Figment

Thing is, I am right. You’re not. It is that simple. It’s indeed clear you don’t play the mode. People work more together than in randoms because it is far more personal and easier to connect with two other people than with twelve. Coordination is easy, people know you’re talking to them. Sharing info is also much appreciated by others (sounds like you don’t care enough because you think the mode is beneath you for being too simplistic and don’t need to). You’re all fighting the same units, so ganging up and ambushing should be easier. So mark targets, discuss positions for a crossfire. They’ve got a personal stake in winning, so they are willing to listen. But you have to ask and from the looks of it, you just berate people after the fact, because of your arrogance and lack of social skills. But I shouldn’t call you a caveman, they had more complex social structures than you. You can’t even connect with two allied players. Though since your attitude is horrible, and your willingness and expectancy is so low, it would not be surprising that you don’t even try, put no effort in and sure, then people don’t coordinate with you. Quite sad indeed. Utterly pathetic even. But hey, more wins for me.

You certainly don’t have a lot of imagination for someone who is wrong by his own admission and clearly either too dense or invested to admit it outright so you are left with doubling down on your mistake and hope people will confuse bluster for reason. You literally cite tactical and strategic positions related to a choice of unit which you consider to have tactical and strategic benefits for this mode and then claim that’s got nothing to do with tactics or strategy. Funny and sad at the same time. Tactics and strategy isn’t just done on a Napoleon level. Strategy and tactics can be tic-tac-toe simple or can be convoluted epic campaigns. You refusing to accept that simple tactics are also tactics just means you’re an arrogant fool who works his way through the game on instinct. Either way, your creativity is about caveman level. First off, Brothers isn’t the only map. Second, you can opt to go into the canyon or stay out guarding the entrance with hydro and torps. You can play a bait game, or you can play more aggressive. You can also go around if you expect a stalemate on the other side and with 5,5km range still overlap the canyon. You can also task the DD with this job while you hold the center to do a pincer move. Ask my Shinonome if this works (it does). You can also opt to work with the DD’s smokescreen to crawl up mid more carefully if the other doesn’t have hydro. There are a lot of choices which you conflate since your ego doesn’t differentiate. But your choice of ship alone suggests you don’t think too far ahead. You want to make a strategic impact in this mode and have tactical options? Then you pick a DD and lead.

T4-T7. T4 and T5 are just regular cruisers with excellent AA IMO. The T6 and 7 could use a bit of a damage buff to the guns, but other than that are accurate enough and with 6 spotters and spotter speed up time you'll never have range issues.

DDs counter - pretty good at anti-DD up to 12km. (Do you have the 7% accuracy increase installed? Sounds like you don’t). I’ve killed a lot with them. Hydro and scouting planes and working closely behind your DDs or in their smokescreens together with your hydro will be very effective. Camping counter - air strike works pretty decently as long as there are islands for cover. However, you’ll risk camping a lot yourself if you rely too much on the air strike. Thing is, you want your enemy to come to you, spamming them like any HE cruisers from behind isles and then be deterred by allies to move up further. CA/CL - at range yes, up close sometimes. Rate of Fire and amounts of guns can allow for 5-12K volleys with AP on a broadside, though 2-4K is more likely. Kiting with HE is done decently at max range with reliable accuracy. You will take heavy BB damage though. BB - you can do 6-8K AP strikes from 8km or closer on broadside superstructures. But you’ll likely be very exposed. If you aim air strike 1,5 to 2 hull lengths ahead, you’ll do 6-12K damage if the ship continues on. Possibly set a fire too. CV counter - these things eat aircraft for breakfast even at 3,5km range I get up to 24 aircraft kills and kill entire wings flying over, so most CVs soon learn to leave you the hell alone. De Ruijter and up are great for chasing down CVs too. Killed quite a few barely getting any damage from constant attacks. I’m also often using it as a scout once DDs are gone, not firing just exposing enemies. Know when NOT to fire to support your team. I would argue their guns need a slight buff in AP power, but other than that I’m reasonably fine with ‘m. It is the teams that lack at times.

Problem is your definition of tactics and strategy is just extremely limited. You don’t even know you’re applying tactics and strategy when you do. Hint: You call it “skill”… Tactic An action or strategy carefully planned to achieve a specific end. Do you take evasive action? Do you plan your route (including straight lines) with deliberate intent? Do you for instance try to get the enemy into hydro range? Do you try to line up or angle your ship in a specific manner compared to the enemy ship? Do you avoid certain positions? Do you zig-zag? Do you apply scouting moves? Etc. Strategy a plan of action designed to achieve a long-term or overall aim Do you intend to end up winning by cap and/or kills? Do you go in in such a manner that your chances increase to achieve this goal? Do you ever direct others to take up certain positions or warn them against enemy positions and moves in order to gain, hold or negate positional (strategic) advantages? Do you select priority targets based on both opportunity and strategic importance (resets, cappers)? Do you or do you not give chase after targets that lure you away from the objective? Etc. Sure you do. You just don’t want to admit these are the skills one applies, even instinctively.

1. Hydro on itself means nothing if you don't position yourself in a spot where it is useful and intend to use it for a particular purpose to gain a tactical or strategical advantage for yourself or your team. That said, Hydro isn't the only tool needed and I certainly havn't required it in my Shinonome. 2. Rushing in is a tactic and strategy. A ill-thought out one and thus a bad one, but both nonetheless. The problem here is that you're too arrogant to try to coordinate with the people you allowed to rush in since you offered no alternative plan and clearly don't intend on doing so. You subsequently talk down about the strategic level of this mode, because of your own failure to be strategic in it by coordinating a plan with your allies. And yes, it will often be down to those people being willing to follow a plan, but I find that if you communicate, 90% of players will coordinate to a mild degree. But your play can also illicit a soft-coordination by incentizing your allies to play like you want them to, by for instance laying smokescreens where you want a cruiser to spam from, etc. 3. 3 man divisions are only as good as their coordination and discipline. I've encountered a lot who get overconfident because they think they're more organised by being on the same teamspeak or discord server, when they're actually less organised because they are without a plan and strategy. This makes them highly vulnerable to traps and situations where they encounter more organised resistance than they anticipated, or encounter creative situations they're not used to. 4. Yeah, I'm totally not exploiting that tactically by positioning myself such that I get broadside torpedoes on those positions and catch them off-guard and let them get themselves trapped into predictable positions and crossfires, as they expect the enemy to be doing the same things as everyone else (rush in straight to cap), as they expect people to only play only for themselves and not to the strengths of one another by for instance laying smokescreens outside their hydro range and outside your side's detection-while-firing-from-smoke-range for others than the DD itself and don't know how to improvise to a situation where they are out-scouted and out-positioned... Oh wait, we wern't allowed to have alternate strategies to your limited vision of the possibilities. I forgot.

Are you still derailing this thread by making it about what derails a thread? Maybe it's time you'd actually contribute to the thread, spammer. 1. I suggest you stop ordering people around. You're not a moderator, you're not even a participant in the thread (!). You have no rights to decide on what people can post and you certainly can't bully or intimidate people to only discuss that which you'd personally like to read or share. Instead, when you do it will only backfire, like it did here. Clearly you could understand this because you're upset about my "order" without realising it's a purposeful mirror to you, getting you upset and going against what you were ordered to do, just to prove a point. You know, you could have simply asked, politely, to get back on topic, or simply posted something on topic again to steer the discussion back, or leave it be, but you didn't. This is on you. You had to go and shout at people and somehow think this would illicit the response you were after, rather than some recalcitrant trolling. 2. Do tell me more about how you failed to value a post for what it was. Hint: not a hijacking. It had its purpose, but I don't think you're aware of it. Or you wouldn't have responded, period, realising you were only making it worse. Try to figure out its purpose? Hint: it may have something to do with deliberately redefining what you meant by spam, since in the context of this thread, no spam existed yet - that is, until you started a derailing discussion by trying to bully people. Why redefine it? Triple purpose: 1. to rattle you enough to post again, which worked 2. to indicate you can't stop people talking about something if they want to 3. mocking your definition of spam. Funnily you just invited me to continue that side-debate off-topic, which I could have done if my plan was to keep trolling you, which I'm not. Lucky you that you're not worth more than this post. And for the record, nobody was turning it into a CV thread. It was a sidenote. Until you decided we should talk more about how this thread is not about CVs. You seriously don't see how this invites mock posts discussing CVs? Sure call it immature, because it very much is, but at least I'm not shouting at people with caps lock. Twice. In a row. That shouts "special" right there. 3. I count three posts about CVs and matchmaking - which is a discussion that pretty much closed by the time you responded because it wasn't really open-ended. And I also count four of yours about what off-topicness is and allowed to be posted here, dutyfully followed up by me eager to let you derail this topic further by having you respond a few times more. Just to the point that our "duel" is now a larger section of this thread than the rest of it and four times that of the amount of CV related discussion that got you so worked up. It's not your forum. You have no powers to make anyone do anything. And you're too inept to even ask politely and resort instantly to shouting. So I'll make one last suggestion: get over it. I don't have a hard time reflecting, you on the other hand have too little self-discipline and lack the awareness to realise it when you're being baited. I'm going to leave this here though. You're not worth responding to further and if you're smart, you'll realise the previous post should be your last. You wouldn't want to invite further off-topic responses, now would you? Or are you so full of yourself that you'll hijack this topic in the name of anti-hijacking, just to get one up over someone who pissed you off and lead you on for two more posts on purpose after you pissed that person off for no reason whatsoever?

Any skill you can think of involves tactics and strategy, because they will position themselves, select weapons and methods and will try to beat anyone they encounter by superior play. That play isn't just aiming.

You're not the boss of me mate, go out and have a drink and a life. So, about that CV spam, you're saying using it three times in brawl is spam? I would disagree, I'm clearly a Shinonome spammer. (Keep at it, I'm sure you'll win this fight eventually WITHOUT BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR DRAGGING IT OFF TOPIC BY BAITING. And CV pairing is on topic, as the calculation may even include a multiplier for ship classes. So stop being the CV-police and go do something useful).

This thread can be written in without caps lock. Also, multi-quote is a thing. Stop spamming this thread. But yes, as we were saying, some CVs can win at times, but who knows how they take that into account in their MM calculations, given they're treating them as equal to DD.

Definitely will be fixed when version 1.0.0 arrives.

Carriers are clearly underpowered in these matches. Came across just one carrier that carried its weight (was very good with dive bombers and impossible to escape in my shino). I tried a couple in my own, but you lack the DoT-time to carry, even if they don’t rush, if you lose caps that ticker is going to be a bit of an issue. If there is an enemy CV, don’t waste your time going after it with your own. You’ll just lose your aircraft.

So guess that’s why winning 80% is realistic… because you just do whatever without thinking and asking teammates to coordinate or working together by providing them with fog or anything. Also fun when you ask people - where in this mode most people are one trick ponies - to do something different and creative you get your unimaginative kind responding that it is ludicrous. It is a fun mode where personal skill and teamwork both have a good chance to win the match. Despite the confines and short duration, if not because of it. Of course that doesn’t stop people from bringing Makarov, Budy or some other lightweight.

I’ve faced a triple division with 52%, 58% and 51% WR, while my team had 55% (me), 43% and 48%. Naturally we won because the three of them went into the narrow on the Brother map and while I torped ‘m from behind with my Shino, they got torped from the front as well by the Graf Spee and the W. Virginia did its thing too. So sounds fine I guess? :p

Of course, where does one get those. ;)

Oh nice, it has got a party hat. :)

I'm usualy third in any match, so maybe it's the player. ;) If people try to play this kind of ship around the air strike, they'll not be much help. But they're good arced shells that can fire from cover, and basically do a lot of fire damage if played right. The AP is mediocre at best, but it does work. I deal about 35-40K on average per battle with these ships (though that average been dragged down by a couple instakill matches before I realized how squishy these are and did just 0-12K), which is fine on the looks of it. They're okay against DDs. However, since it's mostly DoT, it's hard to stop anything coming at you. At max I'm dealing between 58K and even 103K at tier 4 (included two CVs). The AA is actually great, even at tier 4. Tier 5 I barely played against CVs or they didn't go after me. But the other tiers? They tried, oh they tried. :D I use the following captain skills and upgrades for all Dutch ships T4 to T7 (all are 10pts spend, I got one 12 pter, but saving up for now till I make up my mind which skill I really want next): Accuracy is fine as long as you have the 7% increase. The spotter skill is useful since you have a lot of them and it's the best way to deal with BBs. From a range they'll miss more shots. And still prefer to hide near cover. Most my engagements are at 13-18km, unless DDs, which I deal with 4 to 12km. Takes quite a bit of leading at 12km, but it's not bad. Bomb damage isn't great. It's just a 12K total in a match, if you're lucky it'll set a fire. I'm getting the hang of it more though and worked my way back from a 24% WR to 50%. The others are 55%, 53% and 50%. Not too great, but I have to admit it's been a while since I played cruisers mainly and in some of these matches with Kijkduin and Eendracht I've been too focused on practicing the gimmick than just dealing damage. Usualy in DDs or BBs lately. I find they're hard to carry with since they are teamwork tools. And most the teams are made up of tools. Even clear wins and obvious support offert is not taken as an opportunity too often and you'll suffer from it since you can't just geronimo in with torps to do a last second Hail Mary that kills or limps a few ships at once, turning the tide. You really need to play these with a plan in mind and stimulate players to coordinate. They're defintely not bad. Squishy, but not bad. Your team however... Is. De Ruijter: Stats Celebes: Stats Kijkduin Stats Eendracht:

Do you spam the repair button at the first fire? Do you get the fire prevention skill?

30 Dutch tokens if you link to an Amazon Prime account. Also get 10pt Dasha captain and a Gerry T2 Emden II.

Anecdote time! Share the best cheating accusations towards you for regular or uncommon situations (without naming and breaking rules). Came across a Chung Mu in Ranked at a cap zone and started firing. Brought him down to under a thousand in a very heated exchange (I took 50% damage) when he disappears behind an island, on fire. I send some blind shells after him, starting another fire. Hadn't really kept track of it, but he must have repaired early on when his engine broke at the start of the engagement. He died of fires and I was quite surprised and happy with the result. Then it came! What follows was basically (more polite and better spelled than he formulated it): "Hacker! Reported!" "Sorry, what?" "You can't start three fires in one salvo!" (Technically you can with four hits, but I didn't do so, was several seconds in between the fires starting...) "Uhm, one salvo? My Friesland has 1.7s reload." (I don't even have adrenaline rush on it) "Reporting you! Friesland does not have a 1.7s reload. Nothing fires that fast and nothing can set so many fires at once. You cheat." People giggled. :) Some wanted to hurry and buy a Friesland.

I think modules should be more in terms of sidegrades of the same item in the form of trade-offs in minor percentages (like -3% to +3% depending on trait and ship these options can be tweaked). And yes there is of course even more overlap with captain skills in this setup, since captain skills, like ship modules today do this as well. I'd even go so far as to say you should have a point system, where you have a standard amount of points spread evenly on characteristics for each weapon. By tweaking these points (assigning them to another trait from the default), you can opt to penalize some characteristics to boost others. Kind of like how one had to trade armour over speed or gun caliber at a certain amount of engine power. So we could have the following categories: Main cannons: - Standard dispersion - Range - Reload time (Rate of Fire and changing shell type) - Damage - Rotation speed - Aim speed (improved dispersion by narrowing the cone of fire, fine tuning aim after turning or firing - think WoT) - Shell velocity (travel time, arc) - Penetration power - Fire chance Secondaries (AA, AP and HE secondaries): - Standard dispersion - Range - Rate of Fire - Damage - Target prioritization - Aim speed - Shell velocity (travel time, arc) - AA boost duration Torpedoes: - Rotation time - Damage - Range - Torpedo speed - Reload time Aircraft: - Speed - Constant damage taken from AA - Damage taken from Flak - Speed boost - Fighter launch/activation speed - Fighter duration Detection and concealment (off-set scouting ability vs stealth): - Ship detection range (your scouting) - Torpedo detection range (your scouting) - Aircraft detection range (your scouting) - Submarine detection range (your scouting) - Concealment range (being scouted) - Concealment speed (after firing / being detected) Situational: - Spotter aircraft time - Spotter aircraft recharge time - Smokescreen size - Smokescreen setting time - Smokescreen duration - Hydro range - Hydro duration - Radar range - Radar duration - Radar / hydro information sharing speed Engine and steering performance: - Maximum speed - Acceleration / Decelleration - Rudder speed Maintenance vs emergency repairs: - Fire chance - Flood chance - Repair time of flooding - Extinguishing time of fires - Healing time - Healing percentage - Healing speed - Heal recharge speed Hull integrity (damage reduction to specific modules from HE or (S)AP, or hp increases to modules, not total hp): - Magazine protection (reduces magazine explosion chance for instance) - Secondaries protection - Main turret protection - Engine room protection - Rudder protection - Torpedo belt protection - Upperstructure protection etc. Say you could reassign a limited amount of points to improve certain aspects of your ship, but these points would only be freed up by reducing other specs compared to the default setting, with one caveat: it has to be something within the same category. Perhaps you could spend some amount of points outside of a category at a greater penalty.

I know! Baby seals are so cute you want to cuddle them! Right after you gun/torp them down of course.

It's indeed just an extra throw of the dice.

I’m just following local suggestions, I don’t know. Hence why I left them in, just crossed out. Can put question marks (removed?) behind ‘m though. Also added some other mentioned Gerry prems with question (added?) behind them.