[2022] San Diego's Initial Stats are a Flaming Turd

Firstly, please remember that these stats are what exist as she ENTERS testing. Testing can be a wild ride for a ship and see massive swings and changes depending on how she plays out in actual situations.

The reason Test Ships aren't talked about on stream is because what can be extremely X one day can become extremely Y within the span of a Day. Please wait for the finished product before passing final judgement.

---

Some things worth noting even at this early stage.

San Diego has a faster rudder by a second, a 9.2km Concealment when fully built for it, more AA in her mid/short ranges than an Atlanta has (which absolutely matters when she utilizes smoke/teamwork), and -16km range-.

1) Will she hit things at 16km? Depends on the player, and also depends on what testing data shows. If tweaks are needed, testing periods allow for tweaks.

2) 9.2km is terrifying when you have MBRB-boosted SAP tearing apart an enemy DD if you choose to close-support a friendly DD by either hiding just behind their Detection Front or in a smoke they've left (teamwork ftw). The Austin is similarly horrifying when a DD finds out that they are WAY TOO CLOSE to a SAP slinging monster using their MBRB.

3) 150 base AA dps out to 5.8 multiplies quickly. +50% from Defensive Fire. +50% from Priority Sector (+75% if spec'd). That quickly becomes either 337.5dps from 3.5-5.8km or as much as 496.12dps if spec'd and flagged. That's just the LONG RANGE. There's mid and short range as well (which the Atlanta does not boast to the same degree).
Further, San Diego runs a base 7 Flak, which goes to 8 with the Priority Sector skill... 8 Flak is enough for mid-point saturation and to start spilling over to sides, ESPECIALLY when assisted with other friendly Flak that further fills in holes.

---

I understand concern, but please keep perspective on a ship that hasn't even entered Testing yet.

Guys!
There's some great news that should take care of all of this. The ship has not even entered public testing yet.
It's literally the initial design and has yet to be tested by Supertesters, Community Contributors, Privateers, even the Wiki Editors (or me for that matter). By all means share your opinions on how you feel the ship should be adjusted based off the paper-stats, but let's keep the pitchforks down until people get their hands on it and some real gameplay can be tested.
*Side Note - please be respectful to each other in this thread when debating this.

Keep up with the devblogs and you'll see that boats in testing are altered frequently. Atlantico has been adjusted over 4 times now. Hornet is being balanced properly. IT DD's have had several tunings to them.
I'm sorry, but this is borderlining on panic over something that has yet to even begin the process.

It really isn't, though...
I've been on the player side, the CC side, and the WG side long enough now to know when something on paper doesn't speak to it's in-game capabilities.

It's an Austin at T8 on an Atlanta Hull. Is Austin workable?

Not literally. Make an effort, here please. The theme and profile are the same. The stats are different because they are ... different tiers.

Where's the fun in that?

Hahaha! I'm not the fire brigade, but I am interested in making sure people know the process and don't assume that literally the FIRST thing you see on it is set in stone.

As for Lert's reminder that ballistics are different - clearly they are. The too have the same setup in terms of tools, shell types, and likely will be similar in playstylel.
There will always be differences, especially across tiers. Try and focus on the core of what a ship is :)

Sometimes they need nerfs

I am under NDA while discussing the test ships and how they play, so bare with me that I cannot go into too much detail about the ships still in testing.
The IT DD's having gun-range reduced and increased is actually not necessary a nerf or a buff. Currently, the extremely short short on the IT DD guns is by design because it allows them to literally go permanently dark and disengage extremely fast by getting outside their own gun-range. It's not intuitive because few other ships currently in the game possess this quality, but once you try them I believe you will see how that plays out .

I'm not getting fired just to tell you whether or not I'm having immense fun playing the USS Hornet

I am confused why you have twice called me out in this manner. I've seen you post that you don't agree with the direction the San Diego seems to be aimed in (that of a Tier 8 Austin), but other than suggesting that the San Diego be a buffed Atlanta I'm not sure what you're hoping for me to communicate for you.

-

You've stated that San Diego was known as an AA escort. I am telling you directly as a person that is extremely aware of AA mechanics that the San Diego is very capable of blocking for other ships. It's quite likely that she'll draw the attacks onto herself instead, which is a valorous thing for an AA escort to do. If your fantasy version of this ship is one that provides AA escort to others, a version of the Austin is absolutely capable of doing that. The Austin's AA suite is terrifying.

You've also stated concern about the range of her guns and extrapolated shell flight times. However, those times don't exist in the game, because the San Diego doesn't exist in the game yet. Because this is a game, there is nothing stopping our design team from making the shells be more responsive than those of the Atlanta and have reasonable flight times for her maximum range. The Austin has a modified shell pathing compared to an Atlanta, so it's not unreasonable to expect a "Tier 8 Austin" to have a similar leg up should it prove warranted.

You've stated that the DPM of the ship is absolutely less than an Atlanta, and you are very correct. Game Design will often use "windows of strength and weakness" to allow for play patterns. Radar Cruisers have Radar until it runs out, then they don't have it. Austin has Main Battery Reload Booster until it runs out, then the reloads are slow. There is absolutely a huge potential for firing off 5 salvos in a 10 second window of time as opposed to the 2 salvos that would occur from a ship with a natural and continual 5 second reload time. How will that be useful? That's up to the player to decide. If San Diego is a Tier 8 Austin, she will likely be a very hard to ship to master which could be off-putting as many people may want the ship for her historical significance. I can certainly bring up that you'd rather she have a more basic play pattern to appeal to a wider audience.

You've stated that Radar should be included as part of San Diego's kit. You've also suggested having Smoke as an option instead, but to give the choice to the player. This is certainly something to consider, but if the San Diego plays with a friendly Destroyer spotting a few kilometers ahead of it, then it's quite capable of making a heck of an entrance even without a Radar. Further, the DD could even lay a smoke trail for the San Diego to use. It could be a wonderful ship used in a team oriented fashion, which again harkens back to an escort/teamwork role.

-

Is there a different reason that you can give as to why the San Diego should not resemble the Austin's playstyle in any way? Is the issue purely because the Austin is not known for damage capability? or because the Austin is considered extremely niche? Is this more of a comparison situation where you would prefer a Tier 8 Atlanta, instead?

Not agreeing with Mouse's opinion about the qualities and stats of a ship that's not out yet is not disrespecting her. C'mon, Chobi you know that...

You are equating your opinion that she "doesn't have good AA" with fact. It is not. It is not disrespectful, nor personal.
San Diego, as is current, has:

HIGHEST long-range DPM of cruisers for it's tier.


HIGHEST flak damage per puff for cruisers it's tier.


HIGHEST number of flak spawns for cruisers of it's tier.

Those are facts. How they play out in terms of practical use, that's up to interpretation, but trying to say that people disagreeing with you is disrespectful is absurd and I'm tired of it.

We are listening. We wouldn't 'be here talking in this thread if we weren't listening.
Listening does not automatically mean we agree. You cannot conflate those two things.

No, it is not.

Fair enough - looks like I missed the P-Bag when I was comparing.
My point still stands. Saying that the "AA is not good" is an opinion in this case, not a fact. Not one I agree with, either. I have every right to contend with your opinions and it is not disrespectful to do so.

Sure. I've done drawn out AA math before. I did a rather extensive breakdown on a Battleship for SailorMoon several months back.

The role LWM was referring to was of an AA Escort. The purpose of the AA Escort would be to provide AA/Aerial Flank Coverage. If a player wanted to enjoy the AA Role exclusively (which it's actually something I enjoy doing, personally), then dropping 6 Commander Points into AA (not counting Adrenaline Rush) is easy to do because of the fun factor.

I've gone and made a Paint write-out of the proposed AA (because she still isn't even in the game yet) and drawn some pictures about what blocking least-time CV lines does. I've also shown why a CV will not fly over/ignore San Diego as an AA escort (because it would be horrifyingly wasteful to consider doing so)

The Atlanta has extremely high HE dpm, but that capability does not translate into insane damage numbers. The reason is because they are destroyer guns with 21mm HE pen standard, 25 if you take IFHE (just enough to pen most cruisers she's going to see).
San Diego has SAP shells with 36mm base pen. Her shells will do more damage more often to more varied targets. Nearly any cruiser T8-T10 that isn't Russian or Napoli will be penned on the deck by the San Diego's SAP.
There is such a thing as Raw DPM and practical DPM.
Again... maybe it needs to be tested to see how it performs.

On the Community Manager front, I'm going to have to highlight your fairly extensive knowledge of WarGaming and its practices. In short, you don't need me to express the statement you made. You know this because your posts travel around the world in a matter of hours. Our Dev Team was already aware of everything you've written before Boggzy ever even jumped into the thread.

You are very aware of the weight your voice has, as do the ample amount of supporters that are in this thread because they believe in your work. You do good work, and it deserves the respect it has attained.

---

As for myself as a Community Manager, please understand that I'm a weird dude. There's a saying that if you're going to hire someone, hire someone Greedy, because you'll always know where their loyalty lies. As for me, I'm idealistic... so I've spent on average... 60-90 hours a week (or more?) working on these Forums, an internal project regarding the state of Co-Op and PVE Players, and a big drive to fix Player Behavior issues by working with Customer Support to make sure that Tickets are as powerful as they need to be. I'm happy to say we've been very successful on the Customer Support Ticket front as "Significant Actions Have Been Taken" <3

I genuinely want to represent the thoughts and concerns of players. I've been one all my life and I actually have a chance to bring that background and... hell, lifestyle to my workplace. Further, I'm encouraged to use that knowledge to make the game better. I literally woke up at 2:30am this morning and thought, "Well, I'm up. I guess I'll see what's on the Forums." The answer to that was this thread. I responded and went into the office. I stayed there until 6pm, and here I am continuing to work from home because I care about all this.

So please, do me the basic kindness to assume that I do actually care about folks that are upset about things. Also, I really am idealistic, so when I tell you something it's because it's genuine, not because I'm hoping to be a good sock puppet and earn a raise like a good little boy someday.

---

As for your concerns on the San Diego, she does seem to be looking like a Tier 8 Austin at the moment. Personally, I think the Austin is cool because I'm a support-style player. I teach Support CV and I enjoy the playstyle on any class I play (including in non-World of Warships games). So when you describe the San Diego as an AA Escort, my mind thinks "Support ship... that's cool".

Further, I bought the Austin partially because of its ridiculous AA (I am a CV main~), and also because I genuinely feel she's amazing when played close to the front line so that your detection is .2-.5km behind your DD's detection. When they trip across a DD, the Murder Blappening happens. If there's a smoke from the DD, all the better. Worst case, I just go dark because of her extremely low concealment.

I'm not a surface ship player to a Hurricane extent. My expertise in surface ships is NOT. I'm happy to bow to your abilities in that area and recognize that you may actively feel the Austin's playstyle is so niche as to be actively loathed by the majority of players...

... but please understand that when I'm telling you "I think X is cool", it's because I think X is cool. You don't have to like me, but I'm honest in this job. Why? Because you MUST be honest when doing this or else you will never, ever matter for either part of it.

---

Sorry for the wall of text. I've had Migraines for the last 2 weeks (getting my head scanned tomorrow *fingers crossed*). So, I'm tired. Tired me can be a rambly me, especially after a... 17 hour day.

The Primary Shell types for each of these ships is almost certainly:
HE for Atlanta
SAP for SD
Those are the comparisons you're going to want to make in terms of practical damage application.

You can compare the HE dpm of both ships if you want, but pragmatically you should be comparing the potential DPM of the ship's primary shell type: HE for Atlanta and SAP for SD.
It's like saying the Petropavlovsk is worse than Moskva because it has worse HE dpm...
When balancing you have to consider first what a ship CAN do. With MBRB an SD can shoot 5 volleys of SAP in 10 seconds. That's a massive amount of damage in a short period of time.

Ships with SAP and no HE do just fine :)
And yes, that's why we have testing - to see if it works or if it needs adjustment!

I don't think you quite understand how profound the impact the CC Exodus and all related stuff had on the company. Or more likely, you might have a suspicion but have been burned badly enough that you're not interested in whether stuff is different or not.

---

As for communicating to me about the San Diego, please understand something very important. I am NOT a history buff, and there is no conceivable way for me to be able to catch up to the average historical knowledge that this community has. What I DO have is a passion for analyzing game design and systems, so when you refer to the San Diego as some form of abject failure, you should understand that I am not following you on any form of historical connection or grounds.

You mention the firing rate on her guns is not historical. This has no bearing on my connection with the ship, while it very likely has a huge connection to the average player. If you want me to convey this knowledge, you need to express this in an educational format as "I am looking for a historical representation of a historical ship. This is the background, and this is how it translates into a design space". NOTE: You have done this to an extent, but on my last reading of your requests you expressed interest in the San Diego being an Atlanta... that has a 2.7 - 4 second firing rate. While I haven't run the numbers, a 2.7 second firing rate would be almost DOUBLE the DPM of the Atlanta... which is a ship that is already regarded as a damage outputting powerhouse. The Game Design/Systems side of me is immediately on guard at the thought that there's even the beginnings of a chance to justify that.

Further note: Using a MBRB consumable, you do actually get to achieve the Firing Rate you are requesting, albeit for limited windows of time. Again, this is perfectly normal in gaming. There are strength and weakness windows and a firing rate that advanced on anything with significant throw weight is quite jarring. Further, that would likely REQUIRE a hard reduction in Firing Range as well as something that made the shells even MORE obnoxiously floaty... which just sounds scary to consider (I personally hate floaty shells).

---

This "pretend to be right" stuff is really counter-productive. I've read that you feel that both Boggzy and I are not understanding and lobbying for your ideas, but it seems actively strange to me that you feel like you speak for the entire gaming population on this. As though a San Diego that has as Austin-style is such a tone-deaf affront as to be game-breaking... or rather, to be "community-breaking". It could be that I'm extremely tired, but I am genuinely vexxed on why you are so stanchly of this belief.

The company is like a giant body. The hands and feet are the servers that people play on.

Information travels from the fingers and toes up to the head and gets relayed internally to the organs that do the work of keeping the body alive. Vice-versa, the same goes out in reverse in the form of created product.

---

Effectively the information and thoughts expressed on the forum are communicated to GPI (Global Player Interaction) which keeps their fingers on the pulse of everything that's happening to make sure that everything is moving in harmony. It's an exceedingly busy position. They will take feedback from not just one hand or foot (server clusters) but the entire aggregate to give to the Dev Team and other facets of the company. This is how Feedback is collected daily.

Some aspects of Feedback can feel slow or as though they are ignored, but a fair amount of that is because current content being created is often 3-5 months in the future. If something was requesting a change, it may very well take both an amount of time to assess the necessity and impact of that change, and then a further several months to work that into the pipeline to be done. TLDR: Feedback is heard, but can often take long enough to feel as though it was missed. This is why testing processes typically span many months and involve smaller variables which can be tweaked as opposed to variable requiring code or extensive labor (so as to speed up the process/responsiveness).

@LittleWhiteMouse

Ok, again... I'm super tired. Please keep this painfully simple.

Your ASK is essentially...

A Tier 8 Atlanta.

This would likely involve Torps


Defensive Fire and AA that is at least X amount stronger than the Tier 7 Atlanta


An improved Rate of Fire as compared to the Tier 7 Atlanta


To have a Radar like the Tier 7 Atlanta does (or slightly stronger)

I don't think the Smoke/Radar choice would have much legs in the sense that the concept/trope there is more of a British thing. I realize Premium can bend concepts, but people know what an Atlanta is... and if you're looking for a Tier 8 Atlanta than that's going to mean Radar because that's what Atlanta has.

Are you willing to accept that the fire range would very likely stay the SAME as the Tier 7 Atlanta due to the latent power increase of having a faster firing rate? or would you be willing to accept that some form of additional shell float/worst ballistics would be required to deal with the 25-48% damage increase that you're requesting as a concept? Because... that's a shockingly massive increase in DPS for a single tier of difference if you're unwilling to accept a "windowed" DPS burst mechanic like a MBRB of some sort.

---

I -MUST- go to bed. Please understand that I have no ability to magically make ships different. However, if this is something that is Earth-shatteringly enormously huge, then I can at least try to understand what the actual ask is before I try to message folks tomorrow afternoon after I see a doctor.

Guys...
Please try to remember that you cannot directly compare the theoretical DPM of HE and SAP as a 1 to 1. It's just incorrect. They are two separate shell types with two separate characteristics.
Penetration:
USN 127mm SAP: 36mm (pens Bow / stern of nearly every BB below T8 / basically every cruiser deck that isn't Goliath / Petro / Moskva / Napoli / Stalingrad)
USN 127mm HE: 21mm (pens DD's / some light cruisers / all superstructures)

That's a HUGE difference. 127mm SAP can apply damage FAR more easily and regularly to a vast array of the game's ships, while 127mm HE gets much of it's damage from fires or by taking IFHE to raise the threshold to 26mm. It's direct-damage through penetrations as a primary source vs. fires as a primary source.

You simply cannot equate the Atlanta's HE dpm directly with San Diego's proposed SAP dpm without acknowledging that - it's just wrong. It's wrong the same way saying "Petro has T5 HE dpm, so it's weak" is wrong.
Theoretical DPM and Practical DPM are not the same thing and I'm going to start calling it out.

If you guys are curious and want to know what the armor thresholds are, this site is extremely useful: https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Armor_thresholds
The very first section is armor thickness thresholds. 127mm SAP with 36mm pen is enough to penetrate a HUGE variety of what you will commonly face at T8.