Exocet6951

lol'd I have an actual suggestion now. Forum awards. We can call them the Skybucks.

Well he's not wrong that some RN CL torpedo upgrades are questionable. Couple thousand xp on the Fiji to gain 400 extra damage and to go from 257% to 265% flood probability? Meh. Same deal on the Neptune, only you get 1.2k extra damage, which makes it not a complete waste of money.

Neptune also becomes a much, MUCH more dangerous target to leave alone. I don't recall people shooting me in smoke while there were spotted broadside BBs closer to them in the Edin, but it happens often enough to not be a surprise anymore in the Neptune. I think your issue is just a slight adjustment period over a ship that's suddenly less flexible with less concealment and a higher "must kill" profile, all while meeting more ships that have more/bigger guns with more accuracy.

As said before, lemming trains work in theory. But also in theory, the average player is older than 13 years old and is able to read, so take from that what you will. In practice, said mature and literate (/s) players don't understand that strategy and just pile on, because the more players there are around them, the less likely they'll be shot at. So as soon as the first enemies come in contact, you have 8 people beung stopped by the threat of a DD (a Farragut, of all things. Bestest stealth torpedo DD) and two cruisers excreting enough brown stuff in their pants to actually speed up their ships. Lemming trains vs small competent groups are the best example of the saying: "I am not afraid of an army of lions lead by a sheep, I am afraid of an army of sheep led by a lion" You'd rather have an army of lions led by a lion, but that doesn't happen often. All in all, I prefer having my games where the majority of the players split in 60/40 (+-10%) to two adjacent caps and don't stop at the slightest hint of danger. That's the best you can hope for in this game.

Like other people on this thread, I've only ever dropped ONE premium ship in an SC (Santa box or not) and that was the other day on the test server

Year of the CA confirmed.

Baltimore with AA spec works surprisingly well with secondaries. The surprise being that it can actually do something other than fire off into the distance with the shell never to be seen again. It's not transcendent, but I've gotten a few close quarters combat medals with it killing DDs. I've even switched target on the main guns before a DD was killed to get a head start because I knew that the DD in question was almost dead, of no immediate threat, and that it would die in the next couple of second. That being said, specifically specc'ing secondaries on cruisers is more of a drunken lolbuild than anything. If you're in secondary range, you're in torpedo and fun and engaging citadel diddling range.

Your problems in no particular order of importance: 1) Joined 9 days ago 2) Have less than 200 battles 3) Only went to T4 4) Bought a tough to play premium T7 BB In short, even if there was cheating like in the game (which there isn't), you wouldn't even be able to distinguish it from normal gameplay. More on this: What did you expect? You to be able to show up with literally no evidence of blatant cheating and expect him to be banned forthwith? What is this, 1950's America McCarthyism ?

That could be the test server

Because there's such a thing as recurring patterns and it's easy to keep track of it. Incredibly easy even. What my experience shows is that literally no thought went into the system to take into account technical issues, including the game itself crashing. The worst part is that it will take weeks for the punishment system to wipe my slate completely clean because of something the game did. If the game crashes again tomorrow, or if the next patch is faulty and locks up the loading screen until I manually close the game, I'm getting punished for I believe 3 battles and I'm back to weeks of being kept on record as being an AFKer. And again with 7 battles after that, and 21 battles after that, etc... In short, welcome to WoWS punishment system, where you better ****ing pray that the developers don't release a buggy patch, just because they were too lazy to code a series of simple checks on their punishment system to see if someone should be punished or not. If Google is able to create a complete profil of your personna by your minute browsing habits, then WG can keep a simple track record to see if you're a serial leaver or not. A small indie MOBA with a hundredth of the budget was capable of designing such a system is make it seem like common sense. Why can't WG, one of the largest video game companies ever?

It does fit perfectly indeed ! "We'll flood the game with BBs and make cruisers pay for it!"

Say "South European branch" three time in a mirror, and you'll get Greeks coming on this thread offended that they're grouped up with the Turks

I'm more concerned about the AFK penalty. I just 20 minutes pressed "battle", the game crashed in that lovely "I crashed but I'm not going to make stopping the process easy" sort of fashion, and by the time I came back 5 minutes later, my ship was destroyed. I turned orange. I haven't been AFK in a battle for months. Perhaps even in over a year. 1 crash, orange. Ergo, WG didn't have the very basic idea to even bloody check if a client is still connected to the game before immediately handing out warnings. Come on WG, this should have been a problem noted and put on an "issues to deal with" list on the first day of the new disciplinary system mechanic meeting.

Yet having the Hood and a QE class shooting at the Dunkerque and Bretagne is perfectly fine...

I won an Atago in a super container, first ever premium ship in any container, including a few dozen Christmas containers in 2016 and 2017 ! It was, however, on the test server

Ils ont fait le coup deux fois en plus ! Sur les allemands et italiens Honnêtement je ne sais pas qui a été le plus surpris du succès à plusieurs reprise du Swordfish face a de cuirassés flambant neufs, l'amirauté britannique, l'amirauté allemande/italienne, ou les pilotes de Swordfish ! "Although it fared reasonably well against Axis bombers over Norway and in the Mediterranean, the Skua suffered heavy losses when confronted with modern fighters, particularly the Bf 109 and they were withdrawn from front line service in 1941" Ça fait pas exactement rêver d'être comparé à un avion dont les performances en tant que chasseur était plus comparable à un biplan en toile, qui a été construit en moins de 200 exemplaires, et à été en service pendant 3 ans de fin 1938 à 1941. Les gars, je comprends ce patriotisme et esprit de "what if", mais il y a un moment il ne faut pas essayer de réécrire l'histoire. Les portes avions et la France, ce n'est pas une histoire d'amour. C'est un long processus ardue qui n'a rien donné jusqu'à la création des portes avions (Foch et Clemenceau) style moderne avec ponts d'envols anglés, qui ont du être remplis d'avions américains jusqu’à la création de l’Étendard. Quel intérêt de faire une branche avec exactement un navire français réellement construit (utilisant des avions américain sinon c'est la tristesse absolue), et dans le meilleur des meilleurs des cas, que des navires français papier avec avions soit papier, soit prototypes abandonnés, soit américains. On se moque parfois des branches Russes et Pan-asiatique pour être un assemblage 75% factice ou cloné, mais alors là, une branche de CV FR, c'est le mélange des deux pour faire une branche à la fois factice et clonée !

I'm going out on a limb here and assuming each code is one time use, so sharing codes with others is pointless ?

And yet, they still consider German beer superior to the glorious and divine Belgian beer.

The potato people Danes will contribute ! http://www.navalhistory.dk/English/TheShips/N/NielsJuel(1923).htm Fear the might of a 16 knot well armored coastal defense ship with a 6x1 150mm broadside Literally the only contribution Denmark could possibly ever have in the game unless WG finds a way to work around the multiple main caliber gun design problem, in which case there can be a second ship.

I think WG should make the ultimate troll ship for April 1st 2019 Nikolai hull and guns with Kutuzov main guns as secondaries, Kamikaze torpedoes and smoke+radar combo. That way for 2 weeks, everyone can play the most overpowered ship conceivable by man...for free ! Bonus points for modelling it as a toy boat and making them fight in a bathtub.

When you play a secondary build Tirpitz and you kill a Bismarck who calls your secondaries OP:

For the République, since the guns have a mind of their own, your ship is fast, and everyone knows that you can be HE spammed for loads of damage, a good amount of tanking skills and synergizing with improved adrenaline rush. I know this is a bit controversial, but the EU server has a huge hard-on for concealment. While it might be invaluable for more organized play, I find it's not as necessary on the rather large and visible République in random battles, which heavily relies on constant pressure rather than a large salvo burst, so I don't take it. I use: (1) priority target : for obvious reasons (2) adrenaline rush : gotta shoot fast (2) expert marksman : to counteract the slower turrets when you mount main battery mod 3 and keep it under 40 seconds (3) superintendent : moar heals = moar damage (3) basics of survivability : for obvious fire-related reasons (4) fire prevention : see above (4) advanced fire training : a bit more AA range and secondary pressure on nearby targets, although taking CE instead works just as well. This build is serving pretty well. I have enough staying power to let the guns fire long and often enough to get good hits, then retreat if the return fire is too persuasive.

And you showed a *damaged* BB in the WORST POSSIBLE SCENARIO IMAGINABLE getting killed by 3 torpedoes. I could show evidence that a BB can eat literally a million torpedoes in the best scenario possible, but that's hardly grounds to make broad statement that DDs kill BBs with 3 torpedo hits. Because that's what you did, a broad statement.

Perhaps because it's an issue that's 2 years in the making, which WG admitted to, and almost nothing has been done to change it, quite on the contrary even? It's also not hate to suggest changes to a problematic class that everyone and their mother knows is problematic. I mean, I've had on two separate occasions people who had never seen the game asked me why I bothered playing a cruiser (in this case, a rather ordinary one without a significant gimmick like RN CLs) when I explained to them why I couldn't get closer than 15km to a battleship. Even non-players understand the problem of having too many and too powerful BBs. Even the developers know and acknowledge this.

TL;DR: An already T7 BB with shockingly poor total HP and with a torpedo belt more comparable to a T4 ship than anything got hit by 3 torpedoes from a DD specializing in extremely high damage torpedoes 2 tiers higher then said BB. What conclusive proof that BBs are all super fragile little flowers. Let's completely disregard that you're assuming most of your math from where you saw the torpedo hit, not where the server calculated it did. It's unfortunate, but the desync is ridiculous at times. I could make a good case that the Des Moines has a citadel in the water in front of the ship just by posting screenshot evidence.