffer and needlessly benefit because of that. 

3. The players who do run those are at a disadvantage, nonetheless they can still do well. Not as well if they had a stealth + tank build, and that rule follows through 9/10 battles. 

4. Main battery accuracy buff would be nice, however their trade-offs still are nonsensical. The citadel came with the trade of having armor that resulted in more penetration damage than most other ships. Now, the French and British get this without trading the armor nor the firing angles in comparison to their equivalent tier German counterparts. 

5. Nonsense, 4 fires that burn for full does more damage than a flooding. 3 fires does something like 2 percent less damage than flooding. It's either die by flooding or by fire. True for a lot of situations.

6. Glad we can agree on something.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,010
[SALVO]
Members
17,709 posts
18,486 battles
37 minutes ago, Schindlers_Stink_Fist said:

Sounds less like a rant and more like valid concerns, IMO.

I was thinking the same thing.  The OP's post seemed less rant and more rational observations.  I might not have agreed with everything, but he certainly presented everything reasonably and formatted well (which makes the read that much easier), and without writing a multipage tome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
157
[STURM]
Members
318 posts
3,141 battles

Most of what I was going to say has been said already, so I'm just gonna gonna give my two cents on two points.

3 hours ago, AD_MORTEM_INIMICUS said:

The National flavors of battleships is such a mess. The German citadel niche is not unique and the secondaries are not unique. Those were the TWO of the three MAIN selling points of that nation. The other being hydro. Not enough to compensate for what happens when they face other battleships from a different nation. 

Eh, for the most part I think the national flavors are fine. Personally, the biggest issue hear is how bland the origanal two line, USN and IJN, are. Then again, I don't really play either, so take my view there with a grain of salt.

But I disagree with you on the citadels and secondarys of German BBs not being unique. The German turtleback armor scheme is the best at preventing citadels at close range, to the point that I'm genuinely shocked whenever I score one one them at ranges over 11-12 KM. Even the underwater citadels of other nations can be beaten if you know where to aim.

As for the secondarys, the German line is really the only one that can make use of them. It all comes down to the increased penetration of the secondarys, even more than the range. French BBs might have better range, but because they NEED IFHE to damage most ships, (even destroyers for the smaller guns), generally they are worthless except for starting fires, and not worth the deep skill point investment. Plus, their vulnerability to HE spam means ships without fire prevention are gonna die quick.

2 hours ago, AD_MORTEM_INIMICUS said:

1. It's still pretty much shoot nothing but AP anyways in nearly all situations unless the only combatant to be faced is a DD. This change hasn't changed much in terms of BB play, but it has with DD play. I can argue that it made them both dumber to play as destroyers no longer have to consider whether bow on or broadside is the better choice. Your point is moot. 

I gotta disagree here as well. Unless you're in the Yamato, shooting AP at a bow tanking BB is pretty much a waste of time. Just fire your AP at his turrets, hopefully disabling at least one, and make your next shot HE. Heck, you could shoot that AP at a different, juicier target before switching. After that, unload HE into their snout. It's more consistent, even discounting the chance to set fires.

But I really do like you point about putting penatration data in game. I hate it when games hide crucial data away on third party sites, if they even release it at all. Plus one for that.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1
[ACES]
[ACES]
Members
21 posts
8,071 battles

Dunno about anyone else, but I'll always load AP in BBs anyway, save for the very beginning.

Expert Loader is nearly useless IMO, even if it's The Captain Formerly Known As Segal...if I see a DD, am I gonna take an additional 10 seconds to change out shell types just to take a shot at it for potential better damage?  Nope...I'm gonna take the shot immediately, do what damage I can, THEN change to HE after the guns are cleared.

Finally, you're always going to have those A-Holes out there who tell you to "Get Gud" with BBs and go to AP anyway...between WG, players and mechanics, something's always going to "lose".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×