Exocet6951

That depends on RNGesus.If the Cleveland has a bit of luck with HE shells and sets fires relatively quickly and switches back to AP to do real damage, while the BB either doesn't hit or hits for 200-300 every time, the Cleveland will out DPM the BB and DoT the hell out of it with fires. That's exactly what I did against a Fuso last match. I stayed at 12km and changed course often so he would have poor accuracy, while I slammed HE shells into him to set him on fire, and switching back to AP to deal around 3-4k damage per salvo. He lost over 40k hp and died while I lost a pitiful 15k. I then moved on to a Myogi that I utter wrecked with 8k damage salvoes. I won't even talk about what I did to the poor Omaha that had the bad luck of crossing the path of a Cleveland at 4km distance. TL;DR : Cleveland stronk. Cleveland with a bit of luck can melt down BBs of equal tier. Alone.

There's a fine line between historical precedents and game playability to consider. At what point is sacrificing gameplay for historical accuracy worth it? In the case of IJN DDs, why is the historical aspect of their poor guns preserved, yet the historical quasi-invisible wake of Long Lance torpedoes not implemented?

A chat bug I point out to support : Open a chat window, type out a message in between [ ] symbols, then press enter. The message disappears but the chat stays open. Type something again and press enter a few times, and you will have the text between brackets [ ] followed by the second text you wrote. You can do this multiple times if you want. An example would be: *press enter* > [enter this text with the brackets] *press enter* > [You can do it a second time] *press enter* > Now this text comes last *press enter* And the following message is displayed in chat: " [enter this text with the brackets][You can do it a second time]Now this text comes last " I haven't tested how many times I can reset the chat field by entering text in brackets, so for the moment, I'm assuming you can enter thousand-character long messages.

In that case.... Can we have an English sub-section on the Russian server? <.<

One thing that makes me scratch my head seeing that document is why the Japanese never changed their 25mm gun.They must have noticed that they didn't have enough vertical range. And they had them since 1935. Surely by 1942 they would have noticed that their main AA weapon had a hard time dealing with planes. After all, they had an entire year of conflict with the US, and 7 years of conflict with China to judge the importance of airplanes in modern conflicts and think up of ways to deal with them from the ground. Maybe the Japanese equivalent of an industrial lobbyist was behind the decision to keep the same/similar AA weapon as main AA defense for 10 entire years of warring.

So I've been warming up the CVs since yesterday. I'm making exclusive use of manual drop on TBs, running the Langley on 2 TB squads. The grid making ability is absolutely insane. Granted the current tier I'm on has very little decent AA on ships, and almost not ships with the CA ability that shreds planes, but I can see how it can be frustrating for slower targets like BBs. I'm loving the support aspect of CVs, which is why I think they should be reworked. Especially with skills that could allow for additional squadrons, with two CVs in a single battle, it can get torpedo-heavy quite fast. I do very well see CommisionerJan's point when it comes down to higher tier CVs working as a team. It's one of the classes I can see being either used poorly and doing 0 damage, or being used well and wrecking games. Not something I would like seeing when the game is released. If supertesters and devs read the forums, please consider reviewing how CVs' main way of doing damage, turning your attention to dive bombers and fighter/bombers, and easing up on torpedo bombers.

Aww well that's no fair. I can slam 11 torpedoes into a Myogi, and he can still be at 10k HP and use his health potion right after

Games played in a DD = 0 Ships with torpedoes played = 2* Top tier achieved = 6 Credibility on DD and torpedo balance =0 *Phoenix and Omaha, cruisers who happen to have torpedoes as added bonus. I don't even know what to respond to that, all the more because you don't even have an FV215b, nor FV215b (183).

Considering the low amount of carriers in queue, more like World of "1 very good carrier player" Seriously, less reliance on TBs and a bigger focus on smaller, yet more frequent damage in a smaller (and instant in relation to time) zone than a triple manual TB grid that gibs even the most evasive DD.

In my opinion WG should take a long hard look at them. If IJN CAs are defined as torpedo ships, they should be able to use torpedoes correctly. Not have 2:30 minute reload times on launchers that can only aim backwards with torpedoes visible from far away. Jack of all trade ships? More mobility to let them flex where they choose to be. Gunships that happen to have torpedoes? Boost some of the guns (Senjo and Ibuki) so they don't suck hard and feel like absolute downgrades. And in all cases, maybe tone it down with the citadel damage? I mean seriously, half my battles I lose 1/3rd my hp in a single cruiser salvo. I know I'm a fragile ship, but come on, it's gotten to the point where I fear USN DDs' guns more than their torpedoes.

But...that's just a balancing act. If you want to remove CVs ability to surround enemy ships with torpedoes, but still allow them to actually use planes to damage people, you give them the ability to damage targets with things other than TBs. That could mean fighter/bombers with manual bomb drops/rocket deployment zones (rockets are notoriously inaccurate, you fire a lot at a target, hope you hit) an DBs with manual bomb drop and automatic "I don't care just chuck the bombs near the target and hope for the best" like we have now. It doesn't have to be no-brain auto-aim evasive DDs to do damage if the devs don't want it to be. In fact, I think it would help CAs and DDs, because it would mean overall less TBs flying around, the same that can setup unavoidable grids of torpedoes in which you *have* to get hit at least once, even in CAs. With less TBs, they could tweak torpedo aquisition to make DDs less suicide-boats and more useful again. I'm a fervent defender of removing automatic nobrain crap and making CVs more active by forcing them to play with other ships and stay closer to allies, rather than spamming TBs.from the blue line. Which in my mind, would make CAs and DDs more viable.

Seriously? So if I advocate lower CV damage by removing it's reliance on TB squads, and changing/tweaking the other squadrons to provide more stable damage and supportive abilities (at the detriment of damage compared to TBs), I'm asking for an OP game-breaking clicking machine? Seriously? I'll give you a minute to reconsider.

To my stupefaction, the Myoko isn't as bad as I expected. Good RoF and 16km range helps quite a bit. Torpedoes are still Hail Mary weapons, destined to be last resort. Resistance to damage is, well, inexistant. A Cleveland with AP can shave between 5-10k damage per salvo off your hp.... But the quintuple turrets, good RoF, good range dual 203s can be workable.

I really hope they are, because the F4U Corsair could take quite a bit of bombs. Rockets too. They may only be 127mm rockets with 3kg of explosives, but 8 of them detonting on a ship can cause fires and superficial damage (like to AA....*wink wink*) Also, Tiny Tim unguided anti-ship rockets on the Bearcat. Two of those in a cruiser, and you're looking a serious damage. So yeah, in my mind, there's grounds for a fighter/bomber derivative that could remove the absolute necessity of having at least 2 torpedo bomber squads in order to be anywhere close to useful against decent players. If carriers are support weapons, there is no better support than siccing fighter bombers on ships, setting them on fire, damaging their guns, rudders, fire control systems and causing real actual damage with AP bombs.

Oh come on, they have great potential if the player uses it correctly (manual unavoidable 2-3 TB drop at minimal arming distance), but other than that, they are weak as hell. Unless you master the manual drop on torps, your carrier is essential useless. As you put it, a, dangerous and chase for CAs and DDs. Unless they can rework it so the lay-man can use it to some extent, and the pro doesn't absolutely devastate same tier BBs in a single fly-out, it will always be a half-assed, wildcard class. Which is no fun at all for anyone. Hell, maybe making DBs not completely suck, tweaking TBs a bit, and buffing high tier fighters (Bearcat slower than Buffalo...gg), we might see a decen rebalancing. What would be even more grand would be being able to arm fighters by bombs and rockets to attack enemy ships too. Less reliance on TBs to deal damage, with more consistent, but lower potential damage. Plus, seeing a bearcat use Tiny Tim anti-ship rockets from the perspective of the ship would be impressive to watch !

It looks like citadel hits, by the looks of the damage to the ship.How is the extra damage from citadel hits calculated?

I'll be keeping an eye out then. Knowing the way damage relative to hp is calculated would help. If percentage-based multipliers are involved, it may be a culprit.

Hmm, then it might not be tied to that skill... How many reports have you had on the subject? An statistics on the ships involved? Is it only the Kongo with rumors of the Fuso?

So, it only happened to BBs for the moment? If I were you, I would look at the repair skill. It may be a timing issue where the repair skill it activated with a delay, and the ship is "killed" during that delay.

In one battle, I sent torpedoes at a target 10km out of sheer despair. The target never changed course even after I died and took them all. In every other battle, a single maneuver, even from the most map-oblivious player means you miss your torpedoes. At long range, they are at best a single "throw you off-course for a few seconds" technique. And since you're asking us all to learn how to play, might I suggest you do the same, because you are at 50% WR or below on all your torpedo based ships. Going as low as 38% over 21 battles in the Myoko you just mentioned. Which is odd, because you have more success in the Cleveland and Pensacola. In fact, even for destroyers now that I think of it, you are faring better with the more gun-oriented USN ships. But no, torpedoes are fine based on incidental occurences. You are right.

Quick test : how many destroyers above tier5 are on queue right now? Now compare that to the amount of cruisers and battleships. That's a small indicator. But please, do go on playing DDs. How is your tier4 Isokaze coming along? Don't worry, two defeats in a row is just the start. Wait until you get to the Mutsuki. Oh, and try the USN destroyers too. 5.5km range on torpedoes when you are spotted from over 6km is fun too. The truth, good sir, is that you are full of yourself. What you want is to kill people with inpunity with a battleship. You want to feel powerful and better than the peasants in cruisers and destroyers. And the fact that you pay so little attention to the map that you can let a destroyer sneak up on you at less than 2km and slam 6 torps into you threatens that feeling. Nevermind the fact that you can heal back up after an attack like that, and after you kill that DD with ease, you can go on killing everything else.

So....IJN cruisers (except for the glorious Mogami) are all trashy because they have quasi-unusable torpedoes? That explains so much... But thank you for those 8-10km range torpedoes I can only use when hugging islands and ambushing a ship that's coming alone. I'm sure that one single game I managed to do that vastly outweighs the countless in which I never fired the torpedoes, because all the fighting happened at over 7km and you can see the torpedo warning from really far away anyways. It is, because with the 155s, it's an unholy mix between USN and IJN. A fragile yet speedy with the guns from a USN cruiser. Torpedoes are a bonus.

So let me check something really quickly... The fact that you cannot kill a DD closing in on you in open waters 10km away is a good reason to nerf them all? They aren't a double barreled WTF E100 with the speed of a batchat 25, they're a T49 with the 152mm gun. If you let on get in your rear, on an open map, when you can see it coming and having the ability to 1-2 shoot them using each individual turret, of which you have at least 3, then the T49 deserves to get in your rear and shoot you.

Donc, juste pour info sachant que je comprend et je suis partisan de l'absence du pavillon du soleil levant dans le jeu, une image d'époque d'un navire Japonais arborant ce pavillon sera t-elle censuré?Et même question pour un navire moderne de la JMSDF

My best bet is torpedo aquisition range increase that now requires torpedo oriented ships to launch at less than 5km range in order to get even a single hit, and the disfunctional armor and AP mechanism. You can't launch torpedoes at close range with a CA if you lost half your hp to a single salvo from another CA 10km away. At least the DDs can use superior mobility to get around islands and sneak in a few torps that way. But CAs? Nope. The only time I use torpedoes is for area denial, shooting at someone about to cross on my side of an island, and "oh god I'm about to die, swim free my little torpedoes! Swim free and try to avenge me!"