General Criticisms - Game is nowhere near ready for launch

[Command0Dude]

I have a LARGE number of complaints with this game, and I mean, honestly? Anything that typically gets me to rage quit after 1 or 2 matches (didn't used to be this way, but I've gotten so fed up with this game I constantly consider uninstalling until it gets fixed and I just don't feel like dealing with the grind) is going to bomb hard in general release. I'll wager to guess that the state of the GD sub-forum mirrors my general dissatisfaction with the game (I said in the CBT forum that people were going to be [edited]once this thing went public and damn was I right).

 

I'm going to organize this with my most important points first.

 

-Time to Kill.

 

Anyone familiar with this phrase knows it's essentially a game dev. term used to describe how quickly it takes to kill someone, which depends on a few relatively simple individual factors that interact with each other incredibly complexly. It's a rather nebulous term because its hard to define what it should be for each individual game. In Call of Duty for instance, TTK is very low, a short burst from most automatic weapons will kill you nearly instantly - but that's okay, because you respawn in seconds and the gameplay is very fast paced. In World Of Tanks, the TTK is much longer (though not by any means "long"), this is because the game has much more strategic depth and a lack of ability to respawn.

 

What is the TTK for WoWs like? Well, aside from generally being all over the place due to RNG, it's on average, far too short in my opinion. Almost none of these ships FEEL like ships, they feel like paper models, Destroyers quite literally pop in a few hits, Battleships are tinder boxes, back in CBT before BBs had their guns bent a Cruiser could often expect to lose half their HP in a single salvo of AP shells hitting their Citadel once or twice. Secondary Batteries are so useless that if a destroyer manages to get within 5km of you, you're generally going to die with half a dozen torps to the face, and HE is in turn going to be murdered just afterwards because he was forced to close to suicidal ranges just to even launch his torps.

 

This is a game, where a considerably large amount of play time is spent just getting into position and if you make even a small mistake and get caught too far from your team, or run into too many enemy ships, you simply can't retreat - because you're already dead.

 

What's worse is the damned citadel mechanic. A lucky shot (and lets not call it anything other than luck - dispersion prevents actual skill) can see most of your health gone from a long range shot right at the start of a match. Sure in World of Tanks if you lose most of your health from a lucky hit at the beginning of a match, it sucks, but 1) You can still make use of terrain and ambush tactics to avoid enemy fire while still being effective and 2) You can get into a new match MUCH faster than WoWs. In WoWs, you take a big hit at the beginning of the game, you might as well be OUT, because you've just been relegated to camping the back of your team and praying you don't get noticed while you try to put in some long range fire (okay, I do exaggerate a little). My point being, the damage difference for most shells, (anywhere from 0, to 400, to 4000, to 10000 damage), couple with dispersion, coupled with relatively low HP threshold, mean that RNG is a huge deciding factor in WoWs gameplay. It's frustrating to the nth degree.

 

Basically, all artillery across the board needs to be nerfed in terms of damage by a bit. Citadel damage needs to be nerfed a lot. HP needs to be raised across all classes, additionally I think the game would benefit if all classes could recover some of their HP by being out of combat for a certain amount of time.

 

-High Explosive

 

Look, stop making excuses, it's overpowered. HE is killing this game, there is no defense against it, it offers guaranteed and frankly really powerful DPM, which when coupled with Cruiser's insane rate of fire allows jarringly lopsided battles. Cruisers absolutely annihilate Destroyers, and can go toe to toe with Battleships in ease. If HE was 20% stronger and always guaranteed to knock out a module in WoT, people would be raving across those forums (it's bad enough looking at the damage potential of arty, but that's neither here nor there, those classes and other 'derp' types are limited by poor accuracy and lousy DPM). HE was never meant to be used in ship to ship combat like this - it should be reserved for the niche case of fighting destroyers, hitting the super structure to do module damage, and giving Cruisers the ability to do some damage at close range when they can't penetrate BB armor belts. AP should be the go to ammunition of choice, there should not be some kind of parity or balance between HE or AP. There certainly isn't in WoT.

 

-Repair Mechanics

 

They're almost stupidly simple. You can lose every single module on your ship, and have them all instantly repaired, but for the next minute (give or take depending on class) you are absolutely hosed. Lit fires? Sit and burn, your repair ability will be up faster than a repair crew can put it out, same for flooding, steering damage, or engine troubles. What...the...hell? There is no thought here at all, it's lazy design. Battlestations Midway had a more engaging, more strategically in depth repair system than this game, and it's almost 10 years old. If you take module damage, you should need to direct your repair crews to prioritize what you want fixed. Remove the Repair Crew as it is entirely. Catastrophic module damage should take time to fix, minor fires should be put out with ease.

 

-Ships are horribly balanced

 

Lets not mince meat. Destroyers (especially the American ones) need to be practically suicidal. Battleships are hilarously impotent due to not being able to hit anything. Pinpoint long range firepower has made Cruisers stupidly powerful (able to go toe to toe with battleships and win hands down). Carriers are impervious to AA now.

 

Let's talk about Carriers, I have the biggest beef with them. Look, in ANY strike run, you should expect to lose planes against a SINGLE ship before you even drop your payload. If that's not happening, players will not feel like their AA is even accomplishing anything. Charging into a massed fleet should net you significant losses. The changes to the Repair system should encourage Carrier players to group their attack craft together, instead of exploiting a stupid cooldown to send their squadrons in staggered onto a target. I also feel like the way squadrons are structured is entirely wrong. Carriers should have the versatility to deploy extra fighters, or extra bombers, as they want, not from the harbor screen, additionally they should be given more reserve aircraft to compensate for the fact that aircraft attrition should be higher. The historical selling point of Carriers was versatility and that isn't represented. Lastly, torpedo planes should behave like torpedo planes (ie no more flying through mountains, and dive bombing targets at their drop points).

 

Destroyers. The American ones need to have their torpedo ranges increased. The Japanese ones need to have their turret rotations increased. These ships should not have such crippling overspecialization that they need to be suicidal - Destroyers should not be forced into point blank launches, or be incapable of using their guns to defend themselves. Additionally, their smokescreens need to be restored. Oh and by the way, I want to be able to manually drop my torps one at a time if I feel like it. This salvo thing is dumb and arbitrary.

 

Battleships can't hit the broadside of the barn, they're big dumb, lumbering XP pinatas at this point. They frankly resemble the TOG of WoT, they're incapable of acting alone, and while frightening in a pack, are usually preyed upon more than preyed by. There's been a lot said about the state of Battleship gameplay at the moment, so I don't feel like I can make any points that haven't already been said. The worst part of their gameplay is that they're simply too RNG dependent.

 

Cruisers...christ. What happened here? They're OP. Cruisers should not be going toe to toe with a battleship and just straight up winning without an effort. I don't think it's the fault of Cruisers specifically, it's just that WG went and overbuffed HE so now it gets spammed all day and Battleships are forced to burn forever due to the crappy Repair mechanic, meanwhile, BB dispersion was nerfed and now they can't hit anything. I don't really feel like Cruisers need to be changed so much as they will naturally return to their proper state in balance if other things are addressed. And no, getting instamurdered by a BB every once in awhile because RNGesus handed him a lucky salvo does not mean Cruisers aren't OP.

 

-Ships don't feel like ships

 

They turn like toys. They stop and speed up...less like toys, but still too much like not being a ship. Tactics make no coherent sense as Crossing your own T is actually MORE beneficial to you than presenting the side of your ship (mostly because of ludicrous citadel damage)...like, the hell?

 

-Cap mechanics are horrible

 

Too many games are ending where most of the team is still alive due to the fact capping is too easy. This is a game where all players are in slow ships. Even destroyers are relatively slow. A light tank in WoT can get across an entire map and reset a lone person in their team's cap without difficulty, the same is not true of Destroyers and WoWs. It's even worse for Battleships or Cruisers. Winning by capping should of course be viable, but right now it's too hard to return to cap, and let's not even start on domination mode. The common response to this point is "well people should consider the map and not lemming!" yet this is a game which all too harshly punishes independent action and encourages lemming together, because individual ships which are spotted by massed fleets get shredded (due to that TTK thing I mentioned earlier).

 

Let me sum up the list of changes I would like to see:

(tl;dr)

 

* Repair System:

-Scrap it completely as is.

-Module repair should decrease to compensate.

-Module repair should decrease further if you designate certain problems as priority tasks (repair time on non-priority modules increases)

-No more permanently destroyable modules.

 

*General Battle System

-Reduce the average damage of AP rounds somewhat, reduce the maximum (citadel) damage of AP rounds more. Same for HE but at a higher ratio (fire chance does not need to be nerfed imo if Repair system is overhauled).

-General increase of HP for all ship classes, 5% for BBs, 10% for CA/CV, 15% for DDs (as a baseline for what proportions should look like).

-All ships which have sustained battle damage, recover a % (perhaps 10-20%) of damage dealt if no further damage is taken after a minute (or so).

-General nerf to all ship's turn radius by an average amount (at least to pre-buff state). General minimal nerf to all ship's rudder shift time.

-General buff to all AA batteries, increase their damage somewhat, increase minimum range, especially on dual-purpose guns.

-General buff to secondary batteries, all batteries have minimum 5km range, with up to 7km range by tier 10. Slight buff to accuracy. Introduce mechanic by which accuracy increases overtime until guns stop firing at a target.

-General buff to main turret rotation. (In this case, much more for BBs and Jap DDs, while some for Cruisers. American DDs may remain untouched)

-Introduce mechanic to return main turrets to neutral starting position, and to preset different turrets in different directions.

-Remove the fighter ability of scouts, make them controllable. Additionally, make it so they can be recalled, and recovered.

-Introduce a listing mechanic (it would really help with balancing torpedoes - this can be delayed and its absence I don't think kills the game, WoT didn't have physics at one time and it survived).

-General Experience Increase for: Shooting down planes, concealing allies, defending allies, resetting capture points

-Reduce speed of capture point gain, with special penalty against destroyers

 

*Class Specific changes

CV:

-Increase Squadron amount by 1 for all carriers

-Increase reserve aircraft amount

-Modular Squadron deployments (Additionally, I would like to see a mechanic where squadrons can have their load outs switched, fighters with light bombs, bombers with light torpedoes, etc)

-Damage buff to Bombers (increase fire chance and AA damage chance)

-Increase recovery and launch time of squadrons (no more launching a whole squadron at once, you need to launch each individual plane at once)

-Nerf Torpedo deployment immunity (Torpedo squadrons required to become more vulnerable to AA on attack run - lower altitude, cannot deploy near coastline)

 

BB:

-Tighten gun dispersion

-Increase range on low tier BBs

-Increase RoF slightly

 

CA:

-Lower gun range of all Cruisers marginally

-Increase performance of dual purpose guns in anti-air role

-Nerf the "panic" caused by the AA ability

-Increase torpedo range on Cruisers, and marginally increase torpedo arc

 

DD:

-Decrease shell flight time

-Increase torpedo ranges (1km minimum for ADD, .5km JDD)

-Increase turret rotation and reload speed (JDD)

-Return smoke to pre-nerf status

-Decrease camo value bonus, while firing

-Introduce "minimum detection" range, any ship within 2km (or so) is automatically detected.

-Increase torpedo damage (offsets BB's increase in secondary battery effectiveness, with expectation torps will be launched more often at further range - might need experimenting with)

-Increase torpedo loading time marginally

 

*Maps

-Increase size of straights and corridors (seriously, many of these places are WAY too narrow)

-Introduce objective based gameplay (eventually)

[W4lt3r]

@ DD changes

 

Shell flight time is already long for destroyers. It's insanely high for mid-high tier US DD's with the 5" Mk 22 (iirc) DP guns. IJN has bit less travel time due to the muzzle velocity and lower arc.

Pre-nerf smoke was bit too ridiculous. I'd rather say keep the current lingering time of the smoke but for US give them 45s activation duration and 30s longer lingering time. IJN retains at current smoke (Fubuki driver, I rarely have to use my smoke)
Firing guns in a DD pretty much instantly detects you already.

What do you mean with increased torpedo ranges? Shortest torpedo for IJN is 6km by my memory in the stock Mutsuki and avg stock is 7 to 10km. US is at 4.5km due to the abysmal Mark 13 torpedo. I could see small increase in this or then a buff in maneuverability / camouflage as well for USN DD's. Or then reduced visibility time for USN DD's if they fire their main guns since those are their main go to weapon.

Minimum detection range is in game but is currently set to 1.5 or 1km range.

Torpedo damage is fine.

Torpedo reload time should be increased in tiers 2 to 5 but reduced in tiers 6 and up.

Also torpedoes shouldn't be spotted by aircraft (CV will become a meta class in the end. This is just to ensure it wont kill off IJN DD's at least)

 

for CAs -

Gun range is fine. What CA's need is drastic loss in accuracy at ranges over 11km so they cannot too effectively fight against battleships at max range.

DP guns do need a base DPS buff. US ones especially due to VT Fuse.

Defensive fire is fine. Maybe increase cooldown from current 120s and 180s to 150s (prem) and 210s (regular)

Torpedoes are fine. They're not the main deal of IJN Cruisers. Torpedo arc is historical.

[H_Guderinyan]

I agree with some complaints, the flawed repair system and such. Capping patches of water is rather...meh.

 

Fighter scouts are also quite [edited]in how effective they are.

 

AA I think I'll keep the jury out on it still, due to how horribly balanced CVs themselves are.

CVs should be the most feared thing in a battle, but amongst themselves they are horribly imbalanced. Having an IJN or USN CV on your team is almost like two different classes.

[Judge_Doom]

The biggest complaints that I have so far is that the amount of xp earned per battle seems to be terribly low, thereby making the grinds very slow, it just seems very unbalanced for some of the amounts of damage and ships sunk etc that can be done, the reward does not equal the effort.  The other complaint I have is this thing with all the fires and no real way of combatting them, put one fire out,  start the wait for your repair kit to re-charge and as soon as the first fire is out another one starts and no way of fighting it so in turn you burn down to nothing and sunk/destroyed.  Lets not even talk about the poor accuracy of some of the BB guns and the difference in spread/dispersion on them, if it is RNG induced as it is in WOT, then it needs a severe fix and quickly.

[Noshiro_]

Judge_Doom, on 15 July 2015 - 08:34 PM, said:

The biggest complaints that I have so far is that the amount of xp earned per battle seems to be terribly low, thereby making the grinds very slow, it just seems very unbalanced for some of the amounts of damage and ships sunk etc that can be done, the reward does not equal the effort. 

 

Are you playing PvE or PvP?

 

Scratch that, yes you are. Select random battles to the right of the battle button.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SteelUnicorn]

The biggest complaints that I have so far is that the amount of xp earned per battle seems to be terribly low, thereby making the grinds very slow, it just seems very unbalanced for some of the amounts of damage and ships sunk etc that can be done, the reward does not equal the effort.  The other complaint I have is this thing with all the fires and no real way of combatting them, put one fire out,  start the wait for your repair kit to re-charge and as soon as the first fire is out another one starts and no way of fighting it so in turn you burn down to nothing and sunk/destroyed.  Lets not even talk about the poor accuracy of some of the BB guns and the difference in spread/dispersion on them, if it is RNG induced as it is in WOT, then it needs a severe fix and quickly.

 

I average 1200 to 2k xp per game when I'm on point, and 1 to 1.5k when I'm having a bad game. The grind is abot the same between the two games if you play average. If you're a good player, the XP you gain is absurd. Use the +50% XP flags, it gets even more stupid (I've had non-first win games in the Warspite that shove past 4k XP netted.)

 

I don't see what your problem is. The grind isn't too bad for me so far.

[Noshiro_]

 

I average 1200 to 2k xp per game when I'm on point, and 1 to 1.5k when I'm having a bad game. The grind is abot the same between the two games if you play average. If you're a good player, the XP you gain is absurd. Use the +50% XP flags, it gets even more stupid (I've had non-first win games in the Warspite that shove past 4k XP netted.)

 

I don't see what your problem is. The grind isn't too bad for me so far.

 

That's because this is him

http://worldofwarships.com/en/community/accounts/1004348828-Judge_Doom

[FuyuzuKii]

Noshiro, the best edumacator since sliced bread.

 

 

 

wait wrong metaphor

[Command0Dude]

Snip

 

My bad, I meant to say decrease DD shell flight time, atm it is too long and that makes it hard to use.

 

For torpedoes, I mean exactly what I mean, they need to have more range (and it would be nice to see customizable speed, basically more speed/less range vice versa) the current ranges are too short, especially for the Americans. It's suicidal short.

 

Smoke did not need to be nerfed imo, it is/was the only defense destroyers have

 

Regarding cruisers, I have no idea if it is possible to implement worse range at 11+km while keeping its close range accuracy. If possible I would support that over a direct nerf to max possible firing range.

 

The defensive fire power would be too powerful considering the general aa buff I'm asking for, so it would need to be nerfed.

[Snoozer]

I don't understand why you think BB should not be set on fire, should not take any damage from anything other then a battleships and then those BB shells should always land on target.

You think ships unrealistic toys because they turn too fast, stop and go too fast, but then you want unrealistic turret turn rates??? and you don't want fire to knock out your turrets? that's too realistic?

 

On your BB you have a magic spell you can cast every 60seconds to close all underwater holes and put of all fires. Realist BB rarely hit anything, most shells were misses.

 

I can't say anything about crying because that is forbidden and it will make you sad, but just because you lost doesn't mean the game is broken. When you drop tons and tons of HE on a BB "JUST LIKE IN THE WORLD WAR TWOSSS!! the BB starts on fire.

 

Just like in real life

 

Just like in real life

 

Just like the ships in the WORLD WAR TWOS!!

 

Being purple and 35,000 games in WOTS if seen team lose 7-8 tier ten tanks in 2-3 minutes so this TTK thing you're talking about maybe a bit off.

 

Sometimes a Battleship take a hit and explodes ( HMS HOOD source= THE WORLD WAR TWOS!!!)

 

 

Sometimes cruisers set the entire length of a battleship on fire ( KM Scharnhorst source= THE WORLD WAR TWOS!!!)

 

 

Sometimes 4 torps hit a BB and it flips over and explodes ( HMS Barham  source= THE WORLD WAR TWOS!!)

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TD0d_J4y_s4

[Command0Dude]

I don't understand why you think BB should not be set on fire, should not take any damage from anything other then a battleships and then those BB shells should always land on target.

 

Never said that, never said that, never said that either. Wow, you're bad at this.

 

 You think ships unrealistic toys because they turn too fast, stop and go too fast, but then you want unrealistic turret turn rates??? and you don't want fire to knock out your turrets? that's too realistic?

 

For JDD I know the turret turn rates are slower than the real values. For BBs I don't know. However WG official policy regarding historical accuracy is that it takes a back seat to gameplay. There is no compelling reason for ships to turn so fast, it devalues torpedo gameplay that's for sure, and breaks immersion in my opinion. Whereas if ships can literally make a 180 turn faster than their guns I think that's a problem.

 

As for knocked out guns. Again, gameplay. WoT does not feature permanently disable anything, including guns. I would support a "more severe disabled" state, in which a turret might be knocked out for say, a minute if a huge amount of damage was done.

 

 On your BB you have a magic spell you can cast every 60seconds to close all underwater holes and put of all fires. Realist BB rarely hit anything, most shells were misses.

 

All ships had damage repair ability, especially battleships. No magic. Also, I suggested giving a portion of this power to all classes.

 

 I can't say anything about crying because that is forbidden and it will make you sad, but just because you lost doesn't mean the game is broken.

 

Oh look, the "I'm an alpha, I'm better than everyone else!" attitude. Hey, just because there are people good at Candy Crush doesn't mean Candy Crush isn't a horrible, soul stealing corpse of a game.

 

Leave the petty, childish accusations at the door.

 

[Snoozer]

IJN Yamashiro Set on fire after a few hits...

 

 

 

 

At 03:52, the battleship was attacked by a large formation to the north commanded by Rear Admiral Jesse Oldendorf. First came 6- and 8-inch (200 mm) shells from three heavy cruisers, Louisville, Portland, and Minneapolis, and four light cruisers, Denver, Columbia, Phoenix and Boise.^[37] Six battleships formed a battle line; the Pearl Harbor veteran West Virginia was the first to open fire a minute later, scoring at least one hit with 16-inch (410 mm) shells in the first 20,800-meter (22,700 yd) salvo,^[38] followed by Tennessee and California. Hampered by older radar equipment, Maryland joined the fight late, Pennsylvania never fired,^[39] and Mississippi managed to fire exactly one salvo—the last of the engagement. The Australian heavy cruiser HMAS Shropshire also had radar problems and did not begin firing until 03:56.^[40]

The main bombardment lasted 18 minutes, and Yamashiro was the only target for seven of them.^[41] The first rounds hit the forecastle and pagoda mast, and soon the entire battleship appeared to be ablaze.

 

 

 

 

[Noshiro_]

Noshiro, the best edumacator since sliced bread.

 

 

 

wait wrong metaphor

 

Best edumacator

[Command0Dude]

IJN Yamashiro Set on fire after a few hits...

 

Never said BBs shouldn't be set on fire. You seem really intent on making strawmen to burn though.

 

Try again?

[Snoozer]

IJN Kirishima set on fire....

 

 

 

When the Japanese illuminated and fired on South Dakota, all doubts were removed as to which ships were friend or foe. From this close range, Washington opened fire and quickly hit Kirishima with at least nine main battery shells and almost forty secondary ones, causing heavy damage and setting her aflame. Kirishima was hit below the waterline and suffered a jammed rudder, causing her to circle uncontrollably to port.

[Sirus_Patton]

I do disagree slightly with cruisers.  Even their range is fine (save the 20% range increase skill for 6" guns).  In actuality, the problems with them only come from light cruisers spamming nothing but HE while heavy cruisers still do better against a BB firing AP (provided the player knows where to aim).  Even the AA ability is now situational, and many times I think it's better to take the hydroacoustic ability on IJN CAs to assist in destroyer hunting, but requires no nerf as it's the major defense of a combined fleet against a CVs attacks.  What I don't understand is that they lowered fire chances and damage of 5" and smaller HE rounds (destroyer guns) in 4.0, yet left the largest of the offenders (the 6" rapid fire cruiser guns) alone.  I understand that WG doesn't want these games to run the whole duration of the battle (Russian server games last about 8 minutes on average, as everyone rushes into the middle of the map and blasts away rather than doing anything tactical) but the current fire mechanics just aren't fun unless you're the individual setting the fire.

 

For a note, destroyers high explosive vulnerability is fine.  If that was to be nerfed, you would need to re-add the ability to score a citadel hit on a destroyer and deal max AP damage to it because HE is literally the only viable ammo against them.

[CRAZYxMICK]

You are sighting history and that's great but are you undstanding what you are writing.  The fires you  referenced were cosed by ap exploding inside the ship making internal fires very deadly.  As far as HE that can't penateate the armor its just superficial yes AA and other deck items will be out of action, but you can light the deck of a ship on fire and it will sail on with little regard to it. 

[Schlachtkreuzer_]

They can set my BB's alight all they want, the real problem is the amount of damage the ship receives because of this fires. Like the HE in WOWS acts, one can be forgiven when you assume that they are filled with gasoline. They act more like cocktail bombs.

[Snoozer]

Oh.... So you're saying that 1 or 2 rounds of AP should set your battleship into an uncontrollable blaze?

[Schlachtkreuzer_]

I do disagree slightly with cruisers.  Even their range is fine (save the 20% range increase skill for 6" guns).  In actuality, the problems with them only come from light cruisers spamming nothing but HE while heavy cruisers still do better against a BB firing AP (provided the player knows where to aim).  Even the AA ability is now situational, and many times I think it's better to take the hydroacoustic ability on IJN CAs to assist in destroyer hunting, but requires no nerf as it's the major defense of a combined fleet against a CVs attacks.  What I don't understand is that they lowered fire chances and damage of 5" and smaller HE rounds (destroyer guns) in 4.0, yet left the largest of the offenders (the 6" rapid fire cruiser guns) alone.  I understand that WG doesn't want these games to run the whole duration of the battle (Russian server games last about 8 minutes on average, as everyone rushes into the middle of the map and blasts away rather than doing anything tactical) but the current fire mechanics just aren't fun unless you're the individual setting the fire.

 

For a note, destroyers high explosive vulnerability is fine.  If that was to be nerfed, you would need to re-add the ability to score a citadel hit on a destroyer and deal max AP damage to it because HE is literally the only viable ammo against them.

Cruisers are fine regarding the ranges..... except the range on the Atlanta....NEEDS A BUFF  

[J30_Reinhardt]

Mother of wall of texts. I'll need to read that the next time I visit the facilities or on my next 15hr flight to Africa...

[lordelamin]

Don't argue with the OP, just went to his personal page and saw were he has a lot of neg's. Right or wrong, he likes to argue. Looked at his page were his battles are rated, and for 127 recorded battles at this time, he is doing well as an IJN DD captain, and not too shabby in his CA's. The OP has a nice win rate, and it is better than mine currently. Matter of fact, all his stats are better than mine. My thing is this: You only have 3 games in BB's , and no games in CV's so what do you base your opinion on them with? 

 

Consider this:

 

You are 12 kilometers away from your target on a moving surface in some BB vs BB action. You are detected just like your target, you hope you're smarter than the target, you adjust your aim ahead of the target and fire your 12 inch guns. at the same time, you see his shot coming at you. Do you just sit there moving in a predictable straight line, or do you try to vary your speed, maybe move in a zigzag motion? Figure in that it's going to take a bit to reload your rounds, and that maybe HE  is not the round you need for the job. Getting your teeth kicked in? Run.

 

As for CV's, the player base has gotten wise, you can't just launch and forget anymore, you have to manually aim a lot more now. I play a lot more of the aerial deniable  type of game were I'm focusing on killing the bombers more than ships now. Have not played them much at all since the wipe. Also you CV's need to be mobile, can't just sit around.

 

As you say, a lot of time can be spent just getting into position were you may still lose the battle. You advocate larger straights, I don't know were I stand on that one.

 

[Schlachtkreuzer_]

Mother of wall of texts. I'll need to read that the next time I visit the facilities or on my next 15hr flight to Africa...

 

Did you read the previous 500 posts about how broken the games is? If "yes", then no need to bother reading this one. Always same old same old. If all the players who get on the forums to rage quit would actually quit then we would have a pretty quite game for ourselves, which suits me.

[Noshiro_]

Cruisers are fine regarding the ranges..... except the range on the Atlanta....NEEDS A BUFF  

 

No. You should get closer then, Atlanta doesn't need to be buffed.

[Schlachtkreuzer_]

 

No. You should get closer then, Atlanta doesn't need to be buffed.

 

........"Sarcasm".....