Dukemaster105

I've almost given up on Satsuma, it frustrates me to no end and thus far hasn't shown what it's supposed to do. Normally, the end of a line represents the pinnacle of what that line of ships is about. With Tier 11s it's usually an extreme expression of that line or a specific upgrade to the Tier 10 that transforms into something much stronger. That doesn't take into account a the really bad ideas that are Burst Fire Mode and Combat Instructions, which is another topic for another time. With the Satsuma though, I just can't for the life of me figure out what it's supposed to do or what it's supposed to be for. The Yamato always gave me good results, or at least I felt like I would rely on the ship when I really needed it to perform. The subjective experience in the Yamato was almost always very good, it rarely left me feeling like I wasn't able to impose my will if I needed to. Conversely, the Satsuma feels like a downgrade, a very large one. Playing it makes me feel like I'm fighting my own ship as well as the enemy, as though it's holding me back from being able to do what I want to or even do what the ship is good at, whatever that might be. I'm good at telling the difference between when I'm holding the ship back or when the ship is holding me back. Without a doubt this is the ship holding me back. I'll list all of its apparent weaknesses. 1: 35 second reload time on the main guns, which is 5 seconds longer than the Yamato, and 7 seconds longer than on the Shikishima. 2: Worse dispersion than the Shikishima. 3: Very slow muzzle velocity on the shells leading to plenty of time for enemy ships to dodge or angle (understandable since they are 510mm guns). 4: Worse maneuvrability than the Yamato (understandable and acceptable since it is a 90,000 ton ship and a tier higher after all). 5: Worse secondary battery firing range than the Shikishima. Not by much, but the Satsuma is supposed to be better since it is a tier higher. 6: Worse secondary battery reload time on its 100mm guns than the Shikishima. A whole 4 seconds longer, making them slower firing than all other Japanese 100mm secondaries. 7: Is a Tier 11, thus you can't run a profit on it like you can on the Yamato or the Shikishima. Objectively it should be better, since it's a tier higher and has statistics or characteristics that are improved over the Yamato, but it just doesn't deliver on its potential. Except in rare or terrible-enemy-team situations where any ship of any tier would be able to do the same. Subjectively it doesn't feel like an upgrade over the Yamato. You don't gain any overmatch advantage over the Yamato the same way the Yamato does over the Izumo. You don't have a raw damage per salvo or damage per minute advantage because of the low rate of fire and poor muzzle velocity. Your AA has finally reached Tier 8 U.S. battleship levels, but it doesn't matter because you'll never see carrier planes that you might be able to defend yourself against. Your secondaries are gimped for no apparent reason. Yes, it's not supposed to be a secondary brawler the same way the Hannover is, but there's still no reason to make the Satsuma's secondaries worse than lower tier ships of the same nation and class, and it's still a player's choice on how they fit and play their ship. I just don't understand the Satsuma, I really don't. I've almost given up trying to figure it out since every battle is a really frustrating 12 vs 13 engagement that leaves me feeling like I worked way to hard for far too little return, only to see Tier 9s and 10s outperforming me and I finish somewhere in the middle of the team. Yes, I have even seen a Minnesota outperform me. Can any of you give some non-insulting advice or tips? I'm lost at this point. Many thanks.

Something has always been possible in Wargaming's titles. That is to form a division, platoon, or whatever and play the game with your friends or other random people. They don't always have to be good players, nor do you, and none of you need to be on some kind of voice chat. However, there are always the elitists out there that exploit the system. Those 60%+ winrate people who only ever seem to play the game in three-ship divisions with two other 60%+ winrate friends and dominate battles. Even people who have 70%+ winrates, which I don't know how that's even possible if you aren't using illegal mods or are otherwise cheating. My proposal is one of two things. 1: Ban divisions completely. You can't form a division in port or in battle, and thus can't rig the game in your favor with specifically picked ships that work well together and become an unstoppable force. Or simpler than that, just being one of the elitists and only playing with your other elitist friends. Thus, everyone is forced to play the game solo and rely on people they've never seen before and will never see again. Which makes the game fair. Everyone has the same advantages or disadvantages, nobody can rig the game in their favor. 2: Hard-cap all divisions to always be bottom tier, no matter what. Then, if three elitists try and play really strong ships in a division and support each other, they'll always be bottom tier against far stronger ships that can deal with them far easier than if they were middle or top tier. Then if the three-ship division of elitists performs well and wins, they can pad their already massive egos even more by dominating as bottom tier ships. Of course you're probably wondering why I don't play with my friends and try and do the same and rig the game in my favor? Well, because I play fair and don't exploit the game mechanics to get an unfair advantage. Besides, I don't have any friends. Something I don't see changing any time soon.

I'm looking to join a clan full of approachable and friendly players. Not so much the generally understood online gamer's meaning of friendly which tends to include insults and bullying, but real friendliness that's sincere and non-sarcastic. I'm not entirely sure to what end my involvement will be in terms of divisions, but I'm always willing to take part in whatever competitive modes are available, and have experience taking orders in arranged clan based battles. My ideal prospective clan would be one with an adult member pool and mature mindset, no drama or big egos, and no elitist players or cheaters with excessively high winrates. People who enjoy fair and fun gameplay that doesn't involve hard exploits of dumb game mechanics that should've been removed years ago, and who understand the spirit that the game was originally intended to be played in. Also people who play other games and want to group up in those other games. My listed winrate is 56% and personal statistical nonsense rating is somewhere in that range or so. English speaking, and can be online at strange hours. And of course everyone in the clan should hate submarines and want them removed, like everyone in this game does.

Well, it's been a bad long time suffering with submarines so far. I can't come up with anything positive to say about them, I just can't. I play destroyers, cruisers, and battleships, but not carriers or submarines. I enjoy things that are a challenge and can be countered by something else. Ships that have real problems associated with them that require care, patience, experience, and forethought to counteract. When you succeed in something with limitations it's rewarding, you feel as though you've mastered something difficult. I can't say the same for submarines. So far I've had a lot of bad experiences, a lot of blah-bland experiences, and very few good experiences playing against them. Combined with the experience of playing submarines on the test server that gave me a real nasty taste for what they're capable of, even in the face of a determined and skilled opponent (granted the test server is a highly artificial environment). I don't think or believe that submarines can be balanced in a way that will make everyone happy with them, or at least content with them. I really don't think the developers can do it. So far every nerf they've thrown their way hasn't gone far enough, and the basic mechanics of submarines functionality seems to nullify any kind of sensible and rational counters, regardless of other factors. Thus, I now request that submarines be canceled. The time and effort put into them could've been far better spent on improving other aspects of the game that are in dire need of it, or at least that could expedite the additions and growth of the game in general. At best they'll be an intensely hated cludge of a ship class, at worst they'll hurt the game to an extent that nobody will like.

I'm looking to join a clan full of approachable and friendly players. Not so much the generally understood online gamer's meaning of friendly which tends to include insults and bullying, but real friendliness that's sincere and non-sarcastic. I'm not entirely sure to what end my involvement will be in terms of divisions, but I'm always willing to take part in whatever competitive modes are available, and have experience taking orders in arranged clan based battles. My ideal prospective clan would be one with an adult member pool and mature mindset, no drama or big egos, and no elitist players or cheaters with excessively high winrates. People who enjoy fair and fun gameplay that doesn't involve hard exploits of dumb game mechanics that should've been removed years ago, and who understand the spirit that the game was originally intended to be played in. Also people who play other games and want to group up in those other games. Also preferably should include single gamer girls over 25 that are looking for their Player 2 in life, if that isn't too pervy or creepy to say out loud. My listed winrate is 56% and personal statistical nonsense rating is somewhere in that range or so. English speaking, and can be online at strange hours. And of course everyone in the clan should hate submarines and want them removed, like everyone in this game does.

I would agree that these ships might need the "Special Ship" status for transferring in a captain of your choice, especially given the service costs being what they are. Although I do understand why they would be classified as normal tech tree ships, since they're essentially no longer superships but proper Tier 11s with their introduction into the tech tree. As for the service costs and credit earnings of them, I do in fact agree with the current levels. World of Warships has never been about the grind or really punishing economics, at least in comparison to World of Tanks. With so many permanent camos available for players to earn without spending real money, and therefore bolster their ability to earn credits in high tiers while simultaneously reducing servicing costs. You see this regularly with people playing their Tier 9 and 10 tech tree ships a lot, perhaps even more so than premiums or other special ships. You can even see it in people's stats for overall battles played compared to battles in Tier 10. Those people who've played thirty-thousand battles and two-thirds of those battles have been in Tier 10s of various flavors. They wouldn't be doing that if they didn't earn enough credits in them, or had a sizable credit flow from elsewhere to even it out. To limit the numbers of Tier 11 ships in the matchmaker, and prevent people from sitting there in that newest top tier, service costs and profitability needs to be different than we're used to. A lot of us, myself included, wouldn't want a matchmaker choked up with Tier 11s smashing us out of existence all the time, the same way we all have trouble being bottom tier in any other tier of ship. Controversially, I would suggest that they should require xp to research and unlock them. Maybe not a popular idea, but given the sheer numbers of people playing their Tier 10s for thousands of battles with permanent camos on them, it really wouldn't be that much work to get the xp required. A lot of people may not even reset their lines for research points anyway, so they'll have millions of xp on their Tier 10s right from the start. I don't even play my own Tier 10s as much as everything else, having a proper grind on my hands would be something rewarding, a goal to achieve over a long period of time, and would motivate me to play my Tier 10s and strive to get the most out of them. How much xp required to research a Tier 11? Well, I would say start with double the xp cost of a Tier 10 and go from there. What I would recommend for addition to their permanent camo though is in addition to the +150% XP, a +???% Commander XP to be added. This would increase the value playing them has to the player, partially offsetting the high servicing costs with larger ship and captain xp payouts. You probably won't earn a credit profit, but you'll really pile up the xp for your chosen commander, especially with the limited numbers of battles you'll probably end up playing in them. Finally, a question for the developers. Will the permanent camo for all Tier 11 ships be available with each ship upon purchase, or does it have to be bought separately?

I've always wondered why certain types of damage were more or less repairable than others. I can understand the logic of AP over-penetrations being fully repairable, since it's just a hole without detonation after all. But I also don't know why you'd even bother repairing it since unless its located in a place where you make take on water, it doesn't endanger the ship and thus you shouldn't even waste your time. Whereas I know they want to in a way reward better aim by making citadel penetrations fully unrepairable or almost unrepairable, it still seems odd that the most sensitive and important parts of the ship can be only slightly repaired while holes in unimportant parts of the ship's unarmored parts gets the bulk of the attention. I also understand why HE damage and fire damage exist. It's a way for smaller caliber guns that have no hope of inflicting serious AP damage to more heavily armored or angled targets to still do something. But we all know you can't make a ship blow up by setting the teak deck on fire. Or the captain's motor-launch. Or the anchor chains. Or the "Titanic, Leonardo DiCaprio, I'm the king of the world!" spot on fire. Ships don't explode or sink because non-sensitive parts get damaged or set ablaze. Also, the extent to which HE and fires have essentially dominated the game for years now has really made any sort of aggressive play in any ship a lost art. It doesn't matter what ship you're in or how good you are, there's always enough HE spam to bring you down. Combined with the island firing cruisers that are immune to return fire or the sniping cruisers that are too far away to hit that are both highly capable of delivering it, it does cause a much higher level of passive gameplay on all levels. I'm both a victim and perpetrator here, honesty all around. It's childishly easy to HE spam battleships from behind islands or by sniping in the open with certain cruisers. They're no real threat to me, and I can deal hilarious amounts of damage with no real danger in return except for the few random times when the battleships in question actually land hits, and even then the trade is more than worth it. Conversely, I want to and actively try to be aggressive in battleships when the situation calls for it or when I see an opportunity. In those circumstances you can go from full-health to dead in a frighteningly short amount of time. Not from any form of AP, not normally. It's almost always HE spam from everyone and everything. Combined with IFHE making armor have no value, and British battleship HE which was a massive mistake on the Developers' part, both features of which need to be removed, it's far too easy to take more damage than you deal without being able to repair all of it. Coupled with torpedoes inflicting damage that can't be repaired, you can find yourself in a situation where you have multiple charges of Repair Party left, but can't use any of them because all remaining ship health is black instead of grey. Meaning you're stuck on pitifully low health for the rest of the battle, despite possessing the tools to heal yourself. Thus brings an end to a much longer premise for this poll than that last one I posted. As before, there's people out there that need to be heard from. Tell us your thoughts and opinions.

No surprises here, you know what this is about. I just finished the long regrinds to get enough points to get the Ohio. I had big expectations of this ship, since I already own the Thunderer and love it dearly, and have a similar love for the Georgia. But as soon as I started playing the Ohio, I realized all my hard work was wasted. This ship is worse than the Großer Kürfurst, and I didn't think anything could be worse than that thing. The Ohio is the solution to a problem that doesn't exist. That is, having a Tier 10 U.S. battleship that can brawl with its secondaries and be somewhat accurate with fewer if larger main guns. The problems with this ship are many and diverse. First, the main guns aren't accurate enough. Their dispersion is worse than the Thunderer, despite having a shorter range, slower shells, and is intended to be a brawler. Second, the AP on the main guns bounces and shatters far too much for shells of their size and penetration, also getting stuck in torpedo protection more than they should. Third, the armor is no better than the Montana, which means you're always in danger of losing most of your ship all at once. Unlike the Republic or Großer Kürfurst which can show their sides and be fine with it. Fourth, you don't have access to an Enhanced Module in Slot 5, so your rudder shift, flooding recovery, and fire extinguishing are all worse. Despite being a brawler that needs those things more than the Montana does. Fifth, the repair party has the quick cooldown we're used to but doesn't have the really good health replenishment that the Montana does. Thus, you will never be able to recover as much health. Any of these five main things would be easily compensated for on their own, maybe even any two or three of them. But to have all five of them at once just makes the Ohio an underpowered and unplayable joke. You can't play from the first line because you can't mitigate damage enough or maneuver well enough to survive it. You can't play from the second line as a support ship to far better Tier 9 battleships because even that is far too close. You can't play from the third line because you're not accurate enough. With all of that said, my early verdict says the Ohio is bad and you should avoid it until it gets buffed to solve some of these problems. Even if they just gave it the same Enhanced Upgrade the Montana gets in Slot 5 that would probably fix most of it. You'd burn less and dodge better, something you really need if you're playing it up close. I see what this ship is supposed to do, but it's unable to fulfill that role. It just doesn't work. Whatever job you need to do, there's a better tool for it than this. Even if you think of it as an average or above-average multipurpose ship, there's still better ships around for the multipurpose role.

Reply for application process. A private message would be preferable.

My position on submarines is well-formed so far, they don't belong in the game. Simple as that, they just don't belong here. But, there's other players out there that should be heard from. So a simple yes/no question for you all. Not their complete removal, just their removal from random battles. I won't comment or discuss further, merely to see your poll response. I leave the comments and further discussion of opinions and facts to you. Good luck, I wish you well.

I don't want to ban smart play, never have and never will. Nor would I want to stop good players from playing the game. If anything, it's the elitists that are driving people away. You get three good players playing together and dominating battles, what do you think the losers in those battles will do? Enjoy getting dominated and having no say in the outcome of the battle? Or quit the game because it's unfair and isn't fun? I guarantee you you'd feel differently if you were the ones being crushed and there was nothing you could do, or everything you did didn't matter. Remember, this game isn't just for the elitists and stat-padders to massage their massive egos and compliment each other on how awesome they always are, this game is supposed to be for everyone. The excellent, good, average, poor, and terrible. I'm not stopping excellent players from playing this game, just stopping them from doing it in a group with other excellent players and rigging things in their favor. Because, if those players really are good and really are skilled, they don't need friends or help. If they're really as good as they think they are, they can win on their own with eleven strangers that they'll never see again. Unless of course you think a game that's unfair and unfun for most people is what you want. Or we can partition people into separate servers based on their winrates. Then we'd always have fair fights all the time, with and against peer players. Post-Edit: Interesting to see the winrates on the people who complain. Your opinions match your winrates. 49% and below: Want the game to be fair. 50%-60%: Want the game to be fair. 60%+: Want the game to be unfair in their favor.

Playing in them both and playing against them both, I can agree that they don't really feel as powerful or intimidating as they perhaps should be. From what I've heard a lot of people saying here, and from a lot of my own experience watching how players counter them, the Satsuma and Hannover seem to be more like Tier 10.5 rather than true Tier 11 ships. Granted, the Hannover is the stronger and my more preferred of the two, it's still got some issues that it shares with the Satsuma. While the Hannover is a massive upgrade over the mediocre Großer Kurfürst in every measurable way, the Satsuma is far less of an upgrade over the already solidly good Yamato. Having said that, both ships can be dealt with fairly easily by current Tier 10 destroyers, cruisers, and carriers. Which is a pretty sad thing to say given these ships are ostensibly Tier 11 battleships, and if Tier 10s have no problem beating up on Tier 11 battleships, what sort of profane madness awaits us in the form of Tier 11 destroyers and cruisers? With all of that said, I've considered a few ways both ships could make their way to being mostly ready. 1: Satsuma secondary battery firing range increased to 7.7km just like the Shikishima. 2: Satsuma 100mm secondary battery guns reload time buffed to 3.0 seconds just like the Shikishima. 3: Hannover hydroacoustic search torpedo detection range buffed to 6km to match its 6km ship detection range. 4: Hannover torpedo damage reduction increased to at least 40%, preferably more. 5: Hannover main battery firing range increased to at least 23km. 6: Both ships need more antiaircraft gun mounts. Not just slider bar increases to their AA DPS, but more mounts to push it up even further. Even in an alternative history where battleship development continued, all nations doing so would still recognize the need for air defense. Both of these ships need far more antiaircraft guns and much more ability to defend themselves against the inevitable Tier 10 carrier strikes. Or at least give all of them Defensive Fire. 7: Both ships need their burn times reduced by about 25%. Their sheer size and ease of hitting them makes them easy HE targets, especially when they're both better armored than we're used to. They shouldn't burn to death anywhere near as easily as they do. Or, give them both an extra charge of Repair Party. As far as the battle mode itself is concerned, having only nine players on each team makes for some unusual ways battles play out. If they were full twelve ship teams we might be able to get a better idea on how strong or not the Tier 11s are.

After many years of suffering through it and hoping it would get better, it has thus not done so. I had hoped it would just be a passing fad that everyone was heavily into but then got bored with and moved on to something else. However, it persists in the game and continues to ruin gameplay without having any counters to it. Wargaming, please remove HE as an ammunition choice from all battleships of all tiers in the whole game, Tech Tree, Premium, and Armory. With that declaration and firm request made, now to explain why. When they first announced British battleships, I was very enthusiastic about them. Especially with stuff like the Orion at Tier 4, which I was all hot for right away. But when I started seeing videos about these ships being played by a variety of Community Contributors, all of them used nothing but HE. I was confused at first, since no idiot would ever use HE against anything but destroyers. Really, what kind of person would use HE against battleships? It's not like that's the ammunition type battleships are supposed to fire at other battleships, or cruisers for that matter. Then I found out exactly what the draw was, and what kind of things were possible if you did it. When I began seeing that gameplay in videos and in battles, I was horrified and disgusted. It took the very thing battleships were supposed to be about and turned it upside down, from big burst damage from well-aimed AP against vulnerable targets to impossible to avoid damage over time against everything. It made the concept of armor and survivability irrelevant and impossible to achieve. Everything we had learned about playing in and against battleships became useless knowledge at that point, and rendered any counter-play meaningless. British Battleship HE has quarter penetration, high alpha damage, and a very high fire chance for its caliber. Any one of those things would've been bad, but all three together is a catastrophe. What makes it worse is HE never ricochets, no matter the angle of impact. Whether it's 1º or 89º, it never ricochets. Almost parallel or almost vertical, it always detonates on impact. Worse is that HE doesn't have to penetrate the armor of the target to cause a fire. It keeps its fire chance even upon a non-damaging impact, or shatter. Therefore, all HE has to do is hit the target to be effective. Even if the hit is on a part of the ship that it will never penetrate, it keeps its fire chance. Furthermore, since it doesn't need to impact at a friendly angle to penetrate, it has the same impact performance of an AP firing cannon large enough to launch small spacecraft into a suborbital trajectory. If the Thunderer's 114mm of HE penetration is to be believed, and my numbers are correct, the 14.3 x armor thickness in mm = caliber of gun in mm required to overmatch. Which means the Thunderer can hit 114mm thick armor at a really silly angle and still penetrate it, but for AP to overmatch it you'd need a gun of about 1650mm (64.4") in caliber. All of this wouldn't be so bad if HE and Fire damage both had saturation, reducing the amount of damage taken by at least 50%, maybe more. But we don't. Which means it doesn't matter how much HE hits your ship or how many fires have been burning for how long, you always take the same full-damage from HE and fires as though it's your first hit of the battle. The answer I expect to hear is "Just tank it. Rotate your damage control and Repair Party and just tank it." Which would be possible, if there weren't other ships shooting at me, with HE and AP, if there weren't torpedoes coming in, and if I could get out of firing range of the enemy before I die. Someone shoots AP at you, your response is to angle up and protect your sides. Well done, you did it. You've used your gameplay experience and knowledge to keep yourself alive for longer. You've learned and become better at the game. The same cannot be said for HE. It never ricochets, it never loses its fire chance, it doesn't need a good angle of impact to detonate, and it doesn't lose penetration with range. There's nothing you can do to protect yourself. Coupled with a lot of the more hated HE-spammers having long firing ranges, excellent accuracy, high rates of fire, excellent shell ballistics, and good concealment. It is entirely possible for cruisers to out-snipe battleships and accurately hit them beyond the range at which battleships can respond effectively. At those ranges, battleships are hard-pressed to make meaningful hits on even stationary cruisers. But cruisers can easily and repeatedly hit battleships without much fear of being countered. Combined with AP sometimes vanishing into a black hole and doing no damage even when it's a massive shell hitting relatively thin armor, and the HE from the cruiser just needing to hit to be effective. Or the battleship AP in question hitting paper-thin armor and bouncing off because of the terribly outdated game mechanic of overmatch. "But don't you play high-tier cruisers and HE spam everything? Aren't you part of the problem too?" Yes I am. I love my Des Moines and the newest addition to my port, the Alexander Nevsky. People talk about the Petropavlovsk as being the end-all-be-all, but every time I play the Alexander Nevsky and put its guns to work, the thought that keeps going through my head is, "Why does this ship exist? This can't be legal. This ship shouldn't be this good at what it does. Someone please nerf me." Yes, I love that ship with a passion, and I want it nerfed because it's just too good. Like all Tier 10 cruisers are just too good. I play in them and it takes no time at all for me to feel dirty and wrong playing them. It's just too much power in the hands of one player. When Royal Navy Light Cruisers were introduced, I took some time getting used to them just like everyone else did. A thinly-armored line of ships without HE and with smoke. But what made those ships what they were and still are is the lack of HE. When I made my way up the line I had to learn a lot about armor mechanics, auto-bounce, normalization, ricochet checks, and over-penetration. Ballistics, the fall of shells, range, the armor of the ends of the ship, the deck, and the ship's topside arrangements. Playing those ships made me a better player. I got better at the game because of their AP-only ammunition. I was forced to make do with what I had and learn how to use it to its fullest. I wouldn't have learned anywhere near as much if they had been just another line of HE spammers. Start battle, load HE, forget AP even exists, and profit. Royal Navy Battleships are the inverse of this. Their HE is far too strong, and starting at Tier 7 their AP is next to useless. Forcing the player to lean on HE as a crutch and use it to the exclusion of AP. You don't have to know anything about the game, armor values, shell performance and penetration, ballistic arcs and diminishing penetration with range, over-penetrations, ricochets, auto-bounce, normalization, or anything of the sort. Place the cross-hair on the center mass of the ship and fire your guns. All you need to do is hit the target and you'll do well. No brain-power required. No learning or player development encouraged or rewarded. No motivation to improve or develop any skills on the player's part. No punishment or consequences for getting it wrong. Play British Battleships, load HE, and get Whitherer in every third battle. Battleship HE does not encourage the player to learn about the game or get better at it. Their own understanding of it is limited to the big damage numbers they get, and their xp and credit earnings. There are no valid or consistently effective counters to it. The game mechanics support and encourage HE spam, and provide no counterplay for the player to do anything about it. Battleship HE is bad for the game. It makes players lazy and inattentive. It makes them chase the one and only goal of big damage numbers instead of playing the game in the spirit for which it was intended to be played. Battleship HE is bad for the game. There is no place for it here. If HE spam must exist as a game mechanic, let it exist on cruisers and destroyers only. Get it off battleships. Then, battleships would be truly feared since you wouldn't see cruisers showing their full sides to Conquerors and Thunderers all the time since they know AP won't be incoming. Please Wargaming, get HE off of the battleships. People learn the best when they're forced to. Allowing any battleship to keep HE as an ammunition choice for its main guns hurts the game in the short and long term. Then, you would see exactly how best to balance or rebalance some battleships when their players see how good or bad their AP really is. All of the British battleships at and above Tier 7 are just awful with AP with the exception of the Thunderer, which is amazing with AP. The KGV is frustrating with AP, the Monarch is deeply mediocre, the Lion is a joke, and the Conqueror is truly pitiful. It's the only line of ships in the game where they get progressively worse after Tier 6. Their HE is the thing they're balanced around, and balancing a whole line of ships around an ammunition type has always been a bad idea. There, my sincere and heartfelt request for battleship HE to be removed. Thank you for reading this, if you have indeed done so.

Shoot AP at them anyway and be content with dealing less damage. We can't force people to willingly play the game properly, but we can make it impossible for them to play it improperly. Remember that you the battleship won't be firing HE at anyone, nor will any battleships be firing HE at you. It goes both ways. Fair is fair.

For all of the slow U.S. battleships you'll need a full concealment build. It won't do everything for you, but it will buy you some time and give you more options. They're all about patience and planning ahead, not rushing into danger without support and expecting everything to work out somehow. It's strange how people think the California is forgotten or that any of these slow battleships are bad. It's like they think you have to be really fast in order to be good at anything. Are these ships all-powerful or suitable for everyone? No, not at all. If you can wrap your head around the slow battleship playstyle, you'll do fine. If you've made it to the Colorado and you can't cope with it by then, you should probably play something else. But as for anyone who thinks a lower tier battleship is better than the Kansas, you're just wrong about that. No extra explanation required. Although, giving the Kansas, Minnesota, and Vermont the usual U.S. repair party with better health recovery and a reload time buffed to 36 seconds is what I'd do for them.

I'm a good judge of ships and their playstyles, what they're good at and what they're bad at. The Ohio is trying to force a playstyle into a design philosophy that doesn't fit that playstyle. If it was supposed to be a brawler, its repair party would be the regular U.S. battleship one. If it was a medium-long to long range ship, its guns would be more accurate. If it was a support ship, it would have a better armor scheme or better maneuvering. It has none of those things, thus it can't do the very thing it's designed for. Then there's the subjective feeling of playing the ship. It just feels weak and vulnerable, like it's really out of place in that situation, regardless of what the situation is. In a way that other Tier 10 battleships just don't. Besides, we all know statistics can be interpreted however you want them to be. Just look at the poor Großer Kürfurst, it took them a painfully long time to buff the guns by a tiny amount, and it still has that piss-poor AP that bounces and shatters on side-on cruisers.

Don't pick IFHE. It's part of the ongoing multi-year development of making all armor in the game have no value with all HE penetrating all armor even if it's angled. It's the whole spam HE at everything plan that's going on right now where you can forget AP even exists and do well with only one ammunition type. People obsess over getting really high damage numbers and all their shots always damaging everything they shoot at, regardless of what kind of ship it is or what tier. People can't content themselves with realizing they aren't supposed to be able to damage certain ships in certain situations and adapt accordingly. But if they increased the skill-point limit to 23 points, you should get it.