Spuggy

The Destroyer rules are a little one sided as the DD's in game have the most varied game play across the different nations Keep current rules for "When in IJN DD" with... [edited]

I don't get why being "Pink" is a punishment though. Personally, I think the ship or Captain or both that turned pink should be impounded in the port and unable to be used until "pink" status is clear. Being pink.... who actually cares?

Komaz and Krazypenguin beat me to it. The Atlanta is a crazy [edited]DD. 15 citadel volley's at close range with AP into cruiser's broadsides wrecks people. It's a monster of an abomination between a Cleveland and a Mahan.

SUBMARINES CONFIRMED IN NEXT PATCH

The British line up would be full of "paper ships" that were never actually built in real life. The player base would get frustrated with war gaming if they introduced those "fictional" tech trees. The Spanish fleet will probably come first

Guys guys guys... relax...... this is the internet. all you need to do is drink their tears because.........

lucky you.... my experience at counting to three is one, two, pineapples, dog hair, potatoes, four, five, oranges, three. Seems like a very long time to still be visible after SA claims you're not.

One of the problems I have with the secondaries is the skill system right now. I think it's a bit silly to lump both AA power and secondary power into the same skills. This ends up making it all a bit more bland when it comes to captains. Currently I like piling my skill points on BB's, no matter what nation they are from, into secondary armament skills. Why? Well because it buffs so much about the BB that it's silly not to. If you want better AA you buff secondaries at the same time If you want better secondaries, guess what, you end up buffing your AA too. Granted, to fully specialise you need to use ship upgrades too but I feel the skills need to be massively reworked to allow for super specialised setups.

there should be a promotional video for ship camo made with this script

Just don't follow Nelson's advice about a captain not doing far wrong when in a CV

unregulated content which creates content which is bad for game play or removes fairness is worse.

Like I said, if you can't connect to the main servers with a modified client how would they use them?

That means a port slot is equal to 1.34 euro. I still stand by my point that premium time is still the standard for conversion to real money.

Hmmmmm, because you can buy a port slot or premium time there is a direct conversion rate to real world currency here. However there is a discrepancy. IRRC a port slot costs 100 dabloons = £0.35 or €0.50 with real money. Or 100 diamonds 1 day of premium costs £0.86 or €1.00 with real money or 50 diamonds. Port slot conversion is 100 diamonds = 100 dabloons = €0.50 Premium conversion is 1 day = 50 diamonds = €1.00 So premium is the best value for diamonds when converting to real world money!. I also believe because premium is a direct conversion it should be the standard. This means that 50 diamonds = €1.00 Therefore: Albany + port slot costs €8.00 (Tier 3 cruiser costing a little less than an Aurora) Tachibana + port slot costs €3.00 (Tier 2 DD - bit expensive no?) Smith + port slot costs €7.00 (really? for a tier 2 DD??) Katori + port slot costs €9.00 (Tier 3 cruiser costing the same as an Aurora) Not sure I'm in agreement with the economy that this event revolves around. It seems completely out of wack and random as [edited]. There should be far more options with regards to diamond trading. It should also be far more comparable with dabloons and real world money. It all seems out of balance. So as you can see it will cost you x amount of € to buy each item. Bottom line is that premium time is your best bang for your buck

Remove the ability for game clients with non-official mods installed to connect to the NA/EU/RU/SEA servers. Create a "Mod Test" (MT) Server for people to test their mods. Allow anyone to connect to it. Mods that are good and work are submitted to WG to install into the game. Players can then cherry pick what they want from their game (mini map types, scope types, skins, shell colours etc) and really customize their game. This way all WG really have to do is quality assure and regionalise the MODs. Most of the hard work of coding and testing gets done for free! Imagine all the different ship skins we could all have. Imagine being able to pick and chose a particular gun scope and fix it to a particular ship Customisation is a major thing and should be embraced. But not regulating the content is what creates the problem of "illegal" customisation.

Best thing that can happen during a cyclone is that it happens early in the match and both teams become super aggressive. They all close range without actually knowing how close they are then all of a sudden the cyclone lifts and everyone is below 10 km from each other and battle lines are blurred giving the situation a bit of "The Nelson Touch" about it. In other words, it's fun when the storm lifts and everyone shouts a collective "OH [edited]!" and gunfire and torps fly everywhere. Fun for all the family.

Svietlana is easily my favorite T4 cruiser right now. You need to be a strange mix of ultra cautious and ultra aggressive all at the same time. Maybe the term is opportunistic. Play like you're an American destroyer. Dive bomb BB's into destruction. I like to use my most forward arc'ing torp launcher from one side to launch a barrage of torps at a BB from <5km whilst dive bombing them forcing them to commit to a particular evasion maneuver. Continue with the dive bomb and then swing the ship around and give them the 6 torps at close range. You can also do the whole ambush thing and eat destroyers for giggles. Just never show your broadside to anything shooting at you. Including DD's. I would really really really like to see a premium version of this ship (perhaps the Chervona Ukraina) at tier 5.

This thread smells funny. Maybe it's the necrotic smell of an old thread being pulled out of the morgue. Also, this is the only thing you should refer to when talking about "how to Tirpitz"

Wait wait wait wait wait......... I have not seen Eurobeat's "How to Clemson" guide mentioned at all! Please check his out and consider him a hero of Freedom shooting DD's.

Currently the captain skill Fire Prevention offers a -7% to the risk of fire. This is currently an ineffective skill. This is because of how the chance of fire formula actually works. The bonus doesn't actually result in a -7% chance of a fire being set on your ship. It actually equates to approximately -1% to the chance of a fire being set per HE shell hit. This makes the skill miss leading as it infers that the skill will provide a much greater reduction in chance of fires being set on your ship. So I'd like to discuss whether A) The skill is currently noticeably effective and worth the skill points. B) The skill description is correct or should be re-worded C) The skill should be redesigned to be an effective "Fire Prevention / Fire Fighting" skill. My answers to these questions are: A) In my experience and my understanding of the current game mechanics this skill is not effective or does it offer any noticeable difference in the chance of fire on your ship B) The skill does not offer a good description as to how effective the skill actually is C) The skill should be redesigned to either offer a larger bonus to the reduction in the chance of fire or changed to offer a different bonus against ship fires. I think the best option would be to make the skill effect how quickly fires are extinguished. The reason for this is that fires are ALWAYS going to happen. Being able to extinguish them quickly without using a damage control would be a very useful ability and can stack with the flags and upgrades already available. Other peoples thoughts?

I can see where you're coming from but I had to read that several times to get the idea of what you were proposing. That level of complexity is too great for the average Joe/Joanne playing this game. First thing I would do is to simply look at the skill as it is already and see if simply increasing the bonus can get us to a balance point base rate * (1 - (Damage Control + Fire Prevention)) * (shell base fire chance + Demolition Expert) = chance of shell starting fire If we increase the bonus to 20% reduction in fire risk then plug the numbers in (vs Colorado HE @ 32%) we get:- 0.76*(1-(0+20))*(0.32+0)= 19.5% chance of fire (vs 22.6% chance of fire with the current bonus and 24.3% chance of fire with no bonus) EDIT - Wait... I think my math has failed I think exploring this kind of route first would be far more beneficial. It is literally just a case of finding the right number that isn't an overpowered mess and also isn't a complete joke.

Can't remember the map but................. I was in a Nurnberg. The match was about to start. ........3 ........2 ........1 ACTION STATIONS!! One second later........ My Nurnberg explodes.

Yes it is 7% but because of how the formula works it's actually less than 1% effective. You are being fooled. Check the math in the link someone posted. It really is that bad and demo expert really is that good From another thread from a while ago: It's just awful. Sometimes it only makes a 1% difference in the final fire chance. Example using 0.76 base rate given above (which appears to be pure speculation, as far as I can tell) and Colorado's 32% chance HE shells: base rate * (1 - (Damage Control + Fire Prevention)) * (shell base fire chance + Demolition Expert) = chance of shell starting fire Without Damage Control: 0.76 * (1 - (0 + 0)) * (0.32 + 0) = 24.3% chance of shell starting fire With Damage Control: 0.76 * (1 - (0.05 + 0)) * (0.32 + 0) = 23.1% chance of shell starting fire In this example, Damage Control makes a 1.2% difference in the chance of fires starting (which is 5% of 24.3%). You'll still be set on fire by every 4th or 5th shell. In conclusion, it's basically useless. Use your captain skill points on other skills. Even the upgrades that "prevent" fires are frakkin' useless!!

Well the +3% fire chance that demo expert skill gives you actually equates to 25% more chance of fire per shell. In reality the skill description should be: "less than 1% fewer fires set by enemies shooting at you" The math is so wonky it's crazy.

I'm guessing you don't understand how the formula works and the difference between the performance of skills. The Demo expert skill offers a +3% chance of fire per shell. If you do the math this skill actually offers +25% chance of fire per shell over the stock shell. The Fire prevention skill is lucky if it reduces the chance of fire by 1%.