allufewig

Yeah, radar alone will not put Atlanta out of her miserable super-situational life. It is better than nothing, certainly, but I too hope that this is not all she gets.

It is global stats that counts when comparing performance. Baltimore doesnt win and it doesnt do damage. I have good stats on some crap ships too, but it doesnt change the facts that these underperform. Single players stats are usually blurred because of games played, individual experience etc. Devs cant look at T_H_O_R when trying to balance, gthey have to look at the whole playerbase, because when you look at those bigger numbers carefully, they usually dont lie.

Aside from progressing upwards my most important goal is winning as much as possible. And Baltimore is just really bad at that. As it is with doing damage and killing enemies - no surprise. Artificially inflated XP-gains are nice because they make the grind feel a little less horrible than it would normally be. But XP is but probably the worst metric of all when comparing performance, because it is not a ship-neutral stat. Usually people want to compare combat-related strenghts, not grindspeed. After another defeat in a piss-poor ship I do not look at the XP and say "hey that number is really big. Awesome stuff!" Or maybe Im an outlier.

Have you ever managed to write a posting without the word "carriers" in it?

Das ist und war bei jedem Spiel mit zufälligen Mitspielern so. Der Zufall ist halt manchmal ein riesen [edited]. Ich spiele gerade auch bissl Homeworld 2 remastered und Overwatch. Das Gefühl vom MM verarscht zu werden ist da ganz ähnlich. Oft genug kriegt man Teams, da kannst du auf 150% Leistung werkeln und die Typen trotzdem nicht zum Sieg spielen. Wenn man Account-Overall richtig viele Win% haben will brauchst du einfach ein paar Divi/Zug/Premade-Kameraden die in der eigenen hohen oder einer noch höheren Leistungsklasse spielen. Ansonsten muss man einfach damit leben, dass man auch mal 6+ Spiele hintereinander verlieren kann, ohne selbst viel falsch gemacht zu haben.

Da kann man lange drüber diskutieren. Wenn überhaupt, dann hätte die Imperator nur in einem Schlachtschiff-Duell einen kleinen Nachteil. Gegen CAs und DDs sehe ich die Russin wegen der bequemen 3x3 Fronttürme, den kleinen Aufbauten und dem "armor-everywhere"-Prinzip sogar als eindeutig überlegen. Sie nimmt dadurch durch Kleinkaliber einfach kaum Schaden, egal ob HE oder AP.

The US 203s, including the upgraded Pensa-guns got a normalization buff. Cant recall exactly when it was, but probably around new year? On Topic: I dont think Pensa is bad. (well, statistically she is) But I dont think shes good either. You need to aim well to compensate for the loss of spammability, you need to develope ammo-awareness and you need to learn how not to die. Things that dont come in an instant, especially when you come from Cleveland which is a rather sturdy HE-spammer. Experienced players certainly can make the Pensa work. The interesting thing is that the two successors to pensacola dont offer any noticeable firepower-upgrade while the increases in protection cant compensate for the disadvantages of getting tiered higher. Imho they feel much worse in a tier-per-tier comparison. Now there we enter an area where the ships are not only hard to play but actually suck. Baltimore especially is hell.

The worst T9 by far nowadays. It does have extremely little going for it. Theres the AA, but Donskoi beats it at that. Guns? Lolz, its basically Pensa-firepower at T9. You dont even notice that few microscopical buffs to it. Of course, it doesnt matter how bad a ship is, some people will always like and defend it, now matter how hard the evidence (global averages and maximums) contradicts them. Just a word of warning: Des Moines is largely the same as Baltimore (handling, mobility, size, looks, armor etc are very similar), but with more than double the rate of fire. Continue the grind only if you think this change could make the ship fun for you.

@TE: Du betrachtest die Nikolai falsch. Sie ist von der Performance her ein vollwertiges T5-Schiff das nur maximal T6-Gegner sieht, also einen MM-Bonus hat. Schwuppdiwupp, alles Sonnenschein.

The only threat secondaries pose to a DD is when they are buffed by that T5-skill. Thats the only situation they might put out measurable amount of damage before a DD can succesfully disengage and re-cloak. My experience as a DD at least. (And as a BB driver that does not skill secondaries).

Not being in secondary range does not automatically imply firing from maxrange. Are the extremes everything you people know?

The point is: You risk much more than you could ever gain from this handful of rng-guided lowcaliber sprayguns. When fighting both DDs and cruisers there is zero benefit of going under 6km when compared to staying at ~8-15. You risk much much less for no noticebale drop in combat-effectiveness. Edit: I did play US BBs from T3-7 ages ago. Cant remember secondaries to be of any use except to scare of some seals in their DDs (never killing anything with secondaries iirc). You can check my horrible survival-stats in BBs. I dont hide them. But even as a designated straight-forward in-your-face type of player I could not find much use in secondaries.

Going to thise range against anything than other BBs is almost certain torpedo-death. Also, there is absolutely no BB I know of that has to go below 10km to get usable trajectory, shell flight time or penetration. Not counting the freaky T2-3 BBs here. A competent BB-captain should strive to maintain a range to the enemy that guarantees safety as well as reliable damage- output. Naturally this excludes both knife-fights as well as sniping from the border-regions.

Optimal BB fighting distance is roughly between min 8 to max 20km depending on specific situation. In anyway thats largely out of range of secondaries unless you completely commit your build to strenghten these guns. Purely from a performance or win-orientated point of view, secondary-specs are not a great choice. You cannot rely on them for damage, you cannot rely on them for self defense. Single games with 25k+ secondary-damage do not change the greater picture. Fun is another thing. Sometimes it seems 75% of discussion here is because people have a hard time of distinguishing between "its great because it is fun" and "its great because it performs well".

Und die Feuergeschwindigkeit von 420mm-Geschützen nach gameplaytechnischem Bedarf erhöhen macht es dann irgendwie "historisch korrekt"? Mein Geschmack ist ein anderer. Ich hab keine Lust auf Tirpitz auf T8, Tirpitz auf T9 und Tirpitz auf T10. Selbst wenn sich Feuerrate und Genauigkeit geringfügig ändern würden - ist ja zum einschlafen.

Es handelt sich doch bei den H-41+Modellen um nichts weiter als reine Planerei. Da gab es nie was wirklich konkretes, insofern kann WG doch hier mal machen was sie wollen ohne dass man ihnen einen Strick draus dreht. Ein Fantasy-Schiff wird's sowieso. Schon aus Gründen der Abwechslung ist ne fette 4x3 Salve was schönes. 4x2 macht die Schiffe gefühlt nur RNG-abhängig. Von 4x3 Granaten trifft immer eine, wenn man halbwegs genau zielt. Ich hab lieber einen ordentlichen Yamato-Counter als ein pseudo-historisch "korrektes" Schiff.

...ist sie vielleicht nichtmal underpowered.

Imperator Nikolai and OBT-carriers are the proof that WG can absolutely sh*t on balancing and people are still going to defend the situation. Sometimes a DD tries to yolo you for a 1 v 1 trade (which is a good idea actually) but genereally speaking, the Imperator can deal with absolutely anything that isnt a skilled carrier or a carrier that is determined to sink you. Nikolai can perform great in T6 battles as well since she is not even *that* much worse than the T6 BBs.

Ich hab wieder aufgehört. Die Preise sind schön, das Format im Prinzip nicht verkehrt. Aber mich ärgert es einfach noch mehr in dem Modus zu verlieren als sonst. Jeder Spieler ist wichtig in dem Modus und ich kann es nicht sehen, wenn ich mehr als 2 oder 3 Spiele in Folge verliere, weil die Teammates irgendeinen völlig abstrusen Schwachfug spielen, den man spätestens ab 200 Spielen nicht mehr machen dürfte. Wenn ich es mal schaffe mir eine "ist doch alles wurscht-Einstellung" zuzulegen, dann versuche ich den Modus möglicherweise nochmal. Viel Glück und Respekt an alle, die das bis R1 durchziehen. .)

Slightly off topic, but: That will happen anyway now that the subject is not puny cruisers but mighty battleships. Unless you get a guaranteed kraken in every match. And even then people would complain that enemies dont explode by just driving near. After all those are german battleships. German ships! GERMAN!! Are you subhumans not able to comprehend the glory of these unbeatable machines?!?!1 It will be the Tiger-in-WoT-drama all over again. Millions of tears from german-military-fanboys will be shed.

I dont know how much the T5- secondary-skill buffs up the whole thing. I tried a full secondary build on Nagato when this skill wasnt available however. Was it good? Lol NO! In fact it was the worst crap I ever specced for. Generally speaking, this secondary-hype is one of the big prevailing stupidities that you encounter in WoWs. Its right up there with picking an AS loadout in CVs, taking the +4000HP skill in a Yamato or taking Atlanta to teambattles. In 9 out of 10 battles/situations it is just the wrong choice.

Die Lösung dass man bei Niederlage als XP-Topscorer keinen Stern verliert ist echt ein Segen, auch wenn das vereinzelt mal zu "Missbrauch" führen kann. Gestern bei 45% Wins 2 Sterne netto gemacht. Ohne diese Regelung hätte ich ranked wohl schon wieder aufgegeben.

You can scale these things down. Just experiment with rifles when you get a chance. Shoot tincans, even half a dozen of them rowed up. Shoot them with FMJ, shoot them with softer lead-tipped ammo to encourage or simulate fragmenting/spalling. Use rounds which exceed the muzzle velocities of naval guns. Lighter .223 rounds for example reach 1000 m/s. It is no matter, all you will get is rather clean holes, even after the fifth or sixth can pass-through. It is not before you fill something rather dense in there, that you will get explosive results. Actual real life damage on destroyers would probably depend on where the ship was hit. It could range from fatal (magazines, engine compartments ) to totally minor, depending on how much resitance the shell meets. The overpenetration mechanic in game might be adjusted to fit game needs, but it certainly isnt BS per se. Combat-experiences as posted by submarine also show, that multiple battleship-hits do not put destroyers out of combat with certainty.

Nur die beiden Premium- DDs sehe ich regelmäßig, die T8 Gefechte waren dagegen von Oberkante bis Unterkiefer voll von Premiums. Es ist schon noch ein Unterschied vorhanden. ;)