Exocet6951

That would have been unfriendly for absolutely every one playing it. Imagine if at tier7, you have basically no AA, and there's a single CV in the battle. Unless you managed to make someone follow you around like a puppy, you wouldn't survive past the 4 minute mark. If a bit of fantasy upgrades are needed to make the game playable, then by all means WG, fantasy away. Playability should never be sacrificed to make room for historical accuracy in a random PvP setting. The 50 forum-goers/die-hard history fans asking for it may be pleased if it were, but the tens of thousands of players who want a balanced game would be pissed. And ultimately, those 50 die-hards would just never play those ships in anything other than PvE and maybe things like ranked battles.

B hull You get more torpedoes, you keep all your main guns, and the AA you get is probably more efficient on the B hull, despite it being of lower rating. 60 or so dpm at 3.1km is better than having most of your dpm in form of low caliber, 2km range AA guns.

I don't know how people can claim the Nagato is accurate. I could barely get the guns to hit a target 10km away. Nor how she has great armor. I had a great memory of it, but my last game, I was quad citpenned from the bow by a New Mexico 14km away. I am not exagerating. I would miss or bounce at 15-ish km, and start to overpen everything (while still missing of course) below 10km. In between? Missing, the occasional regular 1/3rd damage penetration, and the even rarer citpen. I have no idea why, but the Nagato just didn't work for me. It's the only other BB, along with the Myogi, that I couldn't even maintain 45% WR with, despite being between 55 and 65% with the rest of them.

Wow seriously, look at the video. First thing, tier9 BBs don't have 150m error at 4km. They just don't. Secondly, you see ALL the shell landing in a nice, tight little oval (the projection of a circle on a plane that's not perpenticular or orthogonal to it) 150-200m next to the NO. THAT'S the dispersion of the guns. In visual terms : Iowa <==========> \ \ shell trajectory \ \ || ( ) shell spread at 4km New Orleans || || The Iowa missed. It's not 150mm dispersion RNG, which isn't even how much of it there is at 4km, he just missed.

As far as I know, everything is done by the server. Your client is just a way to tell the server "I want to point this spot, turn about this much, and I want to shoot now" Your client isn't doing any calculations other than the rendering of the information the server sends you, ie: your position on the map. If damage and RNG were done clientside, there would be a way to remove all the RNG dispersion, or tell the server that you weren't hit at all, or that all the hits did 0 damage. The best way to prove that the server is doing all the work is to look at it when it doesn't work properly. Notably, ghost shells. Your client sees one thing, the server sees something else. Only the server doesn't really care, and your shell will fly through the enemy simply because according to the server, it's not where you were pointing.

No no, you fail to understand, him missing had nothing to do with dispersion, he completely missed his aiming at 4km with a tier9 BB. All the shells landed in a tight spread 200m next to the NO. THat's not called RNG trolling, that's called missing. That's the sort of thing that happens at that range at tier3 and 4, not tier9. Also, you angled against the biggest threat. As said above, if there's nothing in front of you, and a target 5km away from you in your perfect broadside, you angle against that. So yes, if a BB with relatively light armor stays perfectly broadside to a cruiser 4km away using shells specifically designed to rip through IJN battleships, you can except it to go down quite quickly. And please don't talk about realism while mentioning BBs. You can't have it both ways. You can't have secondaries on par with a light cruiser, and have massively overbuffed mobility and accuracy at long range. Because IRL, battleship took minutes to turn, took kilometers to accelerate and deccelerate, and had a 2% hit rate at ranges where you can easily get 10-15% in this game. So if you want realistic BB gameplay, sure you can have good secondaries, but then you have to accept to be food for dive bombers while being extremely unwieldy and have atrocious accuracy due to the ranges involved. And no, you shouldn't be 4km away from ANYTHING while you're broadside, unless you know for sure that the target is reloading and that you can kill it before. A BB's armor may look impressive, but you have to remember that high caliber guns with naval shells are extremely powerful too.

First salvo, the Iowa completely misses at 4.1km. Not RNG misses, but all the shells go a good 200m to the side. That alone tells us a lot about the skill of the BB player. Then he stays perfectly broadside to a CA with super heavy AP shells. GG Should I show you a video of me wrecking a Shima with a single secondary shell, causing a detonation? Would a completely annecdotal occurence help prove a point? Of course it wouldn't. If you lose at 4km with an Iowa against a NO, either your ship is crippled already, or you're simply terrible.

The only traitors I see are the 2 players in BBs who snipe from max distance, stay alive the longest, and hope to get carried to victory. And if the team loses, one of them doesn't lose a star. Honestly, is bull**** , 5 battles in a row where I see two Fusos immobile, sniping from max range. Those players shouldn't be past rank 20.

Considering the speed and arc of BB shells, hitting a broaddside CA at 14km is mostly down to RNG. The timing and aiming is easy as hell, you just have to hope that a few shells hit mostly where you aimed. But actually aiming is very easy. Even a salvo you think you messed up can hit a slightly angled CA at that distance thanks to the dispersion.

While we can make fun of the OP for thinking everyone who hits him uses an aim mod, let's not forget that aim mods and various cheats do exist in game.

I've indeed killed Kongos and even the odd New York here and there with a St Louis, but on the flip side, I can recall more times where I just heard my ears ringing from the twin citpen I received. You'll also notice that I made a slight exception to lower tier BBs with a low amount of guns, specifically the Myogi, that can have a bad RNG run and fail to kill a cruiser. But for a Wyoming to get wrecked by a St Louis 1v1 starting from full, the Wyoming really needs to be complete garbage. Also, careful when calling stuff unrealistic. If you want to forgo balance for realism, I'm sure you'll enjoy needing over a minute to change course in a BB, need several kilometers to build up speed, have a 2% hit rate at ranges of over 14km, and having bombers completely dominate you, instead of being nuissances. And no health potion while you're at it. And torpedoes being harder to spot. And those torpedoes doing much more damage. The only times BBs have a problem with cruisers being better than CAs/CLs is at tier3 and 4, in the case of the Myogi and arguably the Kawachi if you have terrible luck, and at tier10 when a Zao/DM can invisibly HE spam you. Every thing between that, and a BB getting solo'd by a cruiser the same tier, or even a tier above is purely a L2P issue. Either the cruiser is too far and agile and you disengage seeing as it won't be able to chase you forever, or it's close enough to hit reliably and you're going to win 95% of the time. You mean the same class that can be defeated by either using WASD.exe , or needing entire minutes to kill a CA/BB at ranges above 8km? The same class that has the lowest average damage, despite being the hard counter to the class with the most amount of HP ? DDs are only the tools of victory because they can spot and cap. But even then, they need a competent team to be successful. That's not being a master race, not by a long shot.

First of all, if a cruiser one tier lower than you is crushing your BB, either you're in a Myogi getting jerked around by a fast CL at very close range, getting wrecked by a torpedo cruiser, or you're simply a bad player. Secondly, wow, WG didn't want a class to be the master race while others bow down to their will and satisfy their every whim, how odd.

So basically, BBs are best countered by other BBs. Yup, so weak, that their hard counters are less efficient at countering them then themselves

>enters thread >sees "BBs weak"

After struggling with her, trying to play from close as well as far, I had a last game with it where a NM quad citpenned me through the bow at 12km away. This ship has been a complete disaster for me from game one, and has completely tainted the superb memory of it I had from CBT. After amassing 69k xp on it, I just sold it.

I once diouble citpenned a Tirpitz with a Fuso at about 8km. I was shocked, he was too. We spent the rest of the battle trrying to figure out how that happened.

A harsh lesson for anyone who didn't have enough free xp to get the Nagato's second hull. Oh the horror of having a slow BB that gets citpenned by every CA and BB with ease.

Rank 20 in a nutshell: "omg Ognevoi, use your torps instead of your guns, ur a light!"

If you intend on going up in tier, might I suggest switching Demo Expert with manual AA? German AA is generally nothing special, but those 105mm DP guns you get starting tier7 can be very potent, and surprise the common CV player who sees a German cruiser and thinks the AA will be pretty bad unless he flies right over you. Sure the skill is situational considering the current amount of CVs, but you'll be glad you have it in those 1 in 5 matches where you can be a threat to CVs even a tier above you.

Because it's one of the only ships in the game that can, and it would be a shame to waste that possibility? Also, the Bogatyr is interchangeable, the Eerie is too.

They would need to be uber-buffed to be worthwhile as AA guns, and have acceptable HE shells.

Was he already severely damage? This is probably just a case of damage mitigation. If a section of the ship is too damage, you will do reduced damage to it, to the point of barely even damaging it anymore.

Stats are important in determining how you view your most played class. If you have below average stats in a class and don't take a few steps back to admit that maybe you're not great, asking for buffs is narrow-minded. Which is exactly what's happening with you. As for a single argument, I used 2. FIrst of all, I destroyed your argument that cruisers "can just use torpedoes", because as it stands, only 2 lines of CAs can use torpedoes. Both of which can only do so in specific situations. IJN cruisers use them defensively, and KM cruisers have so little range that it's mostly a last-hope-ambush and DD deterrent. Fire chance? Remove that, and BBs would only be weak to other BBs. Amazing balance, a class that counters itself, and it resistant to everything else. AP on BBs? Only works if they're perfectly broadside, with guns that have good AP shells. In short, USN and KM ships. But oh look, Ap shells were nerfed not too long ago! A bit of angling, and Ap shells become worthless. So no, your arguments are bad, and considering your stats with BBs and complete lack of high tier CAs, you don't have any legs to stand on. Especially since you consider that all BBs have over cruisers is HP.

As for you: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=legs+to+stand+on

*looks at stats, sees his 45-50% WR on average with his BB* Yeah, brilliant arguments like "a cruiser can just use his torps at close range" really makes your point that BBs are underpowered completely valid. Because using torpedoes very agressively is totally a valid option with the IJN butt launchers, and the mighty German 6km torpedoes. That alone should warrant BBs having secondaries that melt DDs and CAs alike. Also, if you decrease the fire chance on BBs, you might as well just remove cruisers from the game. You thought 3-4 DDs per battle was bad? Wait until you see 2 CVs and 5 DDs per match on average, waiting to pick apart your floating e-peen extension. Lastly, if you truly think that the only thing BBs can bring to the fight against CAs is health, you are truly a lost cause.