mtm78

While I sometimes really enjoy reading Geralt's contributions to this forum, there are other encounters which push me towards assuming you might be on to something there Also, the signature is telling no? Especially when you replace 'spade' with some derogatory term for 'colored people' Sorry but to me this reads more like: I don't want these topics on the forum because I am quite certain that one day I'll be the one in the screenshots

Because of not being clear where exactly the shells lands and which armor it encounters there. I am pretty convinced this formula is correct ( or close enough to give useable figures ), any deviation between the data and the subjective 'feel' we have for some of the shells/guns is due to lack of data ( aforementioned impact trajectory and intersected armor values as modelled by WG ). edit: btw looking at those graphs it actually looks like Bayern's higher velocity gives it better penetration across the board. edit2: hopefully tomorrow evening or the day after I will be able to use fnord_disc's formula inside a .net application where I can generate a bit more interactive charts with ( zoom, pan, adding multiple ships to the same graph and so on ).

This is easilly proven false since how can it be random yet some people consistently have high win rate over thousands of games, and some have consistently low win rate over thousands of games. Win rate is far from random. But, given small sample size, average damage might be a better comparison ( but again, in that metric she is also not underperforming for me at least ). Maybe we should try a Warspite division together and see if I can change your mind?

No, definitively no, simply because DD's should be in front not in the back. Yes, I admit that I mostly don't want this game dumbed down because the way it is now a baddie in a DD will be both useless and dangerous to his own team, but if he continues to be such a baddie that he damages allies all the time I would rather see those people banned then catering to their playstyle of cowering behind their cruisers and sometimes even BB's. That even extends to cruisers, like yesterday I had to tell a 'friendly' Aoba to stop torping from behind my Gremmy, he wasn't even directly crossing me but he had zero chance of hitting anything and was confining my space to manoeuvre. Luckily he listened, he even explained why he thought it was viable ( he thought there was a DD between me and the spot I was going for ). Sure, removing friendly damage from torpedoes would lower my frustration level in that case as I don't have to be afraid of torps from behind, but I am way to scared to see DD's just not playing their intended role. And since this is still for a large part a rock-paper-scissor game, if the most stealthy ships you got don't do their job it ruins the gameplay for everyone else as well. Secondary friendly fire was out of player control, that is why it was turned off ( disabling them with P is not viable as it also disables AAA and you might not want to do that when there are planes coming your way but there is also a friendly passing between your secondary build Bismarck and an enemy at 10km ). It's not the same comparison. It would be if they disabled friendly fire for main guns, but they haven't.

People with low expectations? I know some 4x% wr tier X players who were having fun doing less damage in their pre nerf Shimakaze's then I did in my Umizoomi ( Umikaze tier II IJN DD ). For me it's not even winning or loosing in WoWs, if I win but performed below my own expectations I don't have much fun. If I lose but played a fantastic game, I might be salty but I would still not hesitate to press battle again ( unlike when I myself am playing so bad I feel the loss is due to my own lacking performance ). Some will obviously have different expectations of themselves.

There you go lol, and it seems you even had fun getting rid off your pinky status

Post #2 has them both ;)

Yup! Purge the heretic! BB's underpowered, remove CV's from the game and nerf torpedo's! And remove fire damage, it's totally broken

Meh I sometimes camp in the back with my BB, but that's only if the DD's in my team are trying to hide behind me Seriously, I know most camping BB's are just doing it because they are natural campers, but sometimes even players with a functioning brain have to resort to the 'next best thing' if their team isn't playing like they should. Specifically, I would not push in my BB against multiple torpedo destroyers when my own destroyers run away. I rather join the retreat then, no point in me risking my ship for nothing

Ofc, both benefit I guess Anyway, I wasn't boosting, I know my damage stats aren't that impressive, it was mentioned to show that Warspite at least in my hands performs pretty comparable with other tier 6 BB's.

That would depend on exact armor layout at the point of impact no? Currently it's almost impossible for us to properly judge some of the in game behavior since we don't have access to all the data needed. Also, Tirpitz armor was 'bugged' before, it has been fixed ( turtledeck for front turrets was extended I think, there was a gap before ).

Setting, it's under controls tab, iirc it says 'enable smoke outlines' or something similar.

21 fires omg that must have caused some salty chat

I agree, it's more likely that Murmansk is just being played by better players. It would be so nice if we were able to correlate ship statistics with overall statistics of players who play them

Mhm the sample size is rather small yes.... but it's irrelevant since it compares directly with my other tier 6 battleships with public stats. Warspite at tier 5 would be ludicrously OP. Also, 'luck' is something you make happen through sheer will power

If you see this, please report this in the 'current update' section, buggy islands testing is what ST likes the most ( not really ). Anyway, if you report these incidents the islands will eventually get fixed ( remember the invisible icebergs.... ).

That's what I do when the friendly fire system deems me worthy of being one of the colorful people It's not that bad really, the system can be strict but overall it's pretty fair. Remember, pink is not a punishment, pink is a warning! The punishment comes later on with reflected damage, and eventually WG would like faster bans based on the friendly damage tracking system ( though as they said they don't want this fully automated, a human should always check before handing out bans ). Why? Farming slow BB's with Isokaze/Minekaze/Gremmy/*insert any capable DD* can't be less fun then playing against the AI ;)

Request penetration curve's for the Grand Old Lady here -> http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/59528-armor-penetration-curves/

It's a definitive bonus though, even if it's not that big. I mean, there been enough times in Murmansk where I turned and ate a citadel due to dispersion where if I sailed straight or turned later ( because of slower rudder ) I would have probably been fine And I feel a lot more comfortable getting in close with DD's in Murmansk as well because it just gives that feeling that you can dodge those torpedoes more reliably. How much of this effect is actually placebo, I can't say for sure. Probably a lot more then people realize.

I will quit playing if WG dumbs this game down to the level where brainless monkeys can sit in 3rd or 2nd line and spam torpedo's from behind their allies for which they should be screening. Because, unlike your anecdote implies, that would be the real result of the removal of friendly fire. In your case, you were pink for 5 games, so f.....n what? Who cares if you're pink for 5 games because you once in all your games failed to scan around properly and a stray torpedo hit an ally? How would that invalidate that removing friendly fire would be catering to the people who would like nothing more then keeping their DD's hidden behind their allied cruisers/battleships and spam torps from max range without being in the actual front where they are supposed to be?

True but the top and bottom placement isn't decided by gunboat encounters only

And that is why I don't like PVE, there are no tactics involved in fighting with the current AI. Maybe, someday, WG will make the AI less dumb and turn it into a challenge.

I stopped avoiding friendly torps, if people want to be ... and torp from second or 3rd line I just eat their torps and hope they will learn from it eventually. That is how the system should work, punish the ...... and not like some suggest to remove friendly damage so the ..... can torp from behind in safety.

I have 52 games in Warspite with a 69% win rate and 60k average damage. If you compare that with my Fuso it's quite on par, and the win rate is higher then my Arizona stats ( from testing, I don't own Arizona ). Damage wise, she is doing worse then my other tier 6 bb's, but the difference is marginal with Fuso. That doesn't look like tier 5 material to me. But, playing the Grand Old Lady takes a different approach then the other ships as the range and speed combination limit how much you can adapt later on. edit: giving it a small range increase ( maybe on par with Bayern or closer to it at least ) would just make the ship a lot more comfortable to play because your tactical influence is directly relevant to your speed + gun range. I don't think it will raise the stats by much, but it will just feel a lot more comfortable to a lot of players.