Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Kami

ST: Competitive Modes, Balance and Other Changes

34 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,892
-Members-
1,640 posts
785 battles

Please note that the information in the Development Blog is preliminary.

After the release of the 0.8.6 update, you will be able to take part in two competitive battle types.

The VI season of Clan battles will be held in a "6 vs 6" format with Tier VIII ships.

All types of ships except aircraft carriers are allowed and no more than 1 battleship per team. The reduced size of the teams is not planned as a permanent change, but will make it easier to gather clan mates for the battle during summer. The change of the tier from X to VIII will diversify the familiar battle type. With the tier changed, rewards have also changed: You can get up to 8,750 of steel in the VI season.

New Ranked season will be held in "6 vs 6" format with Tier IX ships. 

The lightning model is updated. This is one of the steps in improving the graphics both in terms of quality and performance. 

Lighting.jpg

Hatsuharu, Gnevny and Nicholas have their stock hulls updated: both visually and in armament they are now closer to the re-searchable hulls. 

Now, players may encounter bot-operated aircraft carriers in Co-op battles even if no ships of this type are captained by real players. A bot-operated aircraft carrier is also added if there is an aircraft carrier captained by a player.

The Raptor Rescue operation is brought back and the balance in it is improved: all skills, modernization and premium consumables are removed from bots and the composition of enemy groups is changed. 

The automatic collision avoidance system is improved: it will work more reliably and in most instances will turn the ship in an optimal way. Manual control will always have the priority. 

5 new historical commanders are added: Friedrich Bonte, Horace Hood, Matsuji Ijūin, Vladimir Trubetskoy, Theodore Chandler. Though in game they don't have special talents or improved attributes. They will be available in the Armory for doubloons. 

New permanent camouflage 'Wolf' is added for Flint. It will be available for 3 Clan tokens and give the following bonuses:

  • -3% to detectability range.
  • +4% to maximum dispersion of shells fired by the enemy at your ship.
  • -50% ship's post-battle service.
  • +20% Credits per battle.
  • +100% Experience per battle.

Flint.jpg

New camouflage "Red Heat" is added, giving the following bonuses:

  • -3% to detectability range.
  • +4% to maximum dispersion of shells fired by the enemy at your ship.
  • +100% XP per battle.
  • +100% Commander XP per battle.

Red Heat.jpg

AA guns will now deal continuous damage several times per second. The damage values were recalculated accordingly to consider the increased frequency. This is a technical change with minimal impact in game-play, which fixes some illogical situations.

Tier IX Pan-Asian destroyer Chung Mu:

  • Main battery guns reload time increased from 3.3 to 3.5 s.
  • Torpedo tubes reload time increased from 106 to 122 s.

Tier X Pan-Asian destroyer Yueyang:

  • Torpedo tubes reload time lowered from 156 to 146 s.

After the changes to Yueyang in the update 0.7.11 this destroyer was balanced with classmates in terms of impacting the battle, but Chung Mu was superior to other tier IX destroyers in battle efficiency. The changes will balance these Pan-Asian ships with other destroyers considering the changes to the game after the 0.7.11 update.

Tier X American destroyer Gearing:

  • Re-searchable torpedo tubes reload time lowered from 136 to 122 s.

In the 0.7.6 update the Mk.16 mod. 1 torpedo tubes were added to the ship, the same as Fletcher has. They showed good efficiency on Gearing, and now we want to make re-searchable and stock torpedoes, offering different play styles, equal in terms of combat efficiency.

Tier IX British destroyer Jutland:

  • Main battery guns reload time increased from 3.5 to 4 s.

Jutland is very good in close combat but her overall efficiency is too great. To make this ship more balanced, the reload time is increased from 3.5 to 4 s.

Tier V British cruiser Emerald:

  • Armor of citadel deck is increased from 25 to 40 mm.

This change will protect the citadel deck from penetrations by attack aircraft rockets, 203 mm caliber HE shells and penetrations without ricochets with AP shells.

British battleships King George V, Lion, Duke of York, Monarch, Conqueror:

  • The citadel is raised and it will take some of the casemate space.

conq.jpg

  • The Repair Party consumable is changed:
    • Restoration of the casemate (non-citadel) damage increased from 60% to 75%.
    • Duke of York number of charges increased from 2 to 3.
    • King George V, Duke of York and Monarch restore 0.6% of maximum amount of HP per second instead of 0.5%.
    • Repair Party reload time lowered for King George V, Monarch and Duke of York from 120 to 90 s.
    • Repair Party reload time lowered for Lion and Conqueror from 180 to 120 s.

 

Fighting from long range, British battleships are less demanding regarding their positioning due to a low-sitting citadel. Even a well-aimed broadside salvo rarely hits it. To increase the possibility of punishing angling mistakes, the citadel has been raised and will take up some of the casemate space. But with good maneuvering, the overall survivability of British battleships will only increase due to the improved Repair Party.

Please note that the information in the Development Blog is preliminary.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,121
[WOLF7]
Members
12,189 posts

Meh, if they actually fixed co-op CV's why didn't they put Cherry Blossom back in rather than Craptor rescue?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
919 posts
33,307 battles

WG listened - CV removed from competitive ... I'm happy, but slightly surprised

also yoyo is back - that's fantastic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
71
[DJL]
[DJL]
Members
125 posts
4,537 battles

Looks like they waiting to switch from the nerf hammer from CV to dd's now. Watch out Bb's maybe next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
397
[LHG]
Members
1,633 posts
6,552 battles

The DoY repair charges are at base, right? If so then this is a great change for the ship. And for the other British BBs too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16
[SIGG]
Members
44 posts
2,121 battles
1 hour ago, Athrun2021 said:

Looks like they waiting to switch from the nerf hammer from CV to dd's now. Watch out Bb's maybe next.

My BB's are ready!  Lol I'm too aggressive in them anyways :):Smile_izmena:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
527 posts
7,025 battles

How they gonna nerf Jutland and leave Kitakaze in game as is, its even more broken than Jutland

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
774
[PVE]
[PVE]
Beta Testers
2,499 posts
6,884 battles
11 hours ago, awiggin said:

Meh, if they actually fixed co-op CV's why didn't they put Cherry Blossom back in rather than Craptor rescue?

Keyword CVs, the other operations not in rotation had planes that came from sources outside of CVs thus WG has not quite worked out how the planes could interact without a CV to return to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,660
[ARGSY]
Members
12,893 posts
8,245 battles
2 hours ago, Vader_Sama said:

Keyword CVs, the other operations not in rotation had planes that came from sources outside of CVs thus WG has not quite worked out how the planes could interact without a CV to return to.

So park a CV right up in the corner, behind a hill nobody can possibly shoot over. The planes can still make it. @Kami, take this to the devs please.

Speaking of Raptor Rescue, the thing which needs most fixing here is ENSURING THAT THE RAPTOR ALWAYS GOES TO THE BASE. I've been in TWO runs in which the Raptor lost us the match and threw a five-star win down the drain by running off course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
237
[KAPPA]
Members
880 posts
6,043 battles

The time for my flak boats to earn their keep is returning, nice. Also nice that DoY is getting another heal charge and maybe the rest of the RN BBs are getting the tops of their boilers put back in the citadel. At least they seem to be getting something in return for the loss of their unnatural ability to not take cit hits. Also the Emerald change explains why my IFHE Atlanta is often able to get HE cit hits on the Emerald in Narai, I figured it was some kind of armor hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,660
[ARGSY]
Members
12,893 posts
8,245 battles
2 minutes ago, CaptHarlock_222 said:

The time for my flak boats to earn their keep is returning, nice. Also nice that DoY is getting another heal charge and maybe the rest of the RN BBs are getting the tops of their boilers put back in the citadel. At least they seem to be getting something in return for the loss of their unnatural ability to not take cit hits. Also the Emerald change explains why my IFHE Atlanta is often able to get HE cit hits on the Emerald in Narai, I figured it was some kind of armor hole.

No, it's just that Emerald has always been an eggshell swinging a very small ball-pien hammer. Now she will be a somewhat tougher eggshell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
237
[KAPPA]
Members
880 posts
6,043 battles

Maybe, or maybe the added armor will just make BB shells overpen less, we'll have to wait and see. Considering it's part of the deck, it should only be a problem at the longest of ranges when shells start plunging, hopefully at closer ranges, they'll bounce more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
774
[PVE]
[PVE]
Beta Testers
2,499 posts
6,884 battles
6 hours ago, Ensign_Cthulhu said:

So park a CV right up in the corner, behind a hill nobody can possibly shoot over. The planes can still make it. @Kami, take this to the devs please.

Speaking of Raptor Rescue, the thing which needs most fixing here is ENSURING THAT THE RAPTOR ALWAYS GOES TO THE BASE. I've been in TWO runs in which the Raptor lost us the match and threw a five-star win down the drain by running off course.

Sure let's have a dozen or so CVs take refuge somewhere in the corner, that wouldn't look conspicuous or anything like that.

There are dozens of squads that comes in the air of which did not take off from CVs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
181
[WOLF5]
Members
741 posts
26,395 battles
On 6/21/2019 at 9:41 AM, Kami said:

Please note that the information in the Development Blog is preliminary.

<snip>

Tier IX Pan-Asian destroyer Chung Mu:

  • Main battery guns reload time increased from 3.3 to 3.5 s. 6.1% nerf
  • Torpedo tubes reload time increased from 106 to 122 s. 15% Nerf

Tier X Pan-Asian destroyer Yueyang:

  • Torpedo tubes reload time lowered from 156 to 146 s.

After the changes to Yueyang in the update 0.7.11 this destroyer was balanced with classmates in terms of impacting the battle, but Chung Mu was superior to other tier IX destroyers in battle efficiency. The changes will balance these Pan-Asian ships with other destroyers considering the changes to the game after the 0.7.11 update. Original Nerf was from 3 to 4s (33% nerf) main battery reload time and 15% nerf to torp reload (20s increase to original 136). The new buff renders the net torp nerf to 7.5%

<snip>

Tier IX British destroyer Jutland:

  • Main battery guns reload time increased from 3.5 to 4 s. 14% Nerf

Jutland is very good in close combat but her overall efficiency is too great. To make this ship more balanced, the reload time is increased from 3.5 to 4 s.

 

Yes, these are game balance changes. However those of us that bought permanent camo spending 4000 or 5000 doubloons should have the option to refund the camo at full doubloon cost anytime the nerf to the ship is greater than 10%. You may ask why, well, 10% is a significant number - retirement fund managers are considered extremely good if they can exceed 10% per year. If WG missed the original balance after spending time in ST, then frankly they screwed up significantly.  Again this is referenced from the original released stats. If WG overbuffs/nerfs or overnerfs/buffs then as long as the performance of either main battery/torpedo reload/base plane speed of a SPECIFIC ship does not exceed a 10% nerf from the original released spec, we should qualify for a permanent camo refund. If WG nerfs ALL battleship reload 10% then this is a systemic change and not a specific ship change. If they choose to nerf a specific nation or specific tier, then those should not be considered systemic changes and would qualify for camo refunds. 

As players we already have to deal with meta and systemic game wide changes. However when we spend money to purchase something, then we should have a reasonable expectation that what we spent it on won't significantly change when compared to it's peers. WG as a development company should be expected to get the balance close. That's their job. When they screw up, we as consumers should not be expected to shoulder the cost of their errors, especially when we have already invested our time generating data that shows the original error. 

To WGs credit anytime they have done major changes to any ship (CVs or Russian DD/IJN DD/US Cruiser line splits), they have been exceedingly generous with their compensation because for all intents and purposes they have removed one of our earned ships and replaced it with another that is different. Why should significant specific nerfs be treated any differently when they are removing the original ship performance and replacing it with a ship that does less than 90% of what you originally earned. 

As for the argument that the PA high tier DD's are overly efficient. I for one would like to hear just how WG is defining combat efficiency. Remember these DDs CANNOT hit other dds with their torps. That means they can only score against the larger ships with bigger hit pools. IF WG is looking at raw damage numbers then this was their original design. If you look at the xp earned, then they're top 1/3 of the ship/tier type, but they're not an outlier. How is their performance any different than say the Asashio? That ship does significantly greater damage than all other T-8 DDs, xp is top 1/3. 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
216
[WOLFC]
Members
616 posts
5,094 battles
On ‎6‎/‎21‎/‎2019 at 6:41 PM, SmokinCAT said:

How they gonna nerf Jutland and leave Kitakaze in game as is, its even more broken than Jutland

 

I'm wondering if they are waiting until after they make the changes to IFHE that they announced they were considering a long time ago. But I agree - they need to knock the base pen down to 20mm (1/5 vs 1/4), at least in the interim, for all three of those boats. IFHE would still be useful (give 25mm pen), but those guns wouldn't be nearly as disgusting as they are now.

12 minutes ago, h9k_a said:

As for the argument that the PA high tier DD's are overly efficient. I for one would like to hear just how WG is defining combat efficiency. Remember these DDs CANNOT hit other dds with their torps. That means they can only score against the larger ships with bigger hit pools. IF WG is looking at raw damage numbers then this was their original design. If you look at the xp earned, then they're top 1/3 of the ship/tier type, but they're not an outlier. How is their performance any different than say the Asashio? That ship does significantly greater damage than all other T-8 DDs, xp is top 1/3.  

Simple answer: Asashio is a premium. The player base won't let them nerf it.

 

Edited by Nevermore135
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
181
[WOLF5]
Members
741 posts
26,395 battles
5 hours ago, Nevermore135 said:

I'm wondering if they are waiting until after they make the changes to IFHE that they announced they were considering a long time ago. But I agree - they need to knock the base pen down to 20mm (1/5 vs 1/4), at least in the interim, for all three of those boats. IFHE would still be useful (give 25mm pen), but those guns wouldn't be nearly as disgusting as they are now.

Simple answer: Asashio is a premium. The player base won't let them nerf it.

 

But I'm not advocating for an Asashio nerf. I would like WGs criteria for "combat over performance" to be fully transparent so we understand just what stats they are referring to when they state a ship is over performing. It is obvious that whoever determined the 0.7.11 nerf that should be applied to the Yue Yang was incorrect and whatever checks and balances that should have existed for the original recommendation failed. We all know that stats can be interpolated and manipulated to represent a bias. It is the job of person/team that oversees the audit to make sure that they aren't creating the bias by limiting their interpretation. 

As for your reasoning why premiums aren't nerfed, why then is it reasonable to spend doubloons or money on perm camos that we then have a SPECIFIC nerf applied to the ship that we spent money directly on and not be able to receive some compensation for. Unlike other purchases (doubloons/flags/one-time camos) they can't be used on any ship other than the one it was originally purchased for. If WG was willing to refund for doubloons when they changed the smoke firing (Belfast/Kut), or CVs when the rework hit, then why shouldn't perm camos purchased for ships that have a ship specific not systemic nerf applied to it not have the same compensation? 

In the specific case of the Yue Yang, that WG is now acknowledging indirectly that they over nerfed, why is it acceptable to have spent 5000 doubloons ($20) with no compensation on a ship than then received a 33% nerf to main battery reload and a 15% nerf to torp reload because per the patch notes:

"She also has the option to mount the Surveillance Radar consumable (which enables more efficient fighting against same-type ships). Her silhouette is small, and she carries stealthy torpedoes. Also pay attention to her unique smoke screen: it can hide the ship from opponents for most of the battle and enables more efficient fighting for control of Key Areas or retreating in case of a bad encounter. 

All these factors in combination mean that the destroyer can significantly influence the outcome of battle and surpass same-type ships in terms of statistics."

Note you CANNOT mount both radar and smoke, PA smokes cool down was increased across the entire tree, Surveillance Radar Mod 1 was cut 50% AND the following patch was the one that introduced the 6s radar rendering delay.  So just what "statistics" does WG look at when determining a ship is over performing

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
527 posts
7,025 battles
46 minutes ago, h9k_a said:

But I'm not advocating for an Asashio nerf. I would like WGs criteria for "combat over performance" to be fully transparent so we understand just what stats they are referring to when they state a ship is over performing. It is obvious that whoever determined the 0.7.11 nerf that should be applied to the Yue Yang was incorrect and whatever checks and balances that should have existed for the original recommendation failed. We all know that stats can be interpolated and manipulated to represent a bias. It is the job of person/team that oversees the audit to make sure that they aren't creating the bias by limiting their interpretation. 

As for your reasoning why premiums aren't nerfed, why then is it reasonable to spend doubloons or money on perm camos that we then have a SPECIFIC nerf applied to the ship that we spent money directly on and not be able to receive some compensation for. Unlike other purchases (doubloons/flags/one-time camos) they can't be used on any ship other than the one it was originally purchased for. If WG was willing to refund for doubloons when they changed the smoke firing (Belfast/Kut), or CVs when the rework hit, then why shouldn't perm camos purchased for ships that have a ship specific not systemic nerf applied to it not have the same compensation? 

In the specific case of the Yue Yang, that WG is now acknowledging indirectly that they over nerfed, why is it acceptable to have spent 5000 doubloons ($20) with no compensation on a ship than then received a 33% nerf to main battery reload and a 15% nerf to torp reload because per the patch notes:

"She also has the option to mount the Surveillance Radar consumable (which enables more efficient fighting against same-type ships). Her silhouette is small, and she carries stealthy torpedoes. Also pay attention to her unique smoke screen: it can hide the ship from opponents for most of the battle and enables more efficient fighting for control of Key Areas or retreating in case of a bad encounter. 

All these factors in combination mean that the destroyer can significantly influence the outcome of battle and surpass same-type ships in terms of statistics."

Note you CANNOT mount both radar and smoke, PA smokes cool down was increased across the entire tree, Surveillance Radar Mod 1 was cut 50% AND the following patch was the one that introduced the 6s radar rendering delay.  So just what "statistics" does WG look at when determining a ship is over performing

She was over nerfed badly, in this meta a DD without smoke is a dead one.

Somehow the Z52 can retain its 5.9km hydro and smoke, but YY is broken with out being able to slot both at the same time.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
216
[WOLFC]
Members
616 posts
5,094 battles
3 hours ago, h9k_a said:

But I'm not advocating for an Asashio nerf. I would like WGs criteria for "combat over performance" to be fully transparent so we understand just what stats they are referring to when they state a ship is over performing. It is obvious that whoever determined the 0.7.11 nerf that should be applied to the Yue Yang was incorrect and whatever checks and balances that should have existed for the original recommendation failed. We all know that stats can be interpolated and manipulated to represent a bias. It is the job of person/team that oversees the audit to make sure that they aren't creating the bias by limiting their interpretation. 

As for your reasoning why premiums aren't nerfed, why then is it reasonable to spend doubloons or money on perm camos that we then have a SPECIFIC nerf applied to the ship that we spent money directly on and not be able to receive some compensation for. Unlike other purchases (doubloons/flags/one-time camos) they can't be used on any ship other than the one it was originally purchased for. If WG was willing to refund for doubloons when they changed the smoke firing (Belfast/Kut), or CVs when the rework hit, then why shouldn't perm camos purchased for ships that have a ship specific not systemic nerf applied to it not have the same compensation? 

In the specific case of the Yue Yang, that WG is now acknowledging indirectly that they over nerfed, why is it acceptable to have spent 5000 doubloons ($20) with no compensation on a ship than then received a 33% nerf to main battery reload and a 15% nerf to torp reload because per the patch notes:

"She also has the option to mount the Surveillance Radar consumable (which enables more efficient fighting against same-type ships). Her silhouette is small, and she carries stealthy torpedoes. Also pay attention to her unique smoke screen: it can hide the ship from opponents for most of the battle and enables more efficient fighting for control of Key Areas or retreating in case of a bad encounter. 

All these factors in combination mean that the destroyer can significantly influence the outcome of battle and surpass same-type ships in terms of statistics."

Note you CANNOT mount both radar and smoke, PA smokes cool down was increased across the entire tree, Surveillance Radar Mod 1 was cut 50% AND the following patch was the one that introduced the 6s radar rendering delay.  So just what "statistics" does WG look at when determining a ship is over performing

Oh, I agree with you that YY was overnerfed; WG used a battle axe when they needed a scalpel, IMO. In regards to my comments on Asashio... it was more a tongue in check commentary on WG’s approach to (not) nerfing premiums vs tech tree ships than any kind of advocation for an Asashio nerf. Buts that’s a whole other topic that doesn’t really belong here...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
605
[TOG]
Members
3,614 posts
19,410 battles
On 6/21/2019 at 9:41 AM, Kami said:

New Ranked season will be held in "6 vs 6" format with Tier IX ships. 

Prepare for the "Georgia smoked up in cap" meme. All you need is someone to spot for the secondaries. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,892
-Members-
1,640 posts
785 battles

Hey Captains,

Are you looking forward to the proposed changes to the next season of clan battles and ranked? 

What are your thoughts on ships that you will play if you participate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,444
[WORX]
Members
5,029 posts
15,593 battles
4 minutes ago, Kami said:

Are you looking forward to the proposed changes to the next season of clan battles and ranked? 

Kami I think @NoZoupForYou recent video summed it up for me...

Its not fun nor is it competitive... The only ones who rank out are the one who love the pain of the grind...

Edited by Navalpride33
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,459
[90TH]
[90TH]
Alpha Tester
8,000 posts
9,104 battles
On 6/21/2019 at 3:41 PM, Kami said:

All types of ships except aircraft carriers are allowed and no more than 1 battleship per team.

This doesn't sound like a positive endorsement of the CV rework, by Wargaming. Not when tier 8, with 8 different (and soon more) CVs are available for players/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
463
[CUTE]
[CUTE]
Supertester, In AlfaTesters
1,839 posts
9,995 battles

To make CVs to work right in a CB setting WG would almost have to run the same rule set as King of the Seas and thats 9v9. 

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.

×