Kartoffelmos

Don't worry, it's been that way since closed alpha.

My WoWs folder is 26,6 GB big, and only 2,25 of those are replays .

Can my Atago get better AA now? Kutuzov also needs radar, so please WG, "fix" that as well. One change was not needed, the others were justified. I think you can figure out the rest by yourself.

Your sarcasm detector appears to be malfunctioning . The poster above me (before the edit ) wrote that long lances were "CO2 -torpedoes" and I was feeling snarky at the moment.

You don't? I see nothing wrong with it as torpedoes using oxygen as a propellant were harder to detect. Too bad that the Japanese long lances did not use oxygen...

Maybe the playerbase suddenly realised that you were right all along?

I find them easy to play at least!!!! On a more serious side, battleships need adjustment in a similar fashion to how radar and hydro was added/adjusted for cruisers. As it is now, the best counter to a battleship is another battleship and that does not bode well for the class balance. It's the same as the overabundance of destroyers back in the days when the best counter to a destroyer was another destroyer. To be honest, this is still true, but cruisers have received more tools to help them do their job. The buff of IJN torpedoes is a move in the right direction as the slow battleships are more affected by the change (and more IJN destroyers and less battleships will make cruisers more relevant, hopefully). Though, tier 9-10 are already more balanced than the other tiers due to the cruisers having heal so I'm a bit unsure if there will be any noteworthy effect at all. One might argue that increasing the turn radius of battleship will also help as that will not make them more vulnerable to gunfire but will have a huge impact on the anti-torpedo tactics. Though, that will be a change too drastic in my opinion since it will hurt the level of enjoyment of the BB-players as well as making the already slow ships more cumbersome to manoeuvre. In any case, the problem lies in making small enough adjustments so that the changes don't come back later to bite us in the aft (like the way IJN DDs were adjusted which is one of the reasons why battleships are so popular right now). I agree, but you only need to make small adjustments to other classes to fix the overpopulation. And by small changes, I do not mean powercreep but for instance making carriers great again! fixing/adjusting carriers. Having said that, carriers are also a mess due to their skewed risk/reward and skill curves, so I fear a serious overhaul is in order to make that happen. Nah, BBaby was a thing before that image. I'm not sure who it was that first used that expression though. Maybe I should trademark baDDie© to avoid the "mistake" I did in the past? Though, reversing some of the changes in the bingo would surely help the class balance. I made that bingo (inspired by the Wehraboo bingo) based on the usual BBaby spam when it was not uncommon to have 3+ threads about these "issues" every day and I'm sad to see that most of the squares are no longer relevant. In any case, I don't like artificially balancing the game with (class) limits since that will: alter statistics since you will always have the same/max number of ships in a game when one class is popular lead to mirrored BB matchups more often (larger pool of BB players in the MM queue combined with the usual MM rules), which brings more boring games and more global stat shenanigans cancel out effects if a class is truly OP/UP If the new cruiser line is successful, we may see a meta shift to a more balanced state, but I fear that that will only happen if the new cruisers are better than the old ones (powercreep) which is bad for the game.

One possibility is that it will be similar to Benson but trades torpedoes for defensive fire. I can see the ship being balanced, but WG/Lesta's track record doesn't make me overly optimistic.

Who cares?! Without radar, the ship will be terrible anyway!

Not too strong, just too comfortable. If German battleships weren't as forgiving as they currently are, a lot less people would be playing them no matter their iconic status. In that regard, it's the same as the old Shimakaze spam: the ship wasn't OP, just far too easy to play. As for the server inequality: was not the 40% number used by the devs referring to the RU server? As you know, both the NA and Asia servers have issues with their player numbers which might contribute to the differences. Even more so, the European "self-celebration" still doesn't explain why all the tech-tree battleships are within the top 6 by player numbers from tier 6 to tier 10 on the EU server (despite only being 3 lines). I might be wrong and that the amount of battles (per ship) will paint a different picture, but it is/was far too late in the evening for me to look at that now .

Though, when people play the class that is either easiest or have the highest impact on a battle (or both), you have to adjust certain parameters so that the population doesn't go out of hand. Adding a new cruiser line will hardly fix the issue, just camouflage the symptoms for a little while. Adding a new battleship line on the other hand, would be to put more fuel to the fire. At least the former have the potential to be good for the game. I also do not believe in limiting the classes (well, except carriers because they are "special" ), since that is pretty much admitting that the classes aren't balanced. As the developers have stated (before they buffed battleship survivability further either directly or indirectly -.-'), battleship survivability is too high. Hopefully they will do something about that before adding even more battleships to the game. One solution would be to fix carriers so that they punish battleships harder while being less lethal to the other classes, but I guess we'll just have to see what WG plan to do.

With the current changes, Type93 + torpedo acceleration seems to be the way to go. Stealthier than F3 with more damage and better range at the cost of some speed and a longer reload.

Jupp, that would be awesome. At least you could choose the team based on something other than colour (I do like the red camouflage more than the blue one, too bad that WG didn't think of adding one universal tier [6-10] camouflage that could be locked to a ship of your choosing). The achievements for the top 100 players are also silly: instead of performance, they only reflect the time invested. It will be fun to see if we get errr... "artificial participants" among the winners.

I mostly play cruisers... team fire it is!

In before the announcement at 15:00, a micro-patch at 15:30 that never arrives, a failed troubleshooting of why the patch wasn't deployed and the final postponement to tomorrow.

That would be the trait of the Russian line. After all, most of them appeared out of thin air! But seriously: WG, stop using (cross-class) consumables to sell/balance premium ships!

Well, 66 AA DPS at 5 km is nothing to sneeze at, but yes, the AA as a whole isn't all that impressive. Though, a BB should never get defensive fire in any case no matter how terrible the AA is. Here are more stats: AA (multiply DPS values by 100) and main guns stats:

Seems like she will be rather fast at 32 knots and will also have rather slow turrets (3 deg/s -> 60 s for 180 deg. rotation) with 381 mm calibre guns. For some reason, she also has defensive fire (WG pls).

Gamemodels3d has (just?) updated their site with the data for test version 0.6.4. Amongst other things (Iwaki buff ), there's this ship: And yes, it's another blasted BB! Kaga is also added to the client, with two setups available: 2x4 fighters, 2x6 torp bombers and 1x6 dive bombers 1x4 fighters, 1x6 torp bombers and 3x6 dive bombers (!)

In both my Farragut and Leander, I have not upgraded the fire control system since I don't find it worthwhile. Yes, you can in certain situations hit battleships at longer ranges, but the stealth reduction is simply not worth it, especially on the Farragut (less so on the Leander, but I don't really need the extra range, so why bother?). As for the nerf only being noteworthy in extreme cases, it really is not: it is actually very common that: Destroyers spot each other, one use smoke and the other (well, non-RU DD at least) vanishes because it is no longer being detected. Now? The extra penalty will allow other ships to spot you instead if they are close enough (a 10 % increase in stealth penalty when firing can result in a massive difference). Destroyers spot each other, one opens fire and is "spotted" by other enemies. Before the change (or without the "upgrade"), you would have to travel less in order to sail out of your detectability range, especially if the enemy destroyer also was sailing away/behind an island or dropped smoke. As an added side-effect, battleships that fire at longer ranges have an increased chance of remaining undetected if their target is behind an island and I'm not sure if the border-sailing snipers really needed extra encouragement . On the other hand, they would probably do it anyway, but the possibility alone really annoys me.

Well, time for another "muh realism" vs. shitty game design discussion, I suppose... The "feature" brings nothing to the game (well, except frustration and a feeling of unfairness, similar to arty one-shots in WoT) and punishes certain classes more than others. If fire and flooding ticks also rolled for detonation, at least it would be equal misery for everyone, but for some reason, I cannot see the "it happens so rarely so it's okay"-crowd agree with such a change. Oh well.

"Carrier players hate him because of this one weird trick"

WG in their absolute wisdom removed this feature from tier 4 and 5 carriers, so I guess this is the issue here? As such, you are doing nothing wrong.

But that's the point of this discussion; the ship has a weak citadel (compared to other BBs of the tier or even lower tiers), but she does not often get deleted in 1-2 salvos as was stated earlier. In addition, she is rather accurate and mobile for a battleship to compensate for this lack of belt armour. Which is the main reason why I see the buff as unnecessary, especially since she won't receive any trade-offs. (Not to mention that the game hardly needs more BB buffs )

I only see a Dutch flag so l have no idea what you guys are referring to...