Proposal for Bluewater Naval Changes

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
1

As the title suggests, here’s a thread for various ideas. This post will be updated as patches go on and the game evolves. Also would like to hear your opinions and proposals for changes.

BR change and/or nerf ideas
HMS Prince of Wales: 8.0 → 7.3
Reasoning: 35.6cm shells so bad that spitting on the deck of an enemy ship would deal more damage. The secondaries are also worthless since they’re not zeroed in properly. 7.3 bracket allows PoW to be a competitor to Scharnhorst.

SMS Westfalen and SMS Nassau: 6.0 → 6.3
Reasoning: the rapid fire main guns on these ships allow them to outmuscle practically everything at 5.0 to 6.0 while also being able to deal with most 7.0 ships. This bump will be a hard nerf as it’s not a complete slaughter in a down tier. Even though they’ll still see destroyers.

Sovetsky Soyuz:
Overall armor plate thickness reduced by upwards of 15 to 25%. APCBC Explosive filler reduced from 25.7kg to 19kg, SAP explosive filler reduced from 88kg to 45kg.
Reasoning: More or less the single best ship in the game. Good speed, maneuverability, ridiculously good guns and is practically immortal when played by a competent player.

This armor nerf will allow plenty of ships to actually start cracking it while also requiring the user to think more tactically. Explosive filler nerf is obvious.

Richelieu and Clemenceau: 8.3 > 8.0
Reasoning: overtiered, underarmored and just sounds like the right spot.

Italia and Roma: reload time changed from 45 seconds ace crew down to 31
Reasoning: Partly historical, partly balancing. 45 seconds is not okay in a tier where 22 to 28 seconds is the norm.

American dreadnoughts: 40 seconds reload (aced) changed to 30 seconds reload
Reasoning: American battleships are slow and easily killed despite the sheer amount of secondaries they have. This puts them on parity of their foreign cousins (Britain and Japanese 35.6s) and giving them some ability to fight the RPM monsters of the tier.

HMS York: 5.3 > 5.7, dispersion buffed slightly
Reasoning: HMS York is one of the single most dangerous cruisers in same bracket and a bully to everything else below it. A competent York is literally only balanced by its dispersion being notoriously bad. SAP being a limiting factor is not an excuse since the 20.3cm SAP can deal with any threat that isn’t a battleship.

The BR bump will force it to more often see ships that are comparable to its level of power.

IJN Yamato and Musashi: bow armor and barbette plates increased by 10% (rounded to nearest 10, ie citadel armor belt from 410mm to 450mm), Maneuverability buffed to historical values, sectional health nearly doubled
Reasoning: Almost completely outclassed by other nation 8.7s. The 46cms - while nice on paper - still need to pixel hunt the Soyuz and Iowa (lesser degree than Soyuz) for an instant kill while any shots at the A140 class will often result in death or near lethal flooding.

This buff to maneuverability to historic values and armor should make them more survivable while still retaining viable weakpoints for good aiming.

The sectional health is fairly obvious; Yamato is a F A T ship and this should keep her in the fight a bit longer.

IJN Amagi: buffed maneuverability, overall ship size reduced slightly
Reasoning: She was factually shorter than Yamato, this size change will put her in line with proper size. The maneuverability buff will give some chance to attempt to dodge incoming shells while still retaining her poor armoring

IJN Tosa: 8.0 → 8.3
Reasoning: This is what Amagi WISHED it could be. Better armor and maneuverability and the same bite. 7.0s (to be fair, most ships in the 7.x bracket can’t fight this oppressive monster) can’t kill it and the only other threat is honestly another Tosa. Did I mention it can survive multiple magazine detonations and still not die?

IJN Kako: 5.0 → 5.3, reload (first stage) improved from 4 to 4.5 RPM, second stage from 3 to 3.5, dispersion buffed slightly
Reasoning: Most destroyers below 5.3 cannot kill her while she has a habit of mag detonating things at 10km when the guns actually hit. AP in the early brackets are also scary good despite the ship being painfully mid.

HMS Rodney and HMS Nelson: Sectional health buffed 50%, excluding frontmost bow and stern rearmost stern

Reasoning: The Nelson class is supposed to be durable and their current sectional health doesn’t reflect this durability. This HP buff should allow them to last a little bit longer in concentrated firefights and outmuscle potential 1v1 engagements without tilting their power level too much.

Edit 1:
Added a few ships.

Edit 2:
Added Nelson class, clarified edit 1.

7 Likes
2

Oh boy, double post.

This one for maps:

Palau Islands: adjusted bluewater spawnpoints to A team Northwest, B team southeast, added spawnpoints to west and east. Coastal spawns adjusted to reflect this change.

Reasoning: the idea behind Palau seems to be a mid to close quarters brawl in and around B area with various routes in and out to other flags. This adjustment should make the map more enjoyable overall.

Norway (domination): Complete redesign of East side for 4.7+. Map size increased by 10x10km

Reasoning: East side of Norway has next to no counterplay for team A (north) once team B (south) locks it down, resulting in fast, one sided victories. This redesign will allow team A an actual chance instead of meat grindering into B and C.

Norway (Encounter): Spawns pushed about 5km north (team A) and 5km south (team B), map broken up into two tiers (4.3~5.0 OG, 5.3~6.3 New)

Reasoning: 10km spawn distance increase is a bit obvious for the new bracket. Terrain adjusted accordingly, obviously.

Andaman Sea: 3.0~6.0 > 3.0~5.3, terrain adjusted to be more ‘fair’

Reasoning: Battleships have no reason to be on this map, nor high tier cruisers. It was clearly designed for destroyers and PT boats and this will keep it mostly as such.

Various bits of terrain (like the big island west of C) shifted to provide more balanced cover for both sides. Some rocks protecting the inlets into B and A removed.

Like with the first post, feedback is appreciated - as is your ideas and reasoning. If it’s agreed upon enough, your ideas (with credit and a link to that post!) will be added to these.

3

Tbh i think the Ship changes (not sure about Destroyer/Cruiser changes as i dont really play them) are quite good suggestions, unfortunately i feel like Gaijin is semi-afraid of listening to people that actually play Naval for some reason so they will probably just ignore them :(

4

Get enough eyes on it and something [might] happen for the better.

5

Hi there!

Please change USS Phelps from 5.0 to 4.7
Has the same amount of guns as USS Cowell (4.7) and about 2/3 of the crew. Cowell has all guns in separate turrets, Phelps has 5 guns in 3 turrets, which is a negative if one turret gets hit you likely lose 2 cannons.

1 Like
6

I’d argue most of the DDs across the board need to be shifted down in rating by .3 or more to pull them away from dealing with battlecruisers, let alone most heavy cruisers.

7

Regarding BRs, I think that all BRs in all game modes, but especially Naval, need to be flat-out doubled. Bluewater should extend all the way from 1.0-Top Tier, with the HMS Churchill possibly being BR 0.0 due to being above and beyond worse than everything else.

I think all AI gunner mechanics need utter deletion. If you don’t pay attention in a plane or tank, you get surprised and blown to bits - why should Naval be any different?

I agree on the maps being mostly hot garbage.

8

I gave you an explanation in another thread. No.

1 Like
9

geninuely horrible take why would it lower than hood with a thicker main belt

the scarnhorst is only 7.3 cause you can shoot its barbettes and magazine it via fire but this POW cannot do that also the wales would be facing 6.3s like neveda where it has same pen same guns and a way faster reload

10

The shells are worse than most 6.7s with penetration that almost makes the Nassau class shells in comparison look good.

11

nassau has 472mm of pen max hood has 650mm wyoming has 576mm scarnhorst has 582mm

and it maintains its PEN way better than all of them 7500M it has 517MM
wyoming drops to 416MM nassau drops to 276MM

12

And Prince of Wales has 624mm at point blank with APCBC.

7.3 is - in my opinion - reasonable as this makes her a competitive foil against Scharnhorst and other 35.6cm ships.

Moreso if the other changes were made

13

scarnhorst has infintely less pen at range than POW and most other 7.3s dont even have half the armor

14 inch carriers way more velocity at range than a 11 inch and prince wales at range can just pen and go straight into the magazine one tapping it

14

Which she (Scharnhorst) makes up for with firerate and and close range durability (with an obvious asterisk).

PoW may have more pen at range but her dogass muzzle velocity limits her ranged capability.

15

basically every map is long range and a critical one shot kill is way more useful than bunch of hits that only kill 10 crew

16

except it doesnt cause she cant be penned at range by scarnhorst as its pen at just 7500 M is 303mm while the POW has 493MM

17

And map additions (that don’t suck) as well as changes to others would also adjust this as well.

18

even at point blank range the POW wins cause scarnhorst would have to sit there and drain its crew out while the POW can just hit its barbettes a few times and explodes

19

And almost half the firerate. Scharnhorst can easily knock out turrets until she is in range.

Not necessarily given the severe skill issue someone had with their Pr23 being unable to kill a Scharnhorst at 6+km.

At point blank, Scharnhorst is as much a threat to PoW as she is to Scharnhorst as Scharnhorst has G7As to supplement the ridiculously fast firerate.

20

prince of wales can litreally do same thing