Benser33

I identified more ships that were affected by this change than are listed in the article. https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/123042-psa-regarding-aa-guns-modification-1-on-dds/ In particular, not a single Japanese ship is mentioned. @MrConway Also, as mentioned above, any form of compensation for people who already took action to rectify the issue and place a useable upgrade in the AA Mod slot?

I understood it as meaning theyve lowered the rewards because its easier to make a team of 6 tier 8s than it is to make 7 tier 10s, not because it's easier to progress. But reducing the steel anyway seemed pretty stupid to me. I just hope they dont do tier 8 again, this has been the most unpleasant season in my experience. Changes in rewards compared to Season 5; Total Rewards Squall 750 steel, 20 various signal flags was 1400 Gale 1500 steel, 30 various signal flags was 1800 Storm 2500 steel, 20 various signal flags, 20 "Type 59" camo, 10 "Spring Sky" camo, 30 days of Warships Premium Account was 3000 Typhoon 3000 steel, 10 "Asian Lantern" camo, 150k captain exp, 100k free exp, 10 "Mosaic" camo, 1 Clan Token was 4050 Hurricane 1000 steel was 1000

The only way to really do it is to aim the guns in such a way that the front guns are already aimed where you want them but the other guns continue to move. For example if you aim fore, but slight to port, the front guns will be aimed mostly fore and the rear guns will turn all the way to port to try and match it. If you then change to aim slightly to starboard then the front guns will quickly turn say 5° but the rear guns must turn over 180° to aim to starboard. At some point during that turn they will be aimed directly aft of the ship. At this point you have front guns aimed directly fore but rear guns aimed directly port. You could then lock them in that position with ctrl-X if you wanted to fire at one person immediately ahead of you and another immediately behind, unlocking the guns just long enough to aim correctly, but taking advantage of this is cumbersome and managing the guns independently is no easy task, especially since you can only ever turn all guns at once. At the very least, being aware of how your guns behave, including the ones you arent intending to use in any particular moment, can give you an advantage when an opportunity arises to use a gun that was at least correctly trained. For example if you expect someone to appear to port but youre firing on someone ahead of you, inbetween shots you can aim slightly to port so that the rear gun remains trained on your port side and is more readily available when that previously mentioned ship appears. Or even, with my above example, you might even keep the rear gun/s aimed directly behind you by turning your forward aim between slightly port and slightly starboard, but as I mentioned it is no easy task and the required concentration that is often better spent elsewhere.

Have you tried to as a test to see if they fail the same way warships does?

What? In 1939 the Soviets had 120k tons of submarines and by 1941 the Soviets had the largest submarine fleet in the world. And what does this have to do with SAP shells?

Are you able to install other games with the launcher like WoT?

Maybe they should instead nerf Seigfried down to Bismarck and Tirpitz levels. The new german T9 large cruiser can have the same armament as Gneisenau in every way, including accuracy. That'll be fun. Come up with whatever fantasy reason you like to justify it. The german BB dispersion model is designed to be used by ships who are heavily armored, to the point of resisting a lot of HE penetration and BB calibre overmatching, with a lot of HP, a number of good secondaries, fast turning guns and fast reloading guns. Or simply, the BB dispersion model is for brawlers, the german BBs have this poor accuracy to balance them, that is the real reason. Seigfried is not a brawler, it is more of a long range combatant. We would not give the gun dispersion designed for brawlers to Siegfried and equally we would not give the sniper dispersion to the german BBs. There is not a single BB in the game using the cruiser dispersion model, Bismarck and Tirpitz are designed to have bad accuracy so thinking that there is any possibility they would be buffed to being the most accurate ships in the game is just ridiculous. If you cannot understand why it would be ridiculous to buff Bismarck and Tirpitz (and Gneisenaus) dispersion by almost 40% and you absolutely must have an answer from WG instead I invite you to pose the question to Sub_Octavian who is still hosting a 5 day Q&A on reddit;

For ingame balance reasons different ships uses different models of dispersion. DD dispersion > Cruiser dispersion > Large cruiser dispersion > BB dispersion. There are 10 dispersion models in total. Bismarck and Tirpitz use the German/Italian/French BB Dispersion model. Seigfried, despite being a large cruiser, has had her dispersion improved to normal cruiser dispersion due to only having 6 guns and being tier 9. There is no reasonable argument for why Bismarck and Tirpitz should be allowed to have the same dispersion as a tier 9 cruiser with 6 guns when they have more guns and are also lower tier.

Other than other stuff like checking drivers are up to do you can only check the game logs or send them to support. It may not be something that can be fixed by the user and requires a patch.

It just reduces the time it takes for the reticle to fully "aim" so you can spend more time maneuvering or start the attack run a bit later. But it doesn't improve the maximum dispersion of aircraft attacks and a lot of attack runs usually take enough time that you can fully aim even without SS, so its usefulness is limited for a 4 point skill. What it can do though is counteract some of the lost dispersion caused by correcting your aim mid attack run, allowing for more correction without losing accuracy. I believe that some of the dive bomber changes involved slowing the speed at which bombs dropped, so you may also find you need to lead targets more with the aiming. This is especially true with RN carpet bombers who might even still be suffering from that issue where the bombs were falling much slower than intended, I can't remember if that was fixed.

I have recently noticed that since the latest AA rework some ships, notably DDs, no longer have any flak. This includes ships such as Cossack, Asashio and the new steel DD Somers. As a result, AA Guns Modification 1 does nothing on these ships but it can still be mounted. So, PSA: check through all of your ships and remove any mounted AA Guns Modification 1 upgrades on them if they don't have flak since +2 flak clouds does nothing when the ship has a stock value of 0 flak clouds. I've tried to go through every DD ingame right now and made a list of all of them that no longer have Flak (Updated: All ships from tier 5-10); I've double checked them all ingame but please let me know if there are any ships I've missed or are wrong.

Even if it's 50% off you need to decide for yourself based on your own situation whether paying for the ship is worth it or not. If not, just enjoy the rental (or dont, maybe youll think it sucks?).

There have been a number of changes to the dispersion of bombs and the size/shapes of the aiming reticles for bombers lately but nothing that would match what you describe. If anything, the last patch has made the process of bombing easier due to the buff to the Sight Stabilization skill.

Yamato also has her 57mm deck, so Kremlin is not particularly exceptional in regards having a 60mm deck. The only advantage the extra 3mm grants is that 356mm HE shattered on Kremlin deck, but for now there are no ships with 356mm guns that can face Kremlin. And 60 is not even the thickest deck in the game. Lowering the thickness to 50 will only add the large cruisers, hindenburg and IFHE henri to the list of ships capable of penetrating the deck, and Henris future seems to include losing the ability to pen 50mm. For the average cruiser, nothing would change, for any BB that faces Kremlin nothing would change, for the HE spammers that can burn it to death without penetrating it anyway, nothing would change.

I'll just leave it as is, Polish DDs are important ^^

While I do not believe I could find it now, it was a Sub Octavian reddit Q&A if I remember correctly.

Well a clanmates first game in Colbert the day before yesterday was ended abruptly at the start of the game before causing any damage when he was oneshotted by a kremlin at max range while being spotted by a CV. Now, this sort of outcome is always a possibility. But, as it stands right now, the odds of Kremlin succeeding at something like oneshotting a colbert at max range is too high for a ship that was supposed to sacrifice some of that long range potential in exchange for its close quarters performance. Nothing will stop Kremlin from potentially getting amazing dispersion when it fires even at someone 20km away, not matter how bad the dispersion or sigma gets, but it should be a less likely than it is right now.

Your assumptions are correct. Secondaries aim at the centermost point of the ship at the waterline. Shells will usually hit the middle of the armor belt on the way to this point when firing at a broadside target. This means that at close range against targets that are broadside a number of shells can shatter harmlessly against the belt and depending on dispersion not many may land on the bow/stern areas. Against BBs the belt, uppercasemate and deck can be thick enough to repel secondary penetrations and you might only be able to start one fire (assuming fire prevention being used) unless the target turns towards you and presents more bow/stern towards the middle of where your secondaries aim. However, for the example of ships like GK, the dispersion bonus of ManSecs is quite necessary to get any sort of reasonable performance from the guns when a combination of AFT, SBM1 and MYS flag extends GKs secondary range to 11.6km. Good luck focusing them effectively on anything without ManSec. Although, unless something has changed that I wasn't aware of, even without ManSec designating a target will still improve secondary dispersion by 5% for any secondaries that fire at that target.

Just nerf the sigma on Krem. The ship has some extremes when it comes to dispersion and very strict range. But very tight dispersion at close range and very wide dispersion at long range is meaningless when sigma can allow even the longest range shots to rival accurate BBs in terms of actual spread. The sigma is too high and causes this to happen often enough that their long range "inaccuracy" is not really an issue.

I've had the chance to go through every tier 5-10 BB, CV and cruiser now. I've updated the list in the first post to include Saipan, New York, Texas, Omaha, Marblehead, Murmansk and Oktobraskaya Revolutsiya.

Ahh, I see. Well spotted. I should double check ships with multiple gun options.

And I even have AA Guns Modification 1 on my Saipan. EDIT: had

The answer to your conundrum is Saturation. A stock Benham (no skills) has 14,500 hp. I will use this for my example. Damage dealt to the stern compartment of Benham only will be dealt to two separate health bars of the ship. The bow HP bar and the "hull" HP bar. The bow HP bar is only lowered by damage to the bow. The "hull" HP bar is lowered by damage to any part of the ship. All damage taken by any of the ships various HP bars are also deducted from the ships Hit Points (the total bar that you see above each ship). Half of the damage goes to one HP bar (stern), half goes to the other (hull). Once a HP bar reaches 0 it takes no more damage (this isn't entirely true, but I'll get to that in a moment). You will have noticed that when you hit parts of a ship that they blacken after a while, this indicates that that compartment has becomes saturated (such as the superstructure of a ship going black because the superstructure HP bar has been reduced to 0) so now only half of your damage is being done (to the "hull" compartment). The total HP of the stern of Benham, stock, is 1300 HP. The total HP of the "hull" of Benham, stock, is 10900 HP. When both of these bars are empty, you will not be able to lower the total HP bar by damaging these compartments any more. This means that the total amount of damage that can be dealt to benham by hitting only the stern is 12,200 damage. But, like I said, that's not entirely true. If the stern is 100% saturated it can still take damage from 5 things; Fires and floods are not affected by saturation. Citadel penetrations are not affected by saturation (not that Benham has a citadel). Ramming is not affected by saturation. Overpenetrations will always deal 10% of their full damage, even to fully saturated ship compartments. And finally, torpedos will always deal 10% of their total damage, even to fully saturated ship compartments. So, if the bow of the enemy DD was 100% saturated your torpedo would only deal 10% of its total damage. And the total damage of a Benham torpedo is 15,200, so your torpedo would have done 1,520 damage.

Although you cannot take a time limited snapshot of stats from wows-number, they do offer an interesting filter option by presenting the average stats of top %s of ship players. The top 5% of players for each ship have the following stats. These are lifetime stats, however, Khaba is still quite a strong ship and Tashkent certainly does not outshine it entirely.

You get 50mm plating regions although large calibre AP can still cause full pens if you dont manage to ricochet it. Also, 50mm is not quite enough to arm any BB AP (although it will arm all cruiser AP). A lot of cruiser HE and all DD HE will shatter on these plates however. You get 33% more gun DPM, which is nice on a line of gunboats, but comes at the cost of 1km range. You get 3.2% more HP (or 4.2% more with SE since Khaba receives an extra 350 over Tashkent). Khaba only gains 0.5knts of max speed but 43knts works fine. Khaba torps are centerline, do 33% more damage, have better flood chance and has 10 in total. Tashkent has only 9 torps, although the launchers reload faster and the torpedos travel faster. They also have 2km more range but that still isnt enough to stealth torp with unless you take CE for some reason. Khaba has 600m worse concealment but since you take rudder shift module instead of CSM and dont take CE in captain build either you don't think of it as terrible DD concealment you think of it as quite good cruiser concealment. Khabas rudder shift time of 11.1s is 5s worse than tash but with both rudder shift upgrades it still gets down to an acceptable 5.3s. Khaba does have worse AA dps but Tashkent doesn't get any flak (it can still mount the +2 flak clouds upgrade which now does nothing though lol), whereas Khaba gets a reasonable 4 clouds stock. Looking at the last 2 month snapshot from maplesyrup; Tashkent is achieving 47.49% Winrate, averaging 40,776 damage, getting 0.79 average kills per game with a survival rate of 29.5% Khaba doesnt have a stock grind to deal with so is understandably performing better, however, 51.53% winrate, 67,157 average damage, 1.37 kills and 40.77% survival rate are all significantly better than Tashkents averages. Khaba has drawbacks compared to Tashkent, but it's more specialised as a gunboat and succeeds in the role better than Tashkent as a result.