Xevious_Red

Its just funnier watching two threads running completely opposite to each other. Seeing "battleship armour is worthless, cruisers just DPM you with HE, and fires, I might as well sell all BB now they're utterly useless" Right next to: "Cruisers are worthless, so are DD and CV, no point playing anything other than BB. This is now world of battleships" I haven't played enough games with the new patch to make any strong feelings, just amusing to see everything complained about

Had time for a couple of games last night, myself and platton mate both took south carolinas (and ended up repeatedly on new dawn domination against tier 4-5 ships which was.....definately bottom of the food chain). I tried using only HE, he used only AP, regardless of target so we could have a rough comparison. Both of us ended up shooting varied targets (DD and BB). My HE ended up with an average damage of 1k per shell His AP ended up with an average damage of 1.6k per shell (and didn't seem to suffer from lack of pens - this might be because of low tier, so lower armour). It wasn't the wreck-fest I was expecting from HE. Obviously this was only a few games at low tier with BB so cant comment on cruisers etc

[quote name=

Knew I'd written a comparison before: Mumansk: This is essentially an omaha, with some differences, which again youll either prefer, or think it makes it worse. I'll start with the cons: Less guns Worse dispersion Weaker gun casement Slower (by 1kmph) torps 2x3 torps instead of 4x2 so less torps, less flexible (one either side) AA is shorter range, mostly 2.5 not 3.5 Pros: Range is 14.5 km Torps are 8km Harder to spot Rudder turns 5.0 secs not 9.8 Tighter turn More AA So you get less shots, and they miss more, while providing less AA support for team mates, and your guns break more. However, you can shoot further than your spotted, the AA is nice for protecting you, and you turn on a dime. This really annoys TB and DD which you can dodge their torps with impunity, and you can engage battleships at range while easily dodging any return fire. The torps actually are used at a range you're more likely to be at without needing to be on a suicide run Slow long range torps are however incredibly likely to miss. This was pre-patch. I haven't got home from work yet to check if anything has changed

That is indeed massive math fail - what I get for typing when tired. For some reason I'd made 75% of 12 to be 8 instead of 9, and apparantly descided that 25% of 12 was 4

[quote name= If you have no access to the other factors, then viewable stats are obviously a way to compare, and untill we get a ship armour viewer then we won't know quite what their citadels are like. However, some people take the written stats as gospel truth and will ignore all other factors.

Lets see, battleships that are slower, with much shorter range, combined with increased TB damage, and carriers that have more torpedo bombers. It'll either be that, or increased HE damage + Destroyers easier to citadel and "one shot"

IIRC for battlefield they had some kind of client side confirmation so that it matched server info of where shots were going with client info as to where you were. In the case of serious discrepency it defaulted to the client side. So you had cases where people would deliberately play on servers where they had terrible ping, so their opponents would see them frozen and shoot at that spot, but the server/client exchange would then agree that the player was actually somewhere completely different.

As a heads up though, the ALT key will still list the distance (and flight time) to the mountain though, even though the shells will go over.

[quote name=

I know that pain, your little flotilla of ships turns and sails away at the first sign of enemy ships. In WoT the lemming train stops when it encounters enemies. In WoWS they turn tail and flee. At that point its still better to go with them and do a fighting retreat than to sail onwards on your own. Id also highly recommend playing in a division wherever possible and choosing compatible ships, you have a lot more impact on the game then and you'll always have one captain that you can (mostly) rely on to not run away. Otherwise if you're having to play solo then there are some ships that require more team help than others. Japanese DD are virtually self sufficient, wheras the myogi is the easiest torp bomber target if it's alone. I personally find the Nagato fairly self sufficient as long as its not horribly outnumbered (guns deal with BB and CA, rudder shift and secondarys keep DD at bay, rudder shift and AA suite lets you avoid/shooy down TB)

[quote name= What I would say is look to yourself first, make sure you're pulling your weight in damage and kills. Prioritise targets - a cruiser with 100hp left thats on fire thats being shot at by 3 allies isn't worth your shot, he'll be dead in seconds anyway. A DD thats just taken a BB's shots and is running away on 100hp should be a primary target - your ally can't fire again and that DD might go on to claim a cap. Also, annoying team or not, don't go off somewhere on your own unless you're in a vessel that can solo (usually DD). Sailing off in your BB on your own against 7 enemy ships while shouting "noob team", dying first then typing "thx for support idiots" is far less useful than sticking with your team, even if you don't think theyre going the right way. If you can, be somewhere vaguely useful (like close enough to delay a cap if needed)

The problem here is although we have some stats, which are very nice they don't give anywhere near enough info to judge accurately. For example armour, and citadels. We have a min value and a max value. But how big is the citadel? Where is it located? Because if its underwater then its armour is far less of an issue. How much of the citadrl is covered with the min value? How much the max value? What angle is the citadel armour? For example if you had 2 ships, and one had citadel min 30mm max 300mm, and the other had citadel min 5mm max 200mm, which one sounds better? What if I now said the first one's citadel was the entire ship, with completely flat armour, that was 30mm all over apart from a tiny patch that was 300mm, and that the other ships' citadel was minute, underwater, completely angled, and 200mm all over apart from a tiny patch on the bottom that was 5mm. Now which sounds better? To reference WoT the KV5 has nice armour values on paper. Shame its armour is completely flat and thus easy to penetrate, and has a huge weak spot on the front. Similarly the T34 has a huge turret armour value. Which only applies to a very small portion of the turret. Same for guns, and DPM values. They're all taken off the theoretical max damage. So the fuso does more damage if all 12 of its shells hit and penetrate the citadel than the warspite will do if all 8 of its shells hit and penetrate the citadel. Thats fair enough. Now how much more likely is a 381mm to penetrate armour than a 356mm? A lot? A bit? Nothing at all? Assuming there is a difference in pen values, at what point does the larger caliber become a hinderence because of over penetration? We know the max damage with a citadel hit, but whats the average damage for a normal pen hit? If its 1k per shell for the fuso and 1.5k for the warspite then they'll actually do the same on average, since 12x 1k = 12k and 8x 1.5k = 12k (these numbers are made up to illustrate a point, i have no idea of actual values) Then we have dispersion. Is this fixed or scaled? The fuso is listed as having worse dispersion, but it can shoot further. What dispersion does it have at the warspites range? Does it still potentially spread out up to the listed value even at very short ranges, or is it scaled. If so, whats its dispersion at 16.7km? The next question then is how much does this affect the number of shots? I.e. if they both only hit 75% of their shots because of the dispersion (so 8 shells for the fuso, 6 for the warspite), how does this affect the average damage? Lets use the hypothetical average of 1k per shell for the fuso and 1.5k for the warspite (again, numbers plucked out of the air to show point) 100% hits = 12k for both (even) 75% hits = 8k fuso, 9k warspite (warspite ahead) 50% hits = 6k both (even again) 25% hits = 4k fuso, 3k warspite (fuso ahead). Similarly the secondary guns - the fuso has more. So stats indicate its better. However they all point in different directions, so it can never use all of them unless completely surrounded. The warspite has the vast majority of hers pointing forward and can bring them all to bear. So which is better? Untill we start getting armour models, pen values, dispersion at certain ranges, and average shell damage then the stats as given are virtually worthless. I know from my own experience that I seem to do more damage with the fuso than the warspite. By a reasonable amount. What I don't know is if this is because one is better than the other, or because I use them differently - the fuso I ahoot at BB, to (almost) the exclusion of everything else. The warspite I actively fight destroyers and cruisers, so where I might spend 5 mins fighting two DD in the warspite, kill both and have 26000 damage to show for it (all their HP), I could do the same amount in one good volley from.the fuso onto another BB.

You might find that it sorts itself out with the american BB, their shorter ranges means they'll need to be more agressive to get into range. I find myself spearheading in the warspite ,and on several occassions had a 3 warspite charge down the middle (either to great victory or a pitiful doom)

I think the co-op is pretty much a get to grips with the basics. After the 583 games you've had against the bots (that's quite an impressive number), you probably won't find them a challenge any more. Play some real people, they're..... sometimes more skilled sometimes less and frequently utterly unpredictable

I frequently change around what Im playing based on what the queue looks like. The other day there was noone around tier 6-8 so my nagato kept being put in tier 10 games. I swapped to playing tier 2-3 instead.

I believe when I asked this the answer was cumulative, so 5km + 20% = 6km. + additional 20% = 7.2km Im yet to test this though.

Well looking at the US Battleships (latest twitch feed from WG), they're all short ranged. So they can't fire from the back of the map anyway.

So this has happened on all my battle today, the queue will load, the ship numbers will change wildly - theres 98 people waiting, 346, 23 and it'll repeatedly try to load into a game (the anchor symbol flashes up) before going back to the queue. It does the same with ship type and numbers before finally loading a game. It doesn't seem to crash, just be incredibly weird

To be fair, it's probably more a translation issue. I'm guessing english isn't his first language just by how things are phrased, so it probably was meant to be that he's played nearly 500 battles (true), and that he has experience in all the classes (true)

I personally have no objection if they put in the spotting xp mechanics from WoT, namely if you're in range to detect them yourself, you get full xp. If someone else is detecting them for you, you split your xp with your spotter. This to me kills 3 birds with one stone: It makes BB close to 15/17 km to get full xp for BB and CA It gives xp for CV who brought an all fighter load out and are reduced to scouting DD. It gives japanese DD something to do while they wait for their torps to reload

Don't know who put the minus for this idea. Personally I think its a good idea, plenty of times I've fired but needed to look around/evade and thus not been looking at the "victim" when the shells land. I can see from the little ribbons how many have hit, but unless I'm still looking at the ship I don't always know how much damage it did. For those that have never used it in WoT, there's a little log up in the top corner that reads something like: Enemy 1: AP 5 hits 6568 damage. Enemy 2: AP 12 hits 8005 damage. Destroyed. Enemy 1: AP 1 hit 247 damage. Etc. It doesnt show who hit you, just a running tally of the damage youve done

I tried using HE exclusively for a few games. The results were..... poor. For example in one game my secondarys did more damage than the HE. In another game I had 21 hits with HE, was about to sink anyway so fired AP as the last volley. 7 AP hits, which did more damage than all the previous HE put together.

Well depends on how slow they are, and what their range is. Slow and long range means japanese BB won't have much advantage. Slow and medium range means they'll need to close the gap, so japanese speed + range can keep them at bay. Also define "great" guns: there's alpha, rof (and thus dpm), range and dispersion to be taken into account.

Will expect the grind to be similar to WoT, so higher tiers will need 100+ games with one ship to unlock the next ship. Atm the xp is massively boosted (2k and 3k games are not uncommon at all), and the money is boosted too (think I have 5mill sat around and I'm not using a prem account). This might be a good thing atm we have people with like 60 games in tier 7 while still not even understanding the basics