Exocet6951
-
Content Сount
5,151 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Battles
11809 -
Clan
[SICK]
Everything posted by Exocet6951
-
Poll: Nation limits on current and new operations
Exocet6951 replied to Xanta99's topic in General Discussion
Shooting at neutral ships in a neutral harbor under the guise of "leave with us this instant and/or give us your ships, or we're shooting" might have something to do with it. But hey, apparently burning down the entire fleet at Copenhaguen because the Danes didn't oblige the RN that very same"give us your ships" deal doesn't register as so much as controversial, so I'm just jumping to the conclusion that when it comes down to the RN, they could literally get away with murder and people would still praise and defend them for doing it. [queue 27 British forum goers inundating my notifications about how I'm totally wrong and shooting at neutral ships makes you a white as snow hero as long as the intentions are good] -
In real battle scenario, you use DFAA and you lose AA mounts. You're going to be maneuvering to avoid BB and are going to be near islands, impeding movement. Not everything is ever going to be a perfect training battle scenario where you just sit in the open knowing where the planes are coming from, and just have to worry about pressing a button to win. So yes, I heavily maintain what I said based on personnal observations. AP bombs are absolutely ridiculous in their current state. I've been saying it since they were first tested. Yup, that's exactly it. Poorly planned.
-
Because there's clearly no such thing as pulling your planes away, or losing AA mounts, or using DFAA to protect a friendly from being struck Clearly. Again, I've done it to DMs with DFAA active using a Lexington. All it takes is 4 bombs out of 14. It doesn't take a genius or a raging hatred of CVs to see that an anti BB weapon that works best against against cruisers is fundamentally stupid.
-
Not really though. If the CV catches you with DFAA on cooldown, there are a few planes going through. And when that happens, it's insta citadels. DFAA on cooldown but too many AA mounts destroyed? All it takes is 4 bombs out of 14 to hit, and it's GG. I've had it happen to my DM, and I've done it to DMs and HIVs using a Lexington. Welcome to the anti BB AP bombs, which work reliably better on CAs than BBs.
-
Quite frankly, the fact that you could play the Cleveland out in the open and get away with it shows exactly why it was just not acceptable as a T6. You have CLs capable of smoking up (RN), other long range kiting (Russian and German) , others evasion tanking and harassing (French and Italian). Now there's a branch more focused around concealment and island cover. If you don't like it, play Russian CLs. They don't play with islands too much. Not every branch is going to be exactly suited to your playstyle. Also, the split is ready, but they're splitting the release in two parts, for marketing reasons.
-
If it's not your cup of tea, don't play it? You might not want a branch of Atlantas, but maybe some people do?
-
There was a thread about the Neptune doing the same thing by hitting at a high angle between two turrets. Then it happened to me in one of the first sorties with the Neptune against a Montana. I think that both the Montana and RN CL AP just bug out at times
-
KOTS russian opinion 3:0 or 3:1 for them
Exocet6951 replied to Boris_MNE's topic in General Discussion
Sounds like we're going to be in for some extra bias when RU BBs arrive -
HMCS Haida leak, coming to ST soon
Exocet6951 replied to FishDogFoodShack's topic in General Discussion
I'm betting on Perth smoke + T9 module -
Cleveland doesn't seem very good
Exocet6951 replied to FearsomeFlotsam's topic in General Discussion
That's common to every single cruiser at that tier. Cleveland is extremely resistant to AP fire compared to the others I listed. Clevelands are usually killed by the accumulation of regular penetrations. If he feels that's extremely weak, then he's going to have a very hard time coping with other cruisers. Yet another reason why Cleveland at T6 was just stupid. It distorted everyone's perception of T6 cruisers, from armor to firepower. -
Cleveland doesn't seem very good
Exocet6951 replied to FearsomeFlotsam's topic in General Discussion
If you think the Cleveland has bad armor, god have mercy on your soul if you ever decide to use Japanese, British, Russian, French, or T7-10 American cruisers. -
If I may elaborate a bit more on that, I think you're on the right track, but I don't think that last statement is correct. I think "OP" is a lot more nuanced than broken. To me, a ship can be OP without being fundamentally broken by virtue of being well designed, but having just a tad too good numbers here and there. Like...the Alsace. Overall, it's not a broken concept. It doesn't go overboard with broadside weight or shell caliber, it's speedy but not ridiculously so...But when you combine absolutely everything, the result is just a bit too much. This might sound like me being pedantic, but I think it's important to think about because it complicates the hell out of figuring out what's OP and what's just broken. Or what's both at once.
-
Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"
Exocet6951 replied to Deamon93's topic in General Discussion
Looking forward to the IJN CL minibranch in 2028 Calling it now, Ooyodo going 29 knots with a 950m turn radius on T8 -
Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"
Exocet6951 replied to Deamon93's topic in General Discussion
Worse than that, because Edin actually gains a LOT by going from T7 to T8, namely the concealment module which lets it even stealth torp, and a heal upgrade that lets it heal gratuitous amounts of damage, on top of other smaller goodies. I'm looking forward to them receiving ST feedback and seeing the changes, because that is one of the least appealing ships in the game by virtue of being essentially the same ship, but a tier higher. -
Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"
Exocet6951 replied to Deamon93's topic in General Discussion
So it's still slow and still turns like a cruiser. It has no additional firepower, a marginal increase in AA in form of more 25mm dakka, and a marginal +300 HP increase. Not sure I want to spend that much in order to go from 4 to 6 torpedoes and the ability to mount a "more dakka" module. That sounds like a pretty bad deal to me. Especially since a 6 torpedo salvo sounds absolutely goddamn pointless at anything but point blank range, considering the massive spread quintuple launchers already have, and that's not even mentioning that even-numbered launchers are objectively worse than odd-numbered launchers. -
It's all about the hull's shape and water displacement. If we assume both ships' hulls' max top speed is 38 knots in order not to complicate our lives with extra factors, it doesn't matter one has a 50k bhp and the other a 200k bhp engine, the ships just aren't going faster than 38 knots. The one with the bigger engine is reaching 38 knots much more quickly though. It's not exactly intuitive, I'll grant you that, but that's essentially the explanation. If they made the bow a bit longer, the Z-39 using the exact same engine would have been a bit faster. If they had made it a bit lighter and it lifted out of the water a bit more thus keeping a similar shape but having less drag, it would have been faster using the exact same engine.
-
Well for one, the ship's hull is what determines max speed, to an obvious limit of practicality, ie: a motorcycle engine won't push a battleship to 30 knots, no matter how much time you give it. The engine's power contributes to its acceleration to said max speed, not the max speed itself. So to answer your question what slows the Z-39 down compared to the Akatzuki? Well, practically nothing. If they're both well designed, both of their hulls have similar enough max speed to call it identical. The difference being that the Z-39 will accelerate to 38 knots quicker. More reading material if you're interested: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-relation-between-engine-power-and-displacement-boat-speed It's just the result of a quick google search for a source, but it'll do for a rudimentary explanation.
-
Thoughts and speculations on Italian cruisers
Exocet6951 replied to Exocet6951's topic in General Discussion
Oh I don't think smoke cruisers are taboo unless the base ship itself is so ridiculous that the smoke just cranks the proverbial dial to 11. I like the smoke curtain a lot, and judging by the forum's general (man)crush on the Perth, a series of cruisers like that might be welcomed with open arms. Hell, if said cruiser branch ends up being one massive team utility belt with smoke, I'd be delighted. Cruisers with the tools to make a random team decide "it's safe to go cap, we may move up"? That might actually be potentially(heavy emphasis on that word) as strong as a radar in a random battle by virtue of being able to move the team up. -
Which forum members have you seen in random battles?
Exocet6951 replied to Cobra6's topic in General Discussion
Perhaps, I've been trolling around all day with various ships. Sometimes I don't even look at the chat to be honest. Too much Atlanta dakka dakka going on -
Thoughts and speculations on Italian cruisers
Exocet6951 replied to Exocet6951's topic in General Discussion
Well, the Budyonny and La Gal have more guns with similar reload speeds and a bit more AP and HE alpha, all while being able to be bow on and have 6 guns on target, so while Aosta's "punch" isn't bad per say, she's not exactly top of her class. But it still more or less works. It's not her AP that's lacking. I never feel outclassed when using her. Her HE is rather feeble though, and the difference can be felt, even in a single match. Abruzzi on the other... Jesus, what a wreck. I would be lying if I said that this thread wasn't in part started just to hope that we don't get an entire branch of poorly thought out Abruzzis cobbled together by consumables until it clears the "literally unplayable" threshold. -
Thoughts and speculations on Italian cruisers
Exocet6951 replied to Exocet6951's topic in General Discussion
Indeed, and that's what I'm trying to construct with that proposal: a type of ship that provides the user that punch that's been lacking from cruisers, yet is very present (albeit unreliable) on the Roma. The HE/SAP idea is nothing more than the extension of that notion, but with the added complexity of being able to further reward the user when using the best ammo choice for a given situation. To paraphrase myself from a Roma topic, I believe Italian cruisers and battleships should be built on the principle that they handle beautifully and hit like freight trains. -
Which forum members have you seen in random battles?
Exocet6951 replied to Cobra6's topic in General Discussion
Yup, I pulled a tactical Notser in front of a Des Moines. Good times, good times. -
Thoughts and speculations on Italian cruisers
Exocet6951 replied to Exocet6951's topic in General Discussion
Which is for the best if you ask me. Too many long range HE kiters as it is, and for some reason, WG thought it a good idea to even transform the originally AP oriented German cruiser branch into one that mostly use HE (from what I see in battle when fighting against Hippers => Hindens). So a branch of lower range, yet stealthy ships that have a good punch? Yes please. -
Thoughts and speculations on Italian cruisers
Exocet6951 replied to Exocet6951's topic in General Discussion
They removed radars on RN BBs? I'm perfectly aware that chances are, our input will be ignored. But I'm going on principle that if it isn't, the right time to give it is before testing starts. -
Thoughts and speculations on Italian cruisers
Exocet6951 replied to Exocet6951's topic in General Discussion
On that end, I think they'll receive the "good concealment" coupled with "27mm bow and stern" treatment. The TIX and X is indeed a good question, as the inclusion of the Algérie as a T7 and moving the New Orleans down to T7 sheds some doubt on a historical Zara (ie: no magic AA upgrades and buffed RoF) being T8. If that's the case, the question "what happens to the Spanish and Russian Ansaldo projects?" springs to mind. There might be a hole which WG might have to take some creative liberties in order to deal with.
