Do you agree the Bow armor should be nerfed?

[RainbowDash007]

Hi all, I just wanted a survey done so WG can actually see a sample of players who agree or disagree with the Bow nerf.  I for one want to present a better solution for the reason they are even looking into it.  The problem was people abused a game mechanic by camping or reversing which affected other ships and pissed off people and rightfully so.  Except they think that nerfing armor will fix it, if anything buffing it would make people more confident to charge into battle but that is aside the point.

 

 

A better fix is two fold and they did adopt one of them which I applaud.  First remember in real life you never stopped your ship, you would be too easy to hit by trained gun crews, they routinely hit targets 20 miles away on shore and would be foolish in actual navy combat to do this.  So to realisticly remedy this in a sim game, just put an aim penalty on stopped ships.  You stopped and you have a player fire at you and their aim is decent (meaning they would have hit you) then their shells just curved right into the stopped ship resulting in mass hits.  now sure if they fire AP and you still have your bow armor maybe you bounce some, some might hit your deck as plunge and well not many decks can soak t 10 plunge shots, but it does give bb's a chance to switch to he and shoot at campers burning them and I like more situations where you have a chance to use different shots.  Once you start moving the shell trajectories are normalized and no more aim penalty or massive damage.  Guys as a fellow game programmer, trust me this WILL work as a deterent. 

To stop reversing and bb's staying out of combat and this was being tested is change how you get credits and xp.  if you capture, get secondary hits, spot damage and defense damage, you get more xp and currency.  you reward the bb that goes in and reward the GOOD snipers who actually can sit back and fire effectively from range, you do want some of that just no where near what it has been.

 

So based on everything you read please choose you choice in the poll and would love to hear from others.

[Amogussy]

I do feel that at high tiers it was needed, Yamato was invincible to AP when bow on. But players will probably just sit back further than before in their BBs now because they want the penetration power of other BB shells to not be enough to pen their bow armor.

[the_majestic_eagle]

Yes because yammy was invulnerable to other bb's ap to the bow (and not vise versa) but I also feel it could do more harm than good 

[Macabe]

I don't see why everyone is flipping out over it. Get somewhat closer and angle. It's really that easy. Whether it's actually implemented on the live server, i don't particularly care either way as i don't feel it being as bad as many others are complaining. Also, i wasn't aware this was a sim. 

 

[godzilla5549]

Yes this was badly needed and now I can't wait for it to get to the live server.

[Infeedel]

I don't see why everyone is flipping out over it. Get somewhat closer and angle. It's really that easy. Whether it's actually implemented on the live server, i don't particularly care either way as i don't feel it being as bad as many others are complaining. Also, i wasn't aware this was a sim. 

 

Really happy to see you replying like this Macabe, ggwp.

[Mezurashi]

I've only recently started to get into BBs. I often find myself in rather odd situations where my teammates are charging in with me and then I suddenly find myself alone against the enemy team because my BB teammates decided to bug off and retreat.

 

I always try to lead the charge with my BB and try to set an example, but the majority of BB players that I've encountered so far just want to snipe from behind.

Sigh...

[Submarine_Wahoo]

I personally don't like the change. I get penned through the bow even when I angle because overmatch mechanics.

[ClockworkSpectre]

It is a bad solution to players sitting bow on towards enemies.  It is just going to encourage battleships to set further off and camp, in other words it will make things worse. 

[Exciton8964]

Bow armor deflects everything except 460 makes no sense at all.

Ppl need to learn to use their belt armor to bounce shells.

[Czevak]

Horrible idea.

[HermanBix]

Not a big BB player, but the thought of needing to flank them added to a more dynamic aspect of the game. Dumbing it down, not so much.

[LegoGenius16]

Just.....no. They did this to stop camping, but how are you supposed to close the range when you get citadeled trying to get closer? This will ENCOURAGE CAMPING. Players now will want to stay in the back to avoid damage to themselves (and thus not damage the enemy), where before they could charge bow-on and get closer to hit more accurately and do more damage. I was never a player who sat bow-on in reverse, but there were times when I needed ONE angle where I wouldn't be citadeled. This was a problem that needed solving, but WG really did it wrong IMO.  I will have to stop playing my Iowa and Montana now, if I want to be able to afford new ships like Bismark 

[LegoGenius16]

Bow armor deflects everything except 460 makes no sense at all.

Ppl need to learn to use their belt armor to bounce shells.

 

You haven't played NC, Iowa, or Montana, have you?

[4bRbyHSSzZ6pk]

get over it

[Zhoyzu]

BB players should have already learned how to angle. Nothing changed for BB players who knew how to play already. The only thing the nerf will change is it will make it obvious the good from the bad.

[LegoGenius16]

WG listened to the whiners on this, but then (as the poll currently shows, and as I have noticed), around 70% of the player population pleaded with them to change it. If they truly are making changes to the game according to player input, then I would think that they would change it back. Honestly, this was a real problem, but this wasn't the right way to do it, in my ( and much of the player base's) opinion.

 

I can angle just fine, but I still get lol!penned at 60 or more degrees. Either I'm unlucky as HECK, or the USN BB's have been hate-nerfed too far. I guess I should just hurry up and get my yamato, as that's the only real option for having fun in high-tier BB's. (unless you find being citadeled from every angle fun)

[RainbowDash007]

I do feel that at high tiers it was needed, Yamato was invincible to AP when bow on. But players will probably just sit back further than before in their BBs now because they want the penetration power of other BB shells to not be enough to pen their bow armor.

 

Well this is where this is a playing problem not mechanics problem.  bow shot should always be HE shot, they aren't effected by armor and will do damge and set them on fire.  So I don't see this being a factor if played right.  Bow armor is needed to close in and brawl for yamato it does not angle well at all.

[LegoGenius16]

 

Well this is where this is a playing problem not mechanics problem.  bow shot should always be HE shot, they aren't effected by armor and will do damge and set them on fire.  So I don't see this being a factor if played right.  Bow armor is needed to close in and brawl for yamato it does not angle well at all.

 

​EXACTLY

[Exciton8964]

 

You haven't played NC, Iowa, or Montana, have you?

 

I am playing NC, right now.

I never go bow-on. It works just fine.

[LegoGenius16]

 

I am playing NC, right now.

I never go bow-on. It works just fine.

 

​Yup, NC has decent belt armor. I went broadside when I needed to, and I was fine. but it IS less armored than other T8 BB's, and at Iowa it is DISMALLY bad belt armor.

[Wulfgarn]

Is it too soon for DD Captains to laugh like BB Captains did during their nerfs?

 

Just checking....

[LegoGenius16]

Is it too soon for DD Captains to laugh like BB Captains did during their nerfs?

 

Just checking...

 

​Oh, go back to your torp walls

 

just in case you took that seriously, I was joking

[Heavybarrel120mm]

To me the bow armor nerf is another big FU to U.S. ships (mainly BBs). Starting at about Tier 8 with the North Carolina is where that line really starts to shine. Most of the firepower is in the front of the ships having two turrets in front and one in rear except for the Montana. Pointing your bow towards the enemy was very effective because you could dish out damage while negating a lot of damage taken, and swinging out the rear to fire when safe. I'm a very aggressive BB player often time near the front fighting mostly CA/CLs and DDs cause most BBs want to hide in the back and snipe, but by nerfing the bow armor WG  is more or less making BBs sit back even more.

 

I've always loved the bow on approach with USN BBs for the reasons listed above. I have a great example of how effective this tactic is. I took my Arizona out and was got matched up in a Tier 8 battle. As the battle progress I ended up seeing a NC heading towards me instead of trying to run I told myself I'm gonna see how much damage I can do before I go down. I started heading towards him bow first with a slight angle. We start trading shots as we close in on each other. I'm bouncing most of his shots by being bow forward but he is taking a lot of damage because he's angled to use all three turrets showing me almost full broadside but not quite. As the range between us gets to within secondary range he is down to about 50% HP. My Arizona is set up for secondaries (modules and secondary spec captain) so as those start to go off I angle myself a little more to take full advantage of them. 

 

When it was all said and done he was sinking to the bottom of the ocean and I was floating away in decent shape because I knew how to use my bow armor. So if WG does nerf bow armor I would have been sunk way before we got anywhere close to secondary range.

[Wulfgarn]

 

​Oh, go back to your torp walls

 

just in case you took that seriously, I was joking