Kartoffelmos

Does this game qualify? Can't really say that I was super-close to victory, but it was a bitter defeat nonetheless.

How do I become good at this game? EDIT: Can you babysit CrySpy (new to WoWs) for me? EDIT: Almost there...

So that butthurt 'Murricans who had the option of getting the ship for a postage stamp finally can get her again and stop whining about how all the other servers had the option to buy her. I think I'll never get over that one .

In order to please our German overlords, I would like to suggest Norway, more specifically Trondheim (yes, mapmaker from WG/Lesta, I know you are fond of this city, so get going!). I mean, you have the historical backdrop as well as beautiful scenery: Air photo from British bombers before/during the disastrous attack in 1940 (forum didn't like the extension/format of the picture) (The last one is probably from 1946) One more (not sure about the year of this one): Alternatively, just create a fjord so that Tirpitz can feel at home .

Zipangu is a Japanese port and the most beautiful one in my opinion. The little tugboat and the planes really makes it outstanding. (Also includes kawaii cherry blossom)

Not going to bother with the rest of your rant (though the irony in your statement regarding assumptions is hilarious), but here goes: You stay stealthy so that you are in a good position to support your team mates. If you reveal yourself too soon, you will either make the enemy DD too scared to reveal himself or you will be forced to back off prematurely due to the enemy cruisers/battleships. Staying at long range is a silly play in battleships and will lose you games. Staying at long range in cruisers is viable, but you also must know when to get closer. Suicide-charging is bad play (unless it is your only option) and that's why you want to get an advantage in capture points; you will eventually force the enemy into playing badly. TL;DR: There is no need to exclude certain tactics, you use the one that is most beneficial at any given time. Oh, and bots are terrible at dodging shells by the way.

And there's the problem. Kills mean nothing if you have less caps and all your destroyers are dead because you started the game by revealing yourself to battleships (and then being forced to back off). Nobody cares about Coop. So your problem lies with bad team mates in Coop? Again, nobody cares about Coop and that is why you get trash team mates or bots for the most part. Also, I think I've already established that I get my kills by playing the objectives, not by chasing them as my first priority. Of course I destroy people that are worse at the game than I am, that's how I got the stats to begin with. You do so too as you admitted, but then again, you mostly play against bots. As for skill-based matchmaking, it would hurt everyone: bad players would never improve nor have the motivation to do so since they will only meet better players. Good players will only meet good players and then farm worse players when they inevitably drop in WR/performance/[insert skill measuring stat here] and so on. Respect is also earned, not given (in this context at least); if you have to ask someone to "show you some respect", you are probably not deserving it in the first place... I see that you don't blame noobs for suicide-failplays but you certainly blame better players for some reason. I do not remeber ever saying that I should "camp the caps" but I figured it would be prudent to point out what you're doing wrong in randoms. Also, good for you at winning games against (literally) braindead opponents that, contrary to your claim, is for more interested in suicide-charging than they are at "camping the caps". Then they shouldn't complain about bad win rate or blame the team, nor should you complain about "stat-obsessed players".

Sadly, gamemodels3d doesn't show those stats. This actually makes me question if the ship is properly balanced, especially when one considers the combination of torpedo protection and increased manoeuvrability. If nothing else, she will be extremely forgiving versus destroyers compared to North Carolina.

Too bad, because it is the opposite that wins games. When you get the advantage in capture points (which you should do before you start chasing kills), you force the enemy team to play aggressively, often in a disadvantageous manner. Why? It is much easier to defend a capture point than it is to cap it. The fact that you, as a player that mostly plays cruisers, do not care for capture points must make you extremely popular with your destroyer team mates... "Stats are luck", "omg noob team", "I play for fun", etc., etc.. Instead of blaming others, the first step to becoming better is to acknowledge that the problem lies elsewhere.

Let's try again. According to gamemodels3d, these are the differences: Less HP (63300 vs. 66000) Shorter firing range (21100 vs. 23257 m) Worse AA (48 less DPS at 3,5 km, 29 more DPS at 2,0 km) Worse surface detectability range (16,2 vs 15,66 km) Better air detectability range (12,15 vs. 12,57 km) Better turning radius (710 vs. 760 m) Shorter rudder shift (20 vs. 22,57 s) Seems pretty balanced to me, as long as there are no hidden gun accuracy or armour "surprises". I don't have the North Carolina myself, so I do not know if the manoeuvrability buffs are gamechanging in any form.

Using the logic of this thread, should I ask for bad players on both teams if I win a lot? I mean, that would surely mean that I will lose more, right?

Met Dropsiq yesterday while sailing with Bagel and CrySpy. The game was fun and we pretty much had secured victory (advantage in both points and position) until some of our team mates got greedy and pushed the last cap through a narrow passage. Needless to say, it didn't work out too well and the salt was real .

But that's not the problem in the video. The problem is that RN CL's AP shells detonates almost instantly when hitting the superstructure/thinly armoured sections (extremely short detonation timer and a smaller threshold for "fusing" the shell), which means no overpenetrations and thus no damage to saturated areas. Every other cruiser would overpenetrate the superstructure and sink the Yamato.

I was referring to the actual video, not the damage saturation mechanic in itself .

Isn't this only an issue with the Royal Navy CLs though? Due to how their AP work, the shells will rarely (if ever) overpenetrate the superstructure/thinner armour of larger ships (0,005 vs. the usual 0,025/0,033 "detonation timer"). With other cruisers, the Yamato would be long dead if they followed the same targeting behaviour.

Wait, that was you?! I didn't look at the user names that match, I think. And even if I did, right after you died, a "friendly" destroyer managed to team damage CrySpy so my focus was more on that situation and the following carrier strike that finished the job. I also think I that I met you today in a game where I died early in the Tashkent because the majority of your team went for the A cap on Trap. Looking over the replay just now, I noticed that it was you (and not a destroyer like I initially remembered) that managed to sink my ship after I forked up and beached myself. Sorry for not greeting, was a bit unsure if I had your name from the WoT forum or if you indeed was active "over here" (if not both?). In addition, my two previous games were terrible (no teamwork and players refusing to go after the objectives) so I figured that instead of possibly making a fool out of myself in chat, I should focus on the game. Nevertheless, I quit the match shortly after and got a decent win in my Gneisenau while waiting for the result.

Exactly. The problem is, you just stand outside the cap and force the destroyers to back off due to the good range of the consumable. A Baltimore would be vulnerable when spotted, but a bow-camping Missouri? Good luck with that. Had an encounter with the ship today and she could push the caps (though, pushing on North is a bad idea which is why they eventually lost) and keep me/other destroyers spotted for her team mates. In short, the ship could play much more aggressively than an Iowa normally would and that is a problem. If that's not bad enough: Giving a battleship more tools to deal with destroyers (who are supposed to be the counter of said ships) was obviously a good idea. Not to mention that the 2 minute cooldown is laughably short for a ship that can survive that long while continuously being spotted and fired upon. Lastly, Iowa's/Missouri's (don't think there's a difference here, but it would be nice to know) accuracy makes her more suited for shooting destroyers than for example the German battleships. One might argue that their secondaries make them better at it, but having more reliable main guns (and a way to actually spot the destroyers) is better in my eyes. I do not like the direction the game is going. It started with Belfast/Flint (arguably Atago and Kutuzov as well, but that's been argued to death) and now we have Missouri: all ships that expand their role into that of other classes or in other words, ships that receive a consumable that negate their main disadvantage. Flint is very vulnerable to enemy fire and would normally need islands as cover but has smoke to completely negate this, Belfast takes this to the next level with radar as well (extremely broken) and Iowa just get a radar to counter destroyers (main counter as the ship is very capable against carriers as is) because reasons. Why the Missouri or Belfast had to get an extra utility to make them "unique" is beyond me. Belfast already had HE-shells and Missouri is a forking tier 9 premium. Isn't that unique enough?! Why stop there? Give them smoke while we're at it as well .

I know, right? Who would have thought that they love the German navy?

While I was innocently carrying and gently helping my newbie friend CrySpy grind his way through the Gneisenau, I ran into gr0pah in his Flint and his division mate Lachanar in the Shokaku. I of course, as the gentleman I am, greeted him in the chat and got a greeting in return (and, by proxy, from Tyrendian as well for some reason? If I remember correctly, that is...) while not in any way, shape or form wrote anything that might lead them to target me. Suddenly, the sky was lit up with flaming shells. All our hopes and dreams were crushed by the cruel gr0pah in his untouchable little demon ship. His division mate also lent a hand at the very end, helping my descent into the abyss (both literally and figuratively emotionally) further. Something must be done about this sadistic behaviour!

Might as well make a new post as I can't be bothered to navigate the layout on the last one. According to the announcement of patch 0.5.15.1, the ship will have radar: They could have at least made the duration shorter, but that would be too hard. Can all cruisers with healing get the same amount of charges as battleships now? You know, since there isn't any point in differentiating the abilities between classes?

Yeah, I did some research after my initial post: There's still the extremely unlikely scenario that the RU article is wrong/outdated and NA just copied it, but that's just wishful thinking at this point. The issue I have with this travesty is that the only class that receive more and more crutches to avoid teamwork is battleships. You needed AA from cruisers to fend off carriers and cruiser/destroyer escort to protect yourself from destroyers, but with the current mobility, AA and hydro/radar? Nope, you can do it mostly on your own. Cruisers and destroyers are pretty much dependant on each other (either that or having a gunsboat nearby) in order to contest capture points and spotting enemy destroyers. Yes, radar helped cruisers immensely (well, at least the ones that needed a buff or a new and relevant role), but contrary to the BB buffs, it didn't help them against their counter. If you exclude all the other reasons, the radar should not have been given to a battleship solely due to the impact it has its ability to push into or defend caps. It already has enough durability and now it can weather the fire while making the cap "untouchable"? Seems balanced. On top of all that, it's not like the Iowa is a bad ship to begin with...

Meh, both the Russian and American (but not EU and Asia) article confirm this, so I guess they really went full vodka-mode on this one...

The radar consumable is not mentioned in the news article. Can we hope that WG/Lesta regained their senses?

I think your sarcasm detector is broken . It also has competitive torps for some reason. EDIT: And 9% fire chance, because reasons .

I take it that the same will be applied for the RU/NA servers as well?