HidesHisFace

There already is a lag topic in the beta feedback section ;) Anyway - yeah, the lag is there and is real - and it seems to be bigger than the ping counter says. The delay between the click and the shot is often close to around 2 seconds, which makes the game unplayable, while the game itself reports ping of just above 120, jumping to 250, which should not cause a delay THIS big. Another thing - the lag seems to get significantly worse during combat - when just sailing to the target, I noticed significantly lower pings. This suggests some massive issue with the net code or the server after the restart yesterday.

The game is unplayable at the moment. Before the ping was stable 35, now it jumps between 80-125 with frequent jumps to 250+, very rarely dropping back to 35. It makes aiming at targets that change direction virtually impossible, as your guns will shoot with good second or two of delay. I can confirm it lags like crazy when in combat. When sailing in more peaceful area of the map, I didn't notice a significant lag.

As the title says. I noticed that with current amount of lead needed and the interface layout people with NON-wide screens may have problems aiming in some situations, especially against faster targets at medium ranges, effectively putting them at quite a disadvantage. Basically, against targets such as fast destroyers you may need to fire at target you don't (or just barely) see on your screen or be forced to zoom out, thus potentially reducing your precision (you may not be able to easily determine if enemy is turning when zoomed out). Another small problem I noticed is related to the in game chat - if it is active it may obscure the view on moving targets that are to the left of the reticule, making aiming needlessly difficult and annoying

The damage values may be explained by different, more advanced ammunition used on the same gun. Similar thing was common in tanks - the Russian D10 gun received multiple ammunition upgrades over the years. However, in WoT it is represented by small changes to gun's names or, in many cases, addition of completely made up or obscure guns. Reload differences - well, different ship = different system loading the shells, different way the shells travel from the magazine and different turret designs, for example giving more space. De Moines for example has a fully automated loading system.

I don't know, but I get the impression that the guys asking for torp nerfs basically want to be able to avoid them all the time. You do understand that torps have effectively lower accuracy than damn battleships, and battleships in current build are notorious for their abysmal accuracy... Besides, it is not like you are supposed to avoid all of them - like people are not supposed to avoid all the gun fire. Players using the grid patterns for torps are relatively rare as it requires good coordination of squadrons and micro management most people can't... erm... manage. Most will simply try to plant a spread to your side. I have found that a good defence, other than turning towards or away from the enemy bombers is constantly changing you speed, as it throws of enemy aim. The thing I may agree with is that the ships that can meet carriers should all have access to SOME AA, not essentially very good, but something - simply to avoid the "hand of god" syndrome typical for World of Tanks artillery, where you have absolutely no counter. Now, torp bombers have some minor glitches - sometimes they drop torps in very, very strange spreads, clearly due to messed up pathfinding but this will eventually get fixed.

That is the thing, I prefer 203mm guns and still see Cleveland as OP. "trust me on this, once you know where to shoot it you can kill it very quickly indeed" That applies to every single ship in the game and does not prove Cleveland to be fragile at all - even a destroyer can easily survive a full BB salvo to the face if the BB player has no idea what he's doing. Every ship goes down easily once you start hitting the citadel, but in case of Clevelands, citadel consists of two rather small boxes, and only one of those boxes lies directly under smokestack - in other words, weak spots on this ship are hard to hit, even with accurate guns. And no, don't even think about advising getting close to hit more reliably - the last thing you want is to get close to Cleveland, where its abysmal shell velocity does not matter. The only problem one in Cleveland might have is that due to the fact that this ship is so absurdly OP for tier VI, you ARE going to get focused by almost everything that has you in range.

Except St. Luis - firing AP with relatively low calibre guns on this monster is not going to end well unless you fire at perfect, flat angle.

Clevelands ARE OP, no argument here - in every battle they land as top tier, they are guaranteed to win a game, scoring 2-3 kills each. The team with more Cleves usually wins. Direct competitor, Aoba is a fine ship, very versatile but in direct combat it simply has no chance against raw DPM of Cleveland - Aoba's trademark citadel sniping is worthless against Cleveland because it has virtually no citadel - only two small boiler rooms that are insanely hard to hit at any reasonable (that is NOT point blank) range. That means that Cleve is not only very good in terms of firepower but also way more durable than it should be. Now, does it need a nerf? No, it does not, it simply has NO PLACE on tier VI, it belongs to tier VII or VIII with current stats. It massacres destroyers in no time - 2-3 salvos is all you need. It will win against Aoba in gunnery duel and it can cripple battleships quite reliably with constant barrage of fire - it is not only the matter of being set on fire - such a barrage that Cleve can perform simply causes people to panic in many cases - when you get hit by 12 guns every 7 seconds or so you don't care about shooting back, you think of getting out of there instead. There is simply nothing on equal tier that can counter it. Even with Omaha that is FAR superior to Furutaka such problem does not exist - why? Furutaka is horrible, true, but counters Omaha in direct confrontation quite easily.

If you've been playing recently... the game got kind of flooded by bad teams - playing on weekends and during the day is kind of pointless. When 2 FULL hp BB/CA cruiser kills in a Minekaze is not enough and still brings you 7 losses in a row, you just know something is horribly wrong. At this point no matter how well or how badly you do, the rest of your team won't carry their weight anyway. And the fact that FurryTaco is a horrible piece of scrap does not help either. My advice - play other ships, collect XP bonus flags and USE THEM. The grind in Furutaka made my winrate drop by 5%, I'm not kidding. This thing is horrible, plain and simple. It CAN work in very specific circumstances - pitted against completely clueless cruiser players - it makes short work of them. It frequently meets Omahas, and while Omaha is in general a superior ship, it looses to FurryTaco in open combat, if you use AP and consistently hit huge citadel of US cruiser.

To be honest, I'm not worried about the amount of players. What I'm worried about is that this game is starting to develop the same syndromes as WoT - playing on weekends is already absolutely pointless, so is playing before 11PM on weekdays.

There was even a topic floating around here with a link to youtube page showcasing this mod. Topic got probably scrapped by now. Anyway - BBs need some serious adjustments in gameplay, this is their main problem - currently there is a massive trend for BBs to just sit back and shoot at maximum range where their accuracy is abysmal (even more so than on normal ranges that is) - this is exactly why they are so ineffective. BBs are basically playing WoT artillery, except THEY HOLD THE MAJORITY of hitpoint pool. This means that every single BB standing at maximum, ineffective range is literally stripping the team from 50k+ hitpoints that should be soaking up damage on the front-line. There should be some mechanic in play to force BBs closer to the line to make use of that hp pool - the situation when cruisers and destroyers have to lead the charge because of cowards like this is simply ridiculous. In some cases the situation gets so absurdly stupid that you can predict the outcome based on BBs behaviour after first 2 minutes of the battle. Basically, the simplest solution would be... To nerf BB's range, and significantly so but this solution would require massive compensation buffs. Second solution - make camping a bannable offence - simple, but irritatingly slow to check + some people will still end up with games ruined by campers. Reward getting closer - simple and effective, but reward must be worth it. And yes, I know that some BBs are designed for long range combat but there is a difference between camping at max range and hitting one shot per 3 salvos and actually dealing dmg at mid ranges.

That mod is alive and well. A new version for open beta was released like two weeks ago, so yeah, cheats are back in game.

In current version MM acts like somebody with a drinking problem with absolutely no sense of balance. I mean - it is not only about the tiers, but most importantly about the numbers of ships per class in each team. For example when one team gets 4 DDs and the other gets 2 DDs - it is not like MM could not physically balance it out - 4+2=6, 6/2 = 3 - so 3 DDs per team would be a logical solution but no. And it is not an isolated case - it happens all the time AND causes further problems with tiering. When enemy team gets 2 tier V CVs and 3BBs, you team will likely get something like 5BBs... The problem is - 2 of them are very likely to be tier 3 junk that is completely obsolete in tier V battle anyway. Besides, Tier IV battleships that are likely to be in the setup have horrible AA as well. The MM balances numbers only and not classes against one another. Unlike WoT, WoWS relies more on synergy. A DD heavy team will most likely feast upon a group of BBs, while die to a cruiser spam. WoWS is more about classes and less so about tiers. In many cases higher tier machines are not essentially better than previous tiers, hitpoints included - it is especially true for destroyers and cruisers.

Yes, seems like because of horrible weekend teams servers decided to commit suicide. Can't really blame them.

No, just learn to use them effectively. The last thing we need is a weapon that requires virtually no skill to use. Most ships that can fire relatively large torpedo spread BECAUSE not all torps are meant to hit - plain and simple. Torps are the slowest weapon, making them the least accurate but they also puck the meatiest punch, equivalent of a solid citadel penetration on each hit. In current state they are FINE as it is, maybe with need for some individual tweaks for certain types but that is about it. In terms of mechanics, nothing really needs to be changed. Toprs are also an area denial weapon - if enemy expects torps, he will start changing course, taking evasive action. A nice spread in narrows means that enemy won't use it for some time. Evading means that enemy ships is NOT aiming effectively at the moment. It has more benefits than raw damage. Simply learn to fire your spreads. NEVER match the spread to the indicator perfectly - always fire one a bit forwards and one a bit backwards or fire a wide spread and a narrow inside - this way you maximize the chance of hitting a target at longer distances.

Module dmg that didn't do any hitpoints of damage possibly.

If only, I think that flooding damage after single-two torpedo hits, or perhaps dependant on zone (like when torps hit the bulge, or less vital parts) should be lower or faster to contain, but in general toprs are fine, especially in terms of raw damage. In vast majority of cases, if you get torped to death, it is your and only your fault as the situations in which you should expect attack are absurdly obvious: - Destroyers at distance of 5-10km - expect immediate or delayed torpedo attack. - Stuck in narrows? Expect torps. - IJN cruisers - expect torps, especially if they are retreating/showing their bum. - Smokescreen ahead = torps ahead. - Torp bombers at range of 5km? Take evasive action just in case. Sure, you won't be always able to avoid ALL toprs - that would make them pointless after all but still, the point stands - you should never find yourself in situations where you receive full spread to the side - if it happens, you deserved it - you've been greatly outplayed. Besides - cruiser-mounted torps are situational, while destroyers can be easily one-shot killed by many bigger ships, so they need something to counter their fragile nature - and a massively powerful, though slow to wield weapon is their answer.

Worked quite well for me. It IS a giant destroyer - except not a Japanese one Kuma is more similar to a huge edition of an American destroyer - swift, agile, with good guns and perfectly able to use pretty decent torps. Now, due to simple size and larger calibre, her guns are more capable than on destroyers. Still - you absolutely need to know how to use torps - in comparison to St. Luis, in direct combat, you are an underdog. While Kuma has slightly (and I mean it) stronger armour around non-vital parts, St. Luis has far superior belt armour and protection around water line. I'm not even mentioning the hitpoint advantage and sheer amount of guns that beast has. The thing is - while St. Luis is a frontline brawler, Kuma is a skirmisher and ambusher. It works perfectly as support for both other cruisers and destroyers. In first cases it can contribute to overall damage and exploit the gaps, and for destroyers, it may act as sort of firepower anchor.

Which means they ARE useful, because most people have zero idea how to play and effectively avoid torps.

I had a couple of games in Aoba and while it is not spectacular per se, it is a pretty solid ship, far superior to FurryTaco in pretty much every aspect. While FurryTaco is massively inflexible, able to perform only moderately well as a mid-range cruiser hunter, Aoba can perform variety of roles, cruiser-hunting included - and it can perform them quite well. Similar guns, but with better turrets and rate of fire mean it can rip apart enemy cruisers if you know where to shoot AP. Faster reload and traverse means you can rather easily change the ammo and direction, meaning that you are actually a threat to destroyers, even if they surprise you. AA guns are also rather okay on this thing - not typical american level, but still good enough to fend off some planes. What makes me like this ship the most are torpedoes - you finally get good range on them allowing you to fire them more reliably or to launch covering spreads over narrows and smokescreens.

In other words, it is NOT balanced, because it needs to be in very specific and favourable situation to make it work - if you put Omaha in the same situations Furu would work... Well, Omaha will achieve better results still... The only disadvantage in Omaha in comparison to Furutaka is a GIANT citated. On the other hand, Furu is insanely easy to immobilize - I had games where I was simply unable to move - my steering OR engine was being knocked out right the second I repaired it. In Furu, it is perfectly possible to damage the engine without dealing a single hit point to a ship itself... Let us face it - EVERY ship will perform well if you plan movements in such a way you'll be able to get free shots without ever suffering return fire - that is NOT a balancing point for cruisers.

This ship quite literally caused my winrate to drop by 5% over the course of the grind. I will NEVER, EVER play this turd again, even if they pay me to do so. People say Aoba is not very good either, but I'll tell you what - after a single battle in it I can already tell, in comparison to Furutaka it is like a second coming of RNGesus, as it has decent range on torps, okay AA, acceptable turret traverse and decent reload - in other words, it fixes every single problem of FurryTaco - while still being stock... In theory FurryTaco acts as an anti-cruiser ship but in practice Omaha fares better in that role, as it can manoeuvre faster and bring guns to bear more effectively. AP on its guns, while worse, is still good enough for citadel penetrations if the angle is right and sheer volume of fire mitigates lower shell reliability. AND it has both better torps and AA. To put it plain and simple - Furutaka sucks, and sucks hard. It has almost no redeeming factors other than pretty good accuracy on her guns and okay speed.

Omaha is quite literally made of citadels - pretty much every penetrating hit to the side seems to one or two-shot kill you. I have been one salvo killed in ship more than in ANYTHING else I have - and yes, that includes Furutaka that also has pretty big citadel. Other than that, Omaha suffers from massive engine that seems to be easy to knock out. Now, don't get me wrong, it is a fine ship, but the vulnerabilities of it are really starting to get on my nerves. As for Cleavelands - I don't have one yet, but I'm scared of those thing every time I meet them. The armour is not that bad if angled, and the turret angles on this thing seem to be good enough to allow it to fire all guns even at rather sharp angles, either while retreating or advancing.

Myogi is pretty horrible, really. Awesome range means absolutely nothing with abysmal accuracy and so few guns... Ranging shots are impossible with it because of that. Fortunately - Kongo is WAY better, even stock it beats fully upgraded Myogi in every aspect except speed - I can actually hit thing semi-reliably with it. Still - the grind with Myogi is relatively quick and unlocks TWO ships. If you feel bad playing it... Just remember that you could have been playing Furutaka - it is completely useless AND it is a tier V, meaning longer grind against tougher opponents.

But here you have ranges compressed AT LEAST twice, in most cases reload times are also faster and battles are meant to last 20minutes MAX, unlike real sea battles that could take whole hours of trying to hit somewhere AROUND the target.