Wouldnt every nerf or buff for Soyuz be an artificial one since the ship is completely artificial to begin with?
1 Like
what even is “artificial” in that context when most or almost all stats of that ship have no irl values? all the stats are artificial from the beginning, so they could be set anywhere that leads to better balance, unless ofc they want everyone to only play the soyuz because NO OTHER SHIP WILL BE VIABLE.
unless my english skills are kind of struggling there and artificial has a slightly different meaning in that context?
I mean would i want my favorite toy to be nerfed (to a “balanced” state where other ships of the same BR, same repair cost and with the same SL multiplier can actually compete no less, not worse than them but somehow equal) that i can just slap 10 enemy ships easily before dying, without any thought about doing things right and no need to use my brain, no need to care about that annoying angling or maneuvering while still trying to hit my shots in any way? Hell nah obviously if i was playing it i would want every single enemy ship to be at 10% my capacity so i could have as much fun as possible /s
Well, unless i cared about the game or the naval gamemode in itself and wouldnt like to see it go to ship, player numbers either go down or everyone just play the same ship. but maybe thats just me?
EDIT: Anyways, Soyuz repair cost 197 399 SL when? Since Soyuz K/D 7.2 / 1.7 for yamato is factor 4,24 multiplied with their shared repair cost of 46 608 fully spaded in naval rb is 197 399? Could also balance it like that, i wouldnt care. Still wouldnt play that mess but…
2 Likes
What people mean when they talk about artificial nefs to Soyuz is to give it stats that are below its design stats. So for example, arguing for the removal of its icebreaker bow to make it more vulnerable when bow on (although no one actually argued for this, it’s just an example).
So people who are against artificial nerfs to it are against nerfing its RoF, dispersion or armor because it’s not what was “intended” (even though there are very real and factual arguments to be made about nerfing all those three elements).
Of course, this is an massive double standard because ships that were actually completed gets hamstrung by issues they had IRL while ships that never got finished gets perfect stats since they never got to show whether they would’ve had issues or not. And considering the state of Soviet naval industry post 1917 revolution, we know for a fact that it wouldn’t have been able to build the Soyuz to specs, considering that Sovetskaya Belorussiya (a sistership of Soyuz) had to be scrapped in place after only 6 months of building due to tens of thousands of faulty rivets and they weren’t even capable of producing any Tashkent-class destroyer, only one was built by the Italians.
So gaijin either needs to apply the “intended specs is what we’ll use in game, for both completed and non completed ships” or Soyuz and any other grossly overperforming ship needs to get hit by the nerf bat, even if it’s a so-called “artificial nerf”.
3 Likes
I agree with all of that i have brought in these arguments multiple times already even though im not that informed about what could/should/would have been possible and the actual state of the soyuz’s construction besides what people and easy to research stuff on the internet states. Benefit of the doubt obviously has to go to the russian ship with probably hard to research specs that had hardly begun construction and was probably kept rather secret given the circumstances some 80 years ago and then scrapped because well…
The problem as you explained it ofc still persists anyhow
1 Like
The X-ray is only there to look pretty. It doesn’t resemble the hitboxes and everything else important to the game
No offence but these suggestions feels like they’re designed in a “please buff Bismarck without buffing it directly” kind of way, which is most definitely not a priority considering that it’s already ahead of other 8.3 BBs. We also don’t need Scharnhorst to go back to being unkillable either.
I do agree that kill crediting needs to be reworked however. The kill should go to the one that did the most damage, not the one that got the last hit.
4 Likes
assuming your talking about specfically the floodable magazines this would go to every boat maybe except the earliest dreadnoughts that includes Richileu rome bismarck yamato Iowa alaska kronshdhat soyuz hyuga ise fuso etc
its a mechanic for all 1910s and later boats some may not get them due to them not having it as a feature it will make it harder to ammo rack
its a buff for all ships that get ammo racked to easily
Not quite sure what youre trying to say, but nerfing them through specs will be a bit tough since, yk, they both existed, were actually floating and used in combat. They could go up in BR though.
Now, the soyuz could also go up in BR no problemo since its effectiveness clearly shows its doing way better than anything else but then it would either fight only itself, or still the other 8.7 ships like iowa or yamato, which is worse than the soyuz in every regard but slightly better pen on its shells.
If thats what youre pointing at i also dont really understand why youre argumenting or why you should for the soyuz since dont play any other hight tier battleships so why would you care with also having 0 experience in the 7.7 - 8.7 naval rb environment?`I mean there’s nothing wrong about having opinions, but when they are completely unfounded and you also are not affected by the matter why even care?
Ah no wait, I’m actually sorry, it shows you do have high tier BBs - statshark is hanging on for dear life atm…The soyuz. And basically only the sojuz with 0 matches in some other japanese ships. Or did you play and grind them in ec exclusively?
If that’s not the case that’s interesting man, If i had payed all that money for one ship (because i heard that its the most op thing in game) without experience with any other nations let alone ships of even the same nation i would also want it to absolutely be broken so i can play as bad as i possibly can and still slap everyone. Can’t you sort of see that this will be very or can turn very bad for the naval gamemodes because there will be no people that will want to play it in such a unbalanced state? just so you can sail around in the most op thing since the gamemode naval came into the game? You can then play the soyuz on empty servers, or only against other people playing the soyuz and 15 bots in each team. Thats going to be fun.
1 Like
Why would i need botfarming experience, if in NAB RP gains is better, have more people and not so sluggish? NAB had same aiming as NRB for almost decade if you about that famous “Superior RB” experience.
1 Like
Seriously bro, when gaijin test it in Dev server, nobody in here to complain Soyuz is tooooo OP, it should have been balanced or fixed it in the Dev server, but everyone only focus on real ships at that time. Then everyone got punched by Soyuz and cry like a kid call gaijin to nerf it? It is too late, at least it will still OP in 1-2 major updates.
For most listed ships, they can either withstand fires somewhat reliably due to having magazines lower down (like Richelieu or Iowa with half ammo) or just instantly evaporates when struck anyway (like Alaska or Yamato). The ones that would be the most positively impacted by your suggestion are Bismarck and Scharnhorst. In fact in Scharnhorst’s case elevator fires is the only semi-reliable way to kill it.
Same for the whole “more CQC maps” thing. This vastly favors their armor scheme while mitigating the weaker penetration of their shells. Meanwhile ships that rely on distance to survive (like Yamato) would get completely screwed.
This is indirectly buffing and nerfing the wrong ships.
RoF is considered a soft stat/balance stat so they could nerf that without increasing their BR. That’s why Rodney’s is lower than what it could achieve IRL for example.
@Kweedko But this is a bit off topic as this thread is about the new BBs, and Marlborough and Iron Duke have been in the game for a while, but if you wanna make a thread about currently overperforming ships in general feel free to, as you’re not wrong about Marlborough and Iron Duke overperforming.
Increasing the BR of Soyuz would do nothing to alleviate the problem. It would go from max BR to max BR, so unless you increase it to 11.0 were it will only face other Soyuz and bots, it will still see the same ships as it does right now (with the exception of 7.7) and they’ll still struggle as they do now.
Soyuz needs direct, hard nerfs to its firepower, armor or both.
Excuse me what? Tons of people complained about it was in the dev server and pointed out how busted it would be.
I don’t think there is currently overperforming ships, there is underperforming ones cause of bugs and wrong tune-up or bad BRs. Yesterday I’ve been on Souyz vs Iowa https://youtu.be/ra3DSSQ70Vs?t=4811 and can’t kill Iowa over the distance for twenty five damn minutes, it blown his ammo two times and still survive till the end.
You all here ranting over exclusive Soviet engineering, ship has been built to withstand the Bismarck types of ships, of course it’s good. If not the war, ship for sure has been completed and probably been one of the strongest ships it the world.
1 Like
(x) doubt
(x) big doubt
5 Likes
Not really sure what my terrible naval stats have to do with your fantastical claims regarding Soyuz?
3 Likes
It’s not about the naval doubts.
what on earth are you trying to say?