Benser33

The secondaries are different to Yamato, although I would hesitate to call them "very very strong". Firstly, they have the same range and both ships feature a fore and aft 3x 155mm/60 gun. The difference is the remaining guns. Yamatos 12x2 127mm/40 Type 89 A1s each fire HE shells dealing 2100 damage. The two different mounts have different reloads, so 6x2 in the Mod 3 turrets fire at 10 rpm and 6x2 in the rest fire at 12rpm. That means each side of Yamato has 6 guns producing 126,000 dpm and 6 guns producing 151,200 so an effective total of 277,200 dpm per side (plus the 2x3 155mm guns). However, the 127mm guns only penetrate 20mm of armor, not helpful. For those that cannot be penetrated, the combined 122rpm with a base 7% fire chance equates to, on average, 8.5 fires per minute. Yashimas secondary suite consists solely of 2x 100mm Type 98s which fire a HE shell dealing 1700 damage. Although their RoF is not listed in the article I think it is safe to assume their reload time is 3.00s, the same as the Type 98s on Zao, Yoshino, Harugumo and Kii. This means their 20rpm and 10 guns per side produce 340,000 dpm per side (plus the 2x3 155mm guns) and this includes the 100mm guns native 24mm of penetration. The 200rpm fired by either side of the ship with a 6% fire chance can theoretically start 12 fires per minute compared to Yamatos 8.5. Yashima deals almost 25% more dpm with her secondaries compared to Yamato and with 24mm of pen instead of 19 and noticably better fire chance which could be critically more important in comparison for these ships in the survivability spec they most commonly adopt. 24mm is not much more helpful than 19 (the next common armor threshold beyond 19mm is 25mm) but this does mean it is possible to take IFHE on Yashima and boost the penetration to 32mm while Yamato could only hope to penetrate 27mm. The secondaries are certainly better than Yamatos, although Yashima should be just as concerned as Yamato if something is actually in this range. In a prolonged, short distance encounter with another BB the increased fires per minute of Yashimas secondaries could prove beneficial, and the increased dpm is always welcome against the DDs that would wander close enough to face these guns (woe unto either ship under these circumstances though). But despite having a better secondary battery compared to Yamato it continues to be a ship that does not suit secondary spec. The skill point cost sacrifices crucial survivability skills for the Yamato hull and all-in her secondaries can only reach out to a range of 10.5km. Due to the specifics of IJN BB dispersion it is less than ideal to be fighting ships at this range, especially with the dispersion lost by taking secondary upgrade instead of aiming systems upgrade, IJN BBs have the worst dispersion of all BBs beginning at ranges of 13km, with the difference getting worse as they get closer. The AA is another interesting feature, but again is not the best AA in the game either in DPS, Flak or Range. I compared the stats of a few T10 BBs considered to have strong AA here (all base values); Yamato is clearly not a strong AA ship. It lacks any medium aura, failing to cause the majority of its dps until 2.5km and that is 1km after the cut-off area for its flak. We can see the russians have the advantages in range and flak. Their flak has the largest total coverage (3.1km) and spawns the most with the highest damage. Although it's important to consider the way flak cloud distribution works Montana has the edge in raw DPS for self defense purposes with its incredibly high short and medium range dps and the highest total of any BB by a considerable amount. Bourgogne is also quite competitive compared to Yashima, with almost identical DPS and higher damage but less numerous flak and slightly longer range. Yashimas AA is more well rounded, the Type 98s provide substantially better long range AA than Yamatos Type 89s and her numerous 40mm AA guns provide a substantial medium aura as well. She also retains her increased AA hit ratios which are unique to IJN BBs so more of her paper DPS translates into actual DPS and you benefit slightly more from DPS increasing modifiers. However, by comparison, she does not have the range of her counterparts (5.8km is the worst of any t10 BB) her strengthened medium aura compared to Yamato comes at the cost of a weakened short aura, her total DPS is 4th best and her quantity of flak over Yamato is somewhat watered down by the reduced damage (again the worst at t10). The Russians and Montana have Yashima beaten on both total DPS, maximum range and overall flak performance, even with her uniquely high hit ratio. Her AA suite is much more capable than Yamatos, and relative to her other t10 counterparts she compares well, but I would say she is currently (Slava excluded) ranking around 3rd best perhaps joint with Bourgogne.

I must admit, I would love to play Yashima. It looks very cool, and even if the 510s are not really that good (terrible dpm, low shell count, no noticable improvement in overmatch from calibre but significant increase is overpens due to increased arming threshold that will likely be about 85mm, 720m/s velocity is basically standing still, 35s reload... but all justified for the >32mm overmatch and 20k alpha per shell) it still looks great and potentially opens the way for a H44 like vessel later (maybe the split for GK comes with a 508mm alternative instead of a 420?). Orkan looks like it could be quite a strong ship. I assume it wont get single launch torps, and they arent super strong but could be good for dealing with DDs due to their extreme speed and only 1.6km detect. The guns are naturally identical to Lightning, both being L/M class, but the shells will produce ~3% more dpm, nothing major there. The toolkit of repair and radar on a tier 8 RN DD intrigues me though. Arashi... is this what it takes to sell a Kagero clone now? Based on Arashis real historical profile I could understand the addition of Hydro as one of her most notable acts was attempting to engage USS Nautilus at the time of the Battle of Midway. But, why does it have an american FCS? Why does it have german 150mm guns? I can only imagine this could become part of some sort of future event that explains this totally ahistorical setup, but even if it did, would I want it?... Agir is simply a Seigfried with 305s instead of 380s, so not sure what there is to say about it. I do wonder with these ships why they have improtected bow waterlines, a feature of almost all larger german vessels, even Hipper has 40mm plating along her waterline, Scharnhorst has 70mm, yet you would present two O Project based super cruisers as if they would lack this feature and call them brawlers. Still, I am curious to see how you will change Siegfried as a result of this, I am sure you would create more distinction between them than just their armament (gun calibre, one extra pair of 128mm secondaries and some tweaks to AA suite) and removal of a catapult aircraft.

A further observation I will make looking at these changes overall is the number of additional upgrade for slot 5, something for everyone has realistically been added. Could this indicate a potential future move to remove concealment systems modification from slot 5? I would personally endorse the removal of this module and making the -10% concealment change to the baseline value of all ships that could use it and these new modules add enough options that players have some degree of choice for slot 5 even without this particular option.

This is nice. An interesting idea, I like it. Finally a valuable upgrade for torp-centric DDs in slot 3. Better than the current options, the increased attack time can be more often a detriment than a boon making the AA module one of the more appealing. Quite a powerful module, but for slot 5? Curious. And yet another interesting slot 5 module. Another slot 5 alternative for CV captains. I've used flight control module on almost every CV I think, not sure if this would be that desirable on many CVs but worth thinking about. Removing the extra explosions from this module to produce this new version? An odd choice. Although, more frequent PAA could certainly be useful for some ships... particularly the DDs that like the existing module due to no interest in the aiming system upgrade, and those that might not want the new torpedo upgrade. Merging the engine and rudder modifications for slot 2 made sense. This one I'm not so sure about. It's an AA buff for secondary ships and a secondary buff for AA ships (but who actually used this mod on an AA ship and which of those ships would actually benefit from improved secondaries? An extreme minority, I'm sure.) It is interesting though that you've moved the extra flak to this upgrade from AAGM1 and only while DFAA is active. This makes the value of this module even more exclusive since I can't think of a single secondary ship that has DFAA. A niche module with a confusing identity. Include that is a competitor for slot 6, this modules changes only serve to reinforce the AA of secondary spec ships. Ok, why not. Most people dont find DFAA good enough to justify considering this upgrade, I don't think this changes much. Nice, that's actually made this module a more viable option for some ships. Not sure you really thought this one through. What was this intended to achieve? Radar upgrade for ships like Belfast and Missouri is simply not a good idea.

The secondory module in slot 6 never increased range in the first place. EDIT: I should have continued to read further into the thread and noticed this post was not necessary.

The service record only unlocks features (like commanders, modules, inventory) and game modes. It's not going to vastly accelerate peoples ability to grind to high tier and participate in ranked. It just increases how fast they unlock basic game features.

I agree, I've got a number of clanmates now scrambling to grind "important" UUs to obtain the mission before it gets changed, despite not knowing how the upgrades will be rebalanced, because they don't want to have to earn them through the research bureau.

https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/public-test/bulletin-090/#mods-10

Theyve been tested by ST on the live servers for a few weeks.

It was a bug that should now be fixed. If you still can't see directives, relog. If that doesn't resolve the issue then mention here or contact support.

There's no guaranteed way to obtain Missouri, only chance. As mentioned above, Missouri can be obtained from containers which is perhaps the most consistent chance since you can try to obtain a supercontainer 3 times a day at least. The shop bought christmas gifts can also contain any premium, though some research into their drop rates reveals that the smallest gift containers are not worth buying and the chance of getting a ship from the other containers is weighted, making some premiums more likely than others. Obtaining Missouri nowadays is either expensive or time consuming and luck based.

The Musashi flag, for example, I do believe has never been available. And yet, there it is.

HP values here are wrong.

Odin is a Germanic god. His existence in Nordic mythology is most prominent, but he does exist in Saxon mythology as Wodan. So really, the name should be Wodan not Odin. But, I agree that a name from Germanic mythology does not fit.

If I recall correctly WG did test missiles a very long time ago and concluded that they were simply not right for the game, guided missiles were too powerful and unguided missiles were just boring, and this was 2-3 years ago in a dev diary or something. So, I wouldn't get your hopes up. There was some speculation that this mechanic might get reintroduced around the time the Grozovoi line was first being hinted at but that clearly didn't happen either.

A ship with 10 torpedos launched 10 torpedos? I'm not sure what the issue is, honestly.

In my opinion, for at least the past seasons with only 1 BB the Bourg is massively held back in CW by it's seriously lacking overmatch (unable to overmatch even the 27mm armor of DM and Hinden) and very low survivability make it a poor option when only 1 BB can be taken. To take advantage of its strengths it needs to crack into an exposed flank or form some other sort of breakthrough, but with no other heavy hitting ships present and against the more seriously organised teams you face in CW these opportunities are much rarer. BBs with =>30mm overmatch do not need to wait for opportunities to flank, they can bully many ships bow on and the ships like Kremlin and Yamato bring significantly more survivability than Bourg does. With the recent season and 2 BB limit the opportunities to bring bourg have increased now that it can be used to create a dangerous crossfire and it can work with the other BB to exert pressure indirectly, but its real play is its threat to push and delete if given the opportunity to flank, its guns quantity and reload, MBRB, its speed all enable it to quickly push and potentially severely punish an exposed flank. Depend on the map, enemy comp and state of battle though Bourg can be relegated to simply HE spamming and it can melt extremely quickly due to its low HP and poor HE resistance when facing multiple HE spammers. Among the t10 BBs its more of a high risk/high reward opportunist, and taking risks isn't a very admirable virtue in CW when your success hinges on an organised team being disorganised or making mistakes.

Between Hayate, Marceau, Paolo Emilio and in the more distant future Smalland there are currently 4 tier 10 premium DDs in development so you could even assume that if Hayate will be FXP that means the Marceau, PE and Smal will be Steel/Coal/RB.

I just wish camos had filters for their bonuses.

Mouse over the income indicator in the bottom left above the ship building bar to see an estimate of how far you will get at the current rate of progress. (This is my current progress with 1 premium booster) I am not sure what you mean by Stage 4, if you mean the 4th of the 6 major stages then you are probably well on track to obtain PR but I don't think this would be possible without multiple premium boosters so you might want to double check the above estimate. If you mean 4 of the 36 phases then most definitely not.

God knows but when you look at the IJN options i'm just thankful Ark Royal even has Swordfish.

Well, we will get Indomitable eventually, not exactly like her sisters, but close enough.

You can use the following external mod to connect to EU using the RU client. https://forum.worldofwarships.ru/topic/103154-all-wows-realms-tool-переключение-на-серверы-ru-eu-na-или-asia/ This external tool does need to be updated occaisionally, but is available in Aslains modpack which can keep it updated (when the author releases updates).

All that you need to purchase a ship is enough credits and a free port slot. The number of vacant port slots is displayed on the purchase button that appears on the carousel and in writing by the settings cog on the right side of the carousel when you mouse over it. If you definitely have both a free port slot and enough credits then we'll probably need some screenshots to work out what is going wrong.

Stick to 5v5 or less please, these 9v9 and 12v12 games are just an absolute waste of time. Not to mention that getting 15 wins in 5 hours is a feat unto itself, but getting people to stay and do that for 5 hours straight still means you either need to play every game in under 10 minutes at 50% winrate or less than 14 minutes per game at 80% winrate, if you play for 5 hours straight with no breaks or downtime to switch/find players. Possible with 4v4, but 12v12? It's like you didn't even think about it. Absolute waste of effort. The 3v3 one you did before though was great fun.