Vaderan

There are some threads around the forum about this topic, mostly pinned guides. Charts or statistics with reliable information about gun/shell penetration values and armor thickness aren´t available, afaik. However, if you want to learn more about ship armor en detail, i recommend to have a look at the previously mentioned threads, or ask a search engine. There can be found a lot of information around the web. Just keep in mind: while destroyers and cruisers might have single armor plating protection or a minor complex system of arranged armor plates, battleships, at least historically, come up with very complex protection systems, each unique for it´s shipclass. There are rumours that these complex protection systems are resembeled in the game, which leads to these pretty randomly seeming results with AP shells. Basically: citadell hits are AP shells penetrating into engine rooms, boiler rooms or even an ammunition storage. They are usually protected by the thicksest armor and noticable from the outside by the armor belt surrounding it. In addition, you can have penetrating and overpenetrating hits. Penetrating Ap hits which don´t go into the citadell just managed to pierce some armor and detonate within an area of the ships interior, resulting in a random dmg role, depending on the damage potential of the shell. If you penetrate the same spot twice, you might receive a different result, since WG says, that an already destroyed section cannot be destroyed a second time. Overpenetrating hits are those which produce alsways the same, low damage rolls. They are hits which enter the ship at one side and leave it at the other side, going right through without detonating. They just do superficial damage and cause no flodding, although a hole in the ship should still be a hole in a ship... So, if you cause the same damage again and again (like several times 1000 HP damage with a 355mm shell), you are overpenetrating your target all the time and should either switch to HE or try to hit a different spot. Bounces are depending on two aspects: the angle they hit a surface, and the surface thickness. It´s difficult to explain and depending on the individual situation. Here a simple advice that might help: there are two types of fire 1.: plunging fire 2.: direct fire Plunging fire means shells travelling a wide and high arc, droping down on the targe like bombs. It´s usually long range fire. Direct fire is medium to short range fire, your shells hit the side of the superstructor or the hull (where armor is the thickest). Plunging fire is very dangerous and can cause citadell hits, if it hits the right spot. However, accurate plunging fire requires training and is pretty much some kind of gamble, since your shells can still get lost somewhere in a ships superstructure, causing minor damage. Direct fire has to penetrate the sde armor or even the belt of a ship, to be effective. While direct fire with HE shells can wreak constant havoc and damage, AP shells first have to penetrate. To make it more complex: each ship has some type of "immunity zone", which means that AP shots on it´s armor will just bounce. Depending on shiptype and shell calibre, the immunity zone can be of different size. For example: The Kongo, a tier 5 IJN battleship will have a huge immunity zone against low calibre weapons like DD guns or 155mm cruiser guns. This means, these shells won´t penetrate the Kongo´s armor at most or even any angle. However, since the Kongo is a rebuild, old battlecruiser, it has rather weak side armor for a battleship. Short range fire of 203mm shells might have a hance to penetrate its side, long range plunging fire a chance to penetrate the deck. So, if your cruiser has 15km of range with his 203mm guns, you might be able to penetrate the Kongo at up to, lets say 4 kilometres, for side hits, and from 12-15km for plunging fire. between 4 and 12 kilometres, the Kongos armor has angles and thickness to prevent your 203mm AP shells of penetrating. That´s her immunity zone against 203mm shells then. Another BB with 406mm shells however does have much more penetration. It can penetrate the Kongos armor at different angles, and reduces the Kongo´s immunity zone further, maybe reduces it to 0 at all. As you can see, this is already rather complex. And the mechanics are still subject of change. The best way to get a feeling for it, is trainng, training, training... I hope i could provide some help!

You just have no idea who you are talking to, in terms of aiming, leading and information about plunging fire and all that nice stuff. I wrote advice and guides about it in the CAT forums, explained newcomers how rng works, how several layers of armor work, where to aim, how to lead...you name it. My Yamato scored 3 citadel hits with one salvo on above 20km with precise aiming, but that was all before the accuracy nerfs. I started training aiming, lead and ammunition rack shots before you even had access to this game! Thats exactly the reason, WHY i am "bitching" about this rng, because it makes lead and aim useless to a certain degree. But, since i am obviously not smart enough to adapt, teach me: my target is stationary and in distance for plunging fire. I fire my turrets seperatly, aiming for the middle of the citadel, above the armor belt, to make sure that spreading shots at least hit anything. 2 hit randomly, the rest goes anywhere. Where was my mistake? Another situation: i am crossing the T. My enemy is heading straight to me. Distance some 6 kilometres. I fire my dual barrell turrets in single fire. The target is a St. Louis cruiser, neither particulary small, nor fast. I aim for the middle of the ship, a perfect 180° angle. First turret: left and right. Second Left and right. Thirt: both right. Forth: centre hit and right. Fifths: left and right. Sixths: both right. Where was my mistake, considering the fact that everywhere else "crossing the T" would have been the best strategical position? It´s alright if you are satisfied with a poor 27% hit ratio. It´s all about the goals one has. I know, my aim is better than 30%. I can live with the 3x% on my cruisers, since i prefer long range combat, to decrease BB efficiency when fighting them. But 2x% on my BBs are just disappointing considering the fact, that RNG decides that my shots land these few metres next to where they should have hit, just spreading enough to miss at all or hit where they shouldn´t. You might be happy to hit at all, i want to hit where i aimed, at least with one out of 12 shells...

Exactly! And i bet, if you check your statistics in terms of gun accuracy, you will have around 24-28% average with your main BB guns, and some 35%-40% with your cruisers. With cruisers, a high ammount of gunfire consists of HE fire, since only few targets are apropriate for CA´s AP shells. This means, you have a reliable, constant damage output with a relativly high hit average. A good hit average means, that AP shells are most likely to land, where they should land. They do so 4-10 times, depending on cruiser type and gun type. (low tier) BBs are down that average by ~10%. 25-30% means, 2-3 shells, maybe 4, if you have a Fuso, Wyoming or Arkansas Beta, hit the target on average. Cruisers, speaking of 155mm guns, have a damage potential around some 3000 (?) with HE shells? Most of it is wasted, when scoring hits, but there are fires, and a good salvo with several hits easily brings 1000-4000 damage+fire. Maybe module damage. BB AP shells at tier 4 have 8200+ damage potential. HE around 5k. To make use of the "mighty" damage potential of a BB, you have to use AP. To bring AP to work, it has to penetrate. Overpenetration is useless, as is bouncing. Overpenetration can easily happen, when hitting a CA elsewere than on the citadell. Bounces aren´t rare when firing on a BB. A regular penetrating hit (which isn´t necesarily a citadell hit) migh cause some 4-6k damage, depending on where it hits. It has to be a citadell hit to make use of an AP shells full potential, and even citadell hits can vary in the ammount of damage done. Even with dead accurate shots, BBs would still have enough RNG with lead and the chance of bouncing or overpenetrating when hitting the target, added to the rng of the damage roll. Gunspread for additional rng is okay and necessary, to avoid artillery ownage by any class towards equals and smaller ones. But if rng offers that much variability, that a shot means to spread several hundred metres, it is too much. 24-30% average hit percentage on a BB is different to that on a cruiser or the torpedos of a DD. 10% torpedo hits sounds pretty low, but, especially on IJN DDs, it means firing without receiving counterfire and reliable, significant damage, maybe flodding. 35-40% hits on CAs means consistent HE damage over time with the chance of critical hits and bonus damage of fire, and everyone here knows the effect of constant fires. 24-30% hits with BB AP however doesn´t take into account bounces or overpenetrations. Even regular penetrations only do roughly half of the potential shell damage. The best damage potential is worth nothing, when you cannot make use of it. These days, you are not able to make use of it in BBs. You can send your damage potential to a postcode and see what RNGesus delivers. Penetrating hits or even citadell hits with BBs are no achievement, as they are in a CA or maybe even in a DD, they are a blessing of the dice. For a game that wants to demand skill from a player to be successfull, this seems rather wrong... However, just a basic accuracy buff might be too much. I would like to see something like an aiming circle on a BB. Each shot of a turret makes the circle widen a bit, so it has to aim again. This could simulate the shake and the vibrations that happen on a ship when firing guns of that size. The widening effect could have a cummulative effect. Firing a single turret and waiting 1,5-3 seconds, depending on calibre, could reduce the aim again to optimum. Firing salvo would increase the circle more with every turret fired additionally, making each next shot more inaccurate. All guns at once could make the fire shotgun: halfway accurate on short range, but spread fully rng on long range. This would make fire controll more challanging, but more rewarding and tactical aswell...

Considering the fact that this threads intention was to start a serious discussion, it turned rather fast into a "XX class is too strong and DDs are overnerfed" whine of "DD fanboys". So, to honour the OPs basic idea, let´s try to come back to the constructive discussion: how to change or adapt the DD class and it´s branches to make/keep them compeditive without making them overpowered? If you refer to Ectars statement (i think it was him, if i remember right), DDs are (or should be) basically a CV hardcounter with the bonus of being able to counter any other class with the risk of getting wrecked because of their fragile physics. In addition to the general role WG wants to place on a class, WG also is ambitious in delivering special characteristics for a nations techtree. Regarding the DD tree, this means, that IJN DDs receive the role of the stealthy assasine, while USN DDs receive the (not so thankfull) role of a brawling gunboat. The difference between both classes is obvious: while IJN DDs can do their stealthy business, USN DDs have to give away their position as soon as they want to do anything else but being passive scouts. So much for the obvious facts and the characteristics. Now put this concept into relation with the designated, primary role, Ectar declared on the DD class: hardcounter to CVs. Without any preocupation, is it possible for a DD to hunt down a CV? Well, yes, and no. Yes, if it manages to slip through the lines of enemies, no if the enemy knows what to do to prevent DDs slipping through their lines effectively. Yes, there are CVs which can cause some troubles against DDs, because they got nasty secondary batteries, and since their divebombers got buffed and their fighters posess the ability to keep a DD spotted once he got detected, the job of a DD has become tougher than ever. But this only applies if the CV invests a lot of his attention and several squadrons of planes into dealing with this DD, and if allied ships engage on him. Any halfway skilled DD player would see it as an insult if he would be told: you are not capable of sinking a lone CV. Of course the player would be able to do so, but not due to the abilities of his DD class, but only because of his skills. The reality out there, in 3 out of 5 games is, that most CV players still tend to stay way back behind their allied forces. They still provide single targets to any who manages to break through. IJN DDs stlill have the ability to engage and launch torpedoes unsees, just the (poor) USN DDs have to reveal themselves. But, for compensation (at least in WG thinking) they receive fast turning, rapid firing, highly accurate guns. In theory, both classes are still able to perform as hardcounter to CVs. Since a maximum of 2 CVs is what can be placed on any team, each DD has a stock of 2 Fog charges and 2 engine boosts. So, in (WG) theory, a DD can make a "boost" run on a CV, launch his full armament of torps at close range, turn, smoke and run away. Thats why WG obviously seems to be fine with what they did with DDs. However, we, the players, got used to do different with the DDs during the CAT and CBT. DDs were the weapon against everything, at the cost of fragility. But since they had up to 5 smoke charges, any DD was allowed to perform hilarious torp runs at any target with the chance of retreating unseen. The hardcounter against CVs turned into an area denial weapon and counter against anything within range. DD players got used to it, as BB players got used to precision longe range plunging fire. The (self-)understanding of the DD class turned from CV-hardcounter into raiders of the seas. The last patch ended this understanding in a drastical way. Well, that´s what i read all the time, at least, since i didn´t take out my Sims for a run since the wipe, so i can´t comment. However, if we return to the core question, there will still remain the answer, that DDs can perform in their role as CV hardcounter, as good or as bad as any other class can perform in it´s designated role. BBs still hardcounter CAs. CA players claim them OP for that. As a CA player, i get enrage when my citadell is blown out by an enemy BBs. But, to be honest, it happens by far more rarely than i deserve to get spanked. BBs suffer that much from RNG, that i more often own them with HE and fire, than they do with their big shells. CAs still hardcounter DDs. Well, if they hit them. But if you ask any DD captain, we/he will almost all tell them, that their nasty, fast firing guns just wreak too much havoc on the fragile DDs and their modules. DDs (especially the IJN ones) still hardcounter CVs. We all know the situation, when that fat CV is just sitting still, unaware of our presence. Delicious! Well, USN DDs now have the challanging part... but they got the tools aswell. The story of CVs and BBs is no different. There are always the few BBs who excell at dodging most torpedoes, but the mass of the (fresh) OBT BB captains still take massive beatings from CVs, especially when veteran captains are piloting them. Besides their hardcounter abilities, all classes still can threaten all other classes, but it takes skill and a bunch of luck, sometimes. So, how will you change DDs? What do you want? And how? Without putting them back into that one role, all the (maybe a little bit spoiled?) veterans want them back: the area denial weapon and versatile raider? Noone ever complained about the DD class fragility, since it is taken as given. It didn´t matter that much before 0.4.0, since smokescreens allowed to run and hide anyway, allowing for attackruns and leaving unpunished. So, noone demands thicker armor or more HP. Maybe tougher modules, to prevent engine or rudder damage with every third hit (which feels like each hit taken). What is missed the most, and complained the most aswell, is the nerf to the smoke screen. DD players want the return of their 5 charges with long deployment time, so they can return to the "old" playstyle. However, it seems like WG just wants to prevent exactly that. Just like they want to prevent BBs citadelling repeadetly with insane RNG. Or... (just name the recent changes on other classes that happened during the last patches). Since IJN DDs still seem to do halfway well, and even top tier USN DDs seem to be "strong" enough, the question to be handeled should be: what to with mid and low tier USN DDs to make them attractive, keep em compeditive but don´t op them and make them still different to IJN DDs. My suggestion would be: make their torpedoes faster, their spread tighter, their guns more dangerous to soft targets (if they aren´t already) give them the edge in terms of agilty above IJN DDs. I don´t know how you see it, but when i´m in one of my low tier IJN DDs, the last ship i want to confront is an USN DD. They always feel like the true hardcounter to the IJN DDs for me, as far as i can judge. However, besides all the justified wishes for DDs being a compeditive class, able to perform their role as CV hunters, WG turned around just in time to make all new OBT testers get used to the DDs as just that: CV hunters. Not universal riders.

Pretty much wrong! RNG on BB main batteries is ridiculous, especially on low tier. I can´t speak for higher tiers since OBT start, but tier 3 and 4 BBs are just a pain to play. It´s nothing about skill, it´s pure random luck. Playing WoWs in theses days for me is like this: play a CA: i can contribute massivly to my team, even carry with up to 5 kills, deal ridiculous ammounts of damage and fire, maybe even torpedos, and i leave the game with twice or three times the damage of my HP done. I can take out my DD and hope i find a team i am able to support. Or i take one of my BBs and start praying. I really know how to lead, my aim is precice, i know the citadells and angles of armor, when to use HE and when to use AP. These days, you can very often recognize players "parking" their ships in open waters. BBs, CAs, even DDs become stationary targets, for whatsoever reason. In a CA, with low RNG dispersion, i say "thank you!" and make sure 3/4 or more of my shells fired hit the centre of the ship, often causing citadell hits (if it is possible to benetrate the targets armor). In one of the low tier BBs, however, i count myself lucky, of one of my 8 to 12 shells hits the stationary enemy BB. Heck, i just had a game, my Wyoming vs. enemy Wyoming. Mine is fully upgraded, the enemy had at least the upgraded hull. I was moving, maneuvering, dodging, he was standing still, facing me with his broadisde, all-the-time. Not moving an inch, a centimetre or a milimetre. Doing nothing but circling his turrets. Despite flawless aim on his broadside, despite all my knowledge about aiming, armor thickness, plunging fire, angeling and stuff, i didn´t score a single citadell hit. RNG made my shells go everywhere, but not on target. No matter if i went for salvo, single turret fire (ever recognized the shells of a diuble barrell turret go crossing and then left and right wide on the target?) or full broadside, it was just not possible. On the other hand, despite maneuvering, dodging, turning and angeling, he scored at least 2 citadell hits on me. Of course, i lost this shootout. No, seriously, (low tier) BBs are pure RNG these days, at least in terms of shooting. Of course, a DD or CA who just got pwned by one of the rare citadell hits might see that different, but trust me, it´s hilarious. If you don´t beleave me, go to youtube and watch gameplay videos. I recommend BaronvonGamez Arkansas Beta videos. 20 minutes of wondering, what his drunken gun crews are doing, despite his pretty accurate aiming. I can understand that BB guns shouldn´t be as accurate as CA or DD guns, but they should be at least accurate enough to hit other BBs reliably. As it works now, it is purely broken rng...

Although i am fully with you, i doubt that the ability of mounting the 20% AA Buff module will solve the problem. The Yubari has an overal 3,1km range for all three AAA auras. Though this seems to be rather nice, especially for tier 4, the 20% buff would bring this just to 3,7km range. Add the 4th lvl captains perk to it, and it will have some 4,5km range of AAA power. Okay, nice range, but even when focusing fire on 1 squad, which brings a 50% buff, we still have what? Some 100 DPS of AAA power? That means roughly 7-8 seconds on focused fire to take down 1 tier 4 plane, 28-32 seconds for a japanese squadron, 35-40 seconds for a complete USN squad. Since many CV players know to avoid long flight times through AAA auras (or avoid the Yubari at all), a player can consider himself lucky if the Yubaris AAA stays in action long enough to take down a few planes. The AAA barrage ability of tier 6+ cruisers would be nice, but it would only affect a single AAA gun on the Yubari anyway, so it wouldn´t make a huge difference. Basically, either AAA around tier 4 is just to weak, or CV planes just to robust and too powerfull, with their tier X damage potential. But that´s a different story anyway...

From my experience with Nagato, Amagi and Yamato, the rng doesn´t get that much better. The basic dispersion increases, if i remember right. In regards of "owning" low tier battles with BBs, i have to disagree politely. Compared to the gun performance of the St. Louis, the damage efficiency of tier 3 and 4 BBs is much worse. It´s just that 1 in a hundred citadel hits, that makes it look better. However, with all this overpenetration thingy and low damage rolls with AP shells, the one citadell hit on the BB i fought just a minute ago doesn´t help me, when i try to defend my BB against a St.Louis and my AP salvos score 1 out of 8 for 1200 damage, while each HE round from the St. Louis does 800-2000 + fires avery 7+ seconds... When captaining my St.Louis, i rarely recognize battleships hitting me hard. There was in fact just one battle where i was hit at the citadell by a BB. Compared to the havoc i did with the St.Louis all the time before, it´s ridiculous. Wel, i won´t complain. The St. Louis is a keeper, and i am done with the tier 3 BBs forever... Just less threat to me when playing that beauty...

English isn´t my mothertongue, so i am not sure if i missed anything in this question, like sarcasm or irony or something like that. The intention of this thread was to discuss the influence of RNG on a players performance in regards of specific classes. However, as it can be recognized in several other threads, a specific DD player turned up and lured me into a personal discussion. Despite the fact that i knew it would promise more success to teach the guinea pigs of my little sister the mechanics of nuclear physics than get him to understand anything that´s not supporting his DD affection, i failed for the bait. However, there are others reading/following this topic aswell, and some share my opinion or provide different aspects, and they take part at this thread aswell. For them, i am willing to have this futile argument, because it gives the opportunitiy to explain simple facts in many words. Some understand, some disagree, some remain resistent. Those who disagree and provide valuable arguments why they disagree, are those i welcome in this thread. However, some people join here and read something that might have negative impact on their already average to bad performance in their prefered class. As a result, they try to provide everything that comes up to their mind, in an attempt to disarm that "possible impact", but at the same time, they try to hide why they want to disarm that "possible impact", because the true reason wouldn´t be taken as justified. My position was clear, right from the start: I feel peronaly handicaped by the game mechanics, because my shells don´t go where i aim. They don´t go there because RNG decides where they go. This means, RNG compensates in a negative way for all the effort, practice and skill i developed to achieve accurate, successfull shooting with my guns in this game. On the other side, rng offers less skilled players a higher chance to score "lucky hits". This compensates for the lack of skill in a positive way. Now, while this should have been a discussion about more or less this aspect, Userext shows up. He reads something like "Oh, that dude doesn´t like rng. He knows how to shoot, but rng screws him up from time to time! So he wants more accuracy. Hm, but wait! I am a DD player. If he would be allowed to shot more precisely, because he know how to do, he would pose a bigger threat to me! No, that´s not good. Okay, let´s see, what can i deliver against his complains about rng? Hm... okay, basically BBs would be affected, because CAs already shell the hell out of me. Okay, BBs are slow...hmmm, they have a huge healthpool, hmmm, that doesn´t count aswell! Maneuverability...no. Ah, damage potential! Yes! Thats it! Thos big guns! Let´s use that..." If i just focus on BBs now: their damage potential is basically all they have. That´s why BBs are played. Not for their large HP pool, not for their armor, not for their sluggish movement. It´s like with the DDs: they are played because of their torpedos and stealthyness. Not because theiy are fragile, have no armor and small guns. It´s a question of what you pay for what you get, and both, pay and gain should be aspects of the class, not the mechanics of the game. If you take the CA class as a benchmark in terms of size, damage potential and all the other aspects, you recognize that BBs receive more damage potential, more armor and more HP. They loose torpedos, maneuverability, speed, and grow in size, making them bigger targets and easier to spot. That´s the tradeoff. DD´s gain better torpedos, shrink in size and gain speed, maneuverability and stealthyness. Some of them are the only in game which can attack their targets on open see without revealing themselves! They buy these abilities at the cost of horrible fragility. Until this point, everything seems to be halfway balanced. But, in addition, now the RNG mechanics strike: the bigger the guns, the worse the dispersion. DDs and CAs can handle this quiet good. For BBs, in that matter, it is a direct impact to their damage potential, additional to the variables in regards of overpenetrations, bounces etc.. The primary aspect where BBs excell above all other classes, their gun power, receives a direct nerf, exclusivly for their class. It´s as if DD torpedos compared to CA torpedos, if we stick with CAs as a benchmark, would receive something like, lets say, a detonator rng. Some torpedos do detontate, others don´t. It would be historical accurate, but it would drastically lower the value and fun of DDs and their primary weapon. When i am told in adition, that my personal stats in the BB class seem to be good or above average, which value does that have for the class itsself? My average damage of 42k HP is still below the average HP of my ships, or slightly above, if tier 3 BBs are counted in. A DD with 10k HP requires 2-3 torpedo hits in a game to double his worth of HP in a game. Or, in other numbers: my Wyoming has 12x305mm guns. AP damage potential per shell is? 5k? 6k? The tier 3 BBs have a damage potential of 8x305mm guns per broadside with how much damage per AP shell? 4k? 5k? Sorry, i don´t have the numbers at hand right now. If it is 4kx8, it is a broadside potential of 32000. 40000 if it is 5k. 60000-72000 per broadside on the Wyoming at tier 4. With an average of 42k, this means i made an average use of my damage potential of 1-1,4 broadsides in tier 3, and ~0,7 broadside´s damage potential at tier 4, INCLUDING citadell hits. And i was considered an above average player... Well, i am no mathematics genius, but if i assume to have an average of 10 broadsides per game, this means i make use of 10-14% of my damage potential on tier 3 BBs, and 7% on my Wyoming, as an above average player, per game. If accuracy on BBs would be buffed theoretically by, lets say 20%, my personal average use of my BB´s damage potential on tier 4 ships (since tier 3 BBs are basically done) would increase from 7% per game to some 8,4%. So much for the numbers... Edit: damage potential is above 8k per AP sheel on tier 3 and 4 BBs... And: sorry for this awefull wall of text :-/

Ha, i would love to see torpedos work like AP shells! Really! It would be just awesome. Right now, Torpedos work with something like magnetic detonaters all around their hull. As long as it touches your hull, it goes "boom". It just makes me wanna cry when i almost perfectly dodged another torpedo spread, but my ship keeps drifting, following the gravity of the turn, and hits the bypassing torpedo sideway at his rear with the armor belt. I would have easily bounced 2/3 of the torpedos ever damaged me, if they would work like AP shells. For the rest of your torpedo arguments: thats what i said! Either you hit or you don´t. Wether you hit or not, depends on your lead, and the behaviour of the target. However, the torpedos make their way to where you send them, with their typical spread in widths. Just imagine, you would also have to set the depths of your torpedoes. It would maybe add something to the challange of leading and aiming with gunbatteries. For the shells, it is that they are sent for the specific point where the gunner aimed, but rng decides if they hit that point, or something between that point and 150+ metres away, which makes a huge difference. Besides that, you talk about 3-4k hits from a single Kawashi or Myogi shell? Okay, maybe you are really unlocky. Neither of my DDs ever received a hit like that from a BB, nor did i ever score a hit like that on a DD. But it shows how futile this discussion between the two of us is. Just like when i said: it´s wrong to shoot torpedos in the way of an ally. You represent the DD player. The DD Fanboy maybe, if it were your words. I represent the average player, with preferences and dislikes in all classes. I can do my job in DDs and CAs, since the mechanics allow me to make use of the potential of my ships. This is different when it comes to my (low tier) BBs these days. I still perform above average, my shots go around the aimed positions/target, but they don´t like to hit the mark. I don´t expect 6 out of 8 to hit the mark, but at least one shell hitting where i want it to hit would be awesome. I just had a battle, i was bottom tier with my Wyoming. I faced another Wyoming, broadside to broadside. It was the only encounter for me in this battle, before the higher tier CVs had wiped out the rest of the team. I exchanged 3x12 shell broadsides and 2x 4 shell frontal turret shells with the enemy Wyoming, which shot a single broadside before switching to another target, an incoming DD. 44 shots. ALL shells were on target. 14 Hits. This means an above average hitratio of almost 30%. All were AP, all were on the perfect broadside of the enemy Wyoming. All salvos were perfectly lead, aimed for right above the citadell, distance was below 10km, no plunging fire. My 14 hits caused a total of some 1660 damage, taking a single AAA gun with them. The rest was spread by RNG, to hit anything where they could bounce. Not a single shell hit the space above the belt, or managed to penetrate the belt. The remaining 30 went short or wide. There was nothing i did wrong with the things i could have done. I used the shelltype i am intended to use on an equally strong enemy, i used the correct aim and lead. No fault in the skill. It was RNG that made it an utter fail, regretting the choice of AP instead of HE, which would have done at least some 10k damage + fire, probably. Thats why i started this topic: (in a BB) i can only be as good as RNG allows me to be! The one salvo i took from the enemy Wyoming was a 6k damaging hit, since RNG said so. Not sure if he had loaded HE, since he was fighting light ruisers before. The kill went to the DD, we won the battle but i lost my first vitory of the day for some 197XP. RNG is okay, but it requires limits. In WoT it means to miss a weakspot if you perform a snapshot, in WoWs it means to miss the whole ship...

Relaxing is the point. A game doesn´t have to be challanging all the time. There is the time aswell where you just want to have a beer with friends and clubb some bots...

During CAT, i played the whole grind up to Yamato, I did so again during the 0.4.0 test weekend. No need to tell me anything about the tiers. Of more interest would be the changes that happened to BBs between CAT and CBT, but that´s another story. Since you refer to your prefered DDs, i can almost understand why you don´t like to see any change to accuracy, since you fear more danger to the small DDs. Better accurace = better chance to hit a DD, if the player knows how to aim. That´s why you desperatly stick to your "strong opinion". But as you like to compare DDs and their torpedoes to BBs and their main armament: Torpedoes are slower, with a range from ~5km until 20 km. Their success depends on two things: how good can the torpedo shooting player predict the way of it´s target (and make sure he doesn´t hit an ally), and how fast can the target react on the torpedo, once spotted, if it doesn´t change the course anyway. If the calculations are correct, the Torpedo hits, it does always do damage, with a chance of flooding. Sometimes it does it´s full damage,maybe hits the citadell or ammostorage. Sometimes it does an reduced ammount of damage. Those are the two variables. In addition, at least the IJN DD class has the ability to theoretically fire it´s torpedoes without being spotted. This, besides the small but fragile structure of the DD, leaves the DD in the very comfortable position of potentially inflicting massive damage without having to fear any "answer". If the torpedos of the first salvos miss, try again. (And again, and again...) Ships which rely on the damagepotential of their guns, CAs and BBs, face different odds: First, which ammo against which target? While torpedos just deal damage if they hit, the choice of shells is crucial, especially with a long reload. This is the first variable. When the shelltype has been choosen, the gunner has to predict it´s targets course, just as the torpedo gunner, but with two differences: 1.: the target will be at least aware, that there is a ship in position to open fire at it, so it can prepare. 2.: While torpedos go in a straight line and hit everything in their way, so the gunner just has to find the lead for a specific distance, the gunner of ship artillery has to find the lead and aim for a specific spot. This is the second variable. Third, if the correct spot has been found and the target is hit, there still remains the question, what does the shell do? Overpenetrate? Bounce? Penetrate for regular damage? Plunge into the citadell? The answer is somewhat irrelevant when shooting HE, since it will something between low and medicore damage. But it becomes crucial with AP rounds. Because if they don´t penetrate at least, but bounce or overpenetrate, HE shells would have done more damage. To make it worse, compared to DDs: the enemy can and will fight back. That´s okay, since it has to be that way, but it is different to the DDs approach. The DD might go for repeated stealth torpedo runs. The BB or CA might have relied on that one last, final salvo, since the returning fire obliterates it. That´s where accuracy comes into play. Because even when the right choice of ammunition is made, even if the aim and lead is perfect, accuracy/gun dispersion determine wether you hit where you aimed at, if you hit at all, or if you punch the water. But even the most accurate aimed shot can still bounce or overpenetrate, being a waste, where the torpedo does it´s job. There is just too much rng. The lead, the aim, the dispersion, the "what will happen if i hit?" question. Torpedo is: lead and damage/no damage. Maybe they should change torpedos that way, that they work like AP rounds... Adding this accuracy module might be an option, but it isn´t available on all BBs, and, in addition, how much does it increase accuracy? If we stick with the Arkansas, since she is the lowest tier BB known to me, able to mount that module. 188m of stock dispersion. Enough dispersion to fit a DD or some cruisers, maybe even a South Carolina class battleship between two shells. No, wait! One shell can go 188 metres of the target! Two shells can go 188m from the target, each, at worst. This makes up the lenght of any ship in the game. Since we don´t know the value of that modification, it can be anything from 1% to xxx%. During CBT and 0.4.0 testweekend, i tryed it on several BBs and even CAs. The effect was minimal, especially on BBs, so maybe it has some 5-20% accuracy buff. If it were 20%, it would decrease Arkansas dispesion to some 153 metres, if my calculations are correct. That´s the level of the 155mm gun cruisers around tier 3-5. It didn´t feel like that, however. So the buff might be 5%? Unless there is an official statement from WG, this will be pure speculation. While i tried that module, it didn´t seem to improve accuracy significantly, so i don´t consider it as a valuable addition or compensation for poor gun dispersion. But it´s a sidenote anyway.

Although WoWs is a PvP game in it´s heart, i consider the PvE mode a great addition for several reasons: 1.: basic training for new players and testruns in new/stock ships for any other player. This is a very good way to learn the game´s basics and to get used to a ship, train your firing and maneuvre abilities without the stress of a PvP battle 2.: it is the stressfree gamemode of world of warships. No hate, no chat-bitching from the enemy team. Instead: accurate gunfire from the bots to train evasive maneuvres and map awarness. Or to train team coordination. 3.: related to 2. it is just the perfect way to vent rage or frustration. no matter how good a player you are, from time to time, you have to be on the loosing team for several matches in a row. In WoT, this often leads to ragequits. Rage quits make the player leave the game with a bad humour, a bad feeling, rage and hate and all the negative stuff. Some take a break for a few minutes, some for a few hours, some for days or weeks, some never return. We play games for rewards, for positive emotions. Leaving a game in a rage quit, is exactly the opposite of what players should experience in a game they pay for. If WG would recognize the potential of the PvE mode, they could see that it attracts players who are no fans of PvP games, but PvE and Warships. It´s good to offer a PvE mode to those players, because they can play the game without becoming a burden to a PvP team, feeling like a burden or anything negative like that. They can play WoWs the way they like, and maybe evolve to good PvP players some time. When i started WoWs in CAT, i stood with PvE almost all the time, until the 0.3.0 patch, where PvE was changed. Those were great days. Some of my friends had made it into the CAT aswell, and we spend several evenings a week for hours in CooP, drinking beer, chatting in teamspeak, clubbing bots. We were all fans of warships, we already liked the atmosphere of the game, it was pure fun, no regret, no bad emotions. We were all convinced: if it stays this way, we could go on with this forever, and it would be worth any money spent, Because it was fun. Then came 0.3.0, the CBT, the change. Less income. A longer grind, several other changes. My friends left, barely played the required CBT battles for the Arkansas. They switched to play PvP because they felt urged to do so, not because they wanted to (although we had PvP games during CAT on a frequent base, but they verey voluntary). With PvP, to many of them came the frustration and rage. I can hardly convince them to play with me since the last wipe, since they "don´t want to grind again through PvP with all the things they consider broken". The solution is simple and lays at hand and consists of 2 things, which are in parts already implemented into the game: 1.: leave PvE as it is for standard players. But as soon, as a player has a "premium account", make PvE more profitable. If not 100%, then 80% or 75%. It would make premium an attractive choice for PvE players. In combination with premium ships, it could become a gold mine on PvE based players. That might compensate for the additional costs. 2.: As already implemented with daily objectives, achievements and flags, introduce more PvP based rewards. Unique camourflage skinns, unique stickers for the ships. Personal missions like we have them in WoT, which can only be done in PvP. Stuff like this which will attract the PvP players and make them stand out from the PvE only group. As it is right now, my personal position to the game is: i will stick with it as my remaining 24 days of "forced" premium with the "small fleet preorder pack" runs. After that, i will take a break. For me, there is too much RNG in this game right now, and in PvP, this just makes me rage. I aim perfectly, rng decides that i don´t hit where i aim. My enemy however has more luck with rng and takes me down. No thanks! PvE is too unattractive in terms of rewards, as it is right now. It compensates for 2-3 battles, but since i have to do it by myself, without friends... meh... I hope for the upcoming patches and events. After all, this is still open beta, and there is still much potential. However, it can still go either way...

Well, just because you don´t beleave or think something, doesn´t mean it doesn´t happen. The dispersion of guns is in this game is a fact, a given parametre. It just seems to have an increased effect, the larger the shooting calibre. Since i pledge for an accuracy increase for all classes, the buff would apply to all ships with guns. Fun fact is, that DDs and CAs don´t suffer that much from their dispersion, as BBs do. They just suffer enough to make perfectly aimed shots not go straight into the citadel, but hit a few metres besides. However, firing 8 155mm guns leads to more hits as 8 shells from a BB on an identical target in an identical situation. The BB requres 30 seconds to reload, the 155mm guns 6 to 10 seconds. However, no matter what points are made for you, Usertext: i dare to guess that everybody not playing DDs only is wrong in his opinion, and something between an uninformed newcomer or a preoccupied fanboy. I just like to play all three classes equaly, with no preferences. From my point of view, DDs and BBs are slightly less forgiving to play, compared to CVs and CAs at these days, but they are in completly different ways. However, i can improve on DDs with my own skills, since the handicap of the DDs doesn´t lie in the class, but in the players abilities, while BBs are handicaped by the game mechanics.

Well, i am pretty close with my aiming to the effect of aim assist. That´s why i am in fact complaining. My shots are perfectly at the level of the enemy citadell, they just land 10 metres in front and 30 metres behind my target. Just a few minutes ago, i had a match in my Arkansas. Things developed in a way that an enemy St. Louis appeard 1,6km in front of me from behind an Island. My forward turrets were aimed and ready. Perfect lead, perfect aim, but the shells donked practically out of the barrels, hitting the water some 100 metres in front of the target. The guns of the Arkansas have a dispersion of up to 188m. I shot, RNG rolled the dice and decided to give me a dispersion of ~100 metres short. Awesome!

Sorry dude, i really tried hard to take your comments serious, despite the fact some other forum users don´t even want you to post in their threads anymore. Some of your posts provide usefull input, but sometimes it seems you are some kind of mind blocked, ignoring the obvious. I don´t mean to be offending or insutling, but we are again talking about two different things! One thing is a mod or addon or aid (you name it) that compensates for the lack of skill in leading your shots. That´s more or less your own words: "...you were able to match a good players power." An increase of accuracy, i repeat, means a decrease of shell spread/dispersion. That´s something we already have on DDs and CAs. Their gun dispersion is much lower than that of BBs. The other is no aid to the player, it´s just a parameter of a "game module". As torpedos have a specific range, each ship has a unique gun dispersion on it´s main battery. On DDs and CAs these numbers are bearable, on BBs they take the size of some capital ships... A BB has to make every shot count. It relies on his few shells it shots every 30 seconds. CAs (since most DDs usually avoid to fire their guns), fire twice, three or four times the ammount of salvos per minute, with increased accuracy. It´s no miracle to score 7+ hits salvos with my St. Louis, but almost a wonder to score 2+ hits with a Kawashi. Even worse when these two hits overpenetrate, or bounce, just fail to do any significant damage. I am not talking about taking on DDs. Not even CAs, but other BBs. You lead and aim perfectly, but the shells go where they want. The enemy has more luck with RNG and puts 1-2 shots in your citadell. It´s not about reproducing regular citadell hits, it´s about scoring hit´s at all. As it is these days, i am almost incredible happy if my salvos do some 6k on a BB, or 2-3k on a cruiser. Not because i am bad at aiming, but unlucky in rng...and that´s just frustrating!

Is this gerneral hit %, or my personal? However, as i said, i try to improove my accuracy with gunfire ever since start of playing/testing this game. A part of halfway good hit ratio is going for targets you can make sure to hit, to avoid wasted shots. This is, where rng comes into play again. 30% seems to be a nice number, but from my personal lead and aim, i´d expect more. Because that´s two completly different things. A buff of accuracy would be a decrease of gun dispersion. It would make shells land more often at the place where you want them to land. You still have to lead and aim by yourself. Aim assist (or aimbot, as it was called) was a mod, that indicated the point where the player should aim for, optimising the shot in terms of lead (not aim), if the target doesn´t change course. It does just take away the need of skill in terms of leading shots, but it doesn´t take away the RNG factor. Perfectly led shots, especially on long range, can spread much that they go 50/50 short and long, without a single hit on the target, except for some wet boots and shirts for it´s crew. What i´d like to see, isn´t any kind of aim or lead assist, but an increase of accuracy, so at least some of my shells make it into the target more frequently, and not by total lottery...

Die St. Louis ist vermutlich ein, wenn nicht das artilleristisch stärkste Schiff auf Tier 3, und mit ihren schnell feuernden 155mm Kanonen und der derzeitigen HE Mechanik auch für jedes Schiff auf Tier 4 ein ernstzunehmender Gegner. Eines meiner Lieblingsschiffe, und ein "Keeper" für den Lowlevel Bereich. Obwohl ich bereits beim Erforschen der Omaha bin, habe ich die St. Louis noch. Mit ihr begebe ich mich immer ins erste Gefecht des Tages, um ein weng in (positive) Stimmung zu kommen...

It´s always good to receive advice for assistance and improvement, and it might help the average to better or veteran player. However, with the start of OBT, we will receive a whole bunch of new players, testing this game. Unexperienced, but willing to pay and play. As it is by now, i don´t dare to comment the high tier CV gameplay, simply since i lack any experience on these tiers since the wipe. However, it seems to be the low tier area where CVs have the real impact, causing all this rage and frustration. I personally didn´t had much trouble with CVs since patch, since i learned to watch them. There have been some few situations in my tier 3 BBs and my Arkansas, where i had to face tier IV and V CVs, and although i did everythin i´ve learned since CAT, it was impossible to avoid my death from the skies. The only difference was, that i made it difficult enough in some cases to force the CV player to send a second or third squad. But this is just my personal experience when having troubles with CVs personally. So, i dare to call myself at least averagely to veteran skilled in avoiding/dodging TB squads. However (again), there is still the "newbie" to "average player" factor. I have witnessed couple of situations during the last days, where Arkansas players or even platoons of players who looked like they knew what they did where raped by the single CV on the enemy team. I watched a Myogi turning and firing it´s AAA guns, trying to avoid the tb squads, with the result, that the CV player altered the approach vector of his squad to a position where he predicted the "hard rudder" Myogi to be a few seconds later. The Myogi stopped turning, obviously ruddershifting, but the torps were dropped. The turned "active" a blink of a second before 4 of 5 hit the Myogis broadside. I don´t even recall stories of Kawashis, South Carolinas or Arkansas, since they hve no AAA at all, but they are more or less the same. So, the core or the problem is the following: 1.: Many players don´t know how to act properly, when attacked by tb squads. 2.: Of those players, a high number pilotes "mighty BBs" 3.: BBs are rather predictable in their movement. A veteran CV player seems to be able to predict the course even of a turning BB, calculating his rudder shifting time etc. 4.: besides the sluggish maneuverability of the BBs, good CV players know how to drop their torpedoes. Manual drops often don´t leave time for any reaction. Once they are dropped, things set in motion will come to a result. It´s just the question, wether the target was able to place his ship in a position to avoid damage, or take it all. The last word still remains to the CV player and his squad positioning. 5.: AAA capabilities on low tiers are ridiculously bad. There might be some ships starting from tier 6 which are able to shred CV squads, but between tier 3-5, there is no ship that poses a threat to CV squads. If i recall it correctly, my Yubari, a designated AAA cruiser on tier IV, boosts some constant 70 DPM in a 3 km AAA bubble. A plane of a tier 4 CV has around 700 HP. A wing of 4-5 planes has 2800-3500 HP. So, the so called "sourge of the CVs" cruiser requires 10 seconds of concentrated fire in average to take down a single plane. Make it 7, if perks and boosts join in. However, this goes for a "strong" low tier AAA ship. Most ships have drastically less AAA power, either in DPS or in range, or in both. As a result, ships in of tier 5 and below, with some few exceptions, can basically be considered as training dummies for newcomer CV captains, and as prey for seal clubbers and veterans. 6.: all the above wouldn´t be that bad, if it weren´t fore the strenght of the low tier torpedo bomber torpedoes. The have a damage potential of some 8k damage each on tier 4. A tier 10 CV has planes which fly faster, have more HP and probably maneuvre better, but they still stick with around 8k of torpedo damage. So, if i am not completly wrong with my mathematics, a tier IV CV boosts basically the same "alpha strike" capability like a tier x ship of it´s class. Talking about dps in regards of a CV is futile, since it all depends on the CVs positioning and the flight lenght of it´s planes. So, after all, the balance problem of the CV class in the low tiers is, that they have a tier X damage potential with tier IV equipment, while the targets have a fraction to none of the defense (AAA) potential of the tier X ships, not even regarding the much lower health pool. This in mind, it is more than just obvious, why veteran CV players tend to say, their ships feel weak at high tiers. Their targets can take more hits while inflicting more damage at their squads, while low tier CVs face targets with almost no defense and much less hp. To come to a (personal) conclusion: yes, the individual player can try to avoid damage by having map awarness. But this is all the player can do. The fault in the game balance lies in the fact, that CVs at tier IV have a comparable "alpha strike" potential to their tier X ships, while all other classes lacke the AAA defense capabilities of their higher tiers. The logic result would be: to balance out the classes between the tiers, either addapt the AAA power of all classes of tiers 2-5, and/or decrease the alpha strike potential of low tier CVs. This is, how the classes could be tweaked. In addition, the MM should be addapted, so at least at low tier only almost equal CVs can face each other. It just fills you heart with pity and desperation, when you see you tier IV CV player´s fighters bravely attack the enemies tier V fighters, and watch the the tier V fighters just run right through them. After all, this game will sell itsself thorugh the emoutions it triggers. A 1-2 happy CV players leaving 5+ frustrated newcomers per battle won´t help too much, i´d say...

Ich hatte eben auch so ein Gefecht. Kawashi im CooP. Das Match hat uns tier 1 Schiffe zugeordnet. Das Spiel verläuft unfassbar, nach 3 Minuten liegen wir 4:1 zurück, die Bots marschieren in die Basis (map: Atlantik). Ich drehe alleine um, fahre zurück zur Base. In der Base: Tenryu, Hashidate, Isokaze, Kawashi. Der DD und die Tenryu sind unter 1000 HP, die Hashidate nahezu voll, die Kawashi ebenfalls. Die bots fangen an, mich präzisions HE Feuer niederzubrennen, bewegen sich aber in die "3 km Todeszone". Alle bis auf die Kawashi. Feuerfogus auf Tenryu, da die Breitseite auf Breitseite steht und gefährlich nah für Torpedos kommt. Hauptbatterie verfehlt, Sekundärbatterie stanzt Löcher ins Wasser, trifft aber nix. Irgendwann hat der Bugturm eingedreht und 2 HE Granaten beenden das Spiel. Trotzdem hat das Spektakel lange genug gedauert, um Tenryu und Isokaze eine Torpedokreuzfeuer zu ermöglichen. 2 treffen. Dafür ist die 400 HP Isokaze nun in Reichweite, wenn auch auf der anderen Breitseite. 6 Breitseiten der Sekundärbatterie später fährt sie immer noch munter neben mir rum. Auch hier muss die Hauptbatterie es richten. We glaubt, das war schon alles: da ist noch die Hashidate! Auf Distanzen von ca 1,0-1,5km feuern meine Sekundärgeschütze auf das Tier 1 Boot aus allen Rohren. Der Kahn ist so nah, meine Hauptbatterie können sich kaum einzielen. Nach drei Salven mit der Hauptbatterie geht dann endlich auch die Hashidate unter! Bilanz: 185 Schuss mit der Sekundärbatterie auf kürzeste Distanz und parralell laufende Ziele: 5 Treffer mit erstem Munitionstyp, 4 mit dem zweiten. Man kann ja sagen, was man will, aber wenn man bedenkt, dass die Sekundärbatterie kleine Schiffe im Nahkampf zerlegen soll, dann ist diese Performance eine glatte 6: Thema verfehlt. Ich geh ja noch d´accord, dass auf nahezu maximal Reichweite der Sekundärbatterien mal was daneben geht, oder dass sie sich "einschießen" muss. Aber 9 aus 185 auf kürzeste Distanz, das war lausig...

The OP already brought all arguments it requires to reason why Warspite is as it is right now: 15" inch guns on tier 6 make her the hardest hitting ship in this tier so far, regarding potential shell damage. This is compensated by turret traverse. 16km of range is below Fuso, but on par (or even better?) than elited New Mexico (don´t have the exact stats in mind right now). Her maneuverability and speed are superior to the New Mexico, Fuso might be a little faster. Her AAA is rather good, and her armor allows her to go into a knife fight against a Nagato and come out victorious. Despite the rather annoying turret traverse speed, i don´t see any major drawback on the Warspite, considering the fact she is a tier 6 premium ship. I had quiet some fun with her before the wipe, and i am still considering buying her again. For anything else, considering the OPs passion for this ship, it has to be said: personal preferences or just the legacy of war mashine (no matter if a plane, a tank or a ship) don´t justify an outstanding performance in a game, basically based on numbers, technical data and changes for balancing reasons. Otherwise, the Tiger tanks in WoT would perform different, and we could expect an absolutly OP Bismarck as a premium ship. This would please some fanboys, but enrage all others. As a result, this won´t happen! Well, there are or will be some exceptions for the russian/soviet tree maybe, but then it will be for historical accuracy and balancing reasons, of course...

Als "auch" DD Fahrer kenne ich die Situation. Allerdings: wenn man zu zweit alleine drei Minuten braucht, um auf die Idee zu kommen, dass man sich aufteilt, dann klingt das für mich schon arg nach "langer Leitung". Dazu: gehen wir mal davon aus, dass es eines dieser tier 3-5 Gefechte war, mit einem einzelnen Tier IV Träger. Ein Jagdflugzeug hat wieviel HP? 500? 700? Ein tier 4 DD kommt auf ca 10 DPS Flugabwehr, bei einem Aktionsradius von ca 2km? Gespottet wird er bei 2,5km, circa. 2 DDs im Verband, nahe beieinander, mit aktivierter AA sollten bei den ca 10 DPS pro Schiff eine überlappende Blase von ca 20 DPS haben. Das wären bei konstantem Beschuss der Jäger ungefähr 3600 durchschnitts DPS. 5x700 HP macht 3500. Natürlich haben die Jäger den Vorteil, sich zu "heilen", wenn sie die AAA Blase verlassen, und die Zahlen sind Schätzwerte. Aber, unabhängig davon, wie unangenehm diese Dauerbeschattung auch sein mag, so möchte ich doch behaupten, dass die DDs da auch mehr zugelassen haben, als notwendig war. Ja, CVs sind nervig, aber das können alle anderen Klasse auch sein...

Had a similar game today. I was playing my Wakatake. All my team had already died, thanks various reasons. Enemy had 5+ ships left. Although i didn´t manage to score that many hits with my torps, the enemy team didn´t manage to catch me aswell. We lost the game by cap then, but if it would have lasted for a few more minutes, they would have cornered me. It is definitly possible to keep several ships busy in a IJN DD, but it takes some effort to stay out of detection range. Given the fact that torpedo hits rely very much on the competence of the enemy captains, any result between nothing and complete devastation is possible. The classes are rather balanced these days, it´s just that many captains still have to learn how to act under certain circumstances. If you leave any DD the space to roam at will, he might take advantage of it. But the same goes for any other class aswell. Now, before you call me a DD fanboy, watch my stats. I play and like all classes equally.

AP gegen Schlachtschiffe ist so eine Sache. Wie bereits gesagt wurde, sind die verwendeten Panzerungswerte nicht bekannt. Generell würde ich aber bestätigen, dass 155 HE gegen Schlachtschiffe wenig Sinn macht. Selbst Steilfeuer verkommt zur Lotterie, und, wie ebenfalls bereits gesagt, der Bonusschaden durch Zitadellentreffer hält sich in Grenzen. Viele "echte" Schlachtschiffe, wie die meisten Amis (zumindest mit Hullupgrades) und die Nagato sollten ohnehin so dicke Deckpanzer haben, dass man schon echt Glück haben muss, um durchzukommen. Ausnahmen sind die weichen Japanischen Schlachtkreuzer bzw. Schlachtkreuzerumbauten (Myogi, Kongo, Amagi...). Die sollten deutlich anfälliger gegen 155mm Granaten sein, und ganz besonders gegen 203er. Aber auch hier würde ich wohl vorziehen, eher konstanten (Feuer-)Schaden zu verursachen, als auf die RNG Lotterie in Sachen AP-Durchschlag zu vertrauen...

Nah, i am that type of ollector who keeps all his "rare" and special puppies, no matter how "bad" they are. Although i am completly with you, in regards to to Arkansas overall performance. However, in WoT Wargaming showed some insight to Pre-Order tanks some time ago, so i am slightly optimistic, that sooner or later some love will fall to the Arkansas... After all, she is still a premium ship. Too sad, accelerated captains training is still no feature of this game, it would make prem ships much more valuable...

So, since most of us received this Wyoming class tier IV battleship for their efforts in CBT, i wanted to ask and discuss, how to upgrade it with the modules available? The most outstanding feature of this tier 4 premium reward ship is it´s capability to fit 6 upgrade modules, allowing the player some unique setups for this tier. It´s major drawback is of course it´s lack of any AAA defense, leaving it incredibly vulnerable to any attacks by air. However, this allows us to avoid the discussion, wether any AAA power upgrades are usefull. For me, basically, two setups for the Arkansas, regarding her armament, seem to be viable: focus on main armament, with upgrades to range and survivability, or with focus on the strong secondary armament. During the OBT weekend, i tested out both setups. My personal conclusion: go for the maximum of secondary batteries. With modules and captains perks, the range of the secondary batteries can be buffed to some 5 km. On the opposite, going for gun range will upgrade the main batteries from some 12km range to 13,xx km. Usually, i would say that it´s always of advantage to have superior range with the main guns. However, where is the point in the Arkansas if you don´t make use of her secondary batteries? With a range of 5km, you can easily get close and personal against most BBs she might face in battle (if you manage to get that close, thanks to the lack of speed) and you have a significant advantage when it comes up to defend against US DDs. On the other hand, cruisers like the Omaha, Phoenix, Tenryu and Kuma will be easily in torpedo range before you make it into the 5 km range, and those cruisers can easily ourtun your secondary range. This leaves me in a kind of "i don´t know how to decide"! What would you do (or have you chosen to do), and why?