Kartoffelmos

Clearly, the Arkansas is a bad ship and in a dire need of a buff!

Except you are using a source that only list registered users (aka the ones who have been manually added by searching for user names), while the source I listed collects their stats from the WG API. Here's a link to the front page and no, the link I posted was not "some Asian language page" (it's written in English ) and your browser should have notified you that it didn't show the content because it didn't like the Adobe flash player (høhø). Anyways... It's around 0,2% above the others using the superior () site, but bear in mind that even a small difference can be quite noteworthy due to mirrored matchmaking and the fact that battleships don't contest caps (well, bar a couple of exceptions) themselves. That's also one of the reason why destroyers and cruisers have a larger distribution in win rate, the other being the ability to support team mates (particularly friendly destroyers or against carrier strikes) and/or difference in in-class competitiveness. Of course, but as I also wrote, the ship has a similar kills/game as the rest, so it's more like the ship has a larger chance to survive games than the rest. Needless to say, that is a huge advantage in domination games and the advice that "you only have to focus her whenever spotted" is slightly silly as that relies on the Conqueror player overextending or playing like a potato (CV-games excluded). I'm not sure if you deliberately ignored the rest, but your overly long quote merely confirmed what I wrote, so... Firstly, I didn't, which again would have been clear if you didn't jump to conclusions (why would I bring up K/G and K/D in two separate points if I didn't know the difference?). My point was that yes, the Conqueror burns down battleships, but she also scores equal amounts of kills as the rest of the battleships (Montana being somewhat as an exception here, as her anti-cruiser/destroyer ability nets her a slightly higher number) which in turn means that the damage is far from "useless". See the above point regarding mirrored matchmaking (though I don't recall calling it a massive advantage), but the thing to take note of is that the Conqueror's performance would probably not be hurt by a raised citadel (waterline, I guess?) due to her stealth-oriented playstyle, but it would certainly give her a noteworthy weakness other than being weak against HE. It would also promote angling instead of sitting broadside like a jackass, so maybe it would be a buff overall? I think you missed my point; Yamato rewards good aim since she is accurate (for a battleship at least) whilst a good aim in Conqueror is not nearly as important due to the high fire chance per shell. Yes, you miss out on some juicy HE damage, but you will be able to farm fire damage despite having a below average aim. Using global hit rate as a reference point is somewhat misleading as well, due to the amount of errr... questionable players who sit at maximum range in their battleships. So how do you beat a Conqueror that goes nose in then? You cannot citadel her in a Yamato unless you're extremely lucky (again, submerged citadel) and all other battleships will merely bounce. If you focus-fire her with HE, she can disengage if she feels like it and heal most of the damage. If you have to keep her spotted, remember that the enemy has ships between yourself and the Conqueror as well (unless the ship is out of position) so any destroyer/cruiser action will make this a moot point at best. The thing is, she has a lot going for her while having few noteworthy weaknesses. Making her less foolproof doesn't necessarily have to hurt her overall performance but it would be an improvement with regards to the depth of the game. Additionally, it's not like cruisers can enjoy the wonders of not having a citadel, so why should battleships? Even if it is a design feature(TM), why is it not used as a balancing parameter? This would be the case if the Conqueror didn't have the super-heal, but since she does, there is no significant trade-off.

Why is everyone feeding the passive-aggressive poster instead of merely posting statistics? Excluding the last week due to low sample size, the Conqueror had the highest win rate, dished out the most damage and enjoyed the highest kill death/ratio of all the tier X battleships during two of the three last weeks. What does this tell us? 1. The ship is very resilient despite having supposedly bad armour (it really hasn't; it is comparable to a Montana but is more vulnerable to HE spam/Yamato lol-penetrations, which in turn is greatly compensated with the ridiculous heal and stealth). 2. It's easy to farm damage with the ship and despite the "myth" that it only farms battleship damage, the average kills per game tells a different story (on the same level as Yamato/Kurfurst). Even if those kills are purely battleship kills, that is still quite an impact on the average game. 3. Win rate is slightly better than the rest, but the lazy playstyle shouldn't yield this result. An easy-to-play ship should not, for the good of the game, be more rewarding than ships that are harder to play. For example, if CVs were really easy to play, they should not have the great impact on games as the currently have. Compared to the Yamato, where good aim is (mostly) rewarded, the Conqueror's fire chance negates this aspect. Is the ship overpowered? No, not really, but it is far too strong compared to how it is played.

Ah, that would make sense and it is good to know that MS is reliable. I was somewhat surprised when Sub_Octavian claimed the opposite since MS collects the date from the WG API itself. The last point is also something I've "enjoyed" for quite some time now and it's fun to see that my suspicions were correct.

Now, where is the nearest mirror... Ah, there it is! @Aotearas, @Aotearas, @Aotearas, @Aotearas, @Aotearas! Statistically speaking, everything can happen, no matter how unlikely it may seem. As such, even though I despise the mechanic, I haven't observed a change in the occurrence of detonations.

Indeed. Sadly, @Sub_Octavian stated that MS's numbers were off though he didn't reveal the real distribution. As such, we cannot know for sure how big the difference really is, which is a shame since I was at that time putting together a diagram showing the evolution of the class distribution. Needless to say, I suspect MS is much closer to the truth than wows-numbers or warships.today, since those two sites only monitor "registered" users.

Maybe it's caused by players of lesser than average skill who are playing important cap contesters and aren't using their ship properly?

You make it sound like a non-WG'dlowered citadel is peculiarity rather than the norm... In any case, the solution is the same as always: buff the battleships! We simply cannot have a game with mediocre stronkbotes (as if this applies to theYamato or Roma). You hear that, WG?! We need even more battleships since the current overpopulation cannot possibly be an indication of a flawed game design!

BBaby flags (AA + reduced fire duration). Yay... Last time, I got repair party flags and while none of these are bad, I have enough of them already. Why couldn't I get a special module instead?

By "permanent fire/flooding", he meant fires or floods that run for the majority of their duration (60 seconds without modifiers for battleships and 30 seconds for cruisers and destroyers). You can heal this damage later on, but it will hurt a lot if you have two permanent fires or one permanent flooding. You can read more about this here and here. The Repair Party will heal 100% of fire and flood damage, which is why it is important to properly use your consumables during engagements. In this regard, the Royal Navy heal is identical to the regular ones.

Also, happy new year!

Ah, but Mr. Sir Comrade, battleships are only popular due to their historical performance or importance! I mean, when the Grosser Kurfurst demolished the Montana at the battle of Belarus, the war took an unfortunate turn for the allies. It's also quite sad that the Shimakaze's war record recently was proved to be fake news or else we would see more of her. The old nerf of course had nothing to do with it. In a way, yes. Destroyers and cruisers (to some degree) are still being used since they still retain their roles: escort, screening and support duties (among other things). Battleships on the other hand lost out to the carrier when it came to actually fighting battles. Why put a battleship at risk (with the corresponding hands aboard) when you could send more resource efficient warplanes? The aforementioned escort duties are also why destroyers and cruisers were more vulnerable to carriers. They were simply expendable compared to a battleship.

Super League? Is that edible?

20k free XP, which I'm quite fine with since I recently received my free Missouri .

Except that once they surface, they will b inevitably shelled to death by cruisers and destroyers. As such, you end up with a class that is hiding half the time and is being useless most of the time. I mean, what does a submarine bring to the table that a destroyer with smoke does not? as it is now, a destroyer even outperform a submarine in pure submarine-duties (aka launching torpedoes on unsuspecting ships) while also contributing to the game in the shape of spotting and capping. Mobility will also be a severe issue, as non-submerged sub-marines aren't exactly fast either...

After WG highlighted the important targets, I've found the operation to be one of the easiest ones (well, "special" teams excluded). Shotgun Fuso is as always a excellent ship, due to her DPM and deck armour. To be honest, I found her OP in closed beta and I'm still somewhat amazed that WG haven't adjusted her. As for Jingles, I don't really consider him a good player (I still have traumatic memories of him sailing near the map edges in his battleship ) but he do make entertaining videos which I enjoy. My biggest issue is all the misinformation which he spreads. Stuff like the recent ammunition/fort behaviour (though largely irrelevant), the comment about battleships being in a "tough spot" when battleships were the most popular class, the "explanation" as to why the Conqueror's HE is better than Tirpitz' and the like is really annoying because a lot of his viewers will take it as truth and act accordingly. Since a large section of the player base isn't exactly what you'd call competent, this is somewhat problematic. The lack of proper tutorials doesn't help either.

I met @AnotherDuck while testing some of Jingle's questionable Operation advice in my Aoba (as expected, it turned out that shooting AP at all ranges didn't work. I'm also pretty sure that Leander can penetrate the forts at max range due to the RN AP being an exception to the usual rules). The Aoba isn't exactly the best ship for this operation due to her low DPM and bad AA, but I managed to do quite well despite of this. The Alternate Quacker performed competently in the Fuso as well if I remember correctly .

I will enter this questionable lottery. I will also say in advance that this lottery is obviously rigged and that the winners are of dubious character! With that said, this a quite a generous competition. Happy holidays! First price: Kidd if available, Atlanta if not. Second price: De Grasse Third price: Doubloons

For starters, press the 2 key at the start of the battle and only use HE when AP does nothing. Secondly, do not use your damage control party when there are carrier planes nearby (or at all when you are only suffering from one fire) and finally, improve your positioning. You could have performed much better if you had AP loaded, managed your damage control/heals better and either followed the destroyer or the cruisers in the north instead of pushing into the centre of the map where no cover was available.

On a similar note, gambling is illegal in Norway with the exception of two companies (one arranging horse racing and the other running lotteries). However, companies operating outside the country's borders have free reign to organise and run their contests/lotteries online and even promote the business. Maybe the excepted countries do not allow foreign companies to run lotteries as easily?

Maybe you shouldn't play the class with the most impact if you are not good at it? If you don't carry (høhø) your weight, the enemy CV will harass your team either due to a scouting or striking advantage (possibly both).

Except the future battlecruisers will probably be matched up against regular cruisers...

Yes, because at higher tiers, you cannot merely use your guns to deal with enemy destroyers nor can you spot them for your team mates...

Ah, then I understand. My comment was aimed at the remark that being a cruiser-killer was no real advantage and thus I elaborated on how France's high-velocity guns will yield other advantages. Gun calibre and DPM aside, the accuracy, Krupp value and shell weight made Montana a nice starting point to understand how the guns would behave (as I was interesting in that, initially). Though, it's not really that far-fetched either, as one can draw a parallell to the cruisers Cleveland and Budyonny: one has far worse DPM but they are quite competitive overall. I for one hope you are wrong regarding silly buffs, but WG gonna WG, I suppose... It will nevertheless be interesting to see just how fast the French shells truly are and if the ballistics, as well as the ship's speed and mobility, will be enough to justify the low DPM. Having said that, a more uneven turret distribution would be more unique, but I suppose this is WG's way of promoting manoeuvring over positioning. If the battleship were made "front-heavy", it would also be less vulnerable to return fire which might have resulted in a more boring ship overall (slow/sluggish, slow turrets, etc.). On the other hand, that could have been compensated with lower calibre guns, so I don't know why WG went with the safe option. I didn't argue that the armour was better, I just wondered if you had a source for a detailed armour scheme of the France. Without that, I cannot comment much on the armour since the belt armour value alone does not tell the whole story.