m4inbrain

I can supply a screenshot where a torpedo of mine hit a minekaze for 118 (hundredeighteen) damage. Caused flooding though, so yay me. Torps are far from rng free as well. Gundispersion on BB is already extremely unrealistic, i roughly get a 20% hitrate. Thats 7-10 times that of what what real BBs could do. If you get in more reliable damage, like a certain base damage, you need to reduce the hitrate quite considerably. Because at the moment, its quite balanced believe it or not. Damagewise. Also, two people with the same hitrate roughly have the same avg damage as well - so the system DOES work, its just not rewarding enough for some. Thats down to preference though, not imbalance.

I agree fully with his opinion on carriers, but disagree with his assessment of battleships. He even said it. World of tanks, T54 vs Maus/E100, not able to go through the front without use of premium ammo. Why? Because it's "semi-realistic". And that's what BBs are at the moment. In real life, a battleship can achieve a hitrate of 2-3%. That's three shells out of 100, that hit. The hitrate ingame is alot higher - which is obviously good. Battleships never did "reliable damage", that's why the seabattles took hours, sometimes even days, with ships shelling each other. Or, on the other side of the scale, you have the hood. That's simply how it works, and everything else would be absolutely unbalanced for BBs (in an OP sense). It doesn't even work like that in World of Tanks (again, he cited it) - you have low rolls, you have high rolls, you have onehits, you have no-damage crits, etc - apart from the obvious gun dispersion (BL10, even fully aimed you sometimes shoot the tank behind you), which is random as well. Don't get me started on arty there, that's even worse (but funnily enough, comparable to what we have here - ever had a tank bounce your HE shell? It's fun..). It feels a bit unrewarding at times, if a full broadside of the fuso hits and i do only 4k damage, but that's how it is. It wasn't even different in the other game that he cited, Navyfields. The dispersion there was horrible apart from those guys who spent their life and their savings in that game, simply shooting blobs out of their H44s. Which in the end was the reason why i stopped playing it.

It's not about giving it to good or bad people only. It's about getting a sample size big enough to actually judge something. Now you have a couple of outstanding CV captains judging the performance against mostly CV captains who are not. How do you get data from that? And no, it's never too late to balance something, especially at WG - i certainly remember how long the KV1s was absolutely ridiculously overpowered, before it finally got balanced. Now i do understand where you come from, what you guys actually try to do - but i personally don't think that it works on random servers. There's simply not enough variety.

An actual captain refers to his ship as "her". "She's afloat". "She won't sink". Even in something stupid (but enjoyable) as Pirates of the Carribean, the black pearl is a "she". Also can be heard in "Master and Commander" (good movie btw).

I've seen only one so far, and he didn't really have an impact in the game. It's not even about me wanting one, even if it were live, i'd not get one anytime soon (or even late). It's about the fact that something that apparently might be massively OP is given to a certain group of players, possibly wreaking havoc with it for a while. A ship should never be tested that way. Apart from that, it wouldn't be the first unbalanced thing (in both directions) that WG releases, so that argument is pretty much void. Apart from obviously not having a big sample size to actually judge anything. Btw, the argument about "your stats are crap, your opinion is void" is utterly worthless. There will be alot more sub-par players than good ones, to balance a ship solely around one of those groups is a nice setup for a massive failure.

It still is pretty odd. Was any other ship tested that way, on live servers?

Ships are female, first of all. Second of all, in this very thread i stated that the new spread is stupid, so how about you read the thread before you make yourself look like an [edited]?

Yes, absolutely. It's not like kamikazing was never heard of in WW2, nor was it ineffective. It was stupid imho, but nonetheless. Apart from the issue that we're not talking about shooting torps, but the torpcarrier with main guns. PS: germany had entire plane-squadrons dedicated to ram enemy bombers over germany - just saying. edit: not even main armaments against ships worked consistently. We're talking about a hitrate of 2-3%, 5% being amazing already. That's far from consistent as well.

No. But people would be forced to play WITH them, which is as bad. The rest of your argument is easy to counter: tell me, how many people do you know actively playing T95s and T28s? None? Maybe it's because they're generally considered to be absolutely useless. Not because they're a challenge to play, it's because they are plain bad and seriously cripple your team, because in whatever engagement, the team with less of those turds will have the advantage, because they will have more ships where stuff actually happens. And the small maps in this game are still quite considerably bigger than the maps in World of Tanks. Apart from CVs being the biggest contributors to draws at the moment, because they hang back so far. edit: just realised, the T95 is actually even faster than most of these things, up to DOUBLE the speed. Wow. edit2: sounds really aggressive, not meant that way btw.

Yeah heard that, but since i couldn't support a source, i didn't mention it.

I kinda said, it didn't work, didn't i? I said it'd be fun, not necessarily effective. If i recall correctly (and man, that's a long time ago), even in Navyfields you were able to fire anti-air ammo on your main guns? Might be wishful thinking now, but i do think i remember darkly something like that.

Although, truth to be said, i'd love to use my main armament as anti-torpedo weapon. Not against the torpedos, but the incoming torpedo bombers, which in reality didn't fly around at high altitudes, dived and threw their weapons in the water in a 45 degree angle as pictured in the game. They came in as low as possible in a straight line for quite a while, enough time to get at least one round off. Not that it helped, shown by the yamato (which had dedicated 46cm anti-air incendiary shells iirc), but at least would be fun while there's nothing else to shoot at. I know, wouldn't happen for numerous reasons - just saying that it would be fun.

Read the topic again. Apart from that, i'm done talking to you, i'm actually convinced now that you're simply not able to comprehend what other people are saying.

Honestly? I don't want these things in normal gamemodes. It would take ages to take them out (not because they're tough, but because after a match you have to sail across the whole map to get to them), resulting in even more draws. Have fun with those turds being the last survivors on both sides, which will obviously happen frequently since they won't see any combat beforehand. It's not dull thinking to get them (if anything) into a seperate gamemode, it's to prevent ruining other peoples games. I can tattoo a [edited] on your face, that would be totally crazy and different, would still be ridiculously stupid though. Crazy/different for the sake of being crazy/different is simply just that.

http://worldofwarships.eu/cbt/accounts/517094345-/

Sorry, didn't read that. Still a bad idea, because it would still prevent a losing team from actually catching up. You want to encourage people clawing themselves back into the game, take a 4 spot domination game - two survivors on one team, three on the other. It's three caps vs one, you're on your way to cap the second one - and suddenly lose the game not because the enemy made it to 1000 or whatever, but because you ran out of tickets. That would really annoy me. Preferably, encourage all players/ships to cap/hold caps. That's where the "cappoint in open seas" comes into play, and also the "only counts while defended". Gives a variety of ships a reason to work together, especially DDs with BBs which otherwise have zero reason to stick together at the moment. Those idea i'd like to see in the game, number 5 not. I know already that this would simply frustrate me, to lose because some people in my team screwed up and i don't even get the chance to claw back.

Revert to sarcasm because you can't challenge an argument, cute. Glad we figured it all out though.

Some good ideas, but your number 5 is bad-ish. If a capped circle gives -3 per point, the team that rushes all three cappoints only needs to blow up one or two ships for the enemy to run out of tickets. That wouldn't make for good gameplay, imho.

The hitbox bug is how a weapon should perform? Laughable is what you're trying to propose: you say a weapon should disperse because that's realistic, but somehow expect a ship, wobbling up and down on waves, with (nowadays) really bad FCS to fire with pinpoint accuracy. Do you even know that tanks up to today don't hit at that range with pinpoint accuracy (apart from the computerized big ones)? And that's the caliber of your SECONDARIES, let alone your main armament. Just wow, sometimes not even a facepalm describes feelings sufficiently. edit: small hint, maybe you get the clue.. In WW2, there was a reason to use artillery batteries, not single guns. Take a guess why.

That would only be a problem if only you would suffer from RNG. You don't. While i agree that it would be fun for 20 minutes to shoot laserguided bombs which would literally make every shot under 10km a citadelhit, i'd stop playing after exactly the third time being oneshotted because ships are easy to citadel. Bad idea, good RNG. Oh and for your information, counterstrike has alot of RNG. That was literally the worst example, since just recently they announced that they finally fix the bug that causes it, after years. edit: and of course you have the choice of playing destroyers, torps are not RNG.

Actually just played two games, one win where i went to escort an Amagi, literally doing nothing the whole game apart from shooting down 5 planes and scoring a couple of hits on another cleveland - the second one was more in line to what i usually do, playing opportunistic, trying to engage enemies that are otherwise engaged, just hammering them with shells - endresult, 290000 credits, 2000xp - for a defeat thanks to me being the only one actually doing stuff (only two dead enemies were a benson and an ibuki that i killed). I like playing BBs, i would never demand for CAs doing escorts (because i know now how much of no fun it is). Not only are they not worth it in the current state of the game/meta, it's mindnumbingly boring on top. edit: in that game, 2 destroyers and me held C through the whole game. If anything, cruisers should start pairing up with DDs, not with BBs. Way more effective.

No, they actually fulfill their last order, figured that out today when i was under fire and pretty much dead in the water, i hushed out my torpwings and just leftclicked a BB that got stuck on an island roughly 11km away - pretty much with the third click i blew up, and my planes actually torped him. Or did you mean "give them one more order after i died"?

I'd actually say it depends on the nation you're playing. IJN captains usually don't sail fighter setups because they're utterly pointless. That's why they swarm the map with TBs/DBs, whereas US captains usually go fighterheavy nowadays. I play what is most effective to me, which would be completely anti-ship on IJN carriers and as much air superiority on my US ones. Then again, both only tier 5, might be different on higher tiers (although considering the feedback i read in the forum, it stays that way).

Kawachii for me as well, even though the North Carolina felt bad too. edit: oops, obviously meant South Carolina. ^^