The BB vs DD Debate

[Lensar]

 

A big part of the DD vs BB debate is that each group tends to have their own perspective that comes to mind when they picture DDs in battle.

 

Ask most BB players what they think about DDs, and they immediately picture a scene in mid to late game, when each team has half or less ships left and most are spread out across the map. The BB player then pictures a DD coming in, out of nowhere, dropping torps at them, then turning hiding off in the distance and waiting 2-3 minutes for reload then doing it again. They think this is DD game play.

 

Ask most high-tier DD players what they think about DDs, and they immediately picture a scene at the start of the match. When the DDs are expected/ordered to drive forward into the cap points before any enemies have even been spotted, with no idea what enemy ships will suddenly appear in front of them. They usually picture getting into a knife-fight with one or more enemy DDs, then coming under cruiser fire, followed by them dropping smoke and running for their lives. Then they'll imagine being radared, and revealed, and still being hit from any number of ships and getting knocked out of the game. This is what they think about when others argue DDs are "easy mode" and operate from the "complete safety" of concealment.

 

Is either view more right than the other? Technically, no. But what the anti-DD crowd needs to realize is that any DD that lived long enough to reach the mid to late game to do whatever it is they do there, already had to beat some very significant odds just to make it that far.

 

DD players need to understand that when balancing DDs, how they perform in the mid/late game needs to also be taken into account.

 

BB players need to understand that when balancing DDs, how they perform at the precarious opening moments of a match, needs to also be taken into account.

 

In general, the longer a concealment DD is alive in a match, the more powerful it becomes.

 

[Ace_04]

No argument here.

[Lonewolfpj]

yep that about sums it up

[DoomStomper]

No arguments here either.

 

Even as a primarily battleship and cruiser player (used to enjoy DD's a lot more in closed beta) I've never considered the little guys to be unfair or overpowered.

 

Also, INB4 Craptain Kitty's inevitably hilarious two cents...

[centarina]

Most  BBer are snipe/campers while avoiding close engagement and being worried about  being put on fire  while driving in straight line with eye glued to the scope as they wait out 30 sec between shots, then rage when they get hit by torps, whether from  Plane or DD.

 

Most DDers are either Yolo torper or   stealther with capping as secondary work, who rages when better players wipes them.

 

more skilled players for either class is not a problem 

 

 

 

[FratStar4Life]

Do we really need another thread about your views on DDs? You are like the StationaryAA of DDs, give it up... 

[PelicanHazard]

No argument here. It's logical some players develop those views considering most BBs are not in front for the opening push and so don't meet DDs until after the DDs survive the beginning of the match.

[Canadatron]

Pretty much. You have to survive long enough to make it to "easy mode", but getting there isn't as easy as many imply. I've pretty much stopped IJN/Concealment DD play, moved on over to the least favourite DD tree in VMF gun boats. I just hate that people lump all 3 of the Destroyer trees into one ball under the blanket statement of "Nerf DDs" when they just really wanna wail about IJN ones stealing their lunch.

[Personator]

However, I still believe that BBs need to have something to help them detect DDs if there are no cruisers/DDs/CVs left on their team alive. At the high tiers, it's more of a one-sided fight when it's a battle between a DD and a BB. Just like how CVs at high tiers get their own defensive AA, BBs need an anti-DD thing when they're the last ones alive

 

[scruffycavetroll]

I play both, both are immensely fun and pretty much the opposite of each other. Some of the most 'tense' moments I've had were in DD's simply because you're pretty much paper and need to be really careful. 

 

The one thing I will say is that, I think that in general people should really start to learn that they really should be moving as fast as the slowest member of their 'group', then when enemies are spotted, the fast movers should start to break off. Just something that I remember from the old MechCommander games. If you had an assault mech and a bunch of lights and moved them in a group, they'd all be at the speed of the assault. 

 

I think groups in WoWs should function similarly. 

 

The other problem is, to many people are overly concerned about stats and personal gains than playing 'correctly'. 

[PelicanHazard]

However, I still believe that BBs need to have something to help them detect DDs if there are no cruisers/DDs/CVs left on their team alive. At the high tiers, it's more of a one-sided fight when it's a battle between a DD and a BB. Just like how CVs at high tiers get their own defensive AA, BBs need an anti-DD thing when they're the last ones alive

 

Pretty sure this is why they created the Manual Secondaries skill. Pop a plane, spot the thing, shift click for fireworks.

 

Or, y'know, since WG wants some RPS going on, if the game got to this point they'd probably shrug their shoulders and say your team made mistakes to get there. Dunno.

[xEvilReeperx]

Is either view more right than the other? Technically, no. But what the anti-DD crowd needs to realize is that any DD that lived long enough to reach the mid to late game to do whatever it is they do there, already had to beat some very significant odds just to make it that far.

[snip]

In general, the longer a concealment DD is alive in a match, the more powerful it becomes.

So if I drive my DD into the corner of the map, avoiding everyone until mid-late game, I've overcome significant odds? Hmmm no. You get to choose your risks, and you can certainly choose to operate in complete safety and dump torps at long range in later tiers if you want to. That style of gameplay is bland and uninteresting, especially for the target if there's no friendly CV around to stop you, so it got nerfed a bit

[Personator]

 

Pretty sure this is why they created the Manual Secondaries skill. Pop a plane, spot the thing, shift click for fireworks.

 

Or, y'know, since WG wants some RPS going on, if the game got to this point they'd probably shrug their shoulders and say your team made mistakes to get there. Dunno.

 

That's only if the DD gets too dangerously close to the BB or he's doing a suicide run. Otherwise, they're useless. 

[centarina]

However, I still believe that BBs need to have something to help them detect DDs if there are no cruisers/DDs/CVs left on their team alive. At the high tiers, it's more of a one-sided fight when it's a battle between a DD and a BB. Just like how CVs at high tiers get their own defensive AA, BBs need an anti-DD thing when they're the last ones alive

 

its called real life situational awareness.     

[Lensar]

So if I drive my DD into the corner of the map, avoiding everyone until mid-late game, I've overcome significant odds?

 

Not yet you haven't, but you soon will, since it's likely the rest of your team is getting beat down and by the time you join the battle, you're going to be extremely out-numbered.

 

On average, DDs that hide in the corner (in over 3k games I've never actually seen that happen, not even once, mind you) will not benefit from the increased power that comes the longer they survive in a match, because their team is more likely to fall behind.

[Montana_Prussian]

Do we really need another thread about your views on DDs? You are like the StationaryAA of DDs, give it up... 

 

This^^^^. No more need be said.

[Lensar]

Just like how CVs at high tiers get their own defensive AA, BBs need an anti-DD thing when they're the last ones alive

 

By that reasoning, would you also think that DDs should get some anti-AA thing when they're the last ones alive and CV planes are swarming them?

[Lensar]

 

This^^^^. No more need be said.

 

Yet, you still felt compelled to post!

[tremor3258]

Well said.  The more friendly DDs lingering over enemy, the easier your team's late game is.

 

(Generally)

[MadCaptain_2016]

[BlazerSparta]

 

By that reasoning, would you also think that DDs should get some anti-AA thing when they're the last ones alive and CV planes are swarming them?

 

CV design is just absolute crap.

 

Ships that are powerful late game should have a weak early game, and obstacles to prevent them from reaching that late game power spike.

 

As OP pointed out, DDs have a strong late game when their targets are isolated, but have to survive a dicey early game where a lot of DDs tend to die.

 

CVs don't have to deal with that. CVs have strong utility early game, which just transitions to strong utility+offensive ability late game.

[Skpstr]

Do we really need another thread about your views on DDs? You are like the StationaryAA of DDs, give it up... 

 

LOL!

 

Maybe he'll pay you to coach him.....

[Personator]

 

By that reasoning, would you also think that DDs should get some anti-AA thing when they're the last ones alive and CV planes are swarming them?

 

Pretty much yeah. If one thing gets something, every1 else has to get something as well. Just a suggestion though.

[Personator]

 

CV design is just absolute crap.

 

Ships that are powerful late game should have a weak early game, and obstacles to prevent them from reaching that late game power spike.

 

As OP pointed out, DDs have a strong late game when their targets are isolated, but have to survive a dicey early game where a lot of DDs tend to die.

 

CVs don't have to deal with that. CVs have strong utility early game, which just transitions to strong utility+offensive ability late game.

 

Actually they have a fairly weak early game much like the DDs. In the early-game, it's pretty much a contest over who will get air supremacy (whoever still has fighters remaining). They can attack, but not as well with enemy fighters running free. Much like how DDs are deterred from attacking directly by enemy CL/CA, the fighters deter the enemy CV from attacking directly without risking losing lots of planes.

[BlazerSparta]

Actually they have a fairly weak early game much like the DDs. In the early-game, it's pretty much a contest over who will get air supremacy (whoever still has fighters remaining). They can attack, but not as well with enemy fighters running free. Much like how DDs are deterred from attacking directly by enemy CL/CA, the fighters deter the enemy CV from attacking directly without risking losing lots of planes.

 

(These criticisms are directed at high tier CVs, with large plane reserves, competent players, and large maps to play tag on)

 

You completely ignore the utility CVs have.

 

CVs scout infinitely better than DDs can, and they can prevent a DD from scouting.

 

If a DD really sticks it's head out, that's an easy kill.

 

Early game, a CV can still use bombers to force enemy ships into turns.

 

And finally, unlike DDs, a CV doesn't have a significant barrier to it's late game power.

 

Whereas a DD could lose turrets, or huge chunks of HP, limiting it's ability to take risks and impact the late game, a CV doesn't start suffering a hit to it's capabilities unless it loses a significant portion of it's air wing, something that is difficult to acheive, and typically won't have any effect until the LATE late game. And a CV getting killed before their late game power spike is even more laughably unlikely, especially now that they have defensive fire.

 

CVs are not weak early game. They are simply offensively weak. Their utility is as overwhelmingly powerful as it is the entire game.