World of Warships- Something Has To Change

2,346 views
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (169 votes, average: 4.59 out of 5)
Loading...

Today I discuss what I think needs to happen with the game based on the direction it has been going recently.

Outro Music- Stranger Think by C418

Have a replay?

Join the Discord here!: https://discordapp.com/invite/QA7G9pr

33 Comments:

  1. This is why low tiers are better than T10….

  2. Sorry – BUT:

    Look at the matchmaking – 5BBs vs 3CA/CL. Rings a bell?

    Surprisingly 4DDs…(but thats aside)

    This sounds to me much like a tyical BB mimimimi… too much HE Spam, too many torps. I cant Dev strike in peace…

    Smolensk and Colbert primary counter is a heavy Cruiser with radar. And both ships are gone fast if misspositioned…which leads me to the low Cruiser population recently in T10 and reminds me of the two Citas a Kremlin shot into my perfectly angled Hindenburg…

    I agree though on the fact that the risk side of Smolensk and Colbert is mot high enough.

    One Solution: Overpens should be given a chance to cause flooding…

    And IFHE is about to be modified too, ist it?

    • Just as you say; a cruiser-player has to face 5 hard-counters (BBs) plus up to 2 super-cruisers (which WG openly promotes as “real cruiser-killers”) every single match. And we do not cry about but git gud.
      Now imagine 5 DDs + 2 Asashios every single match – would that be ok? From my standpoint yes. But our BBabies would need a doctor.

  3. Dude, subs are not going to be cruiser killers there are yet another hard counter to battleships…before you go getting all excited about them. They’ll be the fourth class now that is a hard counter to battleships.

    • doubleugly889 I think he is smart enough to realize that Subs will also be BB killers, I think he was meaning that when Subs are released he is going to vent his frustration personally on the new sit behind an island CAs that can target ships 17.7 KM with their BB guns.

    • Sea Lord Mountbatten

      Dan Hryniszak Correct I realize they aren’t designed to be a hard counter to these ships, but I sure am gonna go after them

  4. The problem is that the firepower of these CCs does not reflect reality. Although this is an arcade-style game, there should be some effort to at least try to keep things somewhat aligned with reality. In the 1940s and 1950s, these cruisers would not have been able to carry enough ammunition to maintain this rate of fire for too long. Also, the gun barrels would literally melt at this rate of fire. This would put these guns out of action. Therefore, there should be a mechanism that shuts down the cruiser guns after X amount of rounds are fired during X amount of time. The cruiser player’s dashboard should have a meter showing how hot his barrels are getting and how long he has before he permanently disables his guns so he can stop, cool down the guns and resume firing. If this company is going to create these types of fantasy ships, they should balance the game by increasing the rate of fire for battleship main guns. Also, no cruiser captain in his right mind would stick around firing salvo after salvo at a battleship because he would be blown out of the water either trying to get within range to do so or, if he did get within range of the battleship, be outgunned and destroyed.

    • WW2 doctrine for munitions varied, but usually there was enough to fire between 30 minutes to 2 hours, continously.

      You seem to forget that these ships where expected ro fight for weeks or months without much in the way of resupply.

    • It needs to also be mentioned that no ship burned to death in naval combat. Many ships had fires. They burned the flammable materials and then the fire often went out on its own and would not re-ignite in that area because all of the fire source was already burned. Catapult aircraft is a good example. For most ships in combat, that is the only thing that is going to burn for more than a few seconds. It is why carriers had such issues, almost a hundred planes, machine shops, ammunition and FUEL. Cruisers, Battleships, Destroyers do not have much if any of these things.

      Peace time ships that suddenly found themselves in war were a bit more cluttered with ship boats stacked amidships, but once the war was on, they usually lost those gigs and the fire chance dropped to nil. When ships did burn it was a result of a magazine cooking off, war gaming has no such mechanism for magazine to blow. Fire should do things like wipe out all catapult aircraft, reduce AA to 50% then 25% then zero, reduce speed by 10%, then 25%, then 50%. But once the fire is out, these effects would end except the fighters would be destroyed. Fire should also knock out radar until the fire it is out and it is repaired. Fire should never eat the ships health pool.

    • Caden Grace then you have to get rid of detonations nearly altogether because these where pretty rare. you would also have to prevent a BB shell from ever detonating inside a DD because short of the engine block and drive shaft, nothing in A DD has enough material to trigger a BB shell. You would also have to vastly increase map size and nerf dispersion somewhat fierce because unlike WoWs 30-60% hitrate, real engagements saw 1-5% hitrates.

      In one instance a lone DD went up against nearly everything the IJN had, and got under fire from most of it. It didnt sink, it didnt detonate, it was pierced by several BB shells, it faught a prolonged engagement at short distance. It came back nearly ripped to shreds with most crew dead, but still sailing.

  5. The worst thing is to have these things team up on you. Its so unfun.

  6. I Agree but if the team works together it can countered. But who am I kidding.

    • I took a year/year and a half break from the game with the idea I would come back. Now I’m super into it again.

      First day back I started typing in chat like I always do.. something along the lines of ‘alright folks, let’s focus a/b. Yamato you camp here (clicks map) and watch the back of the map on the east side so they don’t flank around us from C’

      First reply.. “wait, teamwork? In randoms???”

      The team proceeded to go off and do their own thing..

      Boy has the game changed. Sure, it was never great.. but people would at least (for the most part) listen if someone typed out a game plan.. sheesh. I still try though.. in vain most of the time.

    • Raul Alexandru Bota

      @Pole-Star because personal score is what gives you great reward so everyone goes for that and when you play ships like smolensk or colbert you don’t really need team assistance and you still do great, I mean Smolensk doesn’t care about CVs either… but it doesn’t resume to the players opinion it resume to how to get money from those that will pay so don’t expect balance the Premium ships users must have some piñatas to farm.

  7. i think they should add ammo capacity, so ships cant camp behind island bc they have unlimited ammo

  8. Being a BB player myself, I sympathize with what you’re saying, but there are a couple flaws in your argument.

    One: Captain builds are flexible depending on what you want to do. You choose secondary build because you enjoy the passive damage you dish out. But for you to benefit from that, you give up other things… like survival spec. It’s a choice you most make. Do you want to last longer or dish out more damage. You can’t have both to the extreme. That’s the way the system works and it’s fine that way. The meta often dictates what’s hot this patch compared to previous ones, and builds evolve to reflect that. The system is meant to be niche: choose your poison and go out and fight accordingly.

    Two: An “annoying” ship isn’t enough to have the game change. The Shimi when it first came out with its “torp cancer” was annoying. DDs as a whole were annoying for the longest time until radar and hydro. Radar when it first came out was annoying. The Atlanta and Minotaur when they first came out was “rainbow or death cancer.” My point is, there are a lot of “annoying” parts and ships in this game. The players usually adapt or the game adjusts. The game, just like warfare, evolves with an “overpowered” weapon soon being matched and negated by a newer one. Annoying is a feature of the game because it reflects the need to adapt and change.

    • @Hoschi0913 Staying ahead of the curve requires staying ahead of the curve. Like you mentioned, watching CC preview and test videos, playing on the PTS to get a sneak peak in person of some stuff and looking at forums and the WoWS reddit. It’s a choice, if the player doesn’t want to do all of that leg work, then they shouldn’t complain when the info passes them by. The player is responsible for educating themselves with a myriad available resources out there.

    • yeah well i do not have the time nor the patience for all this
      and btw since when is it a players responsibility to stay up to date with a game ?, it rather is the providers / developers responsibility to let the players know about changes, how the affect the game play and what and how to do to counter ( if so ) ……..

    • @Hoschi0913 When? Since the first game released patch notes for players to read. Lol

    • Sword Monkey you are correct, but in theory only. Even before the current HE spammers BB captains were pretty much forced to take endurance skills to deal with CA fire starters i.e. Zao, DM, Moskva, Henri and Hindi (and lets not forget the Harugumo, Kitakaze and British BBs). The situation now with the new ships is that captain skills and ship upgrades are not enough to deal with the fire starting capacity directed at BBs. The result is that no matter the skills and upgrades you took, and the tactics you try to employ (push, snipe etc.), eventually you just get BBQ’d to death.

    • That’s why they’re changing IFHE in the near future. HE has gotten out of hand and defending against it in many ships is becoming pointless.
      I was speaking purely on the game theory of meta and how adjustments are constantly made to and fro to keep meta… meta… so I’m ok being correct in theory only.
      I believe WG’s real long term solution to HE spamming island huggers are subs. They’ve gone too far in and can’t back out so they have to keep pushing forward with new counters to the HE prem ships people love to buy.

  9. I feel your pain on the over pens with a BB and the only thing consistent about RNG is it’s inconsistent

  10. Sea lord I agree with every word. Those ships need to be substantially nerfed or even removed altogether (and I say it as an owner of a Smolensk). They just completely poison the meta and are the very definition of unfair game play. The worst thing about this is that WG was warned this would happen by just about any community contributor who previewed those ships, and they still went ahead and released them.

  11. I’ve given up on T10. An exercise in frustration.

  12. It was cool when there was the worcester doing this, but that ship has a lot of other disadvantages. But now there are too many of theese from different nations…

  13. Is it Russian? Oh, ok. Then it’s fine. LOL

  14. This ship and Colbert. Are broken u should be ashamed if u play them Didi guys alreadyforget hrugamo lol

  15. Already adjusted my play style u can imagine how mad bbs are now that I don’t cap

  16. The main change should be BB accuracy. Tighter spreads, and you should get more accurate with each salvo at the same ship as your fire director dials him in. First salvo, 0-2 hits. Second salvo, 3-4 hits. Third salvo you are hitting with most of your guns and that cruiser should be toast.

  17. I tottaly agree with you , Tbh he spam meta is the most bullsh1t meta

  18. OP ships are not fun, and you play one of them. o7

  19. Excellent video and analysis! How can WoW fix this and still maintain playability (fairness) ??? Possibly make a change back to becoming a little more realistic. All HE shells are not created equally. A 16 inch HE shell is going to create one nasty bit of damage to anything it hits. Whereas in WW2 the BB South Dakota took over 40 hits of all types of 5 inch shells, 20 hits of 8 inch shells, and 3 hits by 14 inch shells with little damage. I don’t think there was a single casualty on the South Dakota. Likewise a single non exploding 15 inch shell fired by the Bismarck at the Prince of Wales killed everyone on Bridge except the Admiral.
    But this is just a game and there has to be playability, because we see how frustrated DD players made WoW nerf CVs. So how can WoW fix this spamming? Maybe take a step back and realize that a Fire caused by a 5 inch round is going to be much smaller and slower burning the one caused by s BB round. In reality a fire started by a 5 inch round would start out smaller and the damage party could jump on it right away and contain it. A fire caused by a 16 inch round has probably killed everyone in the immediate area and would most probably spread faster.
    So perhaps WoW could have a burn rate attached to each type of shell.
    Another “just not right” Factor in the game is,…, here is one from my actual experience, Ranked Battle, I have the Jean Bart, last survivor on the team against 2 heavily damaged BBs and a 1/2 damaged DD. I am about to kill a BB, at range and I am using HE, and the DD ambushes me from around an island. I knew the DD was there and unloaded 8 HE into its broadside. It launched torps and turned to the other side. I pop the quick reload button and hit the DD again at point blank. The DD launches the torps from his Port side. Finally my Secondaries sink the DD. But the DD took away reality of the game play. If 8 X 15 inch shells hit a DD that is all she wrote, wether the shells exploded or not, whether they were HE, AP, or XYZ.
    Anyway this DD fairness crap ruined a good game between my Jean Bart with 75% health vs. a Georgia and a Grobe each with less than 1/4 health.
    WoW has nerfed the BB guns to give DDs a chance. WoW needs to nerf the rate of a fire spreading on a heavily armored BB caused by Squirrel guns.

  20. “Sometimes got to give with HE ships”
    –shaves off 15.5k in 1 shot

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *