ilhilh

The cap time exists because it is not as easy to get into a position to try and get a de-cap in. As much as it can seem like an age to cap, a shorter cap would mean many a game finishing with 50%+ of the ships still afloat at the 10 minute mark. Yep, but you could easily argue that a player knows how agile/fast his BB is at the start of the game so if it is going to take 3 mins to get to the cap and 3 mins to cap then you need to be making a move a lot earlier than most people do. I would say that perhaps as much as 40-50% of my chat in game relates to time reminders as most people seem oblivious... god knows I get tunnel vision a lot of the time so if I shock myself by spotting it with 5 mins remaining then I'm telling EVERYONE.

Was your carrier running up against a blue line in the far corner by any chance? Perhaps it wasn't, but there are far too many carrier players that can not judge where to sit and lose a lot of time with their planes just covering half of the map unnecessarily. They either sit in spawn, by the nearest island or in the furthest corner. I try to sit behind the largest group of players and follow them at a safe distance as they break through. A few times I have had to turn back if an enemy is getting too close but my goal is to stay out of sight but close to assistance and as close as is practical to targets. I don't want to be in the obvious places a DD or torp bombers will go searching and if you are in a corner when a DD finds you but your team mates are miles away then you really ain't going to be getting much help...

There is no challenge in the PvE games - you get a much limited and predictable experience. PvP by its very nature gives you a much more varied experience but with that comes both good and bad - the choices of each person from the macro to the micro (in terms of the map, their team and the opposition), their abilities in terms of reading the game, aiming, choosing their ammo and a hundred other things mean that no 2 games are the same. In co-op you might still get duffer team mates but the opposition is predictably predictable and boring to play against. You might get horrible games, easy games, impossible games... but you learn and improve from it...

I'm not saying you don't have a valid point but there seems to be a running theme between the forum and the game of you arguing with EVERYONE you meet. Is this a trait you have IRL too?

You perhaps have a point with US DDs but I am yet to read a convincing argument about why I would bother even starting the US DD line as things stand now.

I don't think people are asking for accuracy AND range... But, I know in my DD that I can sit outside a BBs detection range and troll him to death with torp spam. Even if I stray slightly into range I can usually escape unharmed even without smoke because the accuracy of the main battery means that even a well aimed broadside most shells will land in the sea

Chance of fire should be reduced. The problem is the sheer number of shells that a cruiser can put down onto a ship is crazy high so it is relatively easy to 1) get a fire and then 2) push it to a stage 2 forcing a repair and then back up to 1 and 2 as soon as they use it. Yesterday I had a game in my Atago where an enemy Atago hit me at about 12km with 1 salvo for a stage 2 fire and rudder damage whilst I qas turning. I repaired as stage 2 fairly chews through your HP pool and turned the other direction. His next salvo did a stage 3 fire and AGAIN rudder damage. In. One. Salvo. Then a Fuso fired a broadside from 16km away at my turning ship and got 2 citadel hits meaning the stage 3 fire burned me out in seconds. Worst game in my Atago ever. Other things could include the size of the shell impacting both amount of damage per tick a ship takes and the duration of the fire - the problem with this approach would be that it would be very hard for a ship captain to figure out the severity of the fire. Perhaps the chance of fire reducing if the ship is already on fire could work - realistic? nope. But it could help the crippling fires you get. Then stage 2 to 3 is harder again. Or perhaps reduced chance of fire for a while after using the repair option... it could represent your ship being smothered fire extinguishing liquid (so... water? but perhaps foam of some description... I don't know how they tackled ship fires back in t'day)

I would like to see the range of them increased. Crap accuracy could compensate to keep them from being OP but it is ridiculous when you have all of these secondary guns silent that are perfectly capable of lobbing a shell 10km just sitting there until very occasionally someone is stupid enough to get in 'range' of them.

This is another one of those threads about how people don't play how you want them to. The problem is not actually BB players camping or the counter argument of CAs yoloing. In any match there will be varying skill levels and tactics but how do you know which 'type' of player is the ship next to you? Unless I am in a division I rarely have any idea if the guy next to me is good/bad/camper/yolo and even if it turned out that they were good how would you organise things with them? And that leads onto the second problem - communication i.e. it is pretty much impossible to communicate with the guy sailing next to you when you are in the thick of things. As such I try and play my own game and this means using team members to my advantage. And by that I don't mean screwing them over intentionally, but I do mean using them to get AA cover, or spot pesky DDs or soak up damage when I've taken a hammering but even if I think someone is trying to work collaboratively I will always try to have 1 eye on the mini map for if they get distracted by something shiny.

Eh?

But, do remember that it plays really nicely

German Navy is arriving in October, as announced (http://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/common/gc-announcements/). Are you thinking they will sneak in the Soviet Navy before then? No, I don't think so either...

I don't think many people are whining about her... there has been 1 solitary thread that I have seen that has said anyhting remotely negative - that thread was about a buff to credit earning which at the same time praised every aspect of how the ship performs in game. ...so I am not quite sure what the purpose is of showing us your best game in it... oh wait, I do see! Anyway, congrats on a good game.

This ship is atrocious! It is truly hopeless. Slow turret turn, slow RoF, low number of guns, short range torps and crap AA. I feel like a noose around the neck of my team whenever I enter a game. I will take on board some of the advice above but I reckon it will be a LONG old slog to the tier VI...

Yea, those are the people who caught it during the 1 week sale. I wish I was one of them!

It was bought with dubloons and as such it got taken off you and your gold was refunded. It then was in the premium shop for 1 week when OBT started but, like you, I was on holiday and missed it. I did raise a ticket asking if anything could get done about it (the dubloons were still sat in my account) and the first response was a cut and paste reply telling me what had happened (which I already knew). I replied and said I knew what had happened but I made the point that I was on holiday and 1 week of sale during the middle of summer is not enough time. The second response seemed to be from a real human who apologised but said it would likely appear very occasionally in the future. So, the first answer was tough **** and the second answer was essentially tough **** again, but at least the second was was polite...

When I saw the thread title I was a little like... uhm... the Atago is pretty decent... what's the problem? Then I saw that problem wasn't with the ships' performance and this makes sense. I haven't played my Atago and Gremmy enough to really monitor it but, it doesn't seem to get spectacular tier VIII premium-esque money - I figured it was me adjusting to it but I think there is some merit to your complaint. A tier VIII permium should out-earn a lower tier premium.

FYI When you go into game you can see the spare planes of each type on the bottom row to the right of your squadrons. These automatically replace losses when squadrons either gtet wiped out or land with missing planes.

It was domination but ironically we had all 3 flags for most of the game. I was around C/B most of time (up to 5 kills) and then as I headed to B and they had 3 tier III BBs left. I killed 1 BB but died to one of the 2 remaining ones. At this point I had 3 team mates alive... but 1 TKd at the same time as I died so that made it 2 half dead cruisers Vs 2 BBs - 1 of which was on full beans. They capped 1 flag but had killed my 2 team mates before even needing to cap the other 2. I think I took a screenshot of the results screen but haven't uploaded it it seems.

Yesterday was a horrible day for me - loss after stinking loss and generally I was playing well (not in my kuma where I managed to get ahead of the team and essentially YOLO into the enemy team for a quick death). I had about 4 games in a row that looked broadly like this - and it really was my greatest achievement that I could come top of the losing team with almost double XP. I then jumped in my Umikaze (torpedo daily mission mixed with sealclubbing) and I was saying to a friend on teamspeak 'I should have played this earlier to stop some of the frustration' as I sunk my 5th ship (first blood and 2 liquidators in hand)... I then killed a 6th ship and died only to realise that we were in fact going to lose... because I guess killing half the team is not enough. I then turned my computer off and got an early night!

The St Louis is a beast. Sure it doesn't have the best range but it is bristling with fast firing guns in all directions (you can just turn in circles and hammer things) and a very decent HP pool. You can just keep a constant rain of shells on people setting fires everywhere. As for the South Carolina, sure it doesn't have much more HP than the St Louis but that is because the St Louis is abnormally high for its tier. But the tier III BBs are notoriously hopeless on both nations...

What are you wanting to do with your phpbb forum? I am run one for my clan (http://www.fifogaming.com) but I haven't done any real work on it in years - I have actually been toying with the idea of re-implementing our forum but I don't have so much time any more and what time I do carve out I want to spend playing the game rather than messing around with forums. That being said if it just a case of setting up different groups and different levels of forum visibility for said groups then I could happily talk you through it.

The Suffolk and Norfolk were examples of heavy cruisers and they shadowed the Bismarck reporting her position for the capital ships - they were not designed as battleship killers with their 8in guns. The Hood was in no way a Heavy Cruiser...

Either the chance of fire needs to drop or the damage it can achieve needs reducing (either less damage/sec or reducing ho long a fire lasts). It is too easy with high RoF ships to not only start fires but quickly push them into a siren inducing lvl 3 fire that savages your ship. Yesterday in my Myogi I had a Phoenix and Kuma chasing me... got set on fire, left it, got lvl 2 fire, repaired, got lvl 1...2... then 3 fire in the space of perhaps 2 minutes. That is ridiculous. As it happened my HP pool was high enough to just weather that storm and I smashed both of them up (kills 3 and 4) and we won with me getting fireproof That being said, I bet there are not many people who pick damage reducing perks for their captains...

You do raise a good point. There are loads of complaints about the lack of teamplay in games... and the game does not make it easy to promote teamplay/organise but it isn't likely to happen by itself. I don't always type in chat, and to be honest I don't want to organise full battle plans but if I can get a few people around me who want to work as a group I find you can have some fairly epic results.