Jump to content

Recommended Posts

No one cares about their babies being touched. I got my play with it out of the way grinding T5s with friends. I have no need for it. Its the whole premise that the ship is being nerfed because players at T5 are just bad and dont dodge torps. Despite the fact that its has no offensive firepower but torps. 

 

Omaha-38,202

Minekaze-40,115

New York-40,128

Kongo-42,511

Murmansk-43,001

Nicholas-27,231

Furutaka-26,195

Look at those numbers and look how close they are. That grouping is amazing stat wise being only a few percent off. You guys are looking at this wrong. For a game to be balance everything has to perform at the same level. It has nothing to do with the Mine being OP. It has to do with the Nick and Furytaco need buffs. 

DDs are not like light tanks in WOT. They are more like TDs. Just like in WOT TDs might have good fire power and are glass cannons, WG still balanced them to perform the same. The same should be said for DDs.

But based on w/r, it can't be compared between classes. DDs have an edge because they can cap and stay unlit unlike BBs. That alone is is proven by win rates up to T5 where DD have the highest w/r. After T5 DD dont see themselves in the higher w/r's

I guess the question is whether you want all the classes to be averaging the same damage. The SEA stats (because those aren't self-selected) have about the same pattern as far as damage, but win rates are different - Nicholas wins as much as Kongo despite nearly half the damage, Murmansk has a bizarrely high win rate for its damage, especially for a premium, etc.

With equal damage per game the DD/CL/CA do seem to win more, probably because they're better at base capping. It'd be fairly reasonable to assume that the trend would continue at higher tiers. It probably depends on whether you want damage or win% to be equal across classes.

Minekaze isn't that far off Omaha with about the same damage, so it at least looks like DD and CA damage could be equalized without throwing off win%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the question is whether you want all the classes to be averaging the same damage. The SEA stats (because those aren't self-selected) have about the same pattern as far as damage, but win rates are different - Nicholas wins as much as Kongo despite nearly half the damage, Murmansk has a bizarrely high win rate for its damage, especially for a premium, etc.

With equal damage per game the DD/CL/CA do seem to win more, probably because they're better at base capping. It'd be fairly reasonable to assume that the trend would continue at higher tiers. It probably depends on whether you want damage or win% to be equal across classes.

Minekaze isn't that far off Omaha with about the same damage, so it at least looks like DD and CA damage could be equalized without throwing off win%.

For game balance everything should be putting up similar numbers. DDs are just as lethal as other ships there is no reason why it shouldnt perform the same damage wise. 

Its like DDs are considered "light tanks" and are treated so. I guess my question is why people think that DDs should be expected to perform the worst out of all the classes like lights in WOT. 

Win rates are harder to fix. DDs and CAs are quick and can cap. Since capping is pretty huge in this game I can see how that is throwing off the win rates while BBs are left to dry. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For game balance everything should be putting up similar numbers. DDs are just as lethal as other ships there is no reason why it shouldnt perform the same damage wise. 

Its like DDs are considered "light tanks" and are treated so. I guess my question is why people think that DDs should be expected to perform the worst out of all the classes like lights in WOT. 

Win rates are harder to fix. DDs and CAs are quick and can cap. Since capping is pretty huge in this game I can see how that is throwing off the win rates while BBs are left to dry. 

That's the problem.  if you can deal as much damage as a BB/CV, but with far more mobility and have stealth capabilities, why play anything else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the problem.  if you can deal as much damage as a BB/CV, but with far more mobility and have stealth capabilities, why play anything else?

How is it a problem when at T5 it has the stealth and speed and still does the same damage. Its harder to deal the damage. Look at the damages. Its pretty much even across the board until you get to T6+.

DDs take 10x the work that BBs have to do to get the same damage. If you deny that then I dont know what else to say. BBs dont need stealth when you have HP and armor.
 

Its different play styles. Doesnt matter how the damage is delt, as long as the final damage is even across all classes

Well still no response I see. Please tell me how you think T6,7,8 DDs are balanced at nearly half the damage of all other classes per tier? I would love to hear this but everyone ignores it because they know its true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

actually, I may have mis-interpreted the DD survivability buff.  Currently, torps hitting the middle of DD's do ~1.35x damage, while torps hitting the bow or stern do ~0.9x dmg.  They are toning the 1.35x down to match the rest of the hull.  unfortunately, test is down so I can't check.  it's still a survivability buff, as it will now be impossible to oneshot some full HP DD's with a single CV plane torp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How is it a problem when at T5 it has the stealth and speed and still does the same damage. Its harder to deal the damage. Look at the damages. Its pretty much even across the board until you get to T6+.

DDs take 10x the work that BBs have to do to get the same damage. If you deny that then I dont know what else to say. BBs dont need stealth when you have HP and armor.
 

Its different play styles. Doesnt matter how the damage is delt, as long as the final damage is even across all classes

Well still no response I see. Please tell me how you think T6,7,8 DDs are balanced at nearly half the damage of all other classes per tier? I would love to hear this but everyone ignores it because they know its true.

Destroyers in general are obviously too weak, but (as with tier 5) battleships appear to win less often if destroyers and cruisers are doing the same damage. Destroyer and cruiser win% seem pretty close given the same damage. I think it has to do with pubs being extremely passive in battleships.

I think the ship classes should be doing about equal damage per game, but if you kept the players as they are now and adjusted the classes to do equal average damage you'd be liable to get shit on by matchmaking filling your team with pub battleships (admittedly, even without considering carriers there are already a fair amount of unwinnable matches due to team composition).

 

As much as I'd like it if destroyers and cruisers had the damage dealing ability of battleships, I get the feeling the effect on pubs would cancel it out.

 

Unfortunately I think balancing destroyers might be beyond Wargaming's abilities, with the way surface ship torpedoes work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Destroyers in general are obviously too weak, but (as with tier 5) battleships appear to win less often if destroyers and cruisers are doing the same damage. Destroyer and cruiser win% seem pretty close given the same damage. I think it has to do with pubs being extremely passive in battleships.

I think the ship classes should be doing about equal damage per game, but if you kept the players as they are now and adjusted the classes to do equal average damage you'd be liable to get shit on by matchmaking filling your team with pub battleships (admittedly, even without considering carriers there are already a fair amount of unwinnable matches due to team composition).

 

As much as I'd like it if destroyers and cruisers had the damage dealing ability of battleships, I get the feeling the effect on pubs would cancel it out.

 

Unfortunately I think balancing destroyers might be beyond Wargaming's abilities, with the way surface ship torpedoes work.

I don't see DDs being weak at all. They have a higher skill floor than most other classes: if you can't play them well you are not going to get good results. This is especially true of USN DDs at lower tiers.

The problem lies with the players not the ships. If you balance things according to stats alone then you are going to end up with a level playing field, the game being balanced into ultimate blandness.
In OBT I haven't yet played USN DDs but I wouldn't change my tactics from CBT in them: main targets are enemy DDs followed by ambushing anything else where possible. I would only go for CL/CAs when a good opportunity presents itself or I have no other choice. This doesn't change until the Benson gets lower detectability than torp range.
IJN DDs should be going for BBs first and foremost and using stealth to open water ambush anything else. You don't have the guns until later tiers to have the power to stay in a gun brawl.

I totally disagree with ship classes doing similar damage per game. If I am killing 3 destroyers in my Nicholas I am doing 35k dmg or so which is lower damage than a New York not even killing one BB but taking huge chunks out of it. Which is more effective? (Rhetorical question). Likewise in a Pensacola doing very little damage to ships but keeping other ships alive while fending off aircraft so that they can do damage. No, DPG is a terrible way to look at balance as a whole.

You can only use the stats to spot outliers and pull them up (for UP ships) and down (for OP) accordingly. Other than that you want to keep the ship class and national characteristics different enough to be interesting and purposely have some ships or even ship classes a challenge to play.

The Minikaze changes make it more challenging to play, it will still be the little bastard that it is in the hands of a good player.

Not entirely sure the CV changes will improve things, they haven't touched the disgusting crap that goes on at high tiers at all. The MM change for CV's -is- very welcome though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see DDs being weak at all. They have a higher skill floor than most other classes: if you can't play them well you are not going to get good results. This is especially true of USN DDs at lower tiers.

The problem lies with the players not the ships. If you balance things according to stats alone then you are going to end up with a level playing field, the game being balanced into ultimate blandness.
In OBT I haven't yet played USN DDs but I wouldn't change my tactics from CBT in them: main targets are enemy DDs followed by ambushing anything else where possible. I would only go for CL/CAs when a good opportunity presents itself or I have no other choice. This doesn't change until the Benson gets lower detectability than torp range.
IJN DDs should be going for BBs first and foremost and using stealth to open water ambush anything else. You don't have the guns until later tiers to have the power to stay in a gun brawl.

I totally disagree with ship classes doing similar damage per game. If I am killing 3 destroyers in my Nicholas I am doing 35k dmg or so which is lower damage than a New York not even killing one BB but taking huge chunks out of it. Which is more effective? (Rhetorical question). Likewise in a Pensacola doing very little damage to ships but keeping other ships alive while fending off aircraft so that they can do damage. No, DPG is a terrible way to look at balance as a whole.

You can only use the stats to spot outliers and pull them up (for UP ships) and down (for OP) accordingly. Other than that you want to keep the ship class and national characteristics different enough to be interesting and purposely have some ships or even ship classes a challenge to play.

The Minikaze changes make it more challenging to play, it will still be the little bastard that it is in the hands of a good player.

Not entirely sure the CV changes will improve things, they haven't touched the disgusting crap that goes on at high tiers at all. The MM change for CV's -is- very welcome though.

DDs dont just have a skill floor, they also have a skill cap. I dare you to find the best DD player and check out their performance. I bet between damage in wins he wouldnt be close to the average BB stats. 

No matter how good you are at aiming torps or staying stealth, the smallest change in speed or direction and even planes spotting you or you torps makes your shots useless. Just like arty, you can only be so good until RNG kicks in except RNG is the enemy. Also I hope you mean "its not the ship its the player" as in the player being the enemy player. Like I said, past T6 is just finding the one stupid driver that continues to drive straight. No skill in your DD will fix that.

And why should classes not do similar damages? This is a game about killing other ships, AKA dealing damage to other ships. If you are in a nicholas and you killed 3 other destroyers congrats. Now do that in a IJN DD with no firepower and DD torp kills being rare. That mean that one match you did great. Now look at all the games where its you in your DD, there is one DD on the enemy team, then what? You are going to kill 1 clemson and think you did as much work as your new york killing the enemy kongo? Because you didnt. Damage is still a metric of performance. 

Average damage is a great way to balance ships. If all ships of a given tier on average are dealing the same damage then that means that the bad player, the average players and the great players are performing as expected as each class averages out to be the same. 

And dont give me the "I want a class that is challenging to play". That just mean that the devs have a class that they know is shit. Yeah a good player might do ok but they can never do great. The fact that you can balance out damage for each class is enough to prove that different play styles work. Tell me how at T5 nearly all perform the same damage wise, yet are all not different enough to play? Dealing 40k damage in a Minekaze is such a drastic way to play compared to doing 40k in a Kongo. 

The fact people just want BBs to be the best because its a battleship. They can deal 15k citadel hits from 20km away will great accuracy, have incredible survivability, can shoot every 30 secs, can repair health, all for the cost of mobility which at T8+ means nothing when DDs are just as fast. But fuck me for asking for 1 torp a salvo to hit every 1:30 secs that I have to wait to fire again only to have all miss. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be making the mistake of assuming we all want DDs nerfed into the ground. The T6-8 DDs could use buffs, particularly to aerial detection range of both the ship and the torpedoes. 

That doesnt Magic away the evidence that the minekaze was OP. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that different ships need a different amount of damage done to them to remove them from the battle is one reason why damage alone is not a good indicator of balance nor is it a indication of how good a player is either.
Check out warshipstats.com to see why. The best ships to do damage in are currently CV's, ergo the best ships to get xp in are also CV's especially at higher tiers. Battleships come in a close second.
Destroyers and Cruisers look bad in comparison but they aren't though. A big factor in those stats is that the better players tend to play the better performing ships at higher tiers and the player base at those tiers is low compared to the median tiers. That will change once the tomatoes scrub their way up to T10 and fuck things up.

Yes, damage is a metric of performance but only one of many. We are going to have agree to differ on using DPG as a way of balancing, personally I think it is a shit idea to try to balance ship classes so that they do similar average damage. If you take the Minekaze as an example of a ship considered by those who know of being an OP ship. If you look at its average dmg you will see that it is actually pretty average for its tier. Now balance it so that its DPG matches say a Zuiho and you have created a monster. Conversely, balance all ships around the median DPG and some ships become utterly UP. If, as you maintain, the game is about removing ships from battles then KPG or K/D ratio would be a better balancing stat than DPG but they wouldn't be because they don't tell the whole picture. The game is not about how much damage you do nor is it simply about killing ships either, that is way too simplistic a view of how to win which is the only point of the game.

I never said I want a ship class that is challenging to play although I do.
There is a huge difference between ships that are genuinely shit and ones that require more than your average skill to get the best out of them. I don't want to be deprived of those challenges simply because tomatoes can't play them(RIP USN DDs and IJN CL/CAs).

T5 ships have a wide spread of damage from the Zuiho at 60k DPG down to the Nic at 25k DPG so your argument that they all do similar DPG doesn't stand up.
Dealing 40k damage in a Minekaze is only slightly above average DPG so nothing special and is slightly below average for a Kongo so nothing special there either.

The fact that you can balance out damage for each class is enough to prove that different play styles work.

 Since when is that a "fact"? I don't see anything to "prove" that at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The fact people just want BBs to be the best because its a battleship. They can deal 15k citadel hits from 20km away will great accuracy, have incredible survivability, can shoot every 30 secs, can repair health, all for the cost of mobility which at T8+ means nothing when DDs are just as fast. But fuck me for asking for 1 torp a salvo to hit every 1:30 secs that I have to wait to fire again only to have all miss. 

.... clearly you have not played BB`s or are just very lucky with your shots. If i shoot at a target 20k away, even the slow Merican BB`s, if he turns just abit, or slows down, i will most likely miss all my shots (cruisers are even harder and DD;s near impossible). At those range RNG plays more of a factor then aiming/skill, somewhat like long range torps. You can launch torps at 20k and get several lucky hits just like i can shoot at 24k and get several lucky citadels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You seem to be making the mistake of assuming we all want DDs nerfed into the ground. The T6-8 DDs could use buffs, particularly to aerial detection range of both the ship and the torpedoes. 

That doesnt Magic away the evidence that the minekaze was OP. 

Then whats OP about it stats wise? It cant be damage because its even across the board, is it win rate, because as I see it now the win rate flows from CA>DD>BB. BBs just cant win as often as DDs or CAs because their speed. This is proven just by sorting stats by win rate. Is it KRD is it surviavibility? If my Mine torps hit an enemy at 10km is it still OP or is the enemy jsut bad and drove in a straight line for nearly two mins?

Just saying it OP in good players hands doesnt mean is OP. A great skilled player can tear up a team in his Kongo but no one is saying its OP. In my Mine I do 51k and in my Kongo I do even better with 60k. So what does that mean in terms of balance. I just want to know why you guys expect DD damage or ability to damage should be so low.

The fact that different ships need a different amount of damage done to them to remove them from the battle is one reason why damage alone is not a good indicator of balance nor is it a indication of how good a player is either.
Check out warshipstats.com to see why. The best ships to do damage in are currently CV's, ergo the best ships to get xp in are also CV's especially at higher tiers. Battleships come in a close second.
Destroyers and Cruisers look bad in comparison but they aren't though. A big factor in those stats is that the better players tend to play the better performing ships at higher tiers and the player base at those tiers is low compared to the median tiers. That will change once the tomatoes scrub their way up to T10 and fuck things up.

Yes, damage is a metric of performance but only one of many. We are going to have agree to differ on using DPG as a way of balancing, personally I think it is a shit idea to try to balance ship classes so that they do similar average damage. If you take the Minekaze as an example of a ship considered by those who know of being an OP ship. If you look at its average dmg you will see that it is actually pretty average for its tier. Now balance it so that its DPG matches say a Zuiho and you have created a monster. Conversely, balance all ships around the median DPG and some ships become utterly UP. If, as you maintain, the game is about removing ships from battles then KPG or K/D ratio would be a better balancing stat than DPG but they wouldn't be because they don't tell the whole picture. The game is not about how much damage you do neither is it about simply killing ships either, that is way too simplistic a view of how to win which is the only point of the game.

I never said I want a ship class that is challenging to play although I do.
There is a huge difference between ships that are genuinely shit and ones that require more than your average skill to get the best out of them. I don't want to be deprived of those challenges simply because tomatoes can't play them(RIP USN DDs and IJN CL/CAs).

T5 ships have a wide spread of damage from the Zuiho at 60k DPG down to the Nic at 25k DPG so your argument that they all do similar DPG doesn't stand up.
Dealing 40k damage in a Minekaze is only slightly above average DPG so nothing special and is slightly below average for a Kongo so nothing special there either.

 Since when is that a "fact"? I don't see anything to "prove" that at all.

CVs are out of this discussion. As of now the class is so broken its not funny. Thats why I havent mentioned it. 

Yeah, damage is one of many but lets narrow things down. Win rate, like I said about DDs and CA will naturally win more because capping and resetting cap which is much harder for a BB abd CAs pulling ahead of DD because they can survive better.This cannot be changed easily unless there is a complete overhaul of the capping system. Slow ships will just lose more. Same can eb said for WOT. Is it KDR, survivability, average kills, hell is it even experience? 

Also like I said, stop bringing the CVs into this. If you read my post from the last page I have all the damage number for T5 except CVs and say that nothing needs to be nerfed but Nick and Fury needs buffs. Every other ship is damn near even on damage.

.... clearly you have not played BB`s or are just very lucky with your shots. If i shoot at a target 20k away, even the slow Merican BB`s, if he turns just abit, or slows down, i will most likely miss all my shots (cruisers are even harder and DD;s near impossible). At those range RNG plays more of a factor then aiming/skill, somewhat like long range torps. You can launch torps at 20k and get several lucky hits just like i can shoot at 24k and get several lucky citadels.

Accuracy compared to torps. My kongo has almost a 30% main battery hit. That is 3X the accuracy of my minekaze torps. And ok, if you want to narrow it down then lets bring the fight to 10km just like Mini torps. So what is more effective at that distance? The kongo firing shells that take mere seconds to reach the target with the target being unable to avoid the shells or the mini torps that take almost 2 mins to get there and if the enemy moves just 10 degrees every torp will miss. 

And you have clearly not played DDs if you think firing torps at anything 15km and up will result in several lucky hits. It just doesnt happen at that range. The chances of landing more than one torp at 15km+ is a joke. The spread alone is more than a ships length. While even a kongo at max range still has a good chance of even landing 2 shells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then whats OP about it stats wise? It cant be damage because its even across the board, is it win rate, because as I see it now the win rate flows from CA>DD>BB. BBs just cant win as often as DDs or CAs because their speed. This is proven just by sorting stats by win rate. Is it KRD is it surviavibility? If my Mine torps hit an enemy at 10km is it still OP or is the enemy jsut bad and drove in a straight line for nearly two mins?

Just saying it OP in good players hands doesnt mean is OP. A great skilled player can tear up a team in his Kongo but no one is saying its OP. I just want to know why you guys expect DD damage or ability to damage should be so low.

CVs are out of this discussion. As of now the class is so broken its not funny. Thats why I havent mentioned it. 

Yeah, damage is one of many but lets narrow things down. Win rate, like I said about DDs and CA will naturally win more because capping and resetting cap which is much harder for a BB abd CAs pulling ahead of DD because they can survive better.This cannot be changed easily unless there is a complete overhaul of the capping system. Slow ships will just lose more. Same can eb said for WOT. Is it KDR, survivability, average kills, hell is it even experience? 

Also like I said, stop bringing the CVs into this. If you read my post from the last page I have all the damage number for T5 except CVs and say that nothing needs to be nerfed but Nick and Fury needs buffs. Every other ship is damn near even on damage.

The stats for the Minekaze don't tell the whole story. Even in the hands of a competent DD driver the Minekaze is OP because of the other things it can bring to the game.
It is a deterrent: players that know a Minekaze is in an area of the map tend not to go into that area or they risk getting ninja'd.
It can drive off enemy ships because they can push a constant tide of torps in the general direction of ships in a particular area.

Enemy ship drivers, especially BB's, are going to have to turn to avoid incoming torps which means their guns cannot bear on target and, more importantly, can mean that the BB has to expose its broadside to other ships.
It can spot ANYTHING on the map without revealing itself except for other DD's.
None of those things will have any effect on your stats other than WR and possibly Survival. It is OP because it does its job far better than any other ship at its tier and is as good as, or better than, other ships at Tier 6/7.
We don't expect its damage to be low, it doesn't need its DPG to be high in order to carry a win. The "nerf" to the Minekaze reflects the reason why it was so powerful in 0.4.0 and will still be very powerful in 0.4.1.

CV's: yeah, the inconvenience of having a ship class that is helped by having its counter class (cruisers) get little or no reward for slotting aircraft so players tend not to want to do it. You cannot remove a class from consideration simply because you don't like its stats. In fact, you are demanding that ALL ship classes be balanced to have similar DPG so you are now arguing against yourself.

I have no idea where you are getting evidence of CA's and DD's winning more... calling you on that one.

You are not presenting any credible evidence or arguments to substantiate your "theory" about how to balance ship classes. If the game was as simple as "do as much damage to win" then yes, you may have a strong case. Fortunately the game is far from that simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then whats OP about it stats wise? It cant be damage because its even across the board, is it win rate, because as I see it now the win rate flows from CA>DD>BB. BBs just cant win as often as DDs or CAs because their speed. This is proven just by sorting stats by win rate. Is it KRD is it surviavibility? If my Mine torps hit an enemy at 10km is it still OP or is the enemy jsut bad and drove in a straight line for nearly two mins?

Just saying it OP in good players hands doesnt mean is OP. A great skilled player can tear up a team in his Kongo but no one is saying its OP. In my Mine I do 51k and in my Kongo I do even better with 60k. So what does that mean in terms of balance. I just want to know why you guys expect DD damage or ability to damage should be so low.

Yeah, damage is one of many but lets narrow things down. Win rate, like I said about DDs and CA will naturally win more because capping and resetting cap which is much harder for a BB abd CAs pulling ahead of DD because they can survive better.This cannot be changed easily unless there is a complete overhaul of the capping system. Slow ships will just lose more. Same can eb said for WOT. Is it KDR, survivability, average kills, hell is it even experience? 

once again, if everything can deal as much damage as a BB, but can take points, disrupt air attacks, or sneak around with an invisibility cloak, then why would anybody play BB's as they have zero advantages and all the disadvantages.  it would basically turn most BB's into Mice.

Accuracy compared to torps. My kongo has almost a 30% main battery hit. That is 3X the accuracy of my minekaze torps. And ok, if you want to narrow it down then lets bring the fight to 10km just like Mini torps. So what is more effective at that distance? The kongo firing shells that take mere seconds to reach the target with the target being unable to avoid the shells or the mini torps that take almost 2 mins to get there and if the enemy moves just 10 degrees every torp will miss. 

And you have clearly not played DDs if you think firing torps at anything 15km and up will result in several lucky hits. It just doesnt happen at that range. The chances of landing more than one torp at 15km+ is a joke. The spread alone is more than a ships length. While even a kongo at max range still has a good chance of even landing 2 shells.

that's why you don't fire torps at 15 km when you can shoot them from 8km or set up ambushes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Accuracy compared to torps. My kongo has almost a 30% main battery hit. That is 3X the accuracy of my minekaze torps. And ok, if you want to narrow it down then lets bring the fight to 10km just like Mini torps. So what is more effective at that distance? The kongo firing shells that take mere seconds to reach the target with the target being unable to avoid the shells or the mini torps that take almost 2 mins to get there and if the enemy moves just 10 degrees every torp will miss. 

You bring up accuracy in a game of infinite ammo and mention 7/10km torp whielding ship that reloads in 30 seconds.  Why *wouldn't* I fire my torps every half minute if I think something might possibly hit them?

And you imply using the 10km torps.  No wonder you miss with those slow beasts.  Use the damn 7km ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The stats for the Minekaze don't tell the whole story. Even in the hands of a competent DD driver the Minekaze is OP because of the other things it can bring to the game.It is a deterrent: players that know a Minekaze is in an area of the map tend not to go into that area or they risk getting ninja'd.
It can drive off enemy ships because they can push a constant tide of torps in the general direction of ships in a particular area.

Enemy ship drivers, especially BB's, are going to have to turn to avoid incoming torps which means their guns cannot bear on target and, more importantly, can mean that the BB has to expose its broadside to other ships.
It can spot ANYTHING on the map without revealing itself except for other DD's.
None of those things will have any effect on your stats other than WR and possibly Survival. It is OP because it does its job far better than any other ship at its tier and is as good as, or better than, other ships at Tier 6/7.
We don't expect its damage to be low, it doesn't need its DPG to be high in order to carry a win. The "nerf" to the Minekaze reflects the reason why it was so powerful in 0.4.0 and will still be very powerful in 0.4.1.

CV's: yeah, the inconvenience of having a ship class that is helped by having its counter class (cruisers) get little or no reward for slotting aircraft so players tend not to want to do it. You cannot remove a class from consideration simply because you don't like its stats. In fact, you are demanding that ALL ship classes be balanced to have similar DPG so you are now arguing against yourself.

I have no idea where you are getting evidence of CA's and DD's winning more... calling you on that one.

You are not presenting any credible evidence or arguments to substantiate your "theory" about how to balance ship classes. If the game was as simple as "do as much damage to win" then yes, you may have a strong case. Fortunately the game is far from that simple.

First here is my proof that CA and DDs are winning more than BBs. DD and CAs are marked in blue, where BBs are red. Look at the shift where more CAs and DDs are winning over BBs. I wish I could find an over all clase win rate to make sure.

b7K1D2N.png?1

And you can use the excuse that mini causes so much fear that BBs turn around. T5 and above this happens will all DDs. The second you are lit or then know where you torps are coming from you see them turn a book it. The fact that the minekaze denys map coverage does not only apply to that ship since the T6,7 have the same torps and can stay all but .3km closer and perform the same role.

 

About CV class and all classes being equal you are right. But this conversation is first of all about ships that have to actually play the game as a ship, and secondly CVs are such an outlier and they balance is not only a counter vs every ship but its even broken between its own class and tier. Its a whole different discussion but yes it should be the same damage. 

If I am not providing enough evidence on how ships need to be balanced then tell me how they are balance as it is? Why do the best players drive mostly BBs (except Onboard where he is great in everything)? Why dont they drive a lot of DD especially DDs after T5! If it was balanced wouldnt players like to play multiple classes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

once again, if everything can deal as much damage as a BB, but can take points, disrupt air attacks, or sneak around with an invisibility cloak, then why would anybody play BB's as they have zero advantages and all the disadvantages.  it would basically turn most BB's into Mice.

that's why you don't fire torps at 15 km when you can shoot them from 8km or set up ambushes.

Once again you are dealing the same damage in your DD as in your BB then whats the issue. 50k damage in a mini and 50k damage in a kongo. At that point its a matter of play style. I really dont get what you are trying say here. Just cause a mini can deal the same amount as a battleship, not everyone whats to work as hard to get the damage. As of now the mini is doing as much as a BB but how many minis do you see to kongos? By your logic that mean EVERYone will be driving minis. Well as I see it now its not the case.

And to torps, I even said that firing at 15km is nothing but luck in the post your quoted. I never fire at 15. 10km is the max range to land even 1 torp. But like normal no one reads the whole post.

You bring up accuracy in a game of infinite ammo and mention 7/10km torp whielding ship that reloads in 30 seconds.  Why *wouldn't* I fire my torps every half minute if I think something might possibly hit them?

And you imply using the 10km torps.  No wonder you miss with those slow beasts.  Use the damn 7km ones.

I guess I should mention T6+ DD torps with min and a half reloads. Mini, yeah I can see you point. 

But 7k are still avoidable. Still pulled 50k average dmg with the 7km torps for my first 5 games or so.

Jeez, Kongo vs MInekaze. I would win in the Minekaze -every- time.
 

Yeah mention a 1v1 situation. Makes sense. Throw in the fact that the kongo will attempt to stay as far away as possible and its fast, no one is killing anyone. 

He wont have a choice anymore will he, patch is out.

Doesnt matter havent had my mini for a while. Its still good with 7km torps, much different play style though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In actual patch-related news, I'm pretty disappointed that Ranked Battles aren't available yet, and the Sims new torpedo option is actually pretty comical.  I thought we'd get an option that traded some speed for range, but didn't think we'd trade a ridiculous amount of speed and damage for said range and 0.1 RPM.  Is there another destroyer in the game that can land a full load of torpedoes into an equal-tier battleship and not sink it?  The Sims is doubtful to kill a full-health Nagato with all 8 torpedoes, and with the torpedo bulge on a Colorado it could possibly survive even with it's meager 50k health.

Bliss-Leavitt Mk8 mod2B

Max Damage: 8500

Range:  9.2km

Speed:  49 knots

Reload:  0.9 RPM

 

The base 11600/5.5km/65 knot/0.8 RPM torps still seem the way to go, but all of that just means that I'll still never play the damn thing unless I'm feeling whimsical.  The rest of the patch seems like good work though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In actual patch-related news, I'm pretty disappointed that Ranked Battles aren't available yet, and the Sims new torpedo option is actually pretty comical.  I thought we'd get an option that traded some speed for range, but didn't think we'd trade a ridiculous amount of speed and damage for said range and 0.1 RPM.  Is there another destroyer in the game that can land a full load of torpedoes into an equal-tier battleship and not sink it?  The Sims is doubtful to kill a full-health Nagato with all 8 torpedoes, and with the torpedo bulge on a Colorado it could possibly survive even with it's meager 50k health.

Bliss-Leavitt Mk8 mod2B

Max Damage: 8500

Range:  9.2km

Speed:  49 knots

Reload:  0.9 RPM

 

The base 11600/5.5km/65 knot/0.8 RPM torps still seem the way to go, but all of that just means that I'll still never play the damn thing unless I'm feeling whimsical.  The rest of the patch seems like good work though.

Wow I didnt think the upgraded torps were going to be that bad. Kind of sad. But at T7 ranked it might not be that bad of a DD. We will have to see though. But any T8+ ship it will do nothing but tickle the enemy.

Also why are ranked battles not ready yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then whats OP about it stats wise?

Among DDs:

2nd highest win rate.

5th highest damage, exceeding EVERY tier 6, 7 and 8.  

2nd highest kill rate.

2nd highest KDR.

5th highest survival rate.

 

DDs dont just have a skill floor, they also have a skill cap. I dare you to find the best DD player and check out their performance. I bet between damage in wins he wouldnt be close to the average BB stats. 

No matter how good you are at aiming torps or staying stealth, the smallest change in speed or direction and even planes spotting you or you torps makes your shots useless. Just like arty, you can only be so good until RNG kicks in except RNG is the enemy. Also I hope you mean "its not the ship its the player" as in the player being the enemy player. Like I said, past T6 is just finding the one stupid driver that continues to drive straight. No skill in your DD will fix that.

And why should classes not do similar damages? This is a game about killing other ships, AKA dealing damage to other ships. If you are in a nicholas and you killed 3 other destroyers congrats. Now do that in a IJN DD with no firepower and DD torp kills being rare. That mean that one match you did great. Now look at all the games where its you in your DD, there is one DD on the enemy team, then what? You are going to kill 1 clemson and think you did as much work as your new york killing the enemy kongo? Because you didnt. Damage is still a metric of performance. 

Average damage is a great way to balance ships. If all ships of a given tier on average are dealing the same damage then that means that the bad player, the average players and the great players are performing as expected as each class averages out to be the same. 

And dont give me the "I want a class that is challenging to play". That just mean that the devs have a class that they know is shit. Yeah a good player might do ok but they can never do great. The fact that you can balance out damage for each class is enough to prove that different play styles work. Tell me how at T5 nearly all perform the same damage wise, yet are all not different enough to play? Dealing 40k damage in a Minekaze is such a drastic way to play compared to doing 40k in a Kongo. 

The fact people just want BBs to be the best because its a battleship. They can deal 15k citadel hits from 20km away will great accuracy, have incredible survivability, can shoot every 30 secs, can repair health, all for the cost of mobility which at T8+ means nothing when DDs are just as fast. But fuck me for asking for 1 torp a salvo to hit every 1:30 secs that I have to wait to fire again only to have all miss. 

Damage?  No.  Win rate?  Yes.  Only 1 BB has an average win rate higher than Minekaze, and it's only by a margin of a tenth of a percent.  

 

Why should classes not do similar damage?  Asking that question demonstrates a severe lack of understanding of the game.  The only way all ships should have a similar average damage is if this were a 1v1 game, or if the only objective was to do damage.  Some ships need higher damage, since it's the only thing they can do.  DDs have the ability to leverage their speed and stealth to cap bases, find carriers, or set up ambushes.  No other class can do those roles so well.  You can't expect them to be damage leaders too.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Among DDs:

2nd highest win rate.

5th highest damage, exceeding EVERY tier 6, 7 and 8.  

2nd highest kill rate.

2nd highest KDR.

5th highest survival rate.

 

Damage?  No.  Win rate?  Yes.  Only 1 BB has an average win rate higher than Minekaze, and it's only by a margin of a tenth of a percent.  

 

Why should classes not do similar damage?  Asking that question demonstrates a severe lack of understanding of the game.  The only way all ships should have a similar average damage is if this were a 1v1 game, or if the only objective was to do damage.  Some ships need higher damage, since it's the only thing they can do.  DDs have the ability to leverage their speed and stealth to cap bases, find carriers, or set up ambushes.  No other class can do those roles so well.  You can't expect them to be damage leaders too.  

Now what is OP about it stats wise compared to every class just not DDs. Comparing it to other DDs will give you skewed results because 6,7,8 are doing god awful because players get better.

Also if only one BB is better than Mine w/r then what should be done to fix it? Look at my image above. BB jsut naturally lose more that DDs and CVs because speed alone. Its not jsut a minekaze issue. 

Yeah classes have their own roles. Yeah the DDs are great at abushes and capping, killing CVs, ha, you think that is viable? But DDs might be good at those roles but ambushing is not always a thing, capping is not always a thing, catching the cv is not always a thing. But dealing damage is between all classes. Great DDs can ambush but with the amount of planes alone prevent ambushes from ever happening. Same for ruining your torps in the ambush. Capping is also never always a good thing be it time restraints, if you can even reach the cap, is there a CV that can light you? CV hunting, while it sounds good a ton of CVs can push 28+ knots. I dont know if you tried it but even pushing 38 knots with boost is impossible to reach a CV in a reasonable amount of time. Not including the CV planes attacking a spotting and drawing attention to the DD. DDs are great when they can fill their roles in the ideal situations but they cant always fill their roles like BBs can which is dealing damage. Maybe if spotting damage is included I would feel better. I am constantly screening for my team but you get nothing for it. 

 

I think there needs to be a separate thread on DD balance as a whole. Its my fault I keep mixing minkaze discussions with T6+ DD discussion, I dont think either one of us are getting the points of the other person. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...