typhaon

The best way to deal with afk players is to give them no reason to do it on purpose. If they don't get a single credit or experience point, nobody will try to be afk unless forced to (maybe a phone call, the door bell or something like that). I don't mind if there's someone afk for a good reason, but I hate players that go afk and get XP and credits with that tactic.

If you want to be sure to not hit allies with your torps, try to launch them either at the front row, with no allies in front of you or at very short range to the target when you are sure, that you won't miss. And also watch behind you, since a torpedo salvo to the side falls way behind you on their run and might hit allies, that are some way behind you. And most important: don't shoot torps, if you're not in range... early torps have rather short range on US ships and I've seen many DDs and CL/CAs launching torps that were several km further away than their max. torp range. And about complaints: Don't give a damn about them, actually I see them as an honest compliment. There are no hacks or cheats in WoWS, so if he really reports you for hacking, the support team will have a short laugh and move on to the next ticket.

If the charge is used and you see no real repair, than you might have had just a tiny little bit of repairable damage. Like it has been said: It's best used after you have faced cruisers that spammed HE shells as those mostly do light and medium damage, or after flooding and fire.

Es ist von WG nicht gewollt, auf hohen Tiers einfach Geld zu verdienen. Wenn du knapp bei Kasse bist, spiel einfach ein niedrigeres Schiff, mit dem du gut klar kommst. Das war schon bei WoT so... der Hauptunterschied ist jedoch, dass man in WoT mit persönlichem Können wesentlich effizienter Spiel kann. Es ist dort einfacher Schaden durch Panzerung zu vermeiden, Geschosse nicht zu verschwenden oder auch alleine gegen mehrere Gegner ganz gut wegzukommen. In WoWS nimmt man eigentlich fast immer Schaden und auch gut gezielte Salven können zum Großteil daneben gehen... dazu kommt das Schadenssystem, dass wesentlich zufälliger ist als bei WoT. Daher ist es auch schwieriger effektiv Geld zu verdienen.

Wie gesagt ist der allgemeine Flakwert nutzlos... denn der gleiche Wert kann entweder für viele Geschütze mit geringer Reichweite oder wenige Geschütze mit höher Reichweite gelten. Um das ganze wirklich abschätzen zu können, musst du dir schon die Detailwerte ansehen um zu wissen, welchen Schaden du auf welche Distanz machst. Und wie gesagt werden ja auch die Flugzeuge immer stabiler.

Well in fact, I think even torps are influenced by RNG when it comes to damage and the chance of flooding. And I don't have that much difficulties to make my shots count on my BBs... if course it's litte luck involved, but you even need more luck for a long range torp salvo to strike the desired target.

Well, the Atlanta has so many turrets all over the decks, that it's hard to miss them...

Die Reichweiten im Spiel sind, wie dir vielleicht schon aufgefallen ist, in der Regel alle kürzer als in der Realität. In der Realität wurde die Reichweite der Geschütze übrigens auch nicht durch eine bessere Feuerleitanlage oder ein Katapultflugzeug erhöht, aber das nur so am Rande. Die Reichweite ist ein wesentliches Mittel zum Balancing im Spiel und ich glaube bei den paar Schiffen, die aktuell im Spiel sind, ist es noch zu früh, um das ganze abzuschätzen. Und was meinst du bitte mit weniger Schaden? Weniger als wer oder was denn? Und deinen Link kannst du vergessen, denn wenn WoWS eins nicht ist, dann ist es historisch korrekt... allenfalls die Models sind korrekt, ansonsten ist es ein Arcade-Spiel, also ist der Vergleich mit der Realität völlig unsinnig. Es ist eben nicht der Anspruch von WG, eine Simulation zu entwickeln... da gibt es andere Spiele auf dem Markt, die da mehr Ambitionen haben.

Distances are downscaled and speeds upscaled in this game to enable an arcade type gameplay. That's no mistake but on purpose. Otherwise this game would be terribly slow and boring...

Eben Code eingegeben, nach einem Kampf war das Schiff im Hafen.

Don't mistake a high number of guns for high damage... that works with low tiers, where armor means nothing, but later you might have a hard time damaging BBs with small cruiser guns. The South Carolina is not that bad though... if you only hit for 1000 dmg with a salvo, you probably just had a bad shot... If you do it right, you can cause 10000 damage with a little luck... especially on soft targets like the St. Louis. The thing is, that BBs require lot more careful gameplay style... a bad salvo can ruin your battle, but if you make your shots count, you will have good results.

It would be good if HE shells had area damage, but since you still have to score a direct hit to do damage, there is no advantage. Maybe if you don't have any clue about the enemy's position, but then you should not waste a salvo anyway. But if you have a good guess at the enemy's position, you want to hit where you aim. And if you want to spread out your shots, you can still do so by firing each turret after the other.

Well... it's about ships... speed definately wasn't one of their advantages.

That's nonsense... why would decreased accuracy increase the chance of hitting someone, unless you really have no clue at all about where it's located... but even then the chance would be equally low to hit it. If I try to shoot at an invisible enemy I have a good idea about where it is so I definately want to hit where I aim. I don't want to hit it at all, I want to hit it hard. It's not like most ships are so big that you cannot miss them... most if the time the invisible ships are DDs that are already hard enough to hit without bad spread.

Range is a nice advantage in IJN BBs, but from my experience, shells, that hit the enemy at long range, have a very bad impact angle which makes it hard to penetrate to the citadel. US BBs follow a different approach regarding armor, as well. While IJN BBs boast decent armor all around, the armor of the lower US BBs is focussed on the vital parts of the ship, meaning citadel and ammunition. So it can be hard sometimes to penetrate those. It's all about the impact angle... without a clean shot, your chances are rather low to have success.

Naja es macht nur wenig Unterschied wenn es ums vorhalten geht, denn die Geschütze sind alle auf den gleichen Zielpunkt gerichtet, nicht in die gleiche Richtung. D.h. wenn ein Schiff relativ nah ist, kreuzen sich die Schusslinien an deinem anvisierten Zielpunkt.

There's much more about XP than just comparing these numbers. What matters most is how much damage you have done against which tier. Kills give a small bonus, but aren't that important. So as long as you don't compare how much damage you have dealt to which enemy, you cannot really compare two battles.

Aim time is bad in WoWS... the bigger the aim time, the slower the turrets turn. So try to keep your aim time as low as possible. I'd like to see the term changed to traverse as well as it would be much clearer to unterstand

Dann müsste aber auch die Squad-Anzahl der Japaner runtergesetzt werden und am Ende hätten wir einen CV-Einheitsbrei, der sich nurnoch anhand der Flaggen unterscheiden lässt. Balancing ist nicht, wenn alles gleich ist. Die US CVs haben eben überragende Fighter... das beginnt bei den Werten und endet bei der simplen Tatsache, dass ihre Squads ein Flugzeug mehr haben, als die Japaner. Dafür haben die Japaner mehr Squads zur verfügung und das bessere Bomber-Layout. Wenn du also Luftkämpfe zuverlässig gewinnen willst, musst du wohl die Amis nehmen. Stehst du eher auf Schiffe Versenken, dann bleib bei den Japanern, mach aber einen großen Bogen um feindliche Jäger.

Sie haben aber prinzipiell ein Flugzeug weniger als die US Squads und daher weniger HP und weniger Feuerpower.

1. Kann keiner sagen.... Buffs und Nerfs gehören zur Spielentwicklung 2. Es geht 3. Nein, US-Fighter sind einfach stärker.

Yes.

Because every visible stat or value in this game would be an endless source of rants, complains, discussions about historical comparisons and balancing, about supposed bugs and trolling. Sometimes I think that it's best to keep the community dumb, because sadly quite a number of players cannot endure wisdom and information.

And even if they would wipe the game, you would get all your bought dubloons and premium ships back.

Well, there are no tanks in naval battles... it was all about hitting the enemy and not being hit yourself. Every hit could possibly prove fatal, so ships tried to not fire at all... that was especially true for battleships, because they weren't developed to take the biggest punishment, but to carry the largest and most dangerous guns... big guns require a big ship... and a big ship which is hit more easy requires more armor... but no commander would try to sail into the battle to draw enemy fire, except when they were really desperate. After all those decisions were not only about a ship but also about several thousand lives of the sailors on board.