allufewig

The skill apparently is just an explosion- (a.k.a. penetration-) buff and a firechance debuff. Nothing on the underlaying mechanics changed. I also played over 40k battles of WoT and never had a single HE bounce. Just rumors that never got profen in testing.

This is game mechanics since 2015 or so afaik. Did you close your eyes while playing? Did you never notice that sufficiently strong HE always does damage, regardless of angle? http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/112361-dealing-damage-heapifhe-edition/ Maybe a picture makes it more clear to you:

Keep the snarkiness for yourself because it works like I said. HE with or without IFHE doesnt care for the angle of impact. Its a simplified mechanic: If it touches armor it explodes. Edit: Technically there is not even any "penetration" of the shell itself, since it always explodes immediately on contact. The "penetration" value is the maximum thickness of armor the explosion can damage.

HE doesnt care about angle of impact, so IFHE doesnt increase reliability in this regard.

As expected it is very good for 152mm guns. I played almost only Kutuzov and Belfast this patch and got pretty obscene averages. Especially Kutuzov profits so much from IFHE. Instead of being reliant on fires in bad matchups you can now do reliable HE-damage to all targets. It doesnt feel that impressive on Belfast, probably because Belfast is toptier almost all the time and the increased pen doesnt matter that much in these cases.

100% reliable, as there is no RNG involved besides dispersion. You hit a vulnerable plate, you damage it. Angle of Impact, distance etc are all irrelevant. IFHE is great especially for guns in the range of 150-152mm as they gain the potential to damage two very common thicknesses of plating within their tierspread: 25mm and 32mm. 203mm guns gain almost nothing as they pretty much already can pen everything except the belt, turrets and some BB-decks. The pen-nerf of Akizuki does not change anything either. No matter if 19mm or 17mm of base-penetration, without IFHE it connot pen even other DDs 19mm plating. With IFHE, it can.

"Longrange-pussyplay" or whatever you called it, ruins your stats. It doesnt polish them. Proven by the gazillion mongoloids that roam this server. But yeah, some people have hard times even realizing the most obvious of things. The rest of your posting wasnt even adressed by me because I didnt care or didnt disagree. Thats why I just quoted a part of it. Again, obvious things...

Youre talking about people who have no clue what their ship is supposed to do or able to do. They have no idea how this game works and probably dont even want to get it either. Theyre the play4fun dudes. Whatever they do, they dont do it for the stats nor will it do their stats any good. If you really believe that playing, lets say a Fuso, at 20km yields "decent" results in any category except survival%, youre completely and utterly retard3d. Im sorry, I cant put it any nicer.

LOL. Did I miss the irony? The only thing maxrange-sniping on a BB is good for is reverse-statpadding with the exception of maybe survivalrate. Check any BB-Campers stats after the battle, they will be bad to horrendously bad, without exception.

So neu ist das aber nicht. Schon als die ru-DDs frisch waren weiß ich noch von Gefechten in denen mich BBs einfach mal ~15k gekostet haben. Die dürfen einen halt nicht angewinkelt erwischen. Breitseite macht nach wie vor nur overpens. Ich wechsle gegen DDs nie auf HE, sondern versuche DDs die sich auf einen Tanz unter 10km einlassen immer schön in die Schnauze zu schießen. 2x normale AP-Pen macht deutlich mehr Schaden als auf die Breitseite zu warten und dann 5x overpen oder 5xHE (von denen garantiert einiges durch die Module aufgefangen wird) zu machen. Mit AP ist mit Glück dann sogar "Devastating Strike" möglich, das kriegt man mit HE nicht hin.

OMFG. If you asked me if I was Jesus, would you really wait for me to give you the most obvious answer that is "no"? How should I know things like that, do I look like a dev or what? Naturally I understood that as a rhetorical question. My problem is that you play dumb in acknowledging the most simple thing: That mines are defensive weapons, pretty much regardless of details of implementation. More incentives to play passive is right up there with RPF in terms of pure sh1ttyness.

Ofc I dont know how they would be implemented exactly. But mines are defensive weapon-systems and you cant change that at all. No matter how "arcadey" you implement them and how far you stray from reality, it would be explosive charges lying around, waiting to explode. Because thats why they are sea-mines. I dont know whats so hard to get there. Now thats the opinion-part: The game doesnt need any incentive to stay even further back or ignore caps and other crucial spots because theres a chance they could be mined. Imho the game needs a new weapon that does the exact opposite.

Mines sure as heck wouldnt move around or come with a flashy warning sign - it would not be mines at all. Maybe when we get flying ships, but right now the blue stuff under them seems to repreresent water. Just like "IRL".

Nö, glaube ich nicht. Bei mir ist Genauigkeit drin und treff auch nicht viel (37%, aber auch nur weil ich den Gegnern mein Schiff mehr oder minder ins Gesicht fahre). In der Hinsicht ist sie schon wie Horst: Wenn nicht immer wieder mal ein paar Torpedos ein Ziel finden, kommt man nicht auf gute Schadenswerte. Die Kanonen sind in der Summe ihrer Eigenschaften oder einfach weil es nur 6 Stück sind irgendwie...meh.

Mines are a passive and hard to detect weapon by their very definition. Their intention is to cut of areas and hinder movement. They are literally designed to do all the things we do not want in an arcade-game that is already plagued by sniping BBs. You would have to alter them in a way that transforms them into something that are no longer sea-mines as we know them. Basically, if you make them more mobile, easier to detect and less random, you get torpedoes. Doh.

Ich setze den Skill auf jedenfall auf meinem Budyonny-Kutuzov-Kapitän ein. Gerade die Kutuzov macht mit den 152mm Granätchen in einem T-10 Spiel (in welche man ja letzterdings vermehrt kommt) praktisch so gut wie keinen HE-Schaden mehr, da kommen 2/3 oder mehr vom Feuer. In dem Tierbereich errechne ich mir eine Gesamt-Schadenssteigerung, wenn man pro Salve wieder 3-6k zieht und nicht so enorm abhängig vom Feuer-RNG ist.

Sturmtorpedoschiff Graf Spee. Macht mir Spass, wobei sie nüchtern betrachtet nicht sonderlich effektiv ist. Was mich irgendwie ärgert ist, dass ich das Schiff im Gegnerteam fast ausschließlich überpenetriere (es gab den Moment an dem ich mich gefragt habe "hat das Ding überhaupt eine Zitadelle?!?"). Wenn ich sie selber fahre, citadelt mich dagegen jeder T5- Heini mit 180mm+ von allen Seiten und aus allen Winkeln.

Ca 200. I use them on ships that are huge, armored and dont need 3% concealment anyway. Fuso, Yamato, german BBs etc. Sadly theyre un-useable on all DDs and CAs if you want maximum camo or survivability.

But but but my shells are huge! Just touching a DD with a single one of them should nuke it to the moon and back! *cries*

I voted yes on unguided rockets. Cant see them do much harm from a gameplay pov, as long as they can balance them in a meaningful way. There are many possibilities to do so. As a mechanic, they would still be lead and click, just like guns. As an AA weapon in the form of the UP-launcher theyre are even less problematic. Just another DPS value at a short range. Voted no for missiles, but even they could *theoretically* work if implemented in a similar fashion than for example in AW (manual guidance). Not sure, but with WGs latest tendency to fck things up (looking at you, new Bastion and RPF), its probably not even worth the try. Mines are just a way to further passivate an already too passive game, no matter how you twist it. Absolutely worst contender for a new weapons system, imho.

The amount of yes-votes for mines is absolutely disturbing. An almost undetectable, unremovable (unless minesweepers), high-damage source that is essentially random and hampers movement and tactical positioning. Truly, that is just what the game needs. The meta is already too fast-paced and aggressive. The idea is almost as good as an always-on wallhack as a skill.

+- 2MM is absolutely fine as such, but please, distribute the games evenly to roughly 1/3 chance for battletiers +0/+1/+2 each. It absolutely does suck to play in excess of 50% in T10 games as a T8 ship. I dont understand why people defend such sh1t here. I swear to god, of my 67 battles in NC 50 or more were in T10. And no, it is not fun to get roflstomped by lolpen-Yamatos and humiliated by invisible Zaos almost every game. You want to have some relaxing games in which you kick some Fuso- and Nürnberg-butt as well. Im a competitive and win-oriented person, not a masochist that likes playing pinata. Ever since they changed MM to screw over T5,6,8 I largely abandoned these tiers.

I see them constantly get outplayed by their IJN counterparts, no matter if they use AS (oh god) or strike. In fact I cant remember the last time I have seen a truly good player in a Lexington or Essex in my team. Statswise US CVs are behind by 4-5% in winrate when compared to the IJNs. In a mirror-mm-environment this really is a lot. They give me the same bad feeling that I get when I see Hipper/Eugen-divisions, New Orleans or Myogis. Usually it doesnt end well, unless the enemy acts completely potatoe.

Beide haben viel dakka dakka lightshow, aber beim Gegner passiert oft nichts. Würde mir spontan noch einfallen.

Die Atlanta ist leider Map-, Team-, MM-, Kapitän- und Skillabhängig.