Nechrom

What credit nerf?

I would not recommend investing in the Atago if you don't plan on running premium account as well. I mean it will still make good credits, but Murmansk will make just as much or more for a fraction of the cost. The only "expensive" premium ship I would recommend for non-premium account users is the Tirpitz if you can get a hold of it. If you have money to get the Atago I would go with the Murmansk instead and some premium time. If you really want a Japanese captain trainer then the Atago is a good ship. But don't get it for credit grinding.

I just want to know, because a forum search only brings up closed threads. And since this forum doesn't seem to allow moderators to merge threads, I have no idea what topic we're supposed to post in when all aim-assist topics gets closed. Feel free to close this one once you've answered.

Is it not allowed even if it's not about a specific mod/tool, but just the idea of aim-assist in general?

Is the visibility reduction not 4 km when firing?

If that's the one then I'm not really sure how anyone is supposed to know that. The title doesn't allude to it since it's specifically about a new mod. If it is to be used for all aim-assist discussions then maybe a rename is in order. Furthermore it would probably cut down on duplicate topics if the moderator in question actually closed the topics with a link to the ongoing discussion since they seem unable to merge threads. This is a general recommendation for the future.

Pretty sure it's 500m with camo but without 4th and 5th skill.

So we're supposed to use his "explanation and apology"-thread for general aim-assist discussions? I find that hard to believe since that would be straight up off-topic.

But I'm not so sure it is "plagued by aimbots". It might yet be, but right now we're still in a good spot. It won't remain as good though if players keep noticing that aim-assist usage goes unpunished. Also as a small note. Aim-assist in WoWS is not even close to as detrimental to the game as say aim-bots in an FPS. You're not working with as small margins in this game and due to RNG there's a very real ceiling on how well you can perform even if you have aim-assistance. P.S Aim-bot != aim-assist. Aim-bots are hands off and almost exclusively 3rd party applications, while aim-assist just adds the guide showing you more information about ship speed and heading than you would otherwise have access to. D.S

I was going to ask as well.

1. I don't think you can call it a witch hunt. It's not about the individual, but what response we can expect from WG in these cases. It was/is about creating precedence if only to ease the minds of players who see aim-assist as a major problem. 2-3. Yes, this is the critical part of the issue. If even posting screenshots of yourself clearly using aim-assist in not enough to get sanctions from WG, then how would someone who makes an effort NOT to get caught ever going to fear repercussions. My honest opinion is that aim-assist isn't a huge problem. It undoubtedly confers an advantage, but most of that advantage will be rendered completely redundant as you learn to aim manually. The edge it gives good players is marginal at best. The biggest effect is definitely on the results of a bad player, and it's still not going to push his results to the level of a good player. That's basically why I haven't weighed in on this issue before now.

Of all the things to complain about...

Murmansk will probably be better for credit grinding than most premiums for the foreseeable future. It's even on par with Atago if you don't run premium account. Only the Torpitz can really outperform it in credit gain. A DD will always be difficult to get a reliable income out of since it relies very much on circumstances to get cap points and damage.

Port slots and free XP is probably the only valid use of doubloons right now. Buying credits remains horrendously wasteful just like in WoT.

I think he was referring to new ships that you can buy using doubloons.

Błyskawica, the topic of the thread.

I would enjoy this ship way more if the guns weren't so anemic. They do even worse HE damage than the US machinegun-cannons. For obvious reasons AP is unusable as well since you'll barely be able to penetrate CL/CAs and you'll overpenetrate DDs (for roughly 200 dmg). What was okay torps on the Gremy at tier 5 is almost useless at tier 7. Too slow and few for ambush tactics and too short range for anything else. It also sucks as a capper for once again obvious reasons. Easily spotted, big and low maneuverability. If this ship had just one unique good quality I'd be fine with it. But nothing stands out on the positive side. With these stats I'd say it's roughly tier 5 material. It's basically a Gremy with different flavor guns, volume of fire instead of single shot punch, much worse maneuverability and worse concealment. How this ship ended up at tier 7 I can't fathom.

I'm hesitant to throw out a "gg" to the other team as that will many times be taken as bad manners when for many on the enemy team it wasn't a "gg". But I do tend to do it in team chat.

Result? Instant purchase.

If you instead buy doubloons beforehand and use them to buy premium time in-game, you get it instantly.

It only emerges from the fjords to convert enemies into credits:

The whole CV issue is about CV-gameplay being, quite honestly, crap. Only reason why enough people played them before was because they were OP. Now when they are fine from a balancing standpoint most people won't touch them. WG seems to be aware of the issue. Time will tell if they can make CV-gameplay interesting enough to get people to play a non-OP CV.

Murmansk also has slightly better AA (2 less 76.2mm, but 4 more 20mm) and much better maneuverability. Gun traverse speed should be identical unless I missed something.

You still get a decent sum. I think you don't get the full compensation because not all friendly fire incidents are 100% on the one doing the damage. For example if you ram into the side of a ship which is currently firing on an enemy far away you'll probably get hit and you can't really say that it's the fault of the guy you rammed. So the amount you get as compensation takes that into account without actually identifying who was at fault in each individual case, as that would be completely unrealistic.

The only thing I'd say the Omaha is better at is the fighter plane it gets which is more useful than the spotter. Other than that it is indeed just the same or in some cases a bit worse. I wouldn't mind giving the Murmansk some flaw, even as an owner of it.