mtm78

Limit all the classes! 3-4 DD 2-3 BB's 1-2 CV's if < tier VIII or 1 CV tier IX and X, rest cruisers ^^ serious ofc, first post was not since this thread doesn't warrant a serious answer with "...." as content in first post with some screenshot of a single match.

BB limit please

Boiler smoke was bad anyway, as it was done by incomplete combustion which also lowers power output. With diesel engines you could just inject fuel into the exhaust directly to create smoke. Still not the same as the smoke we have in game, which is chemical smoke ( white smoke ) which actually reflected sunlight and thus stayed on the ocean surface longer then black smoke which heated up and which dissipated rather quickly.

don't skip out on DE, you need the fires as damage source! CE is actually less important than AFT + DE. CE is mostly useful in late game where you might have to hunt down DD's.

Nah, teamplay means playing to win and if the DD's is going for the right cap's and the team does not it's their fault and not the DD's. Ofc DD should abort and switch sides to lemming train of baddies going for wrong caps, or just switch to delaying enemy from capping the right cap.

How can it be the fire chance which is the issue when fires made up such a small amount of the actual damage inflicted to battleships ( well it was on the only time WG actually gave us a damage distribution chart and since then only less cruisers are being played due to BB overpopulation so I would guess that this amount of actual fire damage has gone down instead of up ). I agree that BB's fire chance should be extremely lowered, but don't lower the potential damage output of low caliber guns fighting battleships or you will end up with even more battleship oversaturation. Bayern shooting HE the whole game should never reach top xp of it's team, BB's are not intended to be HE platform and they actually have valid alternatives ( even if Bayern's AP shells have really bad penetration especially at range... ).

That is how you SHOULD play. You don't need 3 caps, it's bad to split into 3 groups and have two of them run into superior numbers. Best is to focus majority on ONE cap, and a side task force on an adjacent one but less aggressive then the main force which should try and steamroll opposition unless also confronted by equal or even superior force where they should play more conservative and wait for the side task force to cap their point and to put pressure on the main enemy fleet.

Well what if you have 2 cruisers on the team, and 4 DD's and no carriers. That means six BB's. Your allied BB's will 'command' you to kill enemy DD's, while they sit at 20+ km from the closest enemy. That means that any cruiser which goes to support his friendly DD's in killing enemy DD's will be prime focus of the enemy battleships. That is why I am playing long range spam cruisers mostly, but I don't like doing that really. But at least I can be 'useful' without having to be the prime focus of the enemy team. It's why Des Moines is considered worse for randoms ( afaik ) by most, as it shines the shorter the range is

Would be nice if people wanting to talk about game mechanics could stop hiding their profiles. Quality posting man, wow ^^ but no point in this topic, op hides his profile and complains about HE and offers no alternatives nor actual examples off where it would be problematic -> nothing else needs to be said. edit: https://eu.warships.today/player/528359460/MadGelo Do you use your Cleveland with AP only or something? That would explain a lot frankly, like in why HE doesn't need changing since it's HE which actually makes Cleveland a good ship.

Easier? Nah don't think so. Just less stress inducing than a broken interface class.

Thanks, hope you enjoyed the compliments I gave you, you fought an ace game! We also touched on my chat ban history after that 2/3rd FUBAR part lead to a bit off salt being disposed. Especially to a Tirpitz which was using torpedoes on ships 14km away...... And on me as only DD on our team initially getting two ships to join me in trying to contest a cap which isn't very tactically sound. But we did turn it around, it was an enjoyable match from mid game on where you really started to own and I got a bit more breathing space allowing me to get some caps back. edit: Also met X_x_Archeon_x_X or w/e it's spelled. He wasn't in his famous Strike Ranger, but he played well

Everyone is entitled to their opinions, even if they're wrong At least I can understand him, Blys scales a LOT with captain points and 3 games is a bit on the lean side to get those points. SHDRKN4792 when you get AFT DE and CE you will probably change your mind, keep playing it Blyskawica: 27 + 1 = 29 28 No need to say anything which hasn't been said before Belfast: 28 Scharnhorst: 34 -3 = 31 It might be the best battlecruiser in the game, it's still not as versatile as the other two ships left. Math and me, sometimes we don't fit well together.

"DD's lead, others follow" is meta dependent. Currently due to BB overpopulation, cruisers CAN NOT play aggressive.

Why do you feel attacked by this It's not that bad players have worthless opinions, it's just pretty often not actually valid opinions. Any bad player which has good arguments to go along with their opinion is good, it's not the opinion which counts it's the reasoning behind it. Sadly, most bad players lack proper reasoning, because they just don't know how to play. They don't understand where to go on maps, hence they are bad. They claim CV's and DD's and cruisers shooting HE is the reason they got 44% wr in battleships, and when you point out that others meet the same CV's, the same DD's, and the same HE shooting cruisers, yet they don't have a 44% win rate with battleships. Which automatically leads to the conclusion that the 44% wr bb player should look INWARD for reasons of his bad performance, instead off blaming everything else. Ow, and instead of calling out: it's not fair my stats are not your business and dev's should just fix the broken game. You see, good players also have rights. One of those is the right to correct wrong information being presented to the developers.

They are made from 3mm+ steel plating. Remember, these things were designed to be operated by kids so they are practically near unsinkable. Even if you submerge one, if the two air chambers are not punctured it will raise to the surface. As to other recreational vessels, even when they had right of way they usually didn't want to risk meeting a Lelievlet which didn't know the rules, they weigh around 1000 kg, so there was a rule of thumb being applied pretty often which was quite simple -> polyester gives way to wood, wood gives way to steel The boats are 5.6m in length btw. Ships under power should give way to sailing vessels, sounds pretty familiar, but anything smaller then 2o meter is a 'small vessel' and should give way to 'big ships' aka those who are 20+ meters. If a ship smaller then 20 meters, and which is mechanically driven, then that ship should give way.

Having proper CV's in mid tier would fix a lot of the BB oversaturation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Baden-Powell,_1st_Baron_Baden-Powell No we did not went onto sea with our Lelievletten, those ships were specifically made for the indoor waters of Holland -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lelievlet

Sorry it it came across rude, I hope to have you on my team any time It's still a bad place to go, so I do hope that if you're on my team and I tell you to not be a noob and go there you will listen. ^^ This

And are you a decent BB player or not? If below average, maybe you should STOP going there. edit: we don't want to know why BB's go there, we want them to stop doing it. And you calling others who follow you lemmings... you think the rest of the team should be between you and the enemy?

I am a Zeeverkenner ( sea scout ) and when I went for my MBL Z1 ( external reference CWO Kielboot II ) which is for sailing vessels up to 15 meter length, we learned that we had to give right of passage to non-recreational vessels ( which are ofc also exclusively bigger then us lol... we did NOT want to challenge those tanker vessels ). Ofc this is not seafaring rules, that would be MBL Z Z. Been > 20 years though but I think most rules still apply.

Why do you ask?

Sigma is better on Arizona, and pen is more then enough for tier 8 cruisers. But tier 8 BB's can be tougher, New Mex would do better in BB vs BB, Arizona in BB vs CA. My gunboats are Akizuki / Blys / Leningrad, and yes in a DD vs BB role it doesn't matter much it's just more hp to burn away but vs Fletcher and even Udaloi or even Yugumo it can be a lot trickier edit: I just got Kiev, still retraining captain for her though but almost done I think

Mex has worse turret angle on C turret but higher penetration guns.... kind of important when up tiered ;) And OFC torpedo boats scale better, it's gunboats which don't scale as well.

I would not use the term weak... but that is the last thing I will publicly say about it as discussing forum moderation is not allowed.... Problem is also not as community sided as you try to make it look like. We had a Q&A thread it was quite friendly and active and so on, then it stopped.... for more then a year there was no actual Q&A possible on EU forum. Then we had people dismissing arguments as 'whining' which isn't really helping anyone least of all themselves or their credit with community. And yes, they didn't like that unpopular subjects resulted in WG EU accounts getting massive downvotes ... so they remove it because community can't self moderate. And then they add it to the game with the non supervised and NOT CORRECTABLE chat ban system ( ow I could do a separate topic on that one.. but that might not be allowed ). I can't help the feeling you're silently trying to address me personally with this comment, as indeed people make it out that I'm 'toxic' when I go against some 'opinions' being posted on this forum. Like opinions that BB's are UP, HE+FIRE is OP, torpedoes are OP, invisifire is OP, CV's are OP., BB has to camp in the back always. You know, those kind of statements. But I am NEVER actually toxic, you can't be toxic when people make those actually toxic statements and I call them toxic because they poison this forum with disinformation and might influence more developer road map's which look like this -> Then some people ( usually those who I don't agree with ) say my methods or arguing are toxic, that I shouldn't try to use statistical indicators as proof of concept that what they are saying is plainly wrong. Because 'how I perform is none of your business'. Failing to realize it's not about THEIR performance on it's own, I couldn't care less ( unless they ask for help then I would care ). It's about their personal performance in relation to that of better players, and how those better players seem to be less affected by the things on that bingo card for instance, as they are. So yeah I wouldn't say the forum moderation is weak, and that there is less need for toxicity. I think this forum is far from toxic. As long as people can add value to their opinions with factual arguments, differences of opinions are perfectly fine. In Holland we had some news coverage lately about the dangers of 'fake news', and that social media companies have a higher responsibility to address this fake news before it spreads out of control. In World of Warships, this 'fake news' would be that BB's die mostly from HE+FIRES for instance, as server data showed an entirely different picture. So if that's what you mean with 'better moderation', more control and prevention of 'fake news' being prevalent, then yes you might be right.

I can't argue with that And previously tier 5 was for me the most fun ( Murmansk, Gremmy ), now I play mostly I think Blys as premium and generally more tier 7's. I will add btw that I'm moving captain's throughout grinding the line's which explains the high amount of premiums for captain retraining, and the relative low amount of regular tech tree ships ( I tend to grind them quite quickly overall ). Adding to that is my conscious decision to NOT add to the already way to BB heavy meta by starting a grind for NCal ( which I DO want ) and Bismarck ( which I DO want ). ps. sums of ships and total mentioned is probably messed up by WG api problems after IJN DD split. Also, not all DD's scalet that well with tiers, this applies mostly to gunboats The jump from 5 to 7 is easier, at least in my personal observations with the ships I play. The gap between tier 7 and 9 is much greater.