mtm78

Nope only transverse bulkheads so it can bowtank better. Bowtanking good meta yaya da comrade

reporting player position over chat = chat abuse ( well I been using it for those reports ) ;) Interpretations.. interpretations...

Ok, so you give all tier 8 BB's 17km range. MK would just spam HE and kite them. I would increase their linear dispersion increase over distance making 'sniping' result in more 'historically correct' hit ratio's ( 3% I think it was? ).

Calling that a 'buff' if taking a big sip of the WG coolaid. Omg omg omg I got a bit faster reload omg omg omg.... But my torps suddenly are more like Sims torps then proper IJN torps.

Nothing is wrong, nothing changed. Yes I have one. No it is not changed. No WG also didn't just change your's. It's called bad luck, and it happens. You could try using those flags you earn though, they tend to help

Could you inquire if it were possible to promise us a minimum time frame of advanced warning for when she might stop being available?

They had vastly lower detection radius so they were viable even for those who didn't just wanted to pray to RNGezus

Thing is the platform, a DD with hydro is MUCH more dangerous to other DD's then a BB with radar.

Lol It's only 3km so Lo Yang can spot in smoke without getting spotted itself. Yeah, no big deal right ;)

That is my point, 3 second is a lifetime for any BB since the actual turn it is making get's tighter the longer you're trying to shift the rudder ( 3s extra at max rudder shift means an incredible angle which you can change your ships course in comparison with when if you had 3 seconds less ).

Hence me asking for severe gun and perhaps a speed boost.

BB's have rudder shift times which are comparable, and turning radius is while not linear still quite tied in with effective rudder setting. So 3 seconds difference, seeing how this means 3 more seconds of actual turning, is a BIG difference.

She will lose the TA module for sure. I just hope they buff her guns and speed to make up for it.

You're again 100% right but it's the marketing which is what I'm not happy with. They could have done a better job on that, it is a missed opportunity. And my point stand that it can't be argued that it's 'free' when WG will not set a timelimit ( or says, in a binding fashion, that there will not be a time limit ) for obtaining the ship. 'Marketing whine' aside, WG is putting up highly desirable content. It's just a bit expensive, even when it's 'free' ;)

Which is what is it is right, unless it's not 'long lasting'. In which case marketing as premium with 'limited availability' is the safer route. So yes I fully agree, and I hope this is indeed the case! And it would be good for WG to, as it would make it 100% clear that it CAN be gained without spending money ( which is what 'free' means ). And being able to advertise the best credit maker in the game as potentially free would go a long way to remove some of the p2w arguments being thrown around ( since this ship should enable even below average players to progress through the tiers without worries about credits, having it gives people a big advantage ). Sure, ignore the actual argument about it not being free if you can't reasonably obtain it without spending money and that we can't say this since there is no end date. I disagree, my time is a currency, I can spend it in a multitude of ways and it's my own weighing of importance which dictates how to best spend this 'currency'. But either way, you're taking it out of context. It has nothing to do with time being or not being a currency on it's own. It's about not knowing how long it will be available and thus not able to claim it's possible to obtain it for free.

I just checked, I'm using an ( older ) AMD and I have post processing on ( and can't remember having this issue recently ). I did in the past, but that was solved with rolling back a driver update. I tend to stick to a working driver version unless the game's I'm playing are mentioned in the driver release notes as being optimized further for them, before that I ran into issues a lot more often.

Yes, but NA announcements are not worth that much ( there been mistakes in the past ), just as MrConway saying there are no plans to remove it ( now ). That's nothing negative towards MrConway as I think he's doing a good job so far, but if his boss says they will remove them next week he won't have anything to do but come here and say: It's going to be removed in a week, I am sorry guys we couldn't give a more timely warning. Now if the global producer would say the ship will be available for an extended period off time, perhaps even giving a minimum timeframe between the possibility that it might stop being available and the notice given out to the community..

Which is why I agreed one can argue the ship is free, but ONLY if WG commits to how long it will be available ( and if this period is long enough ). If not, saying it's 'free' is to much of a marketing stretch imo. By not doing so, again a part of the business model, WG is hoping more people will spend more money to get her quicker then they would if they knew how long it would be available. edit: Kashuken, on 07 December 2016 - 03:46 PM, said: This is a proper T9 premium ship which can be obtained for FREE but only if you want to obtain it for free. Not true, it's only free if people have enough time to gather enough free xp without spending money. And since WG is not giving us an end date ( see above for why ), it's impossible to claim it's really 'free'.

For 99% of the players, easier to use translates to being the 'best' for them. Edit: Shima's old 20km torps was the perfect example.

I don't always agree with Spithas but I can remember him stating he was for limiting numbers over changing anything about the stats. Also, as we can see, he is obviously performing adequately in his ships it will be hard to convince him the ships are bad. I do hope he will come out and agree with us 'whiners' that USN DD's in comparison have way to good torps. Just check Flamu's video on the Fletcher ( though I don't think he needs to ). Then I am a pleb, I can't get Shima working with F3's, it's to slow, turns to bad and I keep getting recked trying to use the F3's. The 12km torps are decent but already worse then USN torps. Using the F3's is like playing Minekaze, but this time tier 4 and 5 ( and 6 7 ) cruisers have radar off 7.5km.

Bad analogy, the tokens can't be used for anything but the car you're going to get. Free xp in WG games is not that 'cheap'. Most lines have ships which in stock configurations are not viable ( to entice people to free xp upgrades ). This is a perfectly valid business model but it removes the 'exclusivity' which you give your 'tokens'. edit: Just to clarify, I kind of like the fact that it's available for free xp, and I don't mind how exclusive she will be. But I do not agree that it's available for free ( unless WG commits in stating that the ship will always be available, since at one time WG will slow down addition of new lines and thus people will have more expendable free xp ).

Zuiho (1/2/1) : 13 Kongo : 13 - 3 = 10 Would like the last cv eliminated but since this is a performance question I will try to contain my bias Fujin/Kamikaze : 17 + 1 = 18 Gremmy: 32 Konig: 13

Well I am sure Ego you used no flags and premium or anything, and I'm sure anyone who actually wants the ship will be using both cammo + flags to maximize gains. So I'm actually ( even without seeing the numbers ) already quite convinced the truth ( for most players ) will be somewhere in the middle between you two.

Mods of any kind? If so, try playing in safe mode ( available through the launcher ). If in safe mode you got no issues, you got a faulty mod. If not a faulty mod, CTRL+G hides and shows the HUD but yeah that's on off switch and not flickering. Could also be a GPU / driver issue.

Yeah, and no one off course ever needs to use it to prevent Fuso A hull grinds or other of those free XP sinks? And don't argue that's it's a 'choice', you can't play certain stock configurations without getting severy shat on. And that's without the math error ;)