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

Why you do not get a lot of BB brawling tier 8-10

44 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,007
Members
1,210 posts

I feel it has nothing to do with players afraid to fight other BB. I love going in and brawling. It has to do with as soon as you try to push with a BB you get HE spammed. I have no issues with DD torpedoes, WASD is a wonderful thing. What makes me not want to push is HE spam and the amount of damage it does. I am not really sure how this can be dealt with without badly hurting CA or DD that need HE to be useful. But, as a BB player it is hard to deal with HE if you try to push. Get lit on fire, wait till 2-3 fires are going on you then put them out.... within a short period of time you have 3 more fires on you and no way to deal with them and they do crazy amounts of damage. 

 

So we sit in the back not wanting to push. Now if all the BB pushed at the same time and so did the rest of the team, sure you may not get focused by all the CA, but getting your BB and team to push like that will never happen no matter what you change in the game. So WG how you are trying to deal with BB not brawling at least on my end is all wrong. Nerfing the armor will only make us BB players who do like to push think twice about it even more now. 

 

I like that you are trying to figure out how to make the game more brawling and less sniping. You will not get any argument from me on you wanting that to happen, but you need to go about it in a different way. 

 

/my 2 cents

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
413
[SPTR]
Members
4,023 posts
1,090 battles

Get lit on fire, wait till 2-3 fires are going on you then put them out

 

Fire? Pffft, i'm no witch so it won't stop me. As long as i'm floating with working engines and rudders i'll keep on charging forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
101
[VVV]
Beta Testers
814 posts
7,968 battles

Yep, Fire is lame. It's why I run from CA's and only look for BB's to fight from afar. Now with the upcoming BB Nerf, I'll just sit in the back and provide AA support to the CV or myself and snip with my horrible aim. lol

 

1 CA is fine but if I see like 2 or 3, No way. That's a instant death in a BB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,153
[ARGSY]
Members
10,326 posts
16,228 battles

Yep, Fire is lame. It's why I run from CA's and only look for BB's to fight from afar. Now with the upcoming BB Nerf, I'll just sit in the back and provide AA support to the CV or myself and snip with my horrible aim. lol

 

1 CA is fine but if I see like 2 or 3, No way. That's a instant death in a BB.

 

getting teamed up by 3v1  should be deadly.       but then,  teamwork is deadly
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
413
[SPTR]
Members
4,023 posts
1,090 battles

Yep, Fire is lame. It's why I run from CA's and only look for BB's to fight from afar. Now with the upcoming BB Nerf, I'll just sit in the back and provide AA support to the CV or myself and snip with my horrible aim. lol

 

1 CA is fine but if I see like 2 or 3, No way. That's a instant death in a BB.

 

...I'm bad at the game and i've sunk two Mogami that were coming at my Tirpitz without taking heavy damage. But if you don't like taking damage, why snipe at a distance where enemy ships can get more pens?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
509 posts
14,519 battles

OMG FIRE... it takes several fires to do a lot of damage, and that is after several burning periods.  Its percentage base so a fire on a CA does the same percentage as a BB and as a DD.  I'm not sure how much "burn time" it takes to truly burn down a BB, but that is what the repair module is for.  Learn to shoot the enemy better?  You can take out an enemy CA really damn fast, if you know what to do.  Especially if you get close enough to do accurate damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
569
[T-R-F]
Banned
677 posts
22,670 battles

OMG FIRE... it takes several fires to do a lot of damage, and that is after several burning periods.  Its percentage base so a fire on a CA does the same percentage as a BB and as a DD.  I'm not sure how much "burn time" it takes to truly burn down a BB, but that is what the repair module is for.  Learn to shoot the enemy better?  You can take out an enemy CA really damn fast, if you know what to do.  Especially if you get close enough to do accurate damage.

 

I get set on fire, allow it to burn since full health and would use BB repair when done. set on fire again use damage control. as soon as that done set on fire yet again. can't do anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
2,029 posts

But if you don't like taking damage, why snipe at a distance where enemy ships can get more pens?

 

That's not the way things work.  I know you're talking about penning the deck armour, but you take way less damage that way for the most part.  Also, you're harder to hit at a distance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
413
[SPTR]
Members
4,023 posts
1,090 battles

 

That's not the way things work.  I know you're talking about penning the deck armour, but you take way less damage that way for the most part.  Also, you're harder to hit at a distance.

 

Either way, sitting back gets you killed more often then not, unless fire spewing CAs don't bother you when you have a hard time hitting them with slower guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,799
Alpha Tester, Beta Testers
30,523 posts
6,106 battles

 

Either way, sitting back gets you killed more often then not, unless fire spewing CAs don't bother you when you have a hard time hitting them with slower guns.

 

In my Tirpitz it's basically at that point F it. I'm going to lock 1 ship and take it with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14
[GC]
Beta Testers
206 posts
5,193 battles

Not holding the front of the line because of HE spam/fires is an excuse. That's all. It has been so rare to get fires the last few times I've played I've actually switched to firing AP at superstructures instead because it's more likely to do damage. Perfect proof can be found in a video Jingles recently posted, a guy gets 223 gun hits. only sets 7 fires and does only 59k damage in a Sims. If you're terrified of those odds and that's why you're not pushing the line with your battleships play carriers.

 

Edited because repetitive is repetitive durr

 

also, with that 59k damage is at least one torp hit, not sure exactly if there were more

Edited by Caderius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
125
[WOLFB]
[WOLFB]
Members
375 posts
9,883 battles

What I have not seen in the discussions regarding HE and fire is the use of the existing tools to counter these issues. There are modules, captain skills, and flags.

For  chance of fire you have:  Damage Control System Mod1 -5% Risk of Fire / Fire Prevention -7% to the risk of fire (2pts) / NO SIGNAL= -12% to chance of fire.

For the extinguishing time you have:  Damage Control System Mod2 -15% to time / Basics of Survival -15% to time (1pt)/  India Yankee Signal -20% to time = -50% to the time it takes to extinguish the fire

So if you take all these options then you are -12% to the risk of fire and the fires burn only 50% of their normal time. Of course you can't do this AND an offence build - one or the other. Life is full of choices.

Can some one who is knowable on these mechanics comment? I am particularly interested in how that -12% interacts with DD HE chance of fire rates. No DD  has a stock chance of fire rate higher that 9% I believe.


 

Thank  you in advance for your answers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,000 posts
4,522 battles

 

getting teamed up by 3v1  should be deadly.       but then,  teamwork is deadly

 

That's one of the core problems currently. In high tier effective gun ranges are so high that there is no way to isolate pockets of the enemy team for some dynamic 1v1 or 2v1s.

 

As soon as you are lit half the map can fire on you, and with half the map usually comes half the team. 4+ v 1 every engagement, every situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
221 posts
5,266 battles

What I have not seen in the discussions regarding HE and fire is the use of the existing tools to counter these issues. There are modules, captain skills, and flags.

For  chance of fire you have:  Damage Control System Mod1 -5% Risk of Fire / Fire Prevention -7% to the risk of fire (2pts) / NO SIGNAL= -12% to chance of fire.

For the extinguishing time you have:  Damage Control System Mod2 -15% to time / Basics of Survival -15% to time (1pt)/  India Yankee Signal -20% to time = -50% to the time it takes to extinguish the fire

So if you take all these options then you are -12% to the risk of fire and the fires burn only 50% of their normal time. Of course you can't do this AND an offence build - one or the other. Life is full of choices.

Can some one who is knowable on these mechanics comment? I am particularly interested in how that -12% interacts with DD HE chance of fire rates. No DD  has a stock chance of fire rate higher that 9% I believe.

 

 

Thank  you in advance for your answers.

 

Reductions to fire chance scale with the chance of fire from the shell that hits you.  Meaning if a shell has a 15% chance to set you on fire, a 10% reduction to chance means it'll have a 13.5 chance to set you on fire.

All ships get a passive reduction to fire chance based on their tier.  I think tier 10 ships have a 50% reduction to fire chance.  They also reduce the damage from fires, which is partly negated by the fact that they tend to have more Hp.  

All told, your typical Tier 10 battleship will cut the chance of being set on fire by half...except the Tier 10 battleship is much larger than it's predecessors, and it's now much easier to set multiple parts of the ship on fire as each section of the ship is more distinct and a bigger target.  And the number of gun barrels spewing fire at you has gone up.  A Zao will typically have a 50% chance to set someone on fire per salvo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,153
[ARGSY]
Members
10,326 posts
16,228 battles

 

That's one of the core problems currently. In high tier effective gun ranges are so high that there is no way to isolate pockets of the enemy team for some dynamic 1v1 or 2v1s.

 

As soon as you are lit half the map can fire on you, and with half the map usually comes half the team. 4+ v 1 every engagement, every situation.

 

agree that one of hte problem with t9/10 is accuracy and effectiveness of the guns.     they really need to nerf down the long range gunnery, but they won't.   at least most maps have decent cover with islands.    I seem to do fine to t7 ships though.  (even in t9 matches)      the trick is knowing how much is enough without yolo.   I want to tank as much as I dish out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
777
[BARF]
Beta Testers
5,816 posts
5,484 battles

I feel it has nothing to do with players afraid to fight other BB. I love going in and brawling. It has to do with as soon as you try to push with a BB you get HE spammed. I have no issues with DD torpedoes, WASD is a wonderful thing. What makes me not want to push is HE spam and the amount of damage it does. I am not really sure how this can be dealt with without badly hurting CA or DD that need HE to be useful. But, as a BB player it is hard to deal with HE if you try to push. Get lit on fire, wait till 2-3 fires are going on you then put them out.... within a short period of time you have 3 more fires on you and no way to deal with them and they do crazy amounts of damage. 

 

So we sit in the back not wanting to push. Now if all the BB pushed at the same time and so did the rest of the team, sure you may not get focused by all the CA, but getting your BB and team to push like that will never happen no matter what you change in the game. So WG how you are trying to deal with BB not brawling at least on my end is all wrong. Nerfing the armor will only make us BB players who do like to push think twice about it even more now. 

 

I like that you are trying to figure out how to make the game more brawling and less sniping. You will not get any argument from me on you wanting that to happen, but you need to go about it in a different way. 

 

/my 2 cents

I go out of my way to chat and Congratulate battleship captains who engage in secondary range without relying on backup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,651
[CVRME]
[CVRME]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
2,942 posts
10,652 battles

Fire is kind of irritating but i wouldn't say that's the reason.  My take on the lack of brawling is that WG too heavy-handedly nerfed BB maneuverability way back when, making the ships turn slowly, and turn very wide to boot.  Most can't handle angling and pre-anticipating movements to turn ahead of time which is what you must do if you hope to get the ship angled or positioned in time.

 

It all stems back to whining about BBs being too hard to hit with torps and planes back in CBT causing this nerf.  People reap what they sow, and this is the end result.  Ships that are very difficult and unforgiving to brawl with effectively, so the average person won't even bother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,744 posts
8,862 battles

 

getting teamed up by 3v1  should be deadly.       but then,  teamwork is deadly

 

The issue is the ranges at the higher tiers.

 

At tier 5, you can close in to an enemy or two that are 10 km away, and expect that you will only be fired on by those enemies. At tier 10, if you are spotted the entire enemy team is firing on you.

 

It's not really "teamwork" at all. At tier 5 if a cruiser decides to come help his buddies burn down a BB, he had to move to do it; at tier 10 he just shifts his guns.

 

To make matters worse, while range increases dramatically at higher tiers, speed stays about the same after tier 5 or 6, and rudder shift and turn radius get worse, so in addition to the fight starting at much, much longer ranges, you have reduced capability for closing the gap.

 

 

I mean, yes, if several players move to target one player, then it should be bad for the one. But at high tiers, nobody is moving to do anything.

 

 

It's not just fire holding players back. The game would be better with more combat between 10 and 15 km, but to get there you need to sail through incoming fire for 10 km.

Edited by inktomi19d
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
108
[BAKED]
Members
918 posts
12,366 battles

BB accuracy at those tiers means "brawling" starts at around sub 14km as decent players can easily reach 50% hit ratios at those kind of ranges especially against fat BBs. 8km and under isn't brawling range, thats suicide torp run/ramming range.

 

High tier BB's brawl all the time. just not early game. I see mid to late game pushes and brawling all the time.

Unless the enemy team is super clustered, you can't angle against more than 1or 2 ships plus dodge torpedoes without exposing citadel and getting deleted.  And if the reds are sailing in fleet formation focus fire is going to be a major issue as well. So most people wait until the fights are all spread out to close the range against a few ships. Also most wait until the DDs are dead/far away so they don't have to choose to either eat torps or expose broadside to get deleted.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,000 posts
4,522 battles

Fire is kind of irritating but i wouldn't say that's the reason.  My take on the lack of brawling is that WG too heavy-handedly nerfed BB maneuverability way back when, making the ships turn slowly, and turn very wide to boot.  Most can't handle angling and pre-anticipating movements to turn ahead of time which is what you must do if you hope to get the ship angled or positioned in time.

 

It all stems back to whining about BBs being too hard to hit with torps and planes back in CBT causing this nerf.  People reap what they sow, and this is the end result.  Ships that are very difficult and unforgiving to brawl with effectively, so the average person won't even bother.

 

It's not that at all. Even if you gave BBs cruiser level maneuverability you would realize how cruisers play at that tier then facepalm.

 

Hell even if manueverability were brought back down to tier 4-6 levels guns would ensure most people still engage over 15km (since tier 6 guns usually engage ~13km or so.)

 

You would need something silly like Sims turn radius and rudder shift to bring engagements low enough to engage in brawling.

 

Back then what kept everyone from camping were how terrifying tier 9 CVs and (the few who got to test it) 5 TB tier 10 Hakuryus were.

 

Much simpler to just nerf everyone's guns to keep the gameplay meta around 4-6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,651
[CVRME]
[CVRME]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
2,942 posts
10,652 battles

 

It's not that at all. Even if you gave BBs cruiser level maneuverability you would realize how cruisers play at that tier then facepalm.

 

Hell even if manueverability were brought back down to tier 4-6 levels guns would ensure most people still engage over 15km (since tier 6 guns usually engage ~13km or so.)

 

You would need something silly like Sims turn radius and rudder shift to bring engagements low enough to engage in brawling.

 

Back then what kept everyone from camping were how terrifying tier 9 CVs and (the few who got to test it) 5 TB tier 10 Hakuryus were.

 

Much simpler to just nerf everyone's guns to keep the gameplay to 4-6.

 

No.  There was definitely more brawling back then.  And since I doubt you have much experience, try getting into a T8+ BB and see how well you can maneuver in a way that can angle you, evade fire, and not give a flat of enough angle that won't decimate you all while trying to potentially evade torpedo fire should the target you're brawling with have it.  There's more factors to it, but the nerf of maneuverability to BBs was a large factor whether you like it or not.  The only BB i'm willing to brawl in at high tiers is my Bismarck.  And well, the results speak for themselves.

 

CVs were the primary concern back then yes, but that doesn't detract or have anything to do with the state of brawling back then outside of people fearing CVs deleting them without an AA escort.

 

Nerf everyone's guns down to 4-6 is highly unrealistic.   Few (including myself) would accept a lack of progression beyond Tier 6.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
3,000 posts
4,522 battles

 

No.  There was definitely more brawling back then.  And since I doubt you have much experience, try getting into a T8+ BB and see how well you can maneuver in a way that can angle you, evade fire, and not give a flat of enough angle that won't decimate you all while trying to potentially evade torpedo fire should the target you're brawling with have it.  There's more factors to it, but the nerf of maneuverability to BBs was a large factor whether you like it or not.  The only BB i'm willing to brawl in at high tiers is my Bismarck.  And well, the results speak for themselves.

 

CVs were the primary concern back then yes, but that doesn't detract or have anything to do with the state of brawling back then outside of people fearing CVs deleting them without an AA escort.

 

Nerf everyone's guns down to 4-6 is highly unrealistic.   Few (including myself) would accept a lack of progression beyond Tier 6.  

 

Progression of higher caliber and more guns is more than enough, given how armor and mobility progress.

 

There is no need to justify the additional sigma, range, pen, fire chance, shell flight time, and especially accuracy that guns get per tier on top of more guns/bigger guns.

 

Not when armor, mobility, and concealment basically all stagnate after 6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
938
[NUWES]
Members
3,848 posts
15,807 battles

 

I think a better option than nerfing bow armor is increasing the dispersion at long ranges. There's no point in sitting bow-on and exchanging shots if you can't hit reliably at that range. Also, the high tier maps are too open. They favor long range fire too much so, unsurprisingly, the battleships sit an exchange long-ranged fire. Even the few with island clutter in the center can easily be fired over.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,651
[CVRME]
[CVRME]
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
2,942 posts
10,652 battles

 

Progression of higher caliber and more guns is more than enough, given how armor and mobility progress.

 

There is no need to justify the additional sigma, range, pen, fire chance, shell flight time, and especially accuracy that guns get per tier on top of more guns/bigger guns.

 

Not when armor, mobility, and concealment basically all stagnate after 6.

 

You're on the crazy side if you think you can somehow justify 14 inch guns will perform similarly to for example, 16 inch rifles or even yamato's 18 inch ones.  You'd have no way to do it.  Logic would never allow for it, and go ahead try and push your agenda of guns not going past tier 6 in performance.

 

I'll sit back and watch as you get shot down.  

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.

×