Benser33

My first comment in this thread, that you responded to, was not directed at you... You took it upon yourself to reply to me, so don't then complain if I respond? The small container rewards are, generally, better than receiving 75 steel/750 coal. Unless your only priority is steel. You might get a reasonable amount of coal from the containers (communal data gathering suggest coal drop rate from small containers of 7.5%, so on average ~187 coal per small container, which is worse than the coal snowflakes and a 60% chance of simple camos/signals) but ultimately the value of the containers is for each individual to decide based on how much of the contents they consider valuable. And premium ships are taken into account the same as standard ships are. Back in 2018 a tier 8 standard ship was worth 1000 coal, but a tier 8 premium was worth 200 steel. Now they are both worth 75 steel. That is fairer on people who play the game for free and don't have tons of expensive, high tier premiums to obtain steel with. It is less total steel sure, but I'm happy to obtain less steel if it means the average player receives more because of poor economic decision making and pay to win schemes founded in the past.

WG don't even make premiums below tier 5 anymore, unfortunately. The entire year so far, only two tier 5s released (Mikoyan and Oklahoma) and nothing tier 4 or lower... only upcoming premium is Almirante Abreau which is a brazilian copy of Albany. And the newest US BB line started at tier 8 when it could easily have started at tier 5. WG just doesn't care about low tiers anymore it seems. Probably not enough profit to be made. There are not even that many existing tier 2/3/4 premiums, excluding them doesn't make a massive difference.

Getting the smaller amounts of steel from standard tier 8s is much better for players with lots of premiums but it's overall a lot worse than it was in 2018 in terms of gains for collectors and whales. https://whaling.in.fkn.space/ tells me I can get 8.3k steel and 80k coal this year. I ran a spreadsheet on what I'd expect with 2018 stats and it was 18.1k steel and 120k coal... which honestly is a huge amount, I'm not really surprised WG wanted to reduce that and instead we get a more even distribution of rewards

If you don't want to get into the argument of wether the rewards of the event are any good then why are you even continuing to speak? Because that was the argument I was having. Not sure whose reading skills are in question really. Especially also since I already agreed that the rewards of 2018 were better than they were in 2019, but back in 2018 there was only snowflakes and a campaign, whereas this year, which has relatively less snowflake rewards, has a campaign and a dockyard with rewards as well. But again, as I also already said, these things dont matter to people who only care about the 1 resource that is steel. And since all you did was ignore the total rewards and compare the lost steel you are obviously another person who thinks that nothing else is worth receiving. You astutely observed earlier that I have a number of ships already. You are very correct, there is infact no ships I can obtain from containers. The only ships currently available to me are two steel ships, one coal ship and four RP ships. So you might imagine I would be similarly keen to obtain as much steel and coal as physically possible, that I would prefer the 2018 level of rewards to the current offering, but you would be wrong. Heed your own advice and consider that some of us are happier with the amount and variety of rewards including ships, camos, signals, resources, premium time, etc and the average resources available from the small santa gifts (which despite lacking the chance of steel offer good amounts of coal/fxp/signals/camos/premium time, more so than the snowflakes).

At least that hasn't left me such a moaning sod that I go to forums to cry that free video game resources for christmas are garbage.

Well you're just ungrateful then, not sure what else you want.

Tier 10s didnt get super containers for new years, only for the wows anniversary. Last year was identical to this year. https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/game-updates/update-0811-new-year/ In 2018 they did give, overall, a lot more coal and steel, but no containers. There was also no dockyard, just a campaign for PEF and a buyable campaign for even more steel. I'd be looking at 50% more coal and over double the steel by 2018 rules. But why you would feel like the current event that can award such amounts of resources for so little effort is ungenerous is amazing unless the only thing you care about of all of the rewards possible is steel. It's a christmas event that, for just some time, can award someone upwards of 80k coal and 8k steel and multiple containers. I'm grateful for the resources available. Even if it's worse than previous years, I would hardly argue the rewards are "poor". Yes it scales with how many ships you own, it's a reward for owning more ships. Add on to this the other free premiums available to people via the new year dockyard (tachibana, yahagi), the new year campaign (strasbourg), perma camos, other dockyard rewards and the snowflakes I think the overall rewards for the event are pretty good.

I'm set to receive 80k coal, 8.3k steel and 44 containers, rewards for snowflakes are the same as last year if I'm not mistaken, not sure what you mean by poor?

You don't have to pay to respec all four at once, you just pay to respec the one that you want to change, which is exactly how it works now. And the cost to respec has not changed. The cost is per skill point, so having to respec 21 is more expensive than respeccing 19, but it is still the same price per point.

There is an upcoming buff to Kansas sigma but it's not going to revolutionise the ship overall.

It's sort of comparable to Benham except that where Z-44 gets 32mm HE pen, 5k more HP, double the AA and 2km more torpedo range Benham compensates by having twice as many torps, making it an actual good torpedo boat. Z-44 ends up being a very average torpedo boat by still having some sort of hybrid identity that really does not leave it with many usable strengths.

I sort of like this idea, but off-class skills being only 50% effective would really make them pretty poor choices for the cost. Maybe instead a commander could be limited to only spending 4 points on other specs rather than limiting their effect. It could be something like, once a commander has spent 10 points on their main class they can then spend up to 4 points on any skill from the other classes. But, there would also be the issue of stacking similar skills, access to skills not intended for a ship, way too many possible combinations to effectively test and balance. WG needs to, at a minimum, provide players with access to all of the viable specs that were utilised before this rework, such as cruiser secondary specs. But I think what you propose it too convoluted to solve the issue of hyper-specialised/niche ships losing their specs. Those ships could even just be buffed to have their lost skill effects built in. Current: Moving a commander from a BB to a DD requires the commander to be both retrained in the new ship (at 0% for free, 50% for 200k or 100% for 500 dubs) and then respecced to have skills for the new ship at a cost of 10k cxp/25 dubs per skill point. The commander can be transfered to any premium that utilises the same skills as the ship they are trained in. New: Moving a commander from a BB to a DD requires the commander to be retrained (at 50% for free or 100% for 500 dubs) but does not need to pay to respec from BB skills to DD skills unless their current DD spec needs to be changed, if they do need to be respecced it costs 10k cxp/25 dubs per skill point. The commander can be transfered to premiums of all four classes because they can simultaneously have four different class skill specs. I'm not seeing how the new iteration is worse than the current version of the same thing. It's cheaper to retrain to 50%, you won't have to pay to respec every time you retrain a commander for a different class and commanders can use even more simultaneous premiums than before which is particularly valuable for unique commanders. The only added expense for players is that they will have to pay to reset two extra skill points once obtained.

All the information on upcoming ships gets posted on the dev blog. https://blog.worldofwarships.com/ All that we know at the moment is that Tier 7 French BB Strasbourg will come from the new years campaign Tier 9 Japan BB Hizen will come from the new years dockyard Tier 10 US CL Austin be available for Steel Other than that? Nothing is confirmed. Keep your eyes on the dev blog.

SAP has no fuse time despite what mined data says, it is armed immediately on impact and cannot overpen. The combined arming threshold, fuse time and velocity of the AP will likely produce a lot of overpens against cruiser targets, yes.

I said Flint has smoke instead of radar, which can significantly change its playstyle. Flints torps are slower but they have the same reaction time because they are also stealthier but they have more than double the range. It has less guns and lower rate of fire. It has better AA (260 dps Atlanta, 385 Flint). It has 1k less HP. Once upon a time people complained that a ship as powerful as Flint was available to only the best players who would destroy games with them.

They are from last years New Year event. The collection is permanent and can be completed any time now that containers can be bought with coal, although you might receive a santa container from last year which may have different contents than current ones. The containers shouldn't be removed from the armory now that they've been added for regular resources.

From 1 to 19 total is 1,708,000 cxp. From lvl 18 to 19 itself is 300,000 cxp.

Flint has a few significant differences from Atlanta, including less guns, 9km torps and the ability to smoke instead of radar. I assume if WG determines Atlanta can use the range but Flint doesn't need it then Flint is probably outperforming Atlanta

Supposedly if you are stuck and you put the ship into neutral and stop handling the rudder then the game will detect when you're being moved by terrain collision and slowly move you away. But I have not tested this for some time.

The range is based on the ships concealment at the start of the battle, not on things that affect the concealment range during the game, such as the increase for being on fire or the decrease for being in smoke.

Maybe ships like Siegfried deserve an upgrade that enables their secondary viablility, a bit like how specialised upgrades exist for low tier premiums like Yubari and Katori. A lot of people love this unique feature of Siegfried and grinded specifically because of this, you are letting a lot of people down including all of those that took their time to balance the ship.

Well people complain about HE spam, so now they spam less. Wish granted I suppose.

2km is the range of assured acquisition. Minimum surface detection is the ships best possible surface concealment, for example 14.3km for GK or 13.0km for Massa. A ship like MVR can reach a concealment of 10.4km, but a secondary range of 10.9km. In this example, MVRs secondary range exceeds its concealment, so pressumably the secondary range wil be limited to 10.4km.

HE/SAP cruisers get Demoman which will increase the damage portion of the DPM equation rather than the reload part and the smaller calibre cruisers like flint, austin, smol and colbert do not get the penalty for this skill (+15% concealment). This will increase DPM by the same amount as BFT did, but wont increase the rate of starting fires. As regards the loss of range, most of these super light cruisers were already too strong, people complained endlessly about smolensk so unsurprisingly it is receiving nothing to compensate for its lost range, supposedly Flint also needs no compensation. But Atlanta and Colbert are getting buffs to compensate.

I'll join Good luck all