https://navyfield.com/Community/Forum/View.aspx?category=Z01&num=14205

The following you may take as the official statement from the test team unless somebody calls me off.  This comes from the point of view of the person who wrote 90-95% of the patch requests over the last thirty days.

Here are the tiers and levels of all the Event BB's and CV's, new and old:



MN has no EBB2 due to the BB2 hulls given us to work with and the extremely good MN EBB guns (originally for Danton).  RN and IJN have no EBB5 because SDE did not patch those hulls, period.

The rest of this thread has to do with a bit of clarification on the patch notes put out late last night.

In most areas, normal ships were not on the table for us to modify.  Only when EBB/ECV balance forced or allowed it did we change any stock ships or guns.

The Sovietsky Soyuz and Vittorio Veneto costs have always been too low.  They were both bumped over 4 million to put them in line with the other BB5's.

The Yorktown was given an increase to its R-slots in order to carry hedgehogs, and this change was reflected on the Enterprise.  The ECV Victorious underwent a similar change.

The H-39 and H-44 as well as the Stalingrad and Sovietsky Soyuz had changes made to their R-slot values in order to perfect guns and binds designed for EBB's (keep reading).  These alterations do not affect the number of binds able to be carried on any of these ships.

All EBB's and ECV's had their levels examined and costs changed for no reason other than tactical value in Normal Rooms.  In the past, they had all been extremely low.  This was also noted and corrected on the PCV's.

A couple ships had their tiers changed for various reasons.  The O-Project II 1942 has become an EBB4 to more appropriately fit the progression in support slots of the KM line.  As we made this change, we felt it needed a bit more than the KM BB3 guns it currently has, good though they are.  The H-39 N's were improved slightly and are designed to be a solid option on the KM EBB4.  The Bismarck 1943, as the EBB3, has the ability to carry the triple 14.96" guns and is clearly the anti-KM brawler.

Also having its tier changed was the Hyuga.  Many things were considered in working with the IJN EBB's and the lack of sufficient variety in IJN guns made it apparent that the Mutsu could not be made good enough at a tier higher than the Hyuga.  The Hyuga is now the EBB4 with all the punch it has ever had, though a tiny bit slower.  The Mutsu, like the KM EBB3, is a hard-hitter with a buffed FCS space for good spread.

As stated above, we had few chances to tweak any guns, but there was one that worked out perfectly.  The SN had a second set of BB4 guns intentionally broken long ago.  We grabbed these and made them to only fit on the Kronshtadt 1940 and higher level ships.  They have the same shells as the other SN BB3's but now have a true Soviet trait with the range of a Bismarck.

One thing not listed here that had been requested (and appears to have been patched on the Test Server) was a buff to the Hood dual 15".  As they are really only usable on the stock Hood and EBB's Valiant and Hood 1939, we sought an improvement to the spread to compensate for the incredible spacing between turrets on the Hood(s).  We felt this was a far more useful solution than giving the RN EBB4 a better FCS when so many other gun options are available for the ship.

Again, if you look at the gun data adjustment list, you will notice KM and SN BB4/5 guns there.  They were value changes only and reflect the ability to carry the proper number of binds on the ship.

All EBB guns were made to cost the same, as one was free and one was over 500% what most of the rest were.

Now, unfortunately, there are a few things in the patch notes that I cannot explain, nor can anybody else on the test team at this time.  Specifically curious, but not troubling, is the Rental Richelieu "gun control" change.  I am almost certain of what this change is (placement of R/T-slots) and it likely would have been requested in the future, but it was not in any of the requests we made during the EBB/ECV project.

Furthermore, the RM gun angle changes, though likely necessary, have not been tested and are not the work of the test team.  We will be pushing to get those changes undone as soon as possible, at least until they can be properly examined.

And finally, the P24 turning force change is absolutely not our doing.  BB6 work is a future project and we made zero changes to them in this testing session.  We will also be seeking to hold back this change.

As best I can, I will answer any reasonable questions pertaining to EBB's and ECV's and the work we have done on them.  This is not a thread to slam SDE.  Please keep your rants in other threads and this one can be kept for facts and the people who desire them.