piritskenyer

Funny you should say that, friendof mine actually considered doing his thesis in sociology on online players, but then he went with something else. I't's a nice thing to research thouh.

I just discovered that despite what I thought, you don'T have invisifire margin on the 155 if you use camo paint and camo module. You still get detected at the edge of range despite having a supposed invisifir range of some 200 metres. So now I'm just going to free-xp the 203's because I can'T put up with the horrible turn rate on the 155's. I may revisit the 155 once I have the concealment skill unlocked.

I kind of want to play them too, but mostly because they are pretty ships. Otherwise I want to sink them because they are russian.

Or maybe because no movie could give back the awesomeness. In all honesty though that thing would deserve a high-end miniseries instead of a single movie. 3-5 1-hr-long epi.

High-contrast hard-edge camo with straight lines is there to break up the ships' outlines, which makes it harder for a visual observer to correctly estimate the target heading and speed. That's what avoidance camo is based on. High-contrast hard-edge camo with blots was also supposed to do something similar, although in a different fashion. Also, this kind of camo has an easier time blending the ship on the horizon with clouds. This is what detection camo is based on. Lower-contrast soft-edge blotted camo (typically used on ground vehicles and uniforms) are supposed to fad the contrast between the target and its background, effectively blending the target to it's surrounding, making it harder for an observer to pick the target up. Not really used on ships. You don't like the look? Git mods.

"We're gonna need a bigger boat"

If only I could figure out why you are always playing at times where I don't get to watch...

Yes, the Campbeltown. And when she's up, the Warspite.

Niobe looks T4 material at best.

I'm gonna get a british shiiip

No, I don't keep them hidden, because I'm not ashamed of them and even if I was I wouldn'T keep them hidden, because keeping them hidden is suspicious

I was looking at the thing from my phone, and the 76mm looked like a reg gun. As for it being T3, look at what I wrote, where I write:

The render still seems to have all 4 guns. What ai would realistically expect from a T4 bumped Wickes-class DD with two less torp tubes would be: Longer gun range or better RoF or both Longer torp range that would allow for off the bat stealth torping ( 7-8km/55-60kt/11-14k dmg) Reasonably good detection range Good maneuverability And even if she's not very good, I'll buy her, because, well... British.

I'm not sure she'd be entirely unbalancable, I just think it'd be very hard. I definitely think that a fast and (relatively) maneuverable cruiser-killer ship type could have a place in the game if properly balanced. Right now I can'T offer any ideas for balancing the thing, but I'll take a look at it when I'm not at work.

IFA is not only for cpt's who sail in straight lines, it's for people with tendency to tunnelvision.

If I wasn't bad at managing my time and wasn't slowly slipping into being a weekend warrior, I'd volounteer as a basic instructor (may do it yet for weekends). I'm mainly a cruiser guy with occasional BB and DD (both decent). For winrating, see my sig Serious note: If and when I have the time and you are still looking, I'll post a formal application. Cheers, piritskenyer

I think there is still a leap between a ship of the size of Moskva and a ship of the size of Alaska. Many argue that the Alaska class is rather a BC than a large cruiser, mostly because of her 12" guns (which are almost 85mm larger than the guns of Moskva, let's not forget!). I for one wouldn't mind seeing the Alaska in the game (or rather, I'd like her very much to be in game), but I don't think Moskva would be comparable to her in terms of firepower. Sure, Moskva may be a sample for large cruisers in game, but if Moskva is a large cruiser, then Alaska is a VERY large cruiser.

Hello there people, This here be a preparation thread. Preparation for the Ibuki that is. What that means is that I'm asking for your experience with the Ibuki, and also for your setups, your opinions. What is Ibuki's major advantage (if any) over her peers? What is her major disadvantage (if any) over her peers? How does she compare to her line of ships in general? How does she compare to her predecessor? How does she compare to her successor? What equipment and captain skills do you recommend? I'm currently still grinding the Mog (poor thing really had a terrible break with the loss of EM), and I have a cpt laid out like this: BFT, SA EM, IFA Supernintendo Demo Grinding the next skill points. Might retrain and drop BFT and EM for their 3 points to get CE faster. Cheers

In port the model of the ship has B turret with guns at some elevation, which usually means the turret can fire over the one in front of it. So I'd expect the Ibuki to be able to fire all guns forward.

Pensacola is a lot of things, "BAD" is not one of them.

I disagree with you there Vanhal. While not worth maxing for AA, Atago's AA certainly is no slouch. SchabeOink: I just use my current Cpt in Atago, that being a cpt that is generally specced for CA's, who's going to go on to the Ibuki and then the Zao. Situational awareness and BFT (slight boost to secondaries and AA) EM and IFA (IJN CA's are made of glass, so you have to maximise your avoidance IMO) Supernintendo: a pretty generalist skill, comes in handy with the heals on the Atago now and later on with the Ibuki and Zao. Also one more def-AA and cat-fighter charge.) Demo expert: You have the best HE, so why not make it even better? Again, this is a skill that is not ship, but rather class (or nation even) specific. (Not yet reached) Concealment expert.

Being a non-CV player, what I see happen is this: Shutting down the enemy carrier by no means guarantees a win. You rely on your team for damage, which is really just a cointoss sometimes. You shield your team from air attack, sure, but your influence on the battle is otherwise limited: You don't weaken the enemy, you weaken one aspect of the enemy team's striking power, and that alone. Sure, newer AirSup loadouts have DB's tucked in as extra, but a single DB sqn or two have relatively low effect on the game, as they are spending more time in transit and rearming than actually bringing damage home. As for the comparison to an AA-specced CA, no, the case is not the same. An AA specced CA/CL has the power to punish planes in addition to its capacity to cause damage. It's not a direct trade. It also has to be said that an AA specced CA/CL is still not as effective at plane killing w/o proper positioning as an AirSup CV, because the CV's AA can keep up with the enemy planes (in most cases), while a CA/CL can only put itself in harms way, it can't go after the harm to chase it down.

I don't use any at the moment, however the cases where I would use them are as follows: Ships I have a hard time with and need to grind Ships I really like, enjoy and am good at, so I can get even better. These basically are the cases where playing is a matter of "the cost doesn't matter", because otherwise I'm a cheap bstrd.

"Can I get your stuff?" I remember those