Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
Valas1

Ship Lovin', Who needs it?

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

300
Members
697 posts
8,733 battles

I see complaints about various ships needing nerfed, or being nerfed *coughThunderercough* often in the forums, and in the Gameplay Suggestion forum.   But it seems like a lot of the tech tree, premium, freemium, special ships, etc, that could use a little love in one form or another, get mentioned, then lost in the shuffle. Be it power creep, lackluster or miserable gameplay, or it doesn't quite fit it's tier, made Mouse's "Mehbote" rating or lower, etc. Is there a ship you love, but rarely touch anymore? There are several ships in this game, I rarely see, or rarely see anymore, except when it comes time to knock off snowflakes, or occasionally in co-op. 

Which ship(s) do you guys feel, could use some love? And what kind of love do you think it or they need? Be reasonable. I'm talking tweaks, not game shattering changes. Like a bit more health, slightly faster reload on a consumable or guns, better gun penetration, fudging some armor thickness or AA gun count, more stealth, etc. This isn't a "I hate this ship class" thread. I abhor the CV rework, but even CV players must have ideas on which CV's need some love. After all, like it or not, we are all in this game together (at least till subs come out :Smile_trollface:).

Out of all of the ships I own, and have played, the two off the top of my head, are my Indianapolis and Tallinn.  I like my Indy, but it seems (to me anyway), too squishy and could use a little more health, for a little more staying power. This makes the case for me changing my skills around to try the new "improved"  Survivability Expert skill for cruisers. But in my mind, if ships need the SE skill, maybe just bake it into them, and give us something new. 

Tallinn for me, is just a miserable, miserable ship to play.  The AP is nice, but for me, inconsistent. The HE is lackluster at best, even versus destroyers. It might just be me. The radar seems to be it's only redeeming quality.

I can think of more, but I'm curious as to what other's thoughts and ideas are.

 

 

 

Edited by Valas1
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,273
[SLI]
Beta Testers, In AlfaTesters
9,547 posts

I agree on both counts.  Tallinn was a pain to get through and I don't plan on ever going back in it's current state.  I was just playing Indy last night in ranked.  I like it and it's a good ship but it does seem exceptionally squishy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,575
[SGSS]
Members
6,307 posts

Indi needs armor. Cit lowered. Something.  Guns are great but its a cit magnet.

All pasta BB need dispersion buff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,281
[RLGN]
Members
16,841 posts
29,512 battles

Shorten the reload for Oklahoma.

(-)

I’d say shorten the reload on Agincourt, but holy flip, I did 106k my second (Co-op) test game in it, with a lot of work and several kills by the secondaries.

Mostly spammed HE, but insta-kek’d my opposite with AP in a drive by.

Down at that tier, 14 305mm HE shells just murder cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,541
[FOXY]
Members
3,348 posts
8,165 battles
17 minutes ago, jags_domain said:

Indi needs armor. Cit lowered. Something.  Guns are great but its a cit magnet.

All pasta BB need dispersion buff. 

Yeee Indi is one of those ships that could use some armor, its..not great..or the cit lowered, would help alot.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
279
[RNGOD]
Members
143 posts
5,216 battles

I'd like to see Graf zeppelin changed from a meme to a proper carrier.

 

  • Cool 1
  • Meh 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,353
[CAAT]
Members
2,345 posts
5,434 battles
2 hours ago, Valas1 said:

Which ship(s) do you guys feel, could use some love?

CALIFORNIA.

Seriously, her 34.2s reload is wayyyy too slow at Tier 7 (Hyuga laughs in twelve 14in guns at 28s reload PLUS main battery reload booster to boot), her armor's just bog-standard, her secondaries are bog-standard, her Torpedo Protection is laughably WORSE THAN COLORADO (makes zero sense, even from a "balance" perspective), she's slow (now this one is understandable, because she's Standard-Type, but for all her deficiencies, including aforementioned slow speed, she gets NOTHING to compensate for all these weaknesses). All she's got is admittedly "good" Tier 8+ AA (which honestly isn't as amazing as it seems sadly due to AA mechanics vs aircraft being substandard at best) and good concealment (which is definitely great, but it certainly shouldn't be the epitome of this ship's strengths).

Don't get me wrong, you CAN have good matches in her, but the same could be said for literally ANY ship in the game. California could use some love. 30s main battery reload is totally doable (and was her original setup during testing, till Wargaming decided to nerf her for literally no good reason), and frankly, adding DFAA is a brilliant idea, given her actual "floating AA battery" nature. even 32s main battery reload with DFAA would be sufficient, I feel. But she needs SOME kind of buff, no doubt.

 

Edited by SaiIor_Moon
  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,353
[CAAT]
Members
2,345 posts
5,434 battles
1 hour ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

Shorten the reload for Oklahoma.

Also forgot to mention this, but THIS, DEFINITELY THIS. Oklahoma has NO business having that ridiculously long reload time of 38s at Tier 5. Her AP penetration is atrocious already, and she's basically a New York with a different, better turret layout. I don't see how that justifies 38s reload in any way, shape or form. Her secondaries are decent, sure, but they're not THAT amazing, because Oklahoma's armor scheme is reallly not that great for brawling, imo. I have had WAY more success firing from a distance with Oklahoma, sadly, versus brawling (that pains me to say that, but it is what it is).

I mean fine, give her 34.3s reload, same as Texas, it's more than fair. 

Edited by SaiIor_Moon
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
64 posts
129 battles

I'd like to add the Z-52 to this list.... when your tier 9 predecessor can do stuff better than you it's bad. <.<

And aslo the Russian Line split DD's... as it stands it's just 3 random DD's thrown together and called a mini branch... pretty shoddy even by WG's standards but I do have a suggestion for that. :D

 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
345
[LANCE]
Members
940 posts
7,023 battles

Khaba! It got nerfed with a wrecking ball before I even had it but it seems now to have been power-crept to none existence ... horrendous rudder shift, short distance torps, armor allows AP to fuse for full damage and range isn’t even that good! Yeah, we’ve got the R-10 coming at some point but she could still really use some love!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
695 posts
18,128 battles

Alsace (secondary pen or accuracy)

Zao (and all IJN cruisers really - RoF? Not sure, but they’re not very competitive versus Russian Bias and BB creep)

Graf Zeppelin (usable divebombers, possibly concealment buff to match tech tree versions)

Flint (range)

KM BBs (secondary accuracy)

Normandie (see Alsace)

tier 6-9 tech EU DDs (slight buff to torp damage? Perhaps overcoming torp bulges?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,679
[ARS]
Beta Testers
6,762 posts
6,907 battles

Zao looks like a Tier 8.5 ship at best compared to more recent cruiser lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
398
[PHD]
Members
2,004 posts
7,777 battles

Yudachi, 

Just lowering the torpedo detection range would help. I think they are at 1.9km, 1.8? They should be closer to 1.2 maybe less. They are kinda slow at 57kts too. I assume WG's idea is with a TRB you can launch so many torps that they can't be dodged.

Add the typical slow gun reload and laughable AA is it any wonder it has an Angry Youtuber rating of  Garbage. 

No power creep, it was released as crap.

Santa Crate gift instead of switches I suppose. 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,281
[RLGN]
Members
16,841 posts
29,512 battles
27 minutes ago, BuffyThePotatoSlayer said:

I'd like to add the Z-52 to this list.... when your tier 9 predecessor can do stuff better than you it's bad. <.<

My suggestion for Z-52 is a little bit odd perhaps.

It sounds like it’s using triple expansion engines. (clankity-clankity-clankity...)

Give it something that sounds more like turbines.

18 minutes ago, Telastyn said:

Graf Zeppelin (usable divebombers, possibly concealment buff to match tech tree versions)

At least I can use Graf’s bombers, unlike the joke of a UI for the tree carriers.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,160 posts

tier X republique has nothing and needs everything....maybe some reaper drones would be nice to have ..

maybe some sidewinder 20km torps with 90 mph speed would be nice ..

also a new slot to put them in ..

needs the dispersion buffed by about 20% ..shells themselves need a buff its like shooting marshmallows at something ..

definitely needs radar the 20km kind 

i could go on but its game time ..

if they added those few measly things then wows would make my gamming experience a pleasurable experience ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by arch4random
no reason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
300
Members
697 posts
8,733 battles
3 hours ago, arch4random said:

tier X republique has nothing and needs everything....maybe some reaper drones would be nice to have ..

maybe some sidewinder 20km torps with 90 mph speed would be nice ..

also a new slot to put them in ..

needs the dispersion buffed by about 20% ..shells themselves need a buff its like shooting marshmallows at something ..

definitely needs radar the 20km kind 

i could go on but its game time ..

if they added those few measly things then wows would make my gamming experience a pleasurable experience ...

Not really tweaks, but I haven't had much issue with my Republique.  Don't have many games in it though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,279
[SIM]
Members
5,908 posts
9,432 battles

Oklahoma, Ochakov, (maybe) Marco Polo, Fen Yang, Indianapolis, and Z-35 are the first ships that come to mind, though I’d need to check their performance stats to make sure that I’m not mistaking “feels bad” for “is bad.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
437
[AC1]
Members
246 posts
380 battles

The whole British CL line needs some help, though I'm not sure what form that help should take.  Better protection against citadels would be nice, so they arent getting deleted in one salvo.  The lack of HE shells really hurts them against larger ships.  A boost to handling/speed or reduction in detectability might be appropriate too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
202
[DRAH]
Members
462 posts
11,325 battles

The brit CL line is very strong from Leander onwards they just need to be played as oversized DDs rather than traditional cruisers. Fiji and Minotaur in particular as still monsters. If there is a british cruiser in desperate need of buffs it is the start of the heavy cruiser line, Hawkins. It is a terrible ship more suited to Tier 4 than T5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
404
[SPTR]
Members
4,021 posts
1,021 battles

I think all the ships that lost their gimmick due to power creep need to get touched up.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
300
Members
697 posts
8,733 battles
13 hours ago, Lynx7386 said:

The whole British CL line needs some help, though I'm not sure what form that help should take.  Better protection against citadels would be nice, so they arent getting deleted in one salvo.  The lack of HE shells really hurts them against larger ships.  A boost to handling/speed or reduction in detectability might be appropriate too. 

 

12 hours ago, Ellyh said:

The brit CL line is very strong from Leander onwards they just need to be played as oversized DDs rather than traditional cruisers. Fiji and Minotaur in particular as still monsters. If there is a british cruiser in desperate need of buffs it is the start of the heavy cruiser line, Hawkins. It is a terrible ship more suited to Tier 4 than T5.

I love the Leander, waited for a long time for it.  It's definitely one of my goto Tier 6's. Fiji is amazing, even without HE.  The only one I felt was kind of meh, was the Ed at Tier 8.  The Neptune and Minotaur are great.  My only wish for the Minotaur, would be a little more range. Maybe 16.5. with mods. I get I think 19 out of my Neptune, but it's barely usable at that range. I mean they could possibly heal a slight amount more perhaps, but if you are getting deleted in one volley, you were in a bad spot to begin with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
530
[KAPPA]
Members
1,610 posts
8,960 battles

Every formerly workable secondary build ship in the game (which is most of them). Any BB with a reload longer than 32-34 seconds, especially if it's a fat slow tub that can't get out of a bad position and can barely make it to a good position before a battle ends.

And, because controversy is fun and engaging, CVs. No, seriously, CVs are honestly a miserable experience to play in co-op. I admit that they might still be usable in randoms and other PvP modes, but the meta in those is garbage for the kind of fighting that I find fun, so I gave up on them long ago. In co-op, CVs are exceedingly difficult to do well in, you basically need your team to fail to get a match that you can earn xp and credits from. There's got to be a way to give CVs a buff that either only works in co-op modes or makes them less horrible to play in a short duration battle while not making them OP in long duration random battles. I wanted to like the CV rework because it made them accessible for a person that is not a RTS wizard, and for about a week or two, it was genuinely fun and somewhat balanced in co-op. Then the nerfs came in hard and heavy with no regard for how they affected modes other than random battles. The one nerf that truly gutted my CVs was the flooding chance and duration nerf. Pretty much everything else was tolerable, but once I lost my ability to reliably cause flooding damage, I just about lost my ability to kill anything with a CV unless I time a drop just right and pretty much steal a kill from someone else (which I do in fact find distasteful). The best idea I can think of for something to make CVs worthwhile in co-op and not absolutely break them for randoms is to dramatically increase the reward for spotting damage for CVs, thus encouraging them to spot targets and allowing another way to earn some kind of meaningful score that makes them not a massive credit and xp leech for a co-op player. It's bad when simply not losing credits in a match is considered doing well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×