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

Time to Prune the Skill Tree

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

937
[BOTES]
Members
2,261 posts
8,846 battles

With the recent IFHE changes, some new gaps in builds for certains hips have been exposed and I believe it time to rework or to universally incorporate some captain skills into the base game.

  1. Direction Center for Fighters: this skill was never very useful, but it became completely useless since it was nerfed to not apply to Spotter aircraft as well. This skill should be removed and added to the base game. There are too many more important 1 point skills for this ever to be a viable choice.
  2. Last Stand. I love this skill so I don't want it gone from the game, but it really isn't a choice. Every DD needs it and it should be added into the base game. It should only be made available for DDs though. CA/BB engines and rudders don't go out frequently enough, so they should still have to choose it as a skill.
  3. Vigilance: this definitely should not be added into the base game given how underpowered torpedoes are, but the skill is also useless for the same reason. Nobody halfway decent gets torped substantially anymore, hit rates have hit rock bottom, flooding nerfs have reduced the effectiveness of staggered launches, the BB sized gaps make dodging even the stealthiest torpedoes in the clunkiest ships a breeze, and the radar/CV meta has made the gaps even larger by forcing DDs to fire from farther back. I would remove Vigilance entirely and replace it with something new.
  4. Massive AA Fire, formerly Manual AA: this joke of a skill only helps ships with terrible AA and even then it won't make their AA good enough to deal with CVs. The increase in priority prep time is far too costly a nerf for anyone with relatively decent AA DPS. I'm going to discuss AFT separately from a primary and secondary gunnery perpsective, but the skill was crippled with the loss of additional AA range not being added to the base game. Both skills should be removed and added to the base game. Massive AA Fire can work as a proc, just like Priority Sector, on a separate keybind. Instead of having tradeoffs, the proc will simply provide instantaneous damage. The "tradeoff" here is that by procing this skill, you won't be able to proc Priority Sector. Thus, each time you are attacked by a CV, you can choose between up-front damage and DPS. This gives ships more adaptability, especially against CVs who like to drop their groups early and attack you with a single squadron.
  5. Advanced Firing Training and Manual Secondaries: I have included these together because from a gunnery perspective, these skills needs to be built into the game or have their cost reduced significantly. For primaries, it is mandatory on a few niche ships like Khabarovsk, but is otherwise useless. It helps with secondary builds as well, but the problem is that in our fire spam oriented, Smolensk dominated meta, secondary ships really can't afford to drop CE or FP in order to take both AFT and Manual Secondaries. Right now, the choice between the two secondary skills severely limits the effectiveness of secondary oriented ships. Either you have the accuracy to work against DD and CA, or you have the range to light annoying fires on BBs in mid range brawls. Secondaries are not effective enough to warrant such an expensive captain skill choice.

These changes will free up a lot of underpowered ships to take important skills that make them more versatile and would serve as a solid buff for the most negatively affected ships from the past year's worth of CV reworks and nerfs.

Edited by awildseaking
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
411
[PROJX]
Beta Testers
819 posts
5,088 battles
Just now, jags_domain said:

Look another hate cv thread from a dd player

 

Good try. Next time just be honest and say you hate planes.

I mean, he's right.

Just look at the skill tree and see how many are actually useful for AA. I'll give you a hint, just one, and it sure as hell isn't MFAA.

Besides, there are some skills that are terribly outdated. I mean come on, who really uses the directional center for fighters skill?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,023
[ARS]
Beta Testers
5,693 posts
5,975 battles
2 minutes ago, jags_domain said:

Look another hate cv thread from a dd player

 

Good try. Next time just be honest and say you hate planes.

I don't see the anti-CV whine part of it, but it certainly has a "woe is me" spiel wherein the OP completely fabricates a bunch of stuff about torpedoes to make them look weaker than they are.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,284
[RKLES]
Members
964 posts

Good post, when is a DD going to be either not spotted or put the hurt on CV planes.

The current situation where the CV can spot and take half of DD's health is not ideal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,836
[SGSS]
Members
5,721 posts
Just now, Helstrem said:

I don't see the anti-CV whine part of it, but it certainly has a "woe is me" spiel wherein the OP completely fabricates a bunch of stuff about torpedoes to make them look weaker than they are.

Every topic is about making life easer for the dd and harder on the planes. Its the same bland thing for over a year now.

There a lot of great dd players that dodge rockets and bombs and do just fine.

Its beyond tireinf at this point to just hate on planes all the time.

 

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
937
[BOTES]
Members
2,261 posts
8,846 battles
28 minutes ago, jags_domain said:

Look another hate cv thread from a dd player

 

Good try. Next time just be honest and say you hate planes.

Interesting non-argument considering that I'm also a CV player. Also interesting how you talk trash about stats and supposed better plays who will come out of the woodwork and tell me to git gud even though you're the one hiding their stats. Statistically speaking, you are far more likely to be worse than me. Matter of fact, I know you are whether you hide or not.

Regardless, please avoid the line of reasoning that someone has to be good to know what they're talking about. Lots of people who are terrible at CVs realize how broken they are. The best players know it too. It's usually the people in the middle who have deluded themselves.

23 minutes ago, Helstrem said:

I don't see the anti-CV whine part of it, but it certainly has a "woe is me" spiel wherein the OP completely fabricates a bunch of stuff about torpedoes to make them look weaker than they are.

Care to make an argument, or just empty assertions? Because I didn't fabricate anything I said. DDs have to play farther back, which increases their torpedo spread by the time torps reach target. This also increases opportunities for ships to get hydro, radar, CV spots, and other tools that either directly spot torps or give someone a very strong idea of where torps will come from. You can check the damage averages for torpedo ships as well. They're dead last in every tier. The only ships that perform better are more exclusive ships that filter out the average player, such as Benham, or ships that couldn't get the nerfbat, like the Kamikaze clones. If hit rates weren't down, we would see average damage increase substantially at all levels of skill. Even at the top 5%, torp boats are dead last. Unicums do much better playing in gun boat DDs across the board.

The first buff we've had in literally years, which barely counteracts the power creep, is the torpedo module giving us an extra 5kts to torp speed. It isn't much, but it's better than nothing.

Edited by awildseaking
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,143
[USCC2]
Members
6,442 posts

I feel they are ideas that are worth considering.

2. IMO the first is most valid as I have seen that if something gets picked so much it should be given (SA was an example)- also DD survival is lower than other ship types anyway and the resulting 'being alive longer to contribute' won't be at to much of a detriment to the other ships.

3. Vigilance is to do with DD damage I feel, and as WG has taken 3+ years to get where we are - I believe it is fruitless to ask for any increase to possible damage by DDs.

1. Is one that is a meh. I mean that I don't see many choosing it over other skills if they have a point lying around, and one extra plane is a minor positive against CV attacks. But to auto give it to players also seems unnecessary. It is a reasonable 1 point skill that can be left alone or if WG thinks is not good enough - add another plane!

4. This explanation I didn't really understand and therefore am unable to comment - my bad - apologies. However, reading the general context, I assume this was the trigger to those who believe this was a veiled attack on CVs.

Is this even picked by anyone? And if not seen as worth the points, then why give it free?

5. The phrase 'want your cake and eat it' has always made me laugh - if I have cake, of course I want to eat it! However, I believe the Captain skills were supposed to be a difficult choice to make - you can't pick everything, you should have choice and make a choice.

This again seems to be a suggestion that 'primarily' has a negative affect on CVs. A possibility for WG if they want to go in that direction, but 4 point skills should be a hard choice. :Smile_honoring:

Edited by _WaveRider_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
674 posts
5,358 battles

captain skills  need a big balance patch, we get plenty of choice but little to no real options, 5 skills only available for carriers, skills like manual sec, AFT and massive AA are more for meme builds than anything else and then we have some skills like concealment or superintendent that are a must have...

 

there has to be some semblance of balance and choice, for instance:

 

*CV   related captain points changed to something that can be used by both aircraft and ships as an example sight estabilization gaining -5 to main gun dispersion, -60% to secondary guns dispersion across all tiers

*manual secondary changed to manual control: opcion to switch between main and secondary guns control, +10% aura damage to targeted aircraft 

*survival expert: added % to torpedo protection or increace rate at wich modules are repaired 

*AFT geting back the AA range increace 

*massive AA adds a flat increace to low/mid/long range damage aura based on tier, as an example 10+5*lv

 

 

  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
356
[PHD]
Members
1,841 posts
7,260 battles

With the IFHE nerf it was discussed, maybe dropping it to a 3 or less skill? LWM mentioned she didn't like the Last Stand skill, in general not didn't use it.

So maybe the whole thing might need a look.

But given WG's record of foul ups last year maybe it's just best left alone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4
[ICBM]
Members
7 posts
5,613 battles

I'd love to see the skill tree greatly expanded. Multiplied, really. 

I'd like four skill trees - one for each ship class. Then players would be picking from skills that are specific to their needs, and actual customization might result. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
729 posts
10,248 battles
13 hours ago, Helstrem said:

I don't see the anti-CV whine part of it, but it certainly has a "woe is me" spiel wherein the OP completely fabricates a bunch of stuff about torpedoes to make them look weaker than they are.

Torpedoes are weak, or unreliable if you prefer, and the best destroyers do most of their damage with guns. Torpedo boats can do well, but gunboats do better in every case except for newbie tiers (and even then sometimes).

When gunboat spec on a Yugumo is viable that doesn't tell you that torpedoes are strong.

 

I think the OP's point was that vigilance is a practically useless skill, and if it were buffed to be useful it would be an unnecessary nerf to torpedo boats that don't need nerfs. It could be compared to the slot 5 torpedo acquisition module, which is useless or worse than the old TASM except for trolling the six people that play Yueyang or Black anymore.

13 hours ago, jags_domain said:

There a lot of great dd players that dodge rockets and bombs and do just fine.

No, there are good players that still do well in spite of planes. As a rule of thumb it's impossible to dodge rocket planes from a competent CV player.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
340
[WOLFC]
[WOLFC]
Members
846 posts
7,138 battles

Secondary builds do have too many mandatory skill requirements. But also I think it's weird that DDs have AFT & BFT become so much more effective on them. Combined with LS & SE (& maybe SI), it makes having a proper commander build for a DD so much more important. They should remove BFT & AFT, rebalance DDs & ship secondaries, and create a new AFT skill that only affects AA. But that would require a lot of rebalancing so they won't do it. Not for DDs.

 

But maybe they can make AFT not work on secondary guns, while giving all secondary guns +20% range instead. That is assuming WG thinks secondary builds need a buff right now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
966
Members
2,069 posts
12,691 battles
14 hours ago, jags_domain said:

Every topic is about making life easer for the dd and harder on the planes. Its the same bland thing for over a year now.

There a lot of great dd players that dodge rockets and bombs and do just fine.

Its beyond tireinf at this point to just hate on planes all the time.

 

If you don't like anti CV threads just dodge them.

  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SYN]
Members
1,420 posts
10,988 battles
14 hours ago, jags_domain said:

 

There a lot of great dd players that dodge rockets and bombs and do just fine.

 

There are meh dd players who dodge rockets a lot of the time. 

14 hours ago, awildseaking said:

 

The first buff we've had in literally years, which barely counteracts the power creep, is the torpedo module giving us an extra 5kts to torp speed. It isn't much, but it's better than nothing.

That was a  nice buff for Legendary Shima. It has gone from "workable " to "comfortable."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,836
[SGSS]
Members
5,721 posts
2 minutes ago, Ensign_Pulver_2016 said:

There are meh dd players who dodge rockets a lot of the time. 

That was a  nice buff for Legendary Shima. It has gone from "workable " to "comfortable."

there were alot of buffs. Concelment for every ship but DD went way up.

Planes dont see torps.

AP only over pens.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,348
[WOLFG]
Members
32,219 posts
9,984 battles
14 hours ago, PotatoMD said:

Besides, there are some skills that are terribly outdated. I mean come on, who really uses the directional center for fighters skill?

It's a dump skill for my Gneisenau and Bismarck captains. I find it more useful than anything else I could pick. (I already have PT and EL)

I did take it off my cruisers though, and replaced it with IFA. I just don't feel that the BBs have enough maneuverability to make good use of it consistently. The extra fighter does help sometimes though. IMO, ot should add 2 fighters instead of one to make it more of a choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,348
[WOLFG]
Members
32,219 posts
9,984 battles
7 hours ago, pepe_trueno said:

*manual secondary changed to manual control: opcion to switch between main and secondary guns control...

That would actually be a nerf to secondaries IMO.

Right now, whether you have MFCS or not, the aimpoint for your secondaries is as close to dead nuts as the AI can do. Making them manual is just going to mean that the aimpoint isn't accurate for most players. It's also going to mean lower DPM, (for mains and/or secondaries) as firing cycles will be missed because you can't fire mains and secondaries at the same time.

Basically, it will help skilled players, and mess up unskilled ones, as they'll be likely to often have their attention focused incorrectly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SYN]
Members
1,420 posts
10,988 battles
10 minutes ago, jags_domain said:

there were alot of buffs. Concelment for every ship but DD went way up.

Planes dont see torps.

AP only over pens.

 

Bluffs, yes, but the turret traverse on the Legendary Shima is so much better 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,200
[EQRN]
Members
2,208 posts
19,737 battles

Massive AA needs to be made a one point skill.  The only ships that could use it are low tier, and 4 points lying around are not something low tier ships are likely to have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
674 posts
5,358 battles
38 minutes ago, Skpstr said:

That would actually be a nerf to secondaries IMO.

Right now, whether you have MFCS or not, the aimpoint for your secondaries is as close to dead nuts as the AI can do. Making them manual is just going to mean that the aimpoint isn't accurate for most players. It's also going to mean lower DPM, (for mains and/or secondaries) as firing cycles will be missed because you can't fire mains and secondaries at the same time.

Basically, it will help skilled players, and mess up unskilled ones, as they'll be likely to often have their attention focused incorrectly.

its an option to gain manual control of them, taking the skill wont make it permanently.

olso secondary guns have the bad habit of aiming center of mass wich means most shots go to the belt armor for no damage, being able to control them means you can target the superstructure for lots of pens or spread them across the ship for fires.

if it proves to be weak may be add an extra 1-2km base range when using manual control but overall i dont think is a weak skill. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,360 posts
33,337 battles
2 hours ago, Otterway said:

I'd like four skill trees - one for each ship class. Then players would be picking from skills that are specific to their needs, and actual customization might result. 

Best idea I've heard for a long time. 

Edited by slokill_1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,348
[WOLFG]
Members
32,219 posts
9,984 battles

 

Quote

olso secondary guns have the bad habit of aiming center of mass wich means most shots go to the belt armor for no damage, being able to control them means you can target the superstructure for lots of pens or spread them across the ship for fires.

Or it means that you'll whiff completely.

Quote

if it proves to be weak may be add an extra 1-2km base range when using manual control but overall i dont think is a weak skill. 

The problem is, its effectively a skill multiplier. It won't prove to be weak in the hands of skilled players, but adding 1-2km range will just buff them even more.

We don't really want more skills like RPF, that buff the ships of skilled players while doing virtually nothing for unskilled players.

Skills are IMO best when their effectiveness isn't completely dependent on skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,662
Members
2,365 posts
52 battles
18 hours ago, awildseaking said:

Direction Center for Fighters: this skill was never very useful, but it became completely useless since it was nerfed to not apply to Spotter aircraft as well. This skill should be removed and added to the base game. There are too many more important 1 point skills for this ever to be a viable choice.

It is actually the outright best and most cost effective AA skill that is currently in existence. If you know your timings with the high tier catapult fighter, the outright best AA consumable currently, it's an extra free plane kill. MAA and BFT both actually have about the same effect for 4x and 3x the cost respectively. In fact DCF is superior because it actually guarantees the kill no matter how terrible your base AA is. AFT meanwhile does even less since a potato CV that dies to flak will die regardless anyway.

Edited by El2aZeR
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,348
[WOLFG]
Members
32,219 posts
9,984 battles
4 hours ago, Otterway said:

I'd love to see the skill tree greatly expanded. Multiplied, really. 

I'd like four skill trees - one for each ship class. Then players would be picking from skills that are specific to their needs, and actual customization might result. 

That would be cool, especially if expanded.

And there's no reason some of the skills couldn't show up in multiple trees, things like AR or SI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×