C4PT41N_0BV10US

Prawdziwy meżczyzna nie boi się być trochę homo. Mam teraz mało czasu na granie, ale zamierzam jakoś rozpisać bardziej ten okręcik jak nim machnę już z 50 bitewek na randomie, to będzie można korzystać

.

Ok. The only reason I find to justify Vigilance instead of SI or even High Alert is drastic differences in playstyles. Which I won't discuss as it's subjective. However, my recomendation will remain as follows - Vigilance is the weakest of tier III skills you can take.

No I didn't. Potentially, you just avoided being mauled for 20+k salvo 1+ citadel + 1 penetration for anything from 4k to 8k + ricochets and/or overpens for another 2+k damage. Situation changes drastically if it were just two citadels even more in favour of dodging BB fire. GE CA have exccellent torpedo protection - forget about being hitted for 20k dmg - never going to happen. More realistic is around 12 - 15k tops. So I much prefer to eat one torp then expose myself to being rotflstomped by BB salvo. So you always know you are in potential danger to be in torpedo wave. I don't understand where's a problem here? I eat BB shots every game, hell, I even eat some shells almost every salvo. I eat 1 torp MAYBE once in five games. And once in 10 games I actually got more then one torpedo hit. I think you're exagerating. Torpedo will be spotted, sooner or later, and you have enough time, 90% of the time to dodge them. BB fire is indeed random, so I prefer to preserve my HP by heal, quicker repair and quicker fire/flooding repair, then by spotting torpedoes a bit faster. Mutliple time. I cant even stress out how it's essential to have this skill. The longer the game, the bigger chance you have to survive and carry. The more HP you preserve, the better you can help your team by being aggressive, or tanking if needed. I even will say it more clear - you have to be a god damn noob, or it must not suit your playstyle in 100%, to not take SI on tier IX in every CA, especially in GE and US CA. IJN can skip it, they don't need it as much. Myoko? Still more stealthy then Pensa and Yorck. Still more stealthy then Hipper. Snipers? Mogami pre-nerf was a god damn 18 km sniper with 155 mm guns, as well as stealthy ninja - now it's a totall crap CA, from top tier to the bottom - but you played him before the nerf, so what the hell? NO has good camo, sure. But when you are catched with your pants down, closing on a target you intend to kill, only to find out you didn't spotted a BB circling behind mountain, or Atago - you don't have torps to finish one target faster. GE CA are also shorter and more narrow then IJN. Vigilance is totally unimportant for their survival. If you absolutely need to take some DD protection, go for the HAS - there aren't CV's in every game, so it might help you sometimes. Seriously, you have very nice stats and you have problems with DD's torping you? Seriously? Great. I also reached rank I on my main account on NO and Atago, not some fantasy accounts for my friends. I also picked HAS on rankeds for Atago and NO - because there was absolutely no CV's whatsoever in 100 games. And there is a difference when you play on rankeds, where you only have 2 BB's, and 4 DD's with some occasional Atago, and when you play random, with 12 ships, with possible CV (1 in 5 games, recently more). I also have amazing analytical capabilities, as well as great looks and irresitible personal charm, henceforth - do I minimise my missing HP each game, each minute, trying to survive being shoted by everything, or do I chose a skill that will help me dodge a torpedo, that ALREADY I'm likely to dodge once or twice in a game? Add to that, that this skill is strictly dictated by MM, because if I end in a game with one DD up to three, I'm likely to not be targeted for entire duration of the game, but I'm sure as hell will be targeted by guns and will be propably shooting planes. Hmm hmm hmm, what to choose, what to choose. I would show you my glorious stats on my other account, but WG would ban me for it, so you have to believe my word.

I guess it's the differences in playstyles. The damage I get from torps is 3% of my overall damage. I always dodge them with ease. There are situations when I dodge BB shots and are in the middle of turn when torps appear, but even in those conditions I eat one torpedo, 2 is a god damn retarded mistake from me. Even with recent buffs the reaction time you have with CA's to avoid incoming torpedo wave is enough. Not to mention higher tier games, when there are a lot of fighter planes and a occasional CV here and there. Not to mention, after 500 games you KNOW where those DD will be. There are no surprises there. Heal is essential for CA's survival. I will always advocate superintendent in it's current meta. High Alert is still better. But that's my opinions based on 2k games played with all nations CA's. And again, and I will always point it out as you did - why the hell you talk about ships you don't have? IJN CA's have vastly different gameplay from other two nations - you're more stealthy, more sniper-like, keeping your distance CA. Then yes, BB will not focus you instantly, same with CA's. It's totally different when you play Hipper with 12+ km spotting range, or NO which has to come close to actually hit something - maybe here's the problem? They do. However, HAS is still crap from tier V upwards. I played Hipper on anti DD setup - it's useless. I would profit much much more on AA setup. To sum it all - I don't get it why people take it, it's a weak skill, not boosting anything worth boosting, just minimising your mistake or lack of attention. And on tier VI DD's aren't a real threat, on tier VII+ I prefer boosting other stuff. I would take Expert Loader and IFA instead of Vigilance anytime. Hell, I would take all tier I skills apart from plane one instead of Vigilance and it would be much better choice.

Generalnie dopiero się z nim zapoznaję, zaliczyliśmy pierwszą randkę, jakiś wypad do McDonalda na romantycznego shake i cheesa itd. Ale do trzeciej bazy jeszcze daleko. Aczkolwiek widzę, że będziemy mieli ciekawą i dynamiczną relację. AP potrafią zaskoczyć - wczoraj miałem gigantycznego bonera jak wbiłem jakiemuś Atago hita za 17k z 12 km. Dym jest świetny, raz że możesz się wycofać z lipnej sytuacji, dwa że fajnie możesz go użyć w ofensywie. Tylko trzeba to robić z głową, najpierw trochę zwolnić a dopiero później zadymiać. HE też są spoko - nie zadają jakoś dużo obrażeń, ale bardzo ładnie i gęsto podpalają. Do tego mamy fajne torpy. Brak samolotu trochę boli z kolei. W weekend umówiliśmy się do kina z Michaiłem, więc opowiem Wam jak było ze wszystkimi pikantnymi szczegółami.

a myślałem że po naszym wczorajszym rajdzie będziemy na drugim miejscu, a tu wciąż tylko 3ecie. Chrzanione EU wciąż nie dało żadnej rezolucji pro-imigranckiej

Well, I played Yorck before the buffs. And I hated it. Not because it was particularly weak, but because it lost the "german flavour" I get used to on Konigsberg and Nurnberg - AP ammo with great ballistics. So, when I first fired my AP Sputnik on Earth orbit I said "what the..." and sold it after the game. And when I got my Hipper, I was home again. But, from what I saw on Crysantos stream, Yorck got some buffs and now performs on par with it counterparts, although still seems to be the weakest of those three (Atlanta obviously doesn't count).

.

Cause maybe, just maybe, most of the players doesn't really look forward to those ships? So we kinda approach their release with "subtle irony". I'd rather have dutch ships, french ships, italian ships, moar german ships, moar US ships, british ships, then soviet cruisers. But, what can I do apart from few snarls and witty sarcastic comments here and there? That's good therapy for me

They were Naval Legends though! You know, cause they didn't sink while sailing through the storm? Amazing feat worthy of patriotic songs, statues and post stamps. I actually feel kinda filthy I bought Kutuzov for team battles.

.

There, fix'd! But it's your opinion, so I respect it, although I disagree with it

.

.

.

.

That's the point. First two years of the war, they HAD the numbers to take RN on. Like I said, beginning of the 1915, the difference in dreadnaught ships was only 2 in favour of RN and in battlecruisers and destroyers HSF had an advantage. They didn't "adjust" tactics to suit the resources available. Kaiser just said no, and so HSF was chillin'n'shiet, and in the meanwhile, they lost the war. Tirpitz was writing exactly that (I can send you the source later if you want, Tirpitz letters are quite a read, although some of them are kinda racist ). He said, that RN could let their fleet sit in harbour, HSF couldn't. They could either go and beat the RN, or at least make them pay dearly for victory, or lose the war. Furthermore, they didn't predict what could happen if they lost - RN would put their hand on all available warships of HSF immediately - hence brave but sad Scapa Flow episode. So, in terms of strategic decision making, they screwed up badly. I would even go so far, to say that HSF was the only force that COULD win the war, but was too scared to try. Not the sailors of course, but the high command. Hell, I would too! And again, the design weren't superior. If it were - every goddamn battleship in the world would go and incorporate this "coffin design" into their ships. It was just a different approach in shipbuilding, but I wouldn't call it superior. What was superior is the objective. RN was a worldwide naval police force - they had to make long cruises, patrols, securing convoys etc. And now we have HSF, which was built with one objective in mind - to beat RN. Accomodation of the crew was abysmal (one of the reasons why crew in HSF mutinied), fuel reserves were sparce, food and supplies were also limited. However, armour was excellent, watertight compartments, ship seaworthiness was top notch. So, 1 vs 1, I would also place my money on HSF ships. Maybe Queen Elizabeth was superior, however Bayern class was a tough nut to crack. But, you also have to have in mind the objective of each fleet. And in that regards, RN was doing her job as good as HSF theirs (apart from high command). As for ship operating procedures - yes, RN was slower to react then HSF, especially after Dogger Bank. Seydlitz incident was quickly analyzed and results were incorporated in fleet regulations, while HMS Tiger (was it Tiger?) and it Q turret explosion didn't change anything. Cordite, stacking propellant in turrets and barbettes, open blast doors - add to that thin armour that was easy to penetrate even from 280 mm guns - RN should be extra carefull, but they was slackin - which costed a lot of RN sailors. And you think that sitting in port for 2 years was the most efficient use for the resources at hand? No. They were afraid of losing their fleet. Mainly cause of Sheers comment that they were a fraction of an inch from disaster at Jutland. But Tirpitz realised something, that Sheer and Kaiser didn't - it doesn't matter! They're already losing the war. They're fighting on 2 fronts, USA is step from joining the war, HSF ships are blocked in their ports, U Boots are losing the underwater war - things are looking grim. And Tirpitz new it will happen in 1914 or even before. Kaiser was very protective of his fleet, so he was allergic to even think about losing his prestige ships. Tirpitz was arguing that they can't let their fleet to be passive. They are the challengers, they need to attack. They can lose the ships - RN can't. It is true what Churchill said about Jellicoe - he was the man that could lose war in one afternoon. But, as it turned out, he didn't have a lot of chances to make a mistake. So, all in all, HSF was competent enough to take RN on, numerical advantage was on RN side, but the fleet procedures and better ship protection were on HSF side. I think it was fairly even forces.

A, to było to z collia w istocie, gg.

.

balanced.

Not really. Tier VIII radar is 25 sec, tier IX is 30 and tier X is 40 for US.

You miss the point bro. It's not that you have a choice. Either you stay away from the caps, and lose the game, or you take the risk. This will of course shift meta, since DD's will now rely on CA support for capping bases, which is actually cool. Second, camo value of certain US CA tiers VIII and IX is actually below range of the radar. So you go in your DD, spot a cruiser at 9,1 km, and then he pops his radar - and you're in dangerous situation. If you think, that long range carpet torping DD's will be a nuisance - they won't. Look how inefficient are initial carpet drops made at long range. They only force a evasive manouver and that all (apart from some potato autopilot skipper now and then). And you take some of my words out of their intended context - I never said anything about DD skipper needing to learn how to dodge to be able to counter radar (although this skill would prove invaluable for some of them), as this remark was concernig Cleveland and Des Moines. But, you need to grow map awareness skills, patience etc. You need to see, that your enemy team has 2 CA's with radar, and one of them was spotted on the other side of the map - do you take the risk? Maybe you should wait for CV to spot? Maybe you should hide and wait behind the mountain? Right now you roll your face on keyboard and that's it for DD players (some of them of course), but we can all agree that without CV, DD gameplay became very very very simplified. And I always imagined DD gameplay as the most "sneaky" and "creative". Why not try to take that risk, pop CA's radar, retreat, and come back after his radar skill is on CD? too hard for DD skippers? I don't believe it. You think, that since you won't be able to stealth spam from 6 km, remain virtually invisible for whole game, that will render whole DD class useless - you're wrong. That will need you to adapt, to think what are you doing, to be more carefull, to take risks, to ask team/division member for asistance etc. Which is great, and I can't wait for this change to hit live server. a

That's an excellent suggestion. We (Imigrants) started to play second team since we had to wait 10+ minutes (with restarting queue few times) for another game around 5500 - 5600 rating. So if we could challenge teams - that would be great. Just add an option to send a challenge, and show the rating of challenging team to the leader of challenged team.

Shima spam "per se" isn't such a problem. Problem appears, for example, when said Shima is capping, and you can't do shiet about it, and it can still be a big danger to you lurking around 6 km from you. So, while a passive Shima gameplay remains unaffected, the real nuisance of DD capping or torping from the border of their range is made much more difficult. Also, I wouldn't say that radar affects stealth shooting at all. It just provides BOOM YOU SEE effect, but not changes the proximity spotting value right? So if you can invisi shoot from 12 km you should still remain invisible depite radar working that's at least how I understand it. [EDIT] Well, now I read it again, and it says "assured acquisition". I'm a bit puzzled if it will affect stealth shooting outside the range of radar or not. Maybe someone with better english skillz could confirm/deny?