Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
tm63au

The NERFING Game

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

2,535
[POP]
Members
2,929 posts
23,736 battles

Woke up this morning to the latest outcry of a Cruiser's latest configuration after the patch, now there seems to be a divided response to this NERF.

I don't have the ship so i cant personally comment whether it was a good thing or bad or was it overkill.

Also in this patch a Battleship received some level of downgrading also to a extent only players of that ship would understand whether it to was hit for 6, however i see no post by disgruntled players of this ship so far, I also would like point out it also received small downgrading in a prior patch.

I would like to point out the battleship in question has been the subject of many posts in the past about its OPness with the powers that be stating in one of the prior patch notes or a DEV BLOG or even just a reply to one of the many posts about said Battleship that they will first access the DATA from games and also they want to stagger any downgrading of said battleship rather than take a sledgehammer to it.

These downgrading of which i have mentioned above .

Now I have been here for a number of years and there have been players here even longer than me that might attest to the fact that the Nation from which this Battleship comes from apart from the few exceptions from that Nation seem always to dodge  the SILVER bullet so to speak, 

They may get a reasonable downgrade one patch then in the next or following there is always a counterbalancing of some description for "REASONS OF BALANCE " game wise. 

Now do other nations ships get downgrading  then a possible counterbalance yes it happens but not on the scale as this particular Nation.

Well that's my view anyway I'm certain there will be others that may counter claim this with facts and figures and the own thoughts and views.

So for arguments sake since i don't have this ship lets say that those who have it are right and its major hit to its current configuration, why was it not given a staged downgrading to TEST its competitiveness in game first then if it is still to OP then give it a follow up downgrading.  

Seems to me a fair idea to me that it should be a level playing field, since one nation gets a fair deal in ship adjustments and yet others get hammered.

regards

 

Edited by tm63au
  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Confused 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts

Well the nation whose sea going vessels appear to be OP in the eyes of certain players of a certain game is the only nation which players consistently decry for unfairly lenient treatment by the developers (who shall remain anonymous to prevent rotten tomatoes being thrown) of a certain online game, and this despite the most important nation in a certain online game for the number of seagoing vessels which are objectively and scientifically proven by researchers (who shall remain anonymous) of a leading research forum (which shall also remain anonymous), to be even more OP, and whose ships are rarely nerfed because the sheer quantity of rotten tomatos that would be thrown would be enough to sink a tomato tanker, case in point a certain CV of a certain nation that is no longer available for sale, because it is deemed more OP than decency permits, has been withdrawn from sale, rather than nerfed as would be considered reasonable for any other CV of any other nation because anonymous devs are afraid of the crowds of anonymous rotten tomato throwers.

Nevertheless, I agree with the OP, who I shall refrain from mentioning. A very mild nerf to AA mount survivability which would only help attacking air squadrons late game, is quite meaningless for a ship which recieves a considerable buff from changes to torpedo detection perks and torpedo dmg mitigation. 

It is being said that a large container of rotten tomatoes is being shipped to a certain city in ####bleep#### even as we discuss this matter.

edited : remove name and shame

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,389
[INTEL]
Members
13,459 posts
37,362 battles
2 minutes ago, LoveBote said:

Nevertheless, I agree with the OP, who I shall refrain from mentioning. A very mild nerf to AA mount survivability which would only help attackign air squadrons late game, is quite meaningless for a ship which recieves a considerable buff from changes to torpedo detection perks and torpedo dmg mitigation. 

It is being said that a large container of rotten tomatoes is being shipped to a certain city in Russia even as we discuss this matter.

I have heard tell of a ship from far-off Muscovy whose armor is said to have fabulous powers. Could it be we speak of that selfsame vessel?

Edited by Taichunger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts
2 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

I have heard tell of a ship from far-off Muscovy whose armor is said to have fabulous powers. Could it be we speak of that selfsame vessel?

fabulous powers, but one fatal flaw, it is defenceless when attacked with exploding rotten tomatoes. (googling for suitable gif)

tenor.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,934
[PVE]
Members
6,956 posts
22,742 battles
53 minutes ago, LoveBote said:

Well the nation whose sea going vessels appear to be OP in the eyes of certain players of a certain game is the only nation which players consistently decry for unfairly lenient treatment by the developers (who shall remain anonymous to prevent rotten tomatoes being thrown) of a certain online game, and this despite the most important nation in a certain online game for the number of seagoing vessels which are objectively and scientifically proven by researchers (who shall remain anonymous) of a leading research forum (which shall also remain anonymous), to be even more OP, and whose ships are rarely nerfed because the sheer quantity of rotten tomatos that would be thrown would be enough to sink a tomato tanker, case in point a certain CV of a certain nation that is no longer available for sale, because it is deemed more OP than decency permits, has been withdrawn from sale, rather than nerfed as would be considered reasonable for any other CV of any other nation because anonymous devs are afraid of the crowds of anonymous rotten tomato throwers.

Nevertheless, I agree with the OP, who I shall refrain from mentioning. A very mild nerf to AA mount survivability which would only help attacking air squadrons late game, is quite meaningless for a ship which recieves a considerable buff from changes to torpedo detection perks and torpedo dmg mitigation. 

It is being said that a large container of rotten tomatoes is being shipped to a certain city in a certain country (which shall remain unnamed) even as we discuss this matter.

FTFY...stick w/the script dude...no ad-libbing (-: & no name & shame allowed on the forums :-)

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,882
[O_O]
[O_O]
Members
5,096 posts
22,683 battles

Cruiser? Is that Henry IV?

Certain ship? Is that Kremlin??

I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess the country/nation is Russia. Is that correct???

I just need to make sure I am understanding this convoluted discussion. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Guest
0 posts
14 minutes ago, Khafni said:

Cruiser? Is that Henry IV?

Certain ship? Is that Kremlin??

I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess the country/nation is BLEEEP!. Is that correct???

I just need to make sure I am understanding this convoluted discussion. Thanks!

Shh, no naming and shaming allowed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,882
[O_O]
[O_O]
Members
5,096 posts
22,683 battles
7 minutes ago, LoveBote said:

Shh, no naming and shaming allowed. 

Oops! :Smile_hiding:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,899
[WAIFU]
[WAIFU]
Members
3,614 posts
15,419 battles

Hmm, OP didn't specify so I have to speculate, but I thought the Hindenburg and Monty got buffs, not nerfs. Though I agree... the Americans have so many OP ships like Georgia and Mass, they really need to get put in their place. 

Edited by pikohan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,535
[POP]
Members
2,929 posts
23,736 battles
8 hours ago, pikohan said:

Hmm, OP didn't specify so I have to speculate, but I thought the Hindenburg and Monty got buffs, not nerfs. Though I agree... the Americans have so many OP ships like Georgia and Mass, they really need to get put in their place. 

Wrong ships  nice try, no cookie for you sorry, we are talking about a cruiser that got a major NERF.

Edited by tm63au

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.

×