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

BBs are Useless Now

35 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

131
Beta Testers
731 posts
3,319 battles

There were multiple people reporting a stealth nerf to BB accuracy, and after a week of playing I can confirm this. I used to get over 30% hit rate on average before and now I'm getting 25% and less. Last game I had with a Missouri fully specced for accuracy got a 20% hit rate -- that is not at all an exception.

Essentially if BBs can't hit anything they're nothing but burning pinatas.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 7
  • Boring 3
  • Bad 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
358
[NGA]
Members
1,495 posts
8,668 battles
2 minutes ago, GUTB said:

There were multiple people reporting a stealth nerf to BB accuracy, and after a week of playing I can confirm this. I used to get over 30% hit rate on average before and now I'm getting 25% and less. Last game I had with a Missouri fully specced for accuracy got a 20% hit rate -- that is not at all an exception.

Essentially if BBs can't hit anything they're nothing but burning pinatas.

Yeah and that Yammy I nailed with a double citadel at 20k in Jean Bart was a complete fluke.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,599
[KSE]
Members
7,724 posts
8,049 battles

Oh. It's you. Again. 

 

...Hi?

 

(Also, you're wrong. This should come as no surprise.)

Edited by Th3KrimzonD3mon
  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
545
[WOLF5]
Members
1,789 posts
2,486 battles

My Missouri must have missed the memo, because I was citadeling things left, right and center last game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,405
[FOXEH]
[FOXEH]
Alpha Tester
6,357 posts
10,910 battles
28 minutes ago, Gunga_Dinner said:

History would agree with the OP.  It is why you don't see many on the high seas anymore.

actually there's been  a big debate on adding a modern type of BB or battlecruiser to the USN! (last I heard they wanted 3) Pacific Ocean only of course; no need to put units to Support Europe, Brits got that covered!:fish_book:

 

The argument is that "dumb" weapons (such as naval artillary) would be cheaper and more effective than spending hand over fist for multi-milion dollar missiles and rockets.:cap_hmm: and given that most modern fleets don't have the armor to repel guns above 5 inches, well even a 12 inch layout would wreak havoc on an enemy fleet. The only threat to a modern BB/BC would be subs (or nukes but that's kinda a waste of money)  because the USN has what 20 CVS? and would have overwhelming air support and CAP in play.

 

the only down side is building time/cost and upkeep. plus you could build/ maintain 3 modern DD instead of 1 BB, though if built right the BB could negate that factor.:fish_book:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,405
[FOXEH]
[FOXEH]
Alpha Tester
6,357 posts
10,910 battles
10 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

My Missouri must have missed the memo, because I was citadeling things left, right and center last game.

same but in my Tirpitz. got 6 citidals on a cheeky mogami.:Smile_playing: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
789
[WORX]
Members
2,552 posts
13,870 battles

no data? no research ? just "I confirmed" it, trust me ?Why do this sounds familiar ?

BB AP changes at tier 10, I am willing to see the numbers of Brit cruisers are getting deleted faster then before.

BBs useless ? Jingles had a saying which due to forums regs I am not going to repost it :P.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
370
[TF_34]
[TF_34]
Beta Testers
1,230 posts
4,106 battles
54 minutes ago, Gunga_Dinner said:

History would agree with the OP.  It is why you don't see many on the high seas anymore.

Oh  Lordy... please forgive him for he knows not what he  Speaks of.

Battleships in their day were  accurate enough. If they were as inaccurate as we see in game, nations would not have built dozens of them at considerable expense.  Once WG plots the patterns elliptically along the line of fire, and fixes shells leaving the barrels at nearly right angles, you might get an appreciation of what gunnery is. Would BBs get 25-35% hits IRL? No. They were designed to do the job well enough, though.  The Mk 38 FCS and Mk  1A FC computer onboard the Iowas (and others) were so accurate and reliable the US Navy never bothered to upgrade them in the 1980s.

You don't see BBs running around today because their ability to project power was eclipsed in range by the embarked air wings aboard aircraft carriers. Had absolutely zero to do with accuracy.

Lack of reach and operating costs in a post-war, cash strapped world did in the battleship.

OP...there was no stealth nerf. Either your aim was off or your target was using WASD hacks you didnt account for.

Wait...scratch that. Maybe the sky IS falling....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
651 posts
5,656 battles
1 hour ago, GUTB said:

There were multiple people reporting a stealth nerf to BB accuracy, and after a week of playing I can confirm this. I used to get over 30% hit rate on average before and now I'm getting 25% and less. Last game I had with a Missouri fully specced for accuracy got a 20% hit rate -- that is not at all an exception.

Essentially if BBs can't hit anything they're nothing but burning pinatas.

Have you tried getting closer than 25km?

Git gud, BBs are still fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,405
[FOXEH]
[FOXEH]
Alpha Tester
6,357 posts
10,910 battles
1 minute ago, BBsquid said:

Oh  Lordy... please forgive him for he knows not what he  Speaks of.

Battleships in their day were  accurate enough. If they were as inaccurate as we see in game, nations would not have built dozens of them at considerable expense.  Once WG plots the patterns elliptically along the line of fire, and fixes shells leaving the barrels at nearly right angles, you might get an appreciation of what gunnery is. Would BBs get 25-35% hits IRL? No. They were designed to do the job well enough, though.  The Mk 38 FCS and Mk  1A FC computer onboard the Iowas (and others) were so accurate and reliable the US Navy never bothered to upgrade them in the 1980s.

You don't see BBs running around today because their ability to project power was eclipsed in range by the embarked air wings aboard aircraft carriers. Had absolutely zero to do with accuracy.

Lack of reach and operating costs in a post-war, cash strapped world did in the battleship.

OP...there was no stealth nerf. Either your aim was off or your target was using WASD hacks you didnt account for.

Wait...scratch that. Maybe the sky IS falling....

can't remember the source, but when desert storm was active the 2 Iowas that were still online were not only still using the WW2 plotting devices but also thanks to new gen 1 drones were able to hit targets with almost a 87% hit accuracy. the enemy actually thought they were under air attack the shells were so accurate!:fish_book: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
396
[DDM_]
Members
1,368 posts
4,265 battles
10 minutes ago, BladedPheonix said:

can't remember the source, but when desert storm was active the 2 Iowas that were still online were not only still using the WW2 plotting devices but also thanks to new gen 1 drones were able to hit targets with almost a 87% hit accuracy. the enemy actually thought they were under air attack the shells were so accurate!:fish_book: 

Stationary targets are FAR easier to hit than moving targets. Battleship accuracy in this game is more accurate than it was historically I'm sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
439
[TDRB]
Members
1,801 posts
6,089 battles
Quote

There were multiple people reporting a stealth nerf to BB accuracy, and after a week of playing I can confirm this.

Last weekend I experienced some strangely poor accuracy with my BB's but since last Monday my accuracy has been within normal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,300
[INTEL]
Members
9,241 posts
26,899 battles
18 hours ago, GUTB said:

There were multiple people reporting a stealth nerf to BB accuracy, and after a week of playing I can confirm this. I used to get over 30% hit rate on average before and now I'm getting 25% and less. Last game I had with a Missouri fully specced for accuracy got a 20% hit rate -- that is not at all an exception.

Essentially if BBs can't hit anything they're nothing but burning pinatas.

Slow day at work, eh? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,239
Members
4,094 posts
15,015 battles

I drive Cruisers and DDs and I aint noticed any downgrade in BB accuracy.

And BBs are far from useless. They're great for stopping torpedoes and setting on fire.  :Smile_hiding:

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
370
[TF_34]
[TF_34]
Beta Testers
1,230 posts
4,106 battles
42 minutes ago, BladedPheonix said:

can't remember the source, but when desert storm was active the 2 Iowas that were still online were not only still using the WW2 plotting devices but also thanks to new gen 1 drones were able to hit targets with almost a 87% hit accuracy. the enemy actually thought they were under air attack the shells were so accurate!:fish_book: 

You are correct, sir. All of Iowas retained their original Mk38 and Mk37 FCS until decomm. Still intact and onboard today. While my New Jersey never received it, Iowa. Wisconsin, and Mo were also fitted with AN/SPQ 9 FC radars.

All four carried Pioneer RPVs for surveillance and gunfire spotting. As you said, shore bombardment missions were insanely accurate with the RPV aloft. The Iraqis disliked the gunfire so much a battalion surrendered to Wisky's RPV when it rolled in over head.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
370
[TF_34]
[TF_34]
Beta Testers
1,230 posts
4,106 battles
49 minutes ago, R_Razor said:

Stationary targets are FAR easier to hit than moving targets. Battleship accuracy in this game is more accurate than it was historically I'm sure. 

Without a doubt. It should be remembered that FCS fittied on BBs was designed to hit moving targets--the shore bombardment role was an afterthought.

Our 5"/38s on New Jersey consistently outshot the 5"/54s on our escorts during gunnery practice against moving targets. To be fair, i have to admit that our two Marine gun mounts consistently outshot the other four squid manned mounts.

For the 16"...we were still accurate against the "killer tomatoes" towed at high speed by RHIBs. In game accurate no, but we scored enough hits that we felt pretty good.

Edited by BBsquid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
91
[MLPVA]
Members
208 posts
3,105 battles

Huh. That's weird. I've actually been  experiencing an increase in my general accuracy in my Großer Kurfürst. Something doesn't add up here, OP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×