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

Wargaming Please Nerf Thunderer--Everyone Knows It's Too OP

104 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

563
[SOBA6]
Members
288 posts

I'm an average player and yet I can take this one ship out time and time again and farm 150k+ in her. She often starts 2 fires at a time on ships in one volley and you know it shouldn't be this way. You can scream and cry but there is a reason they are removing it but there are so many in game we will see this ship for years to come. I own her and I love her but I'm a fair person and I know it needs a nerf. I think if you toned down the fire chance by a small percentage it would be ok. 

Thunder.jpg

Thunder1.jpg

Edited by Lord_Argus
Misspelled
  • Cool 7
  • Haha 2
  • Boring 12
  • Meh 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,684
[HINON]
Members
8,706 posts
12,702 battles

silly fellow forumite, WG doesnt nerf premium ships that are overperforming, they just make them unavailable to get through any means other than rigged Santa Crates after about a year or 2

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,894
[WOLF5]
Supertester
4,851 posts
4,290 battles

Everyone knew Caesare was OP too, didn't stop people from throwing a fit when WG proposed nerfing it. Apparently people only want other people's ships to be balanced:Smile_sceptic: So WG said fine, and haven't directly nerfed a premium ship since. Instead they just go to Christmas containers so people will spend thousands trying to get them.

In short the community has voted against nerfing premiums (something about getting what they paid for), so yeah, can't really blame WG there.

 

Pulling a ship from sale "indefinitely" is WG's way of saying it's OP, ahem, sorry, "too popular" and we're removing it so more people can't get it*.

 

*Unless they want to gamble for it

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
89
[SYN]
Members
318 posts
12,893 battles

Argus my friend, please refer to the spreadsheets  -  now get out there and spread the Love (457mm HE MkII every 22 seconds) around - Enjoy M8

 Capturethu.thumb.PNG.3d9161c7e7cf5096037645368c4b741c.PNG

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
254
[PDCB]
Members
516 posts
9,420 battles

Also, the same thing happens in Wot, there was a tank known for being OP, they nerfed it twice, but it was still too strong. They removed it from the game, literally excluding it... but they brought the tank back after a couple of years.

"balance"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,754
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
27,960 posts
14,894 battles
28 minutes ago, Lord_Argus said:

I'm an average player and yet I can take this one ship out time and time again and farm 150k+ in her. She often starts 2 fires at a time on ships in one volley and you know it shouldn't be this way. You can scream and cry but there is a reason they are removing it but there are so many in game we will see this ship for years to come. I own her and I love her but I'm a far person and I know it needs a nerf. I think if you toned down the fire chance by a small percentage it would be ok. 

 

If you are really an average player I am happy for you to click with it because that is 5% level of play but there are several ships that out perform it in every stat.

2 minutes ago, AJTP89 said:

Everyone knew Caesare was OP too, didn't stop people from throwing a fit when WG proposed nerfing it. Apparently people only want other people's ships to be balanced:Smile_sceptic: So WG said fine, and haven't directly nerfed a premium ship since. Instead they just go to Christmas containers so people will spend thousands trying to get them.

In short the community has voted against nerfing premiums (something about getting what they paid for), so yeah, can't really blame WG there.

 

Pulling a ship from sale "indefinitely" is WG's way of saying it's OP, ahem, sorry, "too popular" and we're removing it so more people can't get it*.

 

*Unless they want to gamble for it

No argument that the Giulio Cesare over performs but the screaming over nerfing it was legit because of their own rule, from WoT but carried over to WoWS to not nerf premiums. They made a super minor adjustment to the lower glacis plate on the Super Pershing which could only be hit when coming over a hill and the yelling and screaming was insane and they had to offer refunds in gold.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
452
[VORTX]
Members
591 posts
7,756 battles

War gaming please remove double CV as they are too OP and dumb down game strategies too much! 

Yup. It doesn’t work. WG doesn’t give a crapabout the game. Sorry bud. They did eventually nerf Smolensk though, sort of ...

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,498
[SALVO]
Members
26,149 posts
29,223 battles
39 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

If you are really an average player I am happy for you to click with it because that is 5% level of play but there are several ships that out perform it in every stat.

No argument that the Giulio Cesare over performs but the screaming over nerfing it was legit because of their own rule, from WoT but carried over to WoWS to not nerf premiums. They made a super minor adjustment to the lower glacis plate on the Super Pershing which could only be hit when coming over a hill and the yelling and screaming was insane and they had to offer refunds in gold.

Players are such hypocrites.

Players:  "Ship is OP!!!  Please nerf!!!"

WG tries to fix the problem.

Players: "WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!  How dare you nerf my premium!!!"

  • Cool 7
  • Thanks 2
  • Boring 3
  • Meh 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
403
[IMP]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
456 posts
6,268 battles

Is Thunderer even a premium though? Isn't it a "Special Ship" like Stalingrad and others?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
1,678 posts
1,286 battles
1 hour ago, AJTP89 said:

Everyone knew Caesare was OP too, didn't stop people from throwing a fit when WG proposed nerfing it. Apparently people only want other people's ships to be balanced:Smile_sceptic: So WG said fine, and haven't directly nerfed a premium ship since. Instead they just go to Christmas containers so people will spend thousands trying to get them.

In short the community has voted against nerfing premiums (something about getting what they paid for), so yeah, can't really blame WG there.

 

Pulling a ship from sale "indefinitely" is WG's way of saying it's OP, ahem, sorry, "too popular" and we're removing it so more people can't get it*.

 

*Unless they want to gamble for it

Thunderer is a special ship, not a premium. And Ceasare is not even comparable to the broken state of the thunderer. As far as I know, Thunderer was never sold for money.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,754
[GWG]
[GWG]
Alpha Tester
27,960 posts
14,894 battles
25 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Players are such hypocrites.

Players:  "Ship is OP!!!  Please nerf!!!"

WG tries to fix the problem.

Players: "WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!  How dare you nerf my premium!!!"

The outcry against nerfs to premiums, one reason we have special ships, is people paid for the ship as it was although the move to tier 6 would not have had much impact on it if at all. The Thunderer does well but as I said to the OP it is beaten in every stat by other ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,967
[SGSS]
Members
5,809 posts
1 hour ago, tcbaker777 said:

silly fellow forumite, WG doesnt nerf premium ships that are overperforming, they just make them unavailable to get through any means other than rigged Santa Crates after about a year or 2

Yes they do.  They nerfed the prem CV.

And dont give me this global change is not a nerf garbage.

You complained Bout cv and you are great with nerfing things you dont like but when its yours its suddenly a proble..

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 2
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,498
[SALVO]
Members
26,149 posts
29,223 battles
5 minutes ago, BrushWolf said:

The outcry against nerfs to premiums, one reason we have special ships, is people paid for the ship as it was although the move to tier 6 would not have had much impact on it if at all. The Thunderer does well but as I said to the OP it is beaten in every stat by other ships.

In all honesty, I don't care.  They should fix OP premium ships and the EU courts should mind their own frickin' business.  

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,108
[ARS]
Beta Testers
5,821 posts
6,038 battles
44 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Players are such hypocrites.

Players:  "Ship is OP!!!  Please nerf!!!"

WG tries to fix the problem.

Players: "WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!  How dare you nerf my premium!!!"

Those aren't the same players.  Group A is the one saying "Ship is OP!!! Please nerf!!!".  Group B is the one responding with "WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!! How dare you nerf my premium!!!" and then we get people like you coming along and saying Group A and B are being hypocrites for both asking for a nerf and asking for no nerf.  They aren't hypocrites, they are different people.

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,967
[SGSS]
Members
5,809 posts
53 minutes ago, Crucis said:

Players are such hypocrites.

Players:  "Ship is OP!!!  Please nerf!!!"

WG tries to fix the problem.

Players: "WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!  How dare you nerf my premium!!!"

During the CV rework they were going to take Cease salad to t6.

This person was itching about changing is little ship.

In the same post he was itching that CV are OP and have to done away with.

 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
400 posts
26 battles

Got the Thunderer about a year ago, played 71 random battles (and some ranked), about 20 of which were recently since the patch hit.

Partly as a guilty pleasure and partially because it was the best thing to clear many of the final Dockyard event with.

And I'd be entirely happy with the HE damage and fire chance being nerfed to bring it in line to most nations BB shells (it doesn't need to be German however... that's just mournful).

The AP shells are pretty awesome anyway and it has concealment, agility, dispersion and improved repair party going for it. Also getting Warspite's damage control instead would be nice though.  Going from flamethrower to flame resistant would be cool.

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
771
[TIMT]
Members
1,413 posts
4,969 battles

 

2 hours ago, 05Chopp said:

Argus my friend, please refer to the spreadsheets  -  now get out there and spread the Love (457mm HE MkII every 22 seconds) around - Enjoy M8 

 

Those are the average values, and they are a bit skewed by selection bias: Bourgogne, Shikishima, Ohio, and Slava are ships that are only available for relatively hard to earn currencies (RB and steel), therefore only a select part of the player population have access to them. You can see that in the number of battles played: Ohio is by far the most played one of the four, and still has only 255k, which is less than a quarter of the games Thunderer has (1321k games). Also, because they are of limited accessibility the players that do have them, got them specifically because they knew what they wanted and can - most likely - make much better use out of them, compared to me in a Thunderer.

Furthermore, the average values don't tell you anything about the distribution, for example take the averages over the x-part of the server population with Ohio:

All top 50% top 25% top 10 % top 5%
95k 112k 121k 131k 136k
55% 62.7% 67.3% 72.3% 75.4%

 

EDIT: The tables got completely messed up, trying to fix that

Edit2: Whatever, all the other tables are gone and for whatever reason I can't put in more than a single table into this post. So you will have to trust me or look it up on wows-numbers yourself.

Point is, Thunderer does more damage than most other BBs with a similar WR. So it is an excellent damage farmer, but WR wise it is not too special. Which is not surprising, given that it is usually the "sniping BB in the back" that doe not support the team etc. Personally, I have to agree with OP that Thunderer is silly. I should not be able to consistently get 100K+ damage in games, being the muppet that I am in BBs. I'd suggest to nerf the HE Alpha and especially the fire chance.

Make it something like high-pen, better-alpha but very poor fire chance ship and encourage more AP use. Would go a long way in reducing the toxicity towards this ship. Give players the options to get a refund on the coal if they don't like the change, but the thing is just too easy mode imho.

Edited by shinytrashcan
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Banned
1,678 posts
1,286 battles
1 hour ago, BrushWolf said:

although the move to tier 6 would not have had much impact on it if at all.

Yeah, I'm sure the T5 Giulio would have no trouble at all in T8 matches with its 320mm guns and 19mm bow. Unless they buffed it before making the change, the ship would have been a joke at that tier.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,498
[SALVO]
Members
26,149 posts
29,223 battles
1 hour ago, Helstrem said:

Those aren't the same players.  Group A is the one saying "Ship is OP!!! Please nerf!!!".  Group B is the one responding with "WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!! How dare you nerf my premium!!!" and then we get people like you coming along and saying Group A and B are being hypocrites for both asking for a nerf and asking for no nerf.  They aren't hypocrites, they are different people.

I realize that they're not the same people.  My point was that the player base is so schizophrenic and of two minds that there'll never  be a single community opinion.  And that WG should just ignore this split opinion and do what's right, and just freaking fix OP premiums.

I wish that they'd turned the GC into a tier 6 premium, and perhaps also created a version of the GC (under a different name from her class, probably the Leonardo da Vinci) for the original WW1 era version and released it as a tier 5 premium Italian BB (13 12" main guns with a fifth turret amidships, and a max speed of 21.5 kts).

 

  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
650
[WOLF7]
Members
876 posts
3 hours ago, MaxVladimus said:

Also, the same thing happens in Wot, there was a tank known for being OP, they nerfed it twice, but it was still too strong. They removed it from the game, literally excluding it... but they brought the tank back after a couple of years.

"balance"

Chicom tank? Type 59, perhaps? I quit WoT 7 years ago, haven't regretted it once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
94
[BE-ER]
Beta Testers
128 posts
16,007 battles

th

35 minutes ago, USS_Taylor_Swift said:

Yeah, I'm sure the T5 Giulio would have no trouble at all in T8 matches with its 320mm guns and 19mm bow. Unless they buffed it before making the change, the ship would have been a joke at that tier.

Do you realize that the bow you can see is actually layered over the original one? When it was modernized, the Italians actually just built a new bow over the old one. And yes, when WG proposed moving it to tier 6, it would have gotten whatever the standard armor levels are for tier 6 (exterior and extremity plating and so on).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,374
[PVE]
Members
10,932 posts
18,944 battles

Please don't nerf my # 1 ship for Co op missions. It's not OP it is just rewarding. Play right reward, play wrong anti-eward.

Edited by Sovereigndawg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,182
[SIM]
Members
5,813 posts
9,272 battles

Nah, just because Thunderer is easy doesn't mean that she's necessarily OP. Being that she's a special ship, not a premium (so suck it, anti-consumer sycophants) WG could simply nerf her if they felt the need. Instead they're pulling her for being too popular while exemplifying a style of play that the community regards as problematic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,446
[RAN]
[RAN]
Members
706 posts
10,053 battles

NO !

Ship                           

Bourgogne    X            86,591     122,868    1.28    4.16    60.08%
Shikishima    X            7,141       113,803    1.03    3.65    58.49%
Ohio               X            54,209     98,981      1.04    4.35    57.00%
Slava             X            1,958        106,904    0.94    4.84    56.38%
Kremlin         X            361,059    95,258      1.02    5.20    55.49%

Thunderer    X            203,489    107,097    0.88    3.12    52.31%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,822
[1984]
Members
4,482 posts
21,506 battles
5 hours ago, Lord_Argus said:

I'm an average player and yet I can take this one ship out time and time again and farm 150k+ in her. She often starts 2 fires at a time on ships in one volley and you know it shouldn't be this way. You can scream and cry but there is a reason they are removing it but there are so many in game we will see this ship for years to come. I own her and I love her but I'm a fair person and I know it needs a nerf. I think if you toned down the fire chance by a small percentage it would be ok. 

Thunder.jpg

Thunder1.jpg

Wg doesn’t need to do anything.

if you feel it’s too strong then never play it again.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×