Jump to content

How silly is this - USS Massachusets


Musket22

Recommended Posts

I've posted often as to how silly I find it that this BB (and a few other BBs) have their ASW Air strike castrated to a range of 5km.

It just hit me that my Massachusets has secondary range reaching out to 10.8km with the AIR STRIKE range limited to 5km.

Oh yes, it's so great in surface and anti-air lets hobble it against the abominations!

  

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a lot of people in dismay over Massachusetts when the changes hit.

I have been playing BBs more the past couple months and I got to say I'm not killing subs anymore. I was killing them regularly in DDs. Most of the BBs I'm playing have 8km ASW [mid tiers]. I've scored plenty of hits but it seems negligible and an unworthy exercise at times. Sure you get a can or two to hit - but it is reliant on everyone nearby to participate.

Whoever said BBs are the best counter to subs must be smoking the wacky tobaccy. I just don't see it. I am dodging torps at times, sometimes not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Musket22 said:

I've posted often as to how silly I find it that this BB (and a few other BBs) have their ASW Air strike castrated to a range of 5km.

It just hit me that my Massachusets has secondary range reaching out to 10.8km with the AIR STRIKE range limited to 5km.

Oh yes, it's so great in surface and anti-air lets hobble it against the abominations!

  

If the submarine is detected, then focus your secondary battery gun on it.  Your main-guns are effective, too.  🙂 
Several ships have "short range" ASW depth-charge airstrikes.  It's a "balanz-ing" thing, given how well those ships perform in other ways.

People seem to be forgetting that the guns fire faster and H.E. projectiles are effective against submarines (when submarines are on the surface or at periscope depth).

Edited by Wolfswetpaws
  • Bored 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still smash in Mass. Love this ship. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Performing well against surface ships and aircraft is great but using that for justification to being neutered against the abominations is total crap.

My point is that it's AIR strike is less than 1/2 the range of its SECONDARIES.

That is a stuningly stupid fact!

Edited by Musket22
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, thornzero said:

There was a lot of people in dismay over Massachusetts when the changes hit.

I have been playing BBs more the past couple months and I got to say I'm not killing subs anymore. I was killing them regularly in DDs. Most of the BBs I'm playing have 8km ASW [mid tiers]. I've scored plenty of hits but it seems negligible and an unworthy exercise at times. Sure you get a can or two to hit - but it is reliant on everyone nearby to participate.

Whoever said BBs are the best counter to subs must be smoking the wacky tobaccy. I just don't see it. I am dodging torps at times, sometimes not.

10km+ safe range, click on sub, spam forever.

DD has to be OVER the sub to kill it, explain to me how is that easier PLEASE DO, PLEASE DO

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Musket22 said:

Performing well against surface ships and aircraft is great but using that for justification to being neutered against the abominations is total crap.

My point is that it's AIR strike is less than 1/2 the range of its SECONDARIES.

That is a stuningly stupid fact!

The only thing "stunningly stupid" is forgetting you're on a team.  😉 
Work together to sink the red-team ships.  🙂 

  • Bored 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Wulf_Ace said:

10km+ safe range, click on sub, spam forever.

DD has to be OVER the sub to kill it, explain to me how is that easier PLEASE DO, PLEASE DO

 

dc.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, thornzero said:

 

dc.jpg

amazing explanation, I am in awe of your anti sub skills

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Wulf_Ace said:

amazing explanation, I am in awe of your anti sub skills

You asked for it.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Wolfswetpaws said:

The only thing "stunningly stupid" is forgetting you're on a team.  😉 
Work together to sink the red-team ships.  🙂 

How about how you try to avoid the fact of AIRCRAFT being shorter ranged than SECONDARIES?

"Work together..." operative word is SHIPS - not the aggrevating abominations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Musket22 said:

I've posted often as to how silly I find it that this BB (and a few other BBs) have their ASW Air strike castrated to a range of 5km.

It just hit me that my Massachusets has secondary range reaching out to 10.8km with the AIR STRIKE range limited to 5km.

Oh yes, it's so great in surface and anti-air lets hobble it against the abominations!

  

Try just 4km on Giulio Cesare if you think 5km is bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Musket22 said:

Performing well against surface ships and aircraft is great but using that for justification to being neutered against the abominations is total crap.

My point is that it's AIR strike is less than 1/2 the range of its SECONDARIES.

That is a stuningly stupid fact!

100% agree. Balancing surface ships vs Subs based on said surface ship's interaction with other surface ships is asinine. Subs operate under a completely different set of mechanics and play mostly underwater. Balancing vs them should be its own thing. Gimping some surface ships (GC, MA, JB, OH, etc...) vs Subs because they are strong vs surface ships make zero sense. But this is WG who couldn't balance something with a scale. ASW range should be standard by ship type and tier PERIOD!

Edited by AdmiralThunder
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Musket22 said:

I've posted often as to how silly I find it that this BB (and a few other BBs) have their ASW Air strike castrated to a range of 5km.

It just hit me that my Massachusets has secondary range reaching out to 10.8km with the AIR STRIKE range limited to 5km.

Oh yes, it's so great in surface and anti-air lets hobble it against the abominations!

  

Massa is already very OP for its tier. Small ASW range helps keep her balanced. You guys cry about balance unless it’s one of the ships you play most. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Bored 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, thornzero said:

Whoever said BBs are the best counter to subs must be smoking the wacky tobaccy. I just don't see it.

Please explain to me how my Stalingrad with 14km conceal and an 8km airstrike is a superior ASW platform to any BB, which all have equal or better concealment with a 11km airstrike. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Type_93 said:

Massa is already very OP for its tier. Small ASW range helps keep her balanced. You guys cry about balance unless it’s one of the ships you play most. 

Read what Adm. Thunder said above you.

Subs are just aggrevating abominations that WG is INCAPABLE of intergrating properly. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Subs are poorly implemented and thus cause problems for every other class.  They could be good... but aren't.

Ships that don't have a true flat deck should not be launching flights of fixed wing aircraft even for asw... It doesn't work even fictionally and was dropped from all fleets in real life.   Like subs, the new hybrid ships just cause jarring disruptions to the game and remove any possible suspension of disbelief for this non-sim sim.  Helicopters work (but not as flights)... fixed wing didn't in the time-span of the game.

Halford... I love when it launches one plane and is quickly joined by the materializing flight around it...   Since none of these planes are actually recoverable in WG combat... they should all kamikaze instead of using munitions... ridiculous.  In fact, the tooltip for the Halford planes say there are 8 on deck...

WG is trapped in years of bad mechanics which keep them from implementing things that would make it all work... spotting being the most egregious example (not just plane spotting).

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Type_93 said:

Massa is already very OP for its tier. Small ASW range helps keep her balanced. You guys cry about balance unless it’s one of the ships you play most. 

We don't care about balancing submarines in the least bit. 
Short sub strike range doesn't balance anything. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Basically, the ASW gimmick is in WoWS because WG chose to paint themselves into a corner with the subs. I guess it takes a special skill to get so many things backwards which would be be admirable by itself if I we didn't have to try and cope with the mess they've made of things.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Type_93 said:

Massa is already very OP for its tier. Small ASW range helps keep her balanced. You guys cry about balance unless it’s one of the ships you play most. 

Unless Musashi has become the new gold standard of ship balancing, "balancing" a ship by completely neutering it's ability against a semi uncommon class is a very, very poor balancing method. 

17 minutes ago, Arcus_Aesopi said:

Ships that don't have a true flat deck should not be launching flights of fixed wing aircraft even for asw... It doesn't work even fictionally and was dropped from all fleets in real life.   Like subs, the new hybrid ships just cause jarring disruptions to the game and remove any possible suspension of disbelief for this non-sim sim.  Helicopters work (but not as flights)... fixed wing didn't in the time-span of the game.

Halford... I love when it launches one plane and is quickly joined by the materializing flight around it...   Since none of these planes are actually recoverable in WG combat... they should all kamikaze instead of using munitions... ridiculous.  In fact, the tooltip for the Halford planes say there are 8 on deck...

WG is trapped in years of bad mechanics which keep them from implementing things that would make it all work... spotting being the most egregious example (not just plane spotting).

This is a game and not a simulator. All your complaints, if "corrected" would make the game significantly worse. More realism does not make for a better gameplay experience.  

Edited by Unlooky
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Unlooky said:

Please explain to me how my Stalingrad with 14km conceal and an 8km airstrike is a superior ASW platform to any BB, which all have equal or better concealment with a 11km airstrike. 

Couldn't tell you about high tiers or the justifications regarding 'balancing op for tier'. Sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Unlooky said:

 

This is a game and not a simulator. All your complaints, if "corrected" would make the game significantly worse. More realism does not make for a better gameplay experience.  

That's not the real reason why this game is a backwards mess, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Admiral_Karasu said:

That's not the real reason why this game is a backwards mess, though.

Attempts to make the game more realistic would only worsen that issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Unlooky said:

Attempts to make the game more realistic would only worsen that issue. 

I'm telling you that, IMO, this has nothing to do with realism or lack thereof, but I agree with you that making the gameplay more consistent with an arcade level scaled down realism would, indeed, worsen the issue.

Now, if we look at the 5 km ASW range on the Massachusetts which is completely useless, more like a distraction even than a gimmick. If you spot a sub within that 5 km range and wait for your planes to go and do their stuff... chances are that by the time you manage to scrape off some paint on that sub it has already sunk you.

With the longer ranges, the ASW plane gimmick does work, sort of, but in most situations my time in game would be better spent focusing on the game play proper rather than watching a clumsy animation of bird droppings. Furthermore, how much fun this even is, even if you hit and maybe even sink the sub.

It would be much more fun to engage the sub using DD's or light cruisers using detection and actually hunt down the sub. I'm suggesting to you, though, that the arcade style game play isn't the principal reason why WG hasn't really implemented ASW this way. The reasons, as I see them, are two-fold. 1) A DD hunting a sub would be spotted and become a target for the opposing team defeating it's purpose as a sub hunter, and 2) the DD player might choose not to do it but instead look for an easier target to farm damage off.

WG has implemented the ASW plane countermeasure largely as a self-defense mechanism because the players can't count on anybody else doing the dirty work for them. There's no proper team play element in WoWS despite it nominally having two teams in every PvP battle. It's often been said that WoWS is a FPS where you take on 23 other players in any given match.

WG is to blame for this. They specifically incentivize yolo type gameplay and leave the players who try to play for the team unrewarded or even punished for their actions, when in fact they should have done almost the exact opposite. There's no cohesion among the team in a random battle, every action they take has to be motivated through the use of the stick and carrot. Until and if WG decides to change this approach, we are stuck with what we got.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Unlooky said:

Unless Musashi has become the new gold standard of ship balancing, "balancing" a ship by completely neutering it's ability against a semi uncommon class is a very, very poor balancing method. 

This is a game and not a simulator. All your complaints, if "corrected" would make the game significantly worse. More realism does not make for a better gameplay experience.  

 Not my argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.