Sander93

It's an advanced game option that WoT didn't have in the beginning either, it will most likely come eventually but you have to remember the game is still CBT so luxury features are not implemented yet.

I disagree, I think the difference in meta is the very reason for the difference in average length so it's actually a nice way to compare them. The timer length / average battle length ratio could explain the difference in draw percentage. WoT's is ~3 (15/5) while WoWS' is ~1,3-2 (20/10-15) which means there is a lot less room to deviate from the average length, causing more draws. I don't agree with increasing the battle timer with such a large margin either, I'm just trying to explain why the percentage is so (relatively) high.

High percentage of draws is probably due to the fact that while the average length of a match has pretty much doubled compared to World of Tanks (4-6 minutes there), the battle timer has only received 5 extra minutes (a 33% increase). Having a 25-30 minute timer would probably reduce the amount of draws by a fair margin.

Scouts can help a battleship in a fight against a destroyer and that's pretty much it, but still you'd have to be lucky for the plane to actually fly towards the destroyer and not scout the vast oceans behind you. Other than that, obviously a neglected mechanic so far.

It might actually be a nice solution to give planes a fuel tank so that they can only fly a certain amount of kilometers around the map, just like all guns have a max range. It would limit CVs to engage whatever is in their range instead of endlessly flying squadrons all over the map in search for the easiest target. Instead of a lone battleship on the other side of the map they would be forced to engage the battleship that is close but is escorted by some cruisers, and CVs wouldn't be so overpowered anymore (considering most recent weird nerfs could be undone because of this).

There were some serious problems with the range of some battleships before (3.1), especially on the North Carolina where every salvo fired towards max range would fall some kilometers short. It was so bad I eventually decided to skip the grind and use converted XP to unlock the Iowa. To be honest I completely forgot about it and I don't know if they fixed it yet. Haven't seen anyone talk about it since the minipatches, until now.

This game mode is seriously flawed. The 1000 score is reached well before one team can take out the other (in 9/10 matches) so all a team has to do is survive until their counter reaches 1000 while sending a single destroyer to sail into the enemy cap for 10 seconds to set them back a few points. It's quite ridiculous to be honest. There's no tactics involved whatsoever, it's just sheer luck whoever gets to sneak in a destroyer for a few seconds.

Iowa main battery shoots like a shotgun up close, 3/4 of the time you get a bad RNG roll and shells fly all over the place. Not a problem when you're targeting battleships or cruisers, but it makes it almost impossible to reliably hit a destroyer. 2-3 of 9 shells hit for overpen 1350 damage and then you better pray you won't get a wave of torpedoes to the face while you take a 30 second reload. Gonna load HE next time to see if that makes a difference in these forced close encounters.

Perhaps there is a difference on lower tiers, but the Iowa seems almost incapable of killing same-tier destroyers because its massive shells completely overpenetrate them. It was like this before, except back then well-aimed shots could hit destroyer 'citadels' and do big amounts of damage. This currently seems impossible. 9/10 direct hits do the 1340 damage (if they do damage at all) and if you're incredibly lucky there will be one shot that does 3000. Destroyers should be immune to battleships at a distance due to their small profile and maneuverability I agree, but right now they can't even be killed up close because there's nowhere a battleship can aim to do reliable damage.

The only thing that bothers me is the current immunity DDs have when taking hits from 350-406mm shells. Last game I had to assault a Benson which was capping in my Iowa and despite hitting him 10 times I barely did any damage because my one-ton-shells overpenned. Shouldn't the sheer energy of such a shell rip a small ship apart? Then there's the issue of secondaries being so influenced by RNG they barely hit anything. It's nearly impossible right now to kill a destroyer with a battleship save for lucky shots, not even at close distances which is kinda unfair. As a battleship you have to take the risk of getting close so you can reliably hit it, while risking getting shotgunned by a load of torpedoes. However right now destroyers are so hard to kill it's not really a risk anymore but rather a suicide mission. Other than that, the Iowa is still my favorite ship to play. Hella fun.

Yeah Baltimore's AA is better, the Des Moines has 76mm guns replacing the 40mm Bofors and even though these have longer range their DPM against planes is pathetic. My experience is pre-9.1, it sucked back then. Being tier 9 it systematically faced higher opponents while having too few improvements compared to the Pensacola and New Orleans, basically it couldn't keep up with the 'matchmaking'. The ROF boost of 3.1 probably helped a bit but I doubt it's suddenly worthy of tier 9. It's a nice AA escort cruiser but that's pretty much it. Can't comment on its performance with the current HE mechanics either.

Ha yeah didn't know about that one, surely that must be an oversight / bug. I was talking about the difference in 5km - 5,1km range for the Yamato as described in the OP.

Well, wouldn't there be a difference in weight/velocity/charge between AP/HE shells fired against ships and flak rounds used against planes, explaining a different range?

I agree. Complete destruction is stupid. Even though it's rare, everyone has had matches where most of their firepower had been permanently destroyed and it just isn't any fun. Especially because it's purely up to luck and RNG to knock out turrets, it's almost impossible to deliberately aim for it (unlike in WoT where you could aim for the turret ring). They should remove it, and replace it by some kind of -50% effectiveness penalty on characteristics. Either -50% load time, -50% turret traverse or -50% accuracy.

RNG to some extend is fine, but the citadel hits are overkill. Just last match a bad player (Izumo) managed to place one good/lucky broadside out of several failed attempts and hit my Iowa for 40.000 damage in one salvo. After that I managed to maneuver in such a way that I ended up sailing straight into his side and placed several well-aimed salvos with the forward turrets right into his non-angled side for a grand total of maybe 10.000 damage (10-20 hits). The only thing skill-based right now is maneuvering in such a way that you are less RNG-dependent when receiving fire, while there is barely any skill in your damage output. You can aim for exactly the right spot and barely do any damage as long as the game doesn't grand you citadel hits. Meanwhile some noob player takes away half your health because he happened to fire one lucky salvo.

No it's not, Wargaming can keep track of every single detail that happens on the servers. As long as we simply play enough they can get a big chump of data for damage balance. A big pile of statistical damage data will be of way more use to them than a bunch people randomly whining about it. And besides, screaming HE does too much damage or starts too many fires like most people in this topic do can not be considered 'giving feedback'. I don't mind the current HE damage (and I'm only playing the Iowa these days so do mind I'm a victim here) although the fire chance might be a bit excessive right now. But hey, I know how much it sucked to come up against a battleship with a cruiser pre-3.1 so I think it's reasonable that cruisers now have a real chance of hurting battleships.

Wow guys calm down, it's the closed beta test and they are just playing around with the numbers to see how it impacts gameplay. Testing is what we signed up for, remember?

Well today I played several matches where I shot down over 30 US aircraft and didn't get the achievement. My previous suspicion that some Japanese planes don't get counted is apparently incorrect. It seems like whether or not the award is awarded is completely random.

I did get the achievement several times, but sometimes only after shooting down way more than 30. I suspect that the planes of some carriers (some Japanese ones) don't count for the achievement.

It's a known bug, you can either fix it by exiting (via task manager) and restarting the game or by resetting the controls to default settings.

The 50B is almost immune to artillery due to its speed unless it's stationary for some odd reason, the Maus is target practice. Same class tanks with completely different play styles and pros and cons. Besides the Iowa does not have an immunity shield against American TD planes, if it's a concentrated attack then two out of three squadrons can launch torpedoes and do serious damage. It's not the Iowa's fault that the Japanese only have 4 planes per squadron and die like flies against everything they fly into. Both light and medium tanks are useless in a straight up fight against a tier 10 heavy (armored) tank if the latter is controlled by a good player. Don't try to lecture me on World of Tanks business, I ended that game with a 66% win ratio after 19k battles so I know my way around it. It had some sort of rock-paper-scissors basis too but every class had tanks that broke lose from the standard pros and cons which made the game very interesting. But let's stop wasting our time, I like battleships and you like carriers so we're never going to agree.

What happened in World of Tanks when the last enemy alive was a tier 10 heavy tank and you were a tier 8 light scout tank? You lost, crap happens. What happened in World of Tanks when you were driving a tier 10 medium coming up against the tier 10 Maus or E-100? You couldn't possibly go up against it in a straight fight. You had to run way and ignore it or use teammates as bait and run around it. In any case it was the need to apply special tactics per individual tank that made the game fun and diverse. Some tanks just couldn't engage other tanks and everyone accepted that. It was fun having tons of different tanks that had different play styles instead of having 4 fixed classes. Just like it would be more fun having different individual ships instead of having 3 major classes with only slight alterations per nation.

Another fix for this is to exit the game using the task manager and restarting it. This way it should register as a crash and you should be able to join back into the match once you start up the game and log in. Doing this fixed it for me.

For the sake of versatility in gameplay I hope they do not, I think it's fun that there are some special ships that require special approaches. Just like seeing a Kitakami should make one turn around and GTFO as fast as possible. World of Tanks had the same principles, where some equal tiered tanks could not penetrate the other in a direct frontal fight so they had to use different tactics. If you can't hurt US battleships with planes, go and take out their IJN teammates and leave the Americans for your team to finish up. Be creative. It really can't be that hard to think out of the box for once.