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

Battleship Armor Nerf Confirmed

353 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

Now, I'm not gonna go on some huge rant and rave, but I am BEYOND displeased with this decision, not because I'm mainly a Battleship Captain, but because Battleships are Capital Ships.

 

Battleships weren't broken, they weren't overpowered, but as seen on World of Tanks, they favor listening to whiners and babies who complain that they can't ALONE destroy something.

 

Yes, we used our ship to it's advantage, putting the nose forward to the enemy, thus eliminating most damage, but wait, guess what? Our Superstructure is STILL there, isn't it? It's not like it's hiding behind a turret or something, switch to H.E, and shoot for the super structure, contrary to popular belief, AP isn't the only thing that'll harm the "Big Bad Battleships".

 

Battleships are Capital Ships, meaning it SHOULD take a team effort to drive one down, you didn't need to nerf the ship itself, you needed to set a cap on Battleships, so that we don't get 5-6 Battleships per team, put a cap at 4 Battleships, and you're golden, we're no longer a huge threat because of Numbers.

 

I mean come on WG, this is an all new low for you, Battleships are already weak to Torpedoes, and Fires, fire damage alone (if it burns the whole time) is equal to that of a citadel, and Torpedo Flooding Damage is MUCH worse, not that I don't understand that but, now we've got even more on our plate, we're basically a Glorified Cruiser with HUGE guns. :sceptic:

 

TL;DR - Battleship Armor nerf wasn't needed, putting a cap on how many battleships per team was.

  • Cool 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
283
[-TNT-]
Members
993 posts
25,388 battles

I'm upset too about this.  WG reason is there are players who stop in the rear with their bow facing the enemies snipping.  Its those BB players who play passively is why this came about.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
495 posts
12 battles

We should give BBabies the same reply they gave to IJN DDs and USN CVs after they got nerfed.

 

"Deal with it."

 

This comes from a player who mains as a BB.

 

I mean, BB whines already got Torps nerfed. AA buffed. High tier planes nerfed.

How does it feel to receive the other end of the stick now BBs?

Edited by Deathskyz
  • Cool 26

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

I'm upset too about this.  WG reason is there are players who stop in the rear with their bow facing the enemies snipping.  Its those BB players who play passively is why this came about.

 

So they need some kind of penalty to battleships that do that, or something, I dunno, all I know is, is I've learned to play my Battleships, and I no longer do that, and as a result, I do average in my Iowa-Class 100K+ Damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,363
[HYD]
Members
7,105 posts
5,289 battles

This change makes BBs more effective against BBs. Technically, it's neither a nerf or a buff. 

 

Edited by Aduial

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

This change makes BBs more effective against BBs. Technically, it's neither a nerf or a buff. 

 

 

Not in high tiers it doesn't, Yamato was already able to penetrate Iowa and Montana frontally, and I guarantee this "Nerf" won't do much to Yamato, because it has such thick frontal armor.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

We should give BBabies the same reply they gave to IJN DDs and USN CVs after they got nerfed.

 

"Deal with it."

 

This comes from a player who mains as a BB.

 

I mean, BB whines already got Torps nerfed. AA buffed. High tier planes nerfed.

How does it feel to receive the other end of the stick now BBs?

 

Japanese DD's can STILL do stuff, they STILL have long ranged Torps, they STILL have High Damage torps, they STILL have the shortest detection range, so what the F**K is the problem with IJN DD's, cause I've YET to see it.
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
495 posts
12 battles

 

Japanese DD's can STILL do stuff, they STILL have long ranged Torps, they STILL have High Damage torps, they STILL have the shortest detection range, so what the F**K is the problem with IJN DD's, cause I've YET to see it.

 

BB's can STILL do stuff, they STILL have long ranged guns, they STILL have High Damage shells, they STILL have the highest HP and armour so what is the problem with BB's after this change, cause I've YET to see it.
  • Cool 21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

 

BB's can STILL do stuff, they STILL have long ranged guns, they STILL have High Damage shells, they STILL have the highest HP and armour so what is the problem with BB's after this change, cause I've YET to see it.

 

Cute, you can copy me.

 

The problem is they're CAPITAL SHIPS, they're SUPPOSE to be tough, they're SUPPOSE to take Teamwork to take down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,242
[NDA]
Beta Testers
5,251 posts
8,893 battles

The anti-bb crowd wont cease will they? 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
495 posts
12 battles

The anti-bb crowd wont cease will they? 

 

Its more of the BBabies who cant deal with changes.

This coming from a BB main.

 

If IJN DDs can "deal with their changes", so can BBs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

The anti-bb crowd wont cease will they? 

 

No, not really, I've seen more topics complaining about how OP BB's are compared to Torps/CV's which I don't concern myself with anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,490
[---]
Banned
6,739 posts
10,147 battles

We should give BBabies the same reply they gave to IJN DDs and USN CVs after they got nerfed.

 

"Deal with it."

 

This comes from a player who mains as a BB.

 

I mean, BB whines already got Torps nerfed. AA buffed. High tier planes nerfed.

How does it feel to receive the other end of the stick now BBs?

 

Wrong answer, if there's ANYONE to blame, it's not ANYONE you can understand you moron, it's the russians, they whine, they get what they want, and it's the russian server, and the russian meta that wargaming cares about, us? we don't matter at all. 
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

 

Its more of the BBabies who cant deal with changes.

This coming from a BB main.

 

If IJN DDs can "deal with their changes", so can BBs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No, they can't, because DD's are fast and hidden very well, BB's are fat, slow, and have crap detection range, stop trying to compare two different types of ships, that's like trying to compare day and night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
5,082 posts
5,575 battles

It takes more skill and thought to perform dynamic angling on the move than to simply go bow-in and stop. As the game is right now, some BBs can do the latter efficiently (e.g. NC, Izumo, Yamato) while others have to angle in motion (e.g. Amagi, German BBs, Iowa, Montana). With this change, the former group will be put on an equal footing with the rest in terms of skill floor while also eliminating the nonsensical and overly static practice of bow tanking. Mark my words, most of the complainers about this change are going to be average and below average NC and Yamato players who have no idea how to play battlecruisers or cruisers that already have to employ dynamic angling at all times.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
15,669 posts
4,714 battles

 

Cute, you can copy me.

 

The problem is they're CAPITAL SHIPS, they're SUPPOSE to be tough, they're SUPPOSE to take Teamwork to take down.

Supposed to be tough? Yeah. Supposed to be countered by DDs? Yeah. BB>CA/CL>DD>BB. Right now it's BB>CA/CL<DD... Depending on tier. Khab dominates it's true. Farragut I love, and Fletcher is great. I personally believe that IJN DDs take as much luck as skill: luck that a BB doesn't change course. Which is why I prefer gun boats. 

 

They also aren't supposed to take teamwork to kill anymore than any ship. All ships should have strengths and weaknesses but also be balanced to be no better than others. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

 

Wrong answer, if there's ANYONE to blame, it's not ANYONE you can understand you moron, it's the russians, they whine, they get what they want, and it's the russian server, and the russian meta that wargaming cares about, us? we don't matter at all. 

 

To quote my favorite Anime Character (From the only Anime I really enjoyed watching), Balalaika - "In the grand scheme our lives are insignificant. They're light as air, much like a candy wrapper..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

Supposed to be tough? Yeah. Supposed to be countered by DDs? Yeah. BB>CA/CL>DD>BB. Right now it's BB>CA/CL<DD... Depending on tier. Khab dominates it's true. Farragut I love, and Fletcher is great. I personally believe that IJN DDs take as much luck as skill: luck that a BB doesn't change course. Which is why I prefer gun boats. 

 

They also aren't supposed to take teamwork to kill anymore than any ship. All ships should have strengths and weaknesses but also be balanced to be no better than others. 

 

What kind of world do you live in?

 

So battleships are suppose to be destroyed on their own by a Cruiser, that it? So now, not only do we have huge torpedo spreads from 10's of Kilometers away, we have to worry about Cruisers being able to destroy us one handed?

 

That logic is so [edited]-backwards I can't even begin to fathom what is inside your head.

 

Battleships are big, tough, and have tons of HP, we are suppose to be counted by at LEAST 2 CA's, or another Battleship, which is EXTREMELY easy to do as it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

It takes more skill and thought to perform dynamic angling on the move than to simply go bow-in and stop. As the game is right now, some BBs can do the latter efficiently (e.g. NC, Izumo, Yamato) while others have to angle in motion (e.g. Amagi, German BBs, Iowa, Montana). With this change, the former group will be put on an equal footing with the rest in terms of skill floor while also eliminating the nonsensical and overly static practice of bow tanking. Mark my words, most of the complainers about this change are going to be average and below average NC and Yamato players who have no idea how to play battlecruisers or cruisers that already have to employ dynamic angling at all times.

 

Yes, because Yamato totally needed to angle :sceptic:

 

IJN Battleships are broken in the higher tiers and everyone knows it, it's no secret.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
2,046 posts
2,264 battles

BaBBies whine until IJN DDs nerfed to oblivion.

 

BaBBies whine until CAs HE ammo nerfed to oblivion.

 

BaBBies whine when WG nerfs their BBs as a result of them becoming overpowered due to having no natural predator in the wild.

 

 

I'm sensing a pattern here......

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KNTAI]
Members
3,134 posts
9,120 battles

No. They need to get some "re-balancing" from their own brethren, same as the cruisers get should they encounter a BB.

 

This update helps cruisers alot in the higher tiers, so that's why I don't see what the issue is. Other than some BB mains crying about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

BaBBies whine until IJN DDs nerfed to oblivion.

 

BaBBies whine until CAs HE ammo nerfed to oblivion.

 

BaBBies whine when WG nerfs their BBs as a result of them becoming overpowered due to having no natural predator in the wild.

 

 

I'm sensing a pattern here......

 

And guess what, IJN DD's are still powerful, they just aren't OVERpowered.

 

Oh, and what a surprise, I've NEVER noticed a change in CA H.E, at all, it STILL burns my battleship to the ground! :amazed:

 

Battleships didn't NEED a nerf, they NEEDED a cap.

 

By the way, don't be a smartass to someone who knows how to do it a WHOLE lot better than you :):teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

No. They need to get some "re-balancing" from their own brethren, same as the cruisers get should they encounter a BB.

 

This update helps cruisers alot in the higher tiers, so that's why I don't see what the issue is. Other than some BB mains crying about it.

 

They could have balanced them without even touching them, by putting a cap on them, to max of 4 BB's per team, problem solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
5,082 posts
5,575 battles

This update helps cruisers alot in the higher tiers

 

Not to contradict you, but I'm curious: how? I thought we were only discussing the armor changes, or are you referring to the rudder shift upgrade?

Edited by gurudennis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
801 posts
2,864 battles

 

Not to contradict you, but I'm curious: how? I thought we were only discussing the armor changes, or are you referring to the rudder shift upgrade?

 

I'm assuming the rudder shift upgrade, which albeit nice, further proves that Cruisers are like WG's Grandchild, they favor them, even over their own children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×