Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles



About Vogel

  • Rank
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,146 profile views
  1. Vogel

    Quality Poster Initiative

    So if a poster is highly critical to the high suvivability of BBs (and power level in general), the numerous pay2win premiums and the uselessness of IJN DDs in the current meta, does that bar them from becoming a quality poster? Given this section It would seem that helpful and accurate is in the eye of the beholder. And criticism isn't exactly exemplary forum conduct Edit: forgot to say that I like the idea, but have some worries on the above-mentioned points.
  2. Would this chap lie, do you think?
  3. Vogel

    So what good is Montana now?

    Well, I sadly cant's say more. Both because I am under NDA, and because I have never played Monty
  4. Vogel

    So what good is Montana now?

    Not going to say to and fro here, but there is a lot of ship characteristics which can have a huge impact on the game which isn't reflected in stats. Turret angles, krupp/penetration values, turret module health, citadel bow armour/deck armour, etc. Waiting until the ships go live when they share just one characteristic is generally a good idea.
  5. Vogel

    Stop shooting!

    It amazes me how many people in ranked never stops shooting, period. Have lost a couple of games because CA and BB alike simply refused to stay safe in stealth and wait for the point/timer to run out.
  6. The armour model/shell penetration is not very difficult to recreate. It's the physics model (shell travel time due to weight, initial velocity, drag coefficient and gravity) that are secret. Krupp and vertical dispersion has nothing to do with that, and could safely be introduced into the client. Krupp should mostly be based on historical data after all.
  7. If I was in charge, Krupp, vertical & horisontal (if possible, there is some fancy things going on with that one, AFAIK) dispersion, HE shell penetration, etc. all would be ingame. The average user probably just use the ratings anyway, so I don't know why we can't expand on the numerical values. But WG is in charge, and they probably consider it not worthwhile to divert manpower on at this point.
  8. Also why I made the suggestion a few posts back. Mine is quite simple, due to "not confusing players with overly difficult mechanics™".
  9. I would guess that WG want to have more dynamic gameplay, and not 3+ BBs sitting in smoke. AS far as I know, this change was meant first and foremost for competitive play.
  10. My suggestion to this whole debacle is still to just treat smoke as an extra layer of concealment. What this would mean in practice is that when in smoke, your detection characteristics will be lowered one step. Take for example a British CL (just going to use stereotypical values here). Whenever it sails out in the open it has 10 km detection range and 16 km detection range when firing. This drops a step in smoke, so then your detection range when sailing will be the auto-detection range (2.5 km, without modifiers and skills) and your detection range while firing will be 10 km. In short, for this example CA: Detection type Open water [km] In smoke [km] Proximity 2.5 2.5 Sailing 10.0 2.5 Shooting 16.0 10.0 Now this idea is probably not perfect, but testing would reveal that. In my opinion it is miles better than what is proposed by WG. It's simple, easy to understand and will progressively be "less" useful for the heavier classes, just as what the proposed design are trying to address.
  11. Vogel

    Kutuzov is absolute garbage!

    Wulfen? No such thing
  12. Could be. But a 14" shell should have better HE performance, so there's that. I'm not stating that KGV "has" to be at T8, but I am wondering if it is workable at that tier. Her armour and displacement means that she will be a formidable opponent if placed at T7.
  13. I do fail to see why 11" can work at T7, but 14" can't work at T8. I mean, it's not like Scharnhorst is overperforming, right?