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

20 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
324 posts

In this post, I am going to lay out my honest opinion on what I would do if I were in WG's position right now, as of February 2020, given my understand of the game, how much I have played it, and what I have discussed with other players.

I understand that not everyone of you are going to agree with me, and much of what I am going to suggest is going to be controversial....but I am more than happy to hear out your opinions and thoughts in the comments below! 

A without further ado, here goes.....

1.) Place HMS Belfast at Tier VIII.   This is so that she is on par with her sister ship, HMS Edinburgh, as I think that it is unusual that Belfast, which is better than Edinburgh in many ways (access to HE shells, radar AND smoke combo, and is a premium ship with premium economic bonuses) would be a tier lower than her.   Plus, having Belfast at Tier VIII would mitigate her over-powered-ness, and would save Tier V ships from being bullied by her (Belfast as a Tier VII can be put into Tier V-VII matches)

2.) Do a USN battleship split.  I would keep the original USN battleship as is (USS South Carolina, Tier III ---> USS Montana, Tier X), but starting at Tier V New York I would make a split.  The split would be something like this: 

 

USS Nevada (Tier V)

USS Pennsylvania (Tier VI) OR a pre-WW2 modified USS Tennessee (Tier VI) this would go in tandem with how Tenessee's sister USS California is being made a Tier VII premium, with WW2-era modifications)  

USS Maryland or USS Washington (Tier VII, Colorado-class ships)

USS South Dakota (Tier VIII) or USS Washington (Tier VIII)

??? (Tier IX)?  [Maybe USS New Jersey or USS Wisconsin (but how to differentiate them from USS Iowa and USS Missouri without making Iowa and Missouri more obsolete?)]

Tillman battleship (Tier X)

 

----> Just to clarify that I myself am debating on the best setup for the USN battleship split, but I am settled on the idea that the Tier V ship ought to be USS Nevada, as she was of a class similar to the New York-class, and is a brand new ship class not yet introduced into WoWS. 

 

3.) Nerf Kremlin.  I find that her armor and her high hit-points pool is ridiculous.   I would certainly reduce her hit-points to be BELOW that of Großer Kurfürst so as to preserve the uniqueness of German BBs of higher the highest hit points of all other nation's battleships, and as a nod to efficient German engineering.  As a historian, I find it infuriating that the RU BBs in the game somehow are BETTER in their engineering design to that of the American, British, and German battleships.    I would also make Kremlin slower in her acceleration, as she is a bit too fast, and I would reduce her armor so that she is more vulnerable to being targeted.   Of course, I do not wish to nerf Kremlin to the ground and make her plain useless.....but I would like to see her be a bit less OP so that other battleships are made a bit more viable again, such as Yamato and Montana.  Speaking of which.....

4.) Buff IJN Yamato and USS Montana slightly. Yamato I would make her have a better hit-point pool, so that she is a bit better on survivability.  Montana already got a buff to her Repair Party which is nice, but I think that she too, should have a slight hit-point increase.  I would also increase the range of Montana's and Yamato's secondary guns so that their secondaries are a bit more useful. 

5.) Increase the secondary range of ALL battleships across the board, except German BBs, French BBs, and other BBs that already have great secondaries (i.e. Georgia, Massachusetts)  I find it ridiculous that more battleships have base secondary ranges of 5 km or less.  I understand that this is made so that DDs and crusiers have a chance to rush in and sink a battleship with guns or torpedoes, but like really? 4km or 5km?  You might as well not have ANY secondaries at that point because they will barely fire off a few rounds before that rushing DD/cruiser is on you and torpedo-ing you to Davy Jones's Locker.   What I would so would be to increase the base secondary ranges by 2-3 km (making ranges range from 6-8 km instead of 4-5 km).  That way, at least you can feel good that your secondaries are firing at the enemy, and with flags, and captain skills you can try out secondary builds on battleships that are not really the best at it.  Like, why not try out a secondary built on your IJN Nagato? Or on your HMS Iron Duke?   Maybe it can be fun!  But with base 4-5 km range, it sucks.  It is not worth while to utilize a secondary built unless you have 6-8 km which is more useable.   I would love to make Tier VII and below battleships (excepting the Germans and French of course) have longer range secondaries. 

6.) Nerf Smolensk. Make her citadel larger, increase her gun reload, lower the time of her smoke dispersion.....these are changes that I would definitely make so as to mitigate her overpowered-ness. 

7.) Nerf Russian radar.  I would either (1) lower the range of Russian radar to 11 km or (2) I would lower the time duration of the radar. 

8.) Add more Tier II battleships into the game. IJN Mikasa is special in that she is the only pre-dreadnought battleship in the game (so far).   If I were in WG, I would definitely add more pre-dreadnought ships because (1) many of them existed….so.....no paper ships, but REAL ships would be added into the game! (2) Why not add more diversity to Tier II gameplay?  So many players complain that high tiers (Tier VIII-X) are stressful, so why not make the second-to-lowest tier a bit more attractive to play?  Furthermore, additional battleships can be added to each of the battleship tech tree lines.  So instead of having battleships start at Tier III, have them start at Tier II.  In other words, add a Tier II battleship to the German, American, Royal Navy, Russian, and French battleship lines.  After all, the cruiser lines start off with Tier I cruisers then move on to Tier IIs before then splitting into destroyers (beginning Tier II) and battleships (beginning Tier III).

9.) Make there be more Clan Battles and Ranked Battles at Tiers II, III, IV, and V.   We have seen there be one Tier VI ranked sprint, a couple of Tier VII ranked sprints and ONE Tier VIII Clan Battle.  The Tier VIII Clan Battle in particular was well appreciated by thousands of players because it was a break from the usual Tier X Clan Battles that occur in 99% of Clan Battles.  But what about the other Tiers Tier VI and below? Why not make THEM also into Clan Battles or Ranked Battles?  After all, there are plenty of Tier V premiums that players have in their ports that they would certainly like to use in competitive game modes besides just Random Battles.  Tier III and Tier IV premiums also exist...so why not have also be given more purpose by creating a Tier II, III, IV, or Tier VI Clan battle/Rank Battle?  In addition, by creating a Clan Battle/Rank Battle that is Tier V or below, it might compel experienced players who have been stuck in Tier X-land to actually go back to playing the lower tiers and...who knows? Maybe rediscover a appreciation of the lower tiers (unless they already have a appreciation for the lower tier ships) since we all were once rookies at playing WoWS...we all had to sail our way up from Tier I all the way to Tier X.   

Now....the only issue that is to be had with a Tier II, III, IV, or Tier V Clan Battle/Rank Battle is that a lot of rookie/newbie players are usually at those tiers, and they might ruin the gameplay and fun that the experience players are trying to have with participating in those events. My solution to that is to add a in-game system that checks to see how many Random Battles you have played in WoWS.  If you have played 1000 less games, then you are not eligible to play in the lower-tier Clan Battle/Rank Battle let's say.   Or the condition could be that you have to play in 200 game or more in Tier VIII or higher ships before you can be granted access to lower tier Clan Battles/Rank Battles.  That way, there is a separation from the rookie players from the experienced players, and the rookie players will not ruin the games of the experienced players.  If the rookie players want to participate in the competitive events, they need to play higher tier ships AND play enough games in them---therefore becoming "experienced" players in the process.

10.) Add Italian battleships in the game.  This is the final point I am going to make, and that is Italian battleships. SAP shells with battleship guns might prove interesting and make said Italian BBs VERY unique in their play style compared to other BBs.  Honestly, I am not that all familiar with the history of Italian battleships, but it would be something like this:

??? Tier II

??? Tier III

??? Tier IV

Conte di Cavour (Tier V, sister ship to Guilio Ceasar)

??? Tier VI

??? Tier VII

Littorio (Tier VIII, sister to Roma)

??? Tier IX

??? Tier X

 

Let me know your comments below!

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 2
  • Boring 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,420
[FEM]
Members
2,103 posts
17,341 battles

Just on the clan battle note, A big issue with lower tier clan battles is you will end up with the "must have" ships such as GC that aren't obtainable anymore dominating. Competitive modes at those tiers will likely be fairly unsuccessful because the ships are a lot more limiting, players who do competitive now likely won't have much interest in a full season of low tier ships they dont enjoy in a sort of simplified version of CBs, and those who WOULD enjoy the low tier CBs such as T2-5, wouldn't want to play it 4 nights a week or even for a full season, further driving participation down. T8 and T10 have always been the best tiers for competitive and that doesn't seem to be changing any time soon. Now we just wait for CVs to be forced in and kill off what remains of competitive.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,661
[WORX]
Members
11,915 posts
19,462 battles

Just glanced over the recommendation... Its heavily BB favored. WG is already BB/Guns/Rockets centered game...

19 minutes ago, Ciryandil said:

Nerf Smolensk. Make her citadel larger, increase her gun reload, lower the time of her smoke dispersion.....these are changes that I would definitely make so as to mitigate her overpowered-ness. 

^^??????

The Citadel of the Smolensk is already open to every gun caliber big to small. It already takes a BB 6 shots to sink cruisers (3 shots if you're lucky)...

This suggestion will  just make her sinkable just going into position... The Smolensk is the pure definition of a "floating citadel" ship at tier 10.

Overall, I give thanks that players are not developers and developers just take orders...

 

 

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
222
[-KAK-]
Members
607 posts
12,053 battles

Some interesting ideas here.

1)  I'll stop you right now, it'll never happen. There was an uproar when WG tried to do that to GC, there'd be another uproar if they did it to Belfast. IMO, the solution is to duplicate belfast at T8 (Adjusting stats if necessary for balance), and call it Liverpool or Glasgow or something.

2) 100% agreed, I'm minorly surprised this wasn't announced instead of a Russian cruiser split. WG's got plenty of material here, and it's well overdue.

3) I get the sense that they're already on this, even if their nerfs are a little.... "small and slow". TBH, Krem's armor is already pretty bad when she's not bow in, but a small health drop could be in order.

4) No, I think they're OK. Not every BB needs usable secondaries, or a health buff. If Yamo or Monty need changes, I don't think their health pools are the place to go.

5) No. French and German BBs are supposed to be special because of their secondaries - Not every BB needs to be a close range brawler (And let's face it, some of them don't have the armor to allow it - e.g Conq)

6) Smolensk is overpowered, but she's a bit of a boogeyman as well. I don't really want to touch this one because most players (including myself) don't have a strong enough grasp of game mechanics to really understand what's happening (IE her near-immunity to broadside BB cits because of shell penetration mechanics) - it's complicated.

7) Russian radar is only as powerful as it is because of the general nerf made to radar a years or so ago (the 10s delay before targets appear gave radars a duration buff). There's a case to be made for lowering it by say 5s, but I'd keep the distance as is.

8) I mean... sure? ok? I can get why WG doesn't devote alot of resources here. T2 ships aren't able to complete most directives or missions (T5+), and even if they were, it'd be rather difficult to complete (Think about getting 100k+damage in T2 ships, or 60K base XP). The expectation amongst the playerbase is that T2 ships will be cheap, but developing a ship (I'd imagine) costs roughly the same for a T2 or a T10. That means that you need to sell alot more T2 ships to break even, and not everyone's interested in T2 ships (See my comment about directives/missions). Let's be honest here, what's the relative populations at T2, T7 and T10? Really, T2 BBs are one of those playerbase wishes that may make plenty of sense gameplay wise, but little to no sense business wise. Small playerbase + same development cost + lower sell = We really can't expect WG to focus there. 

9) No. Please no. I'm all for lowering Clan battle tiers and/or team sizes, but my lower limit would be T5. Yes, there should be some variety outside of just T10, but T2/3/4 is a step too far. You want something at the level of clan battles at that tier? Organize a tournament or something. My prediction would be that dropping Clan battles to T2/3 would see a small surge in players early on, and then it would disintegrate within a week. Edit - Kebobstuzov makes a good point here - There's alot of midtier ships that were removed because they were overpowered, and each ranked sprint session you can see them dominating the game. It'd be the same in Clan battles.

10) Yes. Absolutely. I'm not really sure why WG decided to go (IT) CA > (RN) CA > (PE) DD > (RU) CA in their progression. Italian BBs really should have been the next line after Pan-European DDs, hopefully we'll see them next. 

Edited by TheOmegaDuck
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,267
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers
3,303 posts
9,903 battles
38 minutes ago, Ciryandil said:

6.) Nerf Smolensk. Make her citadel larger, increase her gun reload, lower the time of her smoke dispersion.....these are changes that I would definitely make so as to mitigate her overpowered-ness. 

Nonsense, if anything Smolensk needs an armor buff, that would make her more balanced

 

:Smile_hiding:

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,855 posts
9,195 battles

Guys honestly, you're way overthinking the game. Each ship has it's quirks and nuances which are inherent to any vessel. Play the ship as it is and find the one that suits your style. Not putting down any of you guys observations because you have obviously put thought and time into it. It's a game. Have fun and sink other dumb schmucks ok.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
325
[SNGNS]
Members
585 posts
6,830 battles
9 minutes ago, TheOmegaDuck said:

10) Yes. Absolutely. I'm not really sure why WG decided to go (IT) CA > (RN) CA > (PE) DD > (RU) CA in their progression. Italian BBs really should have been the next line after Pan-European DDs, hopefully we'll see them next. 

i can kinda see why they did this, having two Italian lines released so close together seems kinda bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
222
[-KAK-]
Members
607 posts
12,053 battles
7 minutes ago, Ghostdog1355 said:

Guys honestly, you're way overthinking the game. Each ship has it's quirks and nuances which are inherent to any vessel. Play the ship as it is and find the one that suits your style. Not putting down any of you guys observations because you have obviously put thought and time into it. It's a game. Have fun and sink other dumb schmucks ok.

This is exactly it - in WOWS, ships are designed to play a certain way, to work with certain setups and not with others. But, because we have Nations and famous ships here, and people have connections to them, people seem to want to play their particular nation+ship in their own way, when it's not intended for that.

Yamato is a longer ranged sniper. It relies on it's larger guns to punch through armor. It's secondaries and AA are mediocre, and it has well known armor weaknesses. You can play her as a secondary brawler, but it's not how she was intended.

GK is a shorter ranged brawler. It has turtleback armor which prevents citadel hits at close range. The accuracy of it's main guns isn't the best (So you can't really snipe), but it has great secondaries. You could try and sit at the back and snipe, but you're gonna get frustrated fast - she's not meant to play that way.

This does mean that some ships won't be as useful as others, depending on what the Meta looks like at any given time. It's the same as any game though - There are some things that work (And so people use them), and there are others that just straight up don't (So people don't play them). Ideally, you should be able to play whatever you want, but Meta wise, it's just never gonna happen.

 

There's a dozen different examples like this in the game.

Edited by TheOmegaDuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,840
[AXANR]
Members
3,650 posts
23,196 battles

I'd love to see a ranked sprint at tier 3 (Vampire ftw), 4 (Clemson FTW!!!) or 5 (so many gudbotes I can't pick just one) but a full ranked season or clan season would be too much down there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,855 posts
9,195 battles
6 minutes ago, TheOmegaDuck said:

This is exactly it - in WOWS, ships are designed to play a certain way, to work with certain setups and not with others. But, because we have Nations and famous ships here, and people have connections to them, people seem to want to play their particular nation+ship in their own way, when it's not intended for that.

Yamato is a longer ranged sniper. It relies on it's larger guns to punch through armor. It's secondaries and AA are mediocre, and it has well known armor weaknesses. You can play her as a secondary brawler, but it's not how she was intended.

GK is a shorter ranged brawler. It has turtleback armor which prevents citadel hits at close range. The accuracy of it's main guns isn't the best (So you can't really snipe), but it has great secondaries. You could try and sit at the back and snipe, but you're gonna get frustrated fast - she's not meant to play that way.

This does mean that some ships won't be as useful as others, depending on what the Meta looks like at any given time. It's the same as any game though - There are some things that work (And so people use them), and there are others that just straight up don't (So people don't play them). Ideally, you should be able to play whatever you want, but Meta wise, it's just never gonna happen.

 

There's a dozen different examples like this in the game.

You are totally right on that. I have a certain connection to the Arizona. My uncle was on the ship the day Pearl Harbor was attacked and survived. I bought that ship the day it came out with all WG offered. I suck in that ship no matter how hard I try but yet can play the Krasny decently. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,057
[SALVO]
Members
25,798 posts
28,042 battles
1 hour ago, Ciryandil said:

In this post, I am going to lay out my honest opinion on what I would do if I were in WG's position right now, as of February 2020, given my understand of the game, how much I have played it, and what I have discussed with other players.

I understand that not everyone of you are going to agree with me, and much of what I am going to suggest is going to be controversial....but I am more than happy to hear out your opinions and thoughts in the comments below! 

A without further ado, here goes.....

1.) Place HMS Belfast at Tier VIII.   This is so that she is on par with her sister ship, HMS Edinburgh, as I think that it is unusual that Belfast, which is better than Edinburgh in many ways (access to HE shells, radar AND smoke combo, and is a premium ship with premium economic bonuses) would be a tier lower than her.   Plus, having Belfast at Tier VIII would mitigate her over-powered-ness, and would save Tier V ships from being bullied by her (Belfast as a Tier VII can be put into Tier V-VII matches)

2.) Do a USN battleship split.  I would keep the original USN battleship as is (USS South Carolina, Tier III ---> USS Montana, Tier X), but starting at Tier V New York I would make a split.  The split would be something like this: 

 

USS Nevada (Tier V)

USS Pennsylvania (Tier VI) OR a pre-WW2 modified USS Tennessee (Tier VI) this would go in tandem with how Tenessee's sister USS California is being made a Tier VII premium, with WW2-era modifications)  

USS Maryland or USS Washington (Tier VII, Colorado-class ships)

USS South Dakota (Tier VIII) or USS Washington (Tier VIII)

??? (Tier IX)?  [Maybe USS New Jersey or USS Wisconsin (but how to differentiate them from USS Iowa and USS Missouri without making Iowa and Missouri more obsolete?)]

Tillman battleship (Tier X)

 

----> Just to clarify that I myself am debating on the best setup for the USN battleship split, but I am settled on the idea that the Tier V ship ought to be USS Nevada, as she was of a class similar to the New York-class, and is a brand new ship class not yet introduced into WoWS. 

 

3.) Nerf Kremlin.  I find that her armor and her high hit-points pool is ridiculous.   I would certainly reduce her hit-points to be BELOW that of Großer Kurfürst so as to preserve the uniqueness of German BBs of higher the highest hit points of all other nation's battleships, and as a nod to efficient German engineering.  As a historian, I find it infuriating that the RU BBs in the game somehow are BETTER in their engineering design to that of the American, British, and German battleships.    I would also make Kremlin slower in her acceleration, as she is a bit too fast, and I would reduce her armor so that she is more vulnerable to being targeted.   Of course, I do not wish to nerf Kremlin to the ground and make her plain useless.....but I would like to see her be a bit less OP so that other battleships are made a bit more viable again, such as Yamato and Montana.  Speaking of which.....

4.) Buff IJN Yamato and USS Montana slightly. Yamato I would make her have a better hit-point pool, so that she is a bit better on survivability.  Montana already got a buff to her Repair Party which is nice, but I think that she too, should have a slight hit-point increase.  I would also increase the range of Montana's and Yamato's secondary guns so that their secondaries are a bit more useful. 

5.) Increase the secondary range of ALL battleships across the board, except German BBs, French BBs, and other BBs that already have great secondaries (i.e. Georgia, Massachusetts)  I find it ridiculous that more battleships have base secondary ranges of 5 km or less.  I understand that this is made so that DDs and crusiers have a chance to rush in and sink a battleship with guns or torpedoes, but like really? 4km or 5km?  You might as well not have ANY secondaries at that point because they will barely fire off a few rounds before that rushing DD/cruiser is on you and torpedo-ing you to Davy Jones's Locker.   What I would so would be to increase the base secondary ranges by 2-3 km (making ranges range from 6-8 km instead of 4-5 km).  That way, at least you can feel good that your secondaries are firing at the enemy, and with flags, and captain skills you can try out secondary builds on battleships that are not really the best at it.  Like, why not try out a secondary built on your IJN Nagato? Or on your HMS Iron Duke?   Maybe it can be fun!  But with base 4-5 km range, it sucks.  It is not worth while to utilize a secondary built unless you have 6-8 km which is more useable.   I would love to make Tier VII and below battleships (excepting the Germans and French of course) have longer range secondaries. 

6.) Nerf Smolensk. Make her citadel larger, increase her gun reload, lower the time of her smoke dispersion.....these are changes that I would definitely make so as to mitigate her overpowered-ness. 

7.) Nerf Russian radar.  I would either (1) lower the range of Russian radar to 11 km or (2) I would lower the time duration of the radar. 

8.) Add more Tier II battleships into the game. IJN Mikasa is special in that she is the only pre-dreadnought battleship in the game (so far).   If I were in WG, I would definitely add more pre-dreadnought ships because (1) many of them existed….so.....no paper ships, but REAL ships would be added into the game! (2) Why not add more diversity to Tier II gameplay?  So many players complain that high tiers (Tier VIII-X) are stressful, so why not make the second-to-lowest tier a bit more attractive to play?  Furthermore, additional battleships can be added to each of the battleship tech tree lines.  So instead of having battleships start at Tier III, have them start at Tier II.  In other words, add a Tier II battleship to the German, American, Royal Navy, Russian, and French battleship lines.  After all, the cruiser lines start off with Tier I cruisers then move on to Tier IIs before then splitting into destroyers (beginning Tier II) and battleships (beginning Tier III).

9.) Make there be more Clan Battles and Ranked Battles at Tiers II, III, IV, and V.   We have seen there be one Tier VI ranked sprint, a couple of Tier VII ranked sprints and ONE Tier VIII Clan Battle.  The Tier VIII Clan Battle in particular was well appreciated by thousands of players because it was a break from the usual Tier X Clan Battles that occur in 99% of Clan Battles.  But what about the other Tiers Tier VI and below? Why not make THEM also into Clan Battles or Ranked Battles?  After all, there are plenty of Tier V premiums that players have in their ports that they would certainly like to use in competitive game modes besides just Random Battles.  Tier III and Tier IV premiums also exist...so why not have also be given more purpose by creating a Tier II, III, IV, or Tier VI Clan battle/Rank Battle?  In addition, by creating a Clan Battle/Rank Battle that is Tier V or below, it might compel experienced players who have been stuck in Tier X-land to actually go back to playing the lower tiers and...who knows? Maybe rediscover a appreciation of the lower tiers (unless they already have a appreciation for the lower tier ships) since we all were once rookies at playing WoWS...we all had to sail our way up from Tier I all the way to Tier X.   

Now....the only issue that is to be had with a Tier II, III, IV, or Tier V Clan Battle/Rank Battle is that a lot of rookie/newbie players are usually at those tiers, and they might ruin the gameplay and fun that the experience players are trying to have with participating in those events. My solution to that is to add a in-game system that checks to see how many Random Battles you have played in WoWS.  If you have played 1000 less games, then you are not eligible to play in the lower-tier Clan Battle/Rank Battle let's say.   Or the condition could be that you have to play in 200 game or more in Tier VIII or higher ships before you can be granted access to lower tier Clan Battles/Rank Battles.  That way, there is a separation from the rookie players from the experienced players, and the rookie players will not ruin the games of the experienced players.  If the rookie players want to participate in the competitive events, they need to play higher tier ships AND play enough games in them---therefore becoming "experienced" players in the process.

10.) Add Italian battleships in the game.  This is the final point I am going to make, and that is Italian battleships. SAP shells with battleship guns might prove interesting and make said Italian BBs VERY unique in their play style compared to other BBs.  Honestly, I am not that all familiar with the history of Italian battleships, but it would be something like this:

??? Tier II

??? Tier III

??? Tier IV

Conte di Cavour (Tier V, sister ship to Guilio Ceasar)

??? Tier VI

??? Tier VII

Littorio (Tier VIII, sister to Roma)

??? Tier IX

??? Tier X

 

Let me know your comments below!

1. HMS Belfast: I'd rather that they nerf the Belfast by putting radar and smoke into the same consumable slot.  

2. USN BB line split:  This WILL happen, IMO.  It's only a matter of time.

3. Nerfing the Kremlin: The real problem with the Kremlin is that her deck and superstructure armor (IIRC) is too strong compared to other tier 10 BBs, making her immune to direct HE damage from most tier 10 DDs and cruisers that hurt all other tier 10 BBs.

4. Buffing the Yamato and Montana:  Honestly, the Yammy and Montana are already fine BBs.  

5. Buffing BB secondary range across the board:  (Except for those BBs that already have good secondary range...)  I have no problem with this, but I doubt it will happen as it might be seen as devaluing those BBs that do have good secondary range, particularly the premiums with good secs.

6. Nerf Smolensk:  Personally, I think that the best thing they could do to nerf the Smolensk (not that it would ever happen) would be to remove the smoke generator, and force the Smolensk to fight on the move or use terrain, same as the Colbert or Worcester.

7. Nerf Russian radar:  The thing is that Russian radar has much shorter duration than US radar.  Russian radar has longer range and shorter duration.  And US Radar is the opposite.  Personally, I wish that the Russian radar had been put on German ships instead.  Why?  Nothing against Russians or being pro-German.  Just that by doing that would give the Axis a navy with radar, which would really help to make any Allies vs Axis mission or mode or whatever fairer from a radar balance perspective.

8. Tier 2 BBs: I wouldn't mind this.  It'd be nice if all BB lines started at tier 2 rather than tier 3, and that tier 2 battleships were pre-dreadnoughts.  However, they'd have to really work on the issue of pre-DNs having a second group of main guns that were of a smaller caliber than their primary main guns.  It seems unfair to limit their secondary main guns to the pathetic accuracy of normal secondary guns, not to mention not allow them to be aimed manually by the player.  Maybe a solution would be to bind the "1" key to the primary main guns and the "2" key to the secondary main guns, and define both as firing HE only.  On an important side note, if this issue could be resolved, it would also be a solution to adding "Armored Cruisers" (i.e. the pre-cursor of battlecruisers) into the game.

9. Low tier Clan Battles:  No.  Just no.

10. Italian BBs: This will happen.  It's only a matter of time.  Personally, I suspect that the new tech tree line for Q4 this year will either be Italian DDs or BBs.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,057
[SALVO]
Members
25,798 posts
28,042 battles
40 minutes ago, Vader_Sama said:

Nonsense, if anything Smolensk needs an armor buff, that would make her more balanced

 

:Smile_hiding:

Actually, more armor might make her more vulnerable, because very thinly armored CL can be SO thinly armored that BBs can have a really difficult time doing anything other than overpens on those CLs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,267
[A-D-F]
Beta Testers
3,303 posts
9,903 battles
1 hour ago, Crucis said:

Actually, more armor might make her more vulnerable, because very thinly armored CL can be SO thinly armored that BBs can have a really difficult time doing anything other than overpens on those CLs.

Geez you don't say :Smile_sceptic:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
622 posts
5,307 battles

low tiers dont need clan battles or ranked, what they need to do is alow them to do mission and dailys, May be a buff to thier AA becouse half the ships over there cant even scratch CVs planes making the gameplay quite unpleasant.

 

giving all BBs long range secondary guns for 0 investment is a bad idea,  What needs to be done is a rework to secondary related skills to make secondary builds viable for more ships like changing  AFT to give a flat 2 KM increace to range instead of a %. Overall the investment vs gain is way off i mean BFT+AFT+man sec + secondary modules is a lot of investment for what?  7-11km spam cannons that on a good match will rack 30k damage + some fires.

 

 

Edited by pepe_trueno
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,417
[WOLF1]
Beta Testers
12,312 posts
17,497 battles
2 hours ago, Ciryandil said:

In this post, I am going to lay out my honest opinion on what I would do if I were in WG's position right now, as of February 2020, given my understand of the game, how much I have played it, and what I have discussed with other players.

I understand that not everyone of you are going to agree with me, and much of what I am going to suggest is going to be controversial....but I am more than happy to hear out your opinions and thoughts in the comments below! 

A without further ado, here goes.....

1.) Place HMS Belfast at Tier VIII.   This is so that she is on par with her sister ship, HMS Edinburgh, as I think that it is unusual that Belfast, which is better than Edinburgh in many ways (access to HE shells, radar AND smoke combo, and is a premium ship with premium economic bonuses) would be a tier lower than her.   Plus, having Belfast at Tier VIII would mitigate her over-powered-ness, and would save Tier V ships from being bullied by her (Belfast as a Tier VII can be put into Tier V-VII matches)

2.) Do a USN battleship split.  I would keep the original USN battleship as is (USS South Carolina, Tier III ---> USS Montana, Tier X), but starting at Tier V New York I would make a split.  The split would be something like this: 

 

USS Nevada (Tier V)

USS Pennsylvania (Tier VI) OR a pre-WW2 modified USS Tennessee (Tier VI) this would go in tandem with how Tenessee's sister USS California is being made a Tier VII premium, with WW2-era modifications)  

USS Maryland or USS Washington (Tier VII, Colorado-class ships)

USS South Dakota (Tier VIII) or USS Washington (Tier VIII)

??? (Tier IX)?  [Maybe USS New Jersey or USS Wisconsin (but how to differentiate them from USS Iowa and USS Missouri without making Iowa and Missouri more obsolete?)]

Tillman battleship (Tier X)

 

----> Just to clarify that I myself am debating on the best setup for the USN battleship split, but I am settled on the idea that the Tier V ship ought to be USS Nevada, as she was of a class similar to the New York-class, and is a brand new ship class not yet introduced into WoWS. 

 

3.) Nerf Kremlin.  I find that her armor and her high hit-points pool is ridiculous.   I would certainly reduce her hit-points to be BELOW that of Großer Kurfürst so as to preserve the uniqueness of German BBs of higher the highest hit points of all other nation's battleships, and as a nod to efficient German engineering.  As a historian, I find it infuriating that the RU BBs in the game somehow are BETTER in their engineering design to that of the American, British, and German battleships.    I would also make Kremlin slower in her acceleration, as she is a bit too fast, and I would reduce her armor so that she is more vulnerable to being targeted.   Of course, I do not wish to nerf Kremlin to the ground and make her plain useless.....but I would like to see her be a bit less OP so that other battleships are made a bit more viable again, such as Yamato and Montana.  Speaking of which.....

4.) Buff IJN Yamato and USS Montana slightly. Yamato I would make her have a better hit-point pool, so that she is a bit better on survivability.  Montana already got a buff to her Repair Party which is nice, but I think that she too, should have a slight hit-point increase.  I would also increase the range of Montana's and Yamato's secondary guns so that their secondaries are a bit more useful. 

5.) Increase the secondary range of ALL battleships across the board, except German BBs, French BBs, and other BBs that already have great secondaries (i.e. Georgia, Massachusetts)  I find it ridiculous that more battleships have base secondary ranges of 5 km or less.  I understand that this is made so that DDs and crusiers have a chance to rush in and sink a battleship with guns or torpedoes, but like really? 4km or 5km?  You might as well not have ANY secondaries at that point because they will barely fire off a few rounds before that rushing DD/cruiser is on you and torpedo-ing you to Davy Jones's Locker.   What I would so would be to increase the base secondary ranges by 2-3 km (making ranges range from 6-8 km instead of 4-5 km).  That way, at least you can feel good that your secondaries are firing at the enemy, and with flags, and captain skills you can try out secondary builds on battleships that are not really the best at it.  Like, why not try out a secondary built on your IJN Nagato? Or on your HMS Iron Duke?   Maybe it can be fun!  But with base 4-5 km range, it sucks.  It is not worth while to utilize a secondary built unless you have 6-8 km which is more useable.   I would love to make Tier VII and below battleships (excepting the Germans and French of course) have longer range secondaries. 

6.) Nerf Smolensk. Make her citadel larger, increase her gun reload, lower the time of her smoke dispersion.....these are changes that I would definitely make so as to mitigate her overpowered-ness. 

7.) Nerf Russian radar.  I would either (1) lower the range of Russian radar to 11 km or (2) I would lower the time duration of the radar. 

8.) Add more Tier II battleships into the game. IJN Mikasa is special in that she is the only pre-dreadnought battleship in the game (so far).   If I were in WG, I would definitely add more pre-dreadnought ships because (1) many of them existed….so.....no paper ships, but REAL ships would be added into the game! (2) Why not add more diversity to Tier II gameplay?  So many players complain that high tiers (Tier VIII-X) are stressful, so why not make the second-to-lowest tier a bit more attractive to play?  Furthermore, additional battleships can be added to each of the battleship tech tree lines.  So instead of having battleships start at Tier III, have them start at Tier II.  In other words, add a Tier II battleship to the German, American, Royal Navy, Russian, and French battleship lines.  After all, the cruiser lines start off with Tier I cruisers then move on to Tier IIs before then splitting into destroyers (beginning Tier II) and battleships (beginning Tier III).

9.) Make there be more Clan Battles and Ranked Battles at Tiers II, III, IV, and V.   We have seen there be one Tier VI ranked sprint, a couple of Tier VII ranked sprints and ONE Tier VIII Clan Battle.  The Tier VIII Clan Battle in particular was well appreciated by thousands of players because it was a break from the usual Tier X Clan Battles that occur in 99% of Clan Battles.  But what about the other Tiers Tier VI and below? Why not make THEM also into Clan Battles or Ranked Battles?  After all, there are plenty of Tier V premiums that players have in their ports that they would certainly like to use in competitive game modes besides just Random Battles.  Tier III and Tier IV premiums also exist...so why not have also be given more purpose by creating a Tier II, III, IV, or Tier VI Clan battle/Rank Battle?  In addition, by creating a Clan Battle/Rank Battle that is Tier V or below, it might compel experienced players who have been stuck in Tier X-land to actually go back to playing the lower tiers and...who knows? Maybe rediscover a appreciation of the lower tiers (unless they already have a appreciation for the lower tier ships) since we all were once rookies at playing WoWS...we all had to sail our way up from Tier I all the way to Tier X.   

Now....the only issue that is to be had with a Tier II, III, IV, or Tier V Clan Battle/Rank Battle is that a lot of rookie/newbie players are usually at those tiers, and they might ruin the gameplay and fun that the experience players are trying to have with participating in those events. My solution to that is to add a in-game system that checks to see how many Random Battles you have played in WoWS.  If you have played 1000 less games, then you are not eligible to play in the lower-tier Clan Battle/Rank Battle let's say.   Or the condition could be that you have to play in 200 game or more in Tier VIII or higher ships before you can be granted access to lower tier Clan Battles/Rank Battles.  That way, there is a separation from the rookie players from the experienced players, and the rookie players will not ruin the games of the experienced players.  If the rookie players want to participate in the competitive events, they need to play higher tier ships AND play enough games in them---therefore becoming "experienced" players in the process.

10.) Add Italian battleships in the game.  This is the final point I am going to make, and that is Italian battleships. SAP shells with battleship guns might prove interesting and make said Italian BBs VERY unique in their play style compared to other BBs.  Honestly, I am not that all familiar with the history of Italian battleships, but it would be something like this:

??? Tier II

??? Tier III

??? Tier IV

Conte di Cavour (Tier V, sister ship to Guilio Ceasar)

??? Tier VI

??? Tier VII

Littorio (Tier VIII, sister to Roma)

??? Tier IX

??? Tier X

 

Let me know your comments below!

1) Forumites pitch a fit with this sort of thing.

2) They will

3) They will

4) They will not do this anytime soon.

5) They will not do this

6) They will not do this

7) Unlikely but we may see more than one type of Russian radar

8) Possible 

9) Unlikely, but maybe a special mode, or special season for sprint

10) They will.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,390
[INTEL]
Members
13,459 posts
37,680 battles

I would leave Belfast where she is. Power creep is slowly overtaking her. Although many people have Belfasts, I seldom see them in games.

The Russian cheatbote Kremlin is ridiculous as she is now. She needs a whole range of nerfs to bring her in line with the other T10 BBs. Right now on the NA, EU and RU servers her win rate is roughly 2% higher than other tech tree BBs. In damage and WR only a couple of premiums are better. She's obviously overpowered, but WG refuses to make meaningful changes in her guns and armor. As someone quipped when they announced the last "nerfs" to her, next the devs will nerf her ... horn. I hate seeing that ship in game, it takes forever to kill and it is zero fun to play against.

I agree with @Crucis, for the Smolensk all that needs to be done is to remove her smoke generator. That would her far less annoying to play against. 

Russian bias radar needs to be reduced to 10K like all other radar. It's ridiculous that radar outranges torps at T10. 

Would love a second US BB line.. and a couple of battlecruiser lines. But hey, we have some fantastic... emblems. 

Edited by Taichunger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,097
[KNMSU]
Members
7,086 posts
7,766 battles
3 hours ago, Ciryandil said:

In this post, I am going to lay out my honest opinion on what I would do if I were in WG's position right now, as of February 2020, given my understand of the game, how much I have played it, and what I have discussed with other players.

I understand that not everyone of you are going to agree with me, and much of what I am going to suggest is going to be controversial....but I am more than happy to hear out your opinions and thoughts in the comments below! 

A without further ado, here goes.....

1.) Place HMS Belfast at Tier VIII.  

Stopped reading there.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,057
[SALVO]
Members
25,798 posts
28,042 battles
3 minutes ago, Taichunger said:

I would leave Belfast where she is. Power creep is slowly overtaking her. Although many people have Belfasts, I seldom see them in games.

The Russian cheatbote Kremlin is ridiculous as she is now. She needs a whole range of nerfs to bring her in line with the other T10 BBs. Right now on the NA, EU and RU servers her win rate is roughly 2% higher than other tech tree BBs. In damage and WR only a couple of premiums are better. She's obviously overpowered, but WG refuses to make meaningful changes in her guns and armor. As someone quipped when they announced the last "nerfs" to her, next the devs will nerf her ... horn. I hate seeing that ship in game, it takes forever to kill and it is zero fun to play against.

I agree with @Crucis, for the Smolensk all that needs to be done is to remove her smoke generator. That would her far less annoying to play against. 

Russian bias radar needs to be reduced to 10K like all other radar. It's ridiculous that radar outranges torps at T10. 

Would love a second US BB line.. and a couple of battlecruiser lines. But hey, we have some fantastic... emblems. 

Tai, honestly, I think that the Belfast would be better off if her radar and smoke shared the same consumable slot, same as with the rest of the CLs.  That would greatly balance her, probably to the point that she'd be good to put back on sale.

As for the Kremlin, I think that if they nerfed her deck and superstructure armor to be more in line with other tier 10 BBs, it would be a considerable improvement.

The problem with reducing Russian radar range is that radar right now trades off range and duration.  If you want (Russian) range, you get the weaker duration.  And if you want the good USN duration, you give up range.  It probably wouldn't see fair to reduce Russian radar range while keeping its shorter duration.

As for a second USN BB line I think that it'll happen eventually.  And hopefully ditto for British and German battlecruiser lines.  Heck, the Brits built so many legit battleSHIPS that they could also have a second legit BB line in addition to a BC line.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
14,001 posts
5,814 battles

Belfast isn't anywhere as powerful as she once was tbh, and imho could probably go back on sale as is. She's generally been a victim everytime there are indirect nerfs 'global mechanics change'. And soon with the incoming IFHE changes, which is brutal to light cruisers, never has Belfast been more well and truly buggered.

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.

×