BlueMoon51

I'm looking forward to them although still pretty concerned about how they will work within the game.

I'm not playing a great deal right now, but if you put a gun to my head I would say in the ships I have played the figures look about right.

This is a prime example of what the issue is with the EU server. The fact that the RN should have a greater presence than they do (don't forget there are more ARP ships in the game than RN ones!), doesn't in any way imply that other nations shouldn't be also included. The fact that we have only three non-German, European ships after 15 months is outrageous, end of story and you shouldn't take that as being anti any one nation(other than perhaps the PLAN that simply shouldn't be in the game).

When I saw 4 in my first game yesterday(3 on my side 1 on the other)I thought it might be a good weekend to have a break ;-) I really don't get it chances are you will get your [edited]handed to you, so what's in it for WG AT THE VERY LEAST have them simply play each other or just co-op.

Most U-Boats seemed to have been closer to 20 than that. However, Im not suggesting engaging on the surface I'm suggesting you simply limit the time they are underwater(so in game one would assume say they have a 4km detection range they would be looking to drive at around that kind of distance for an attack run) . It is really a major misconception that they were true submarines anyway as they spent the vast majority of the time on the surface.

Whenever this comes up there is always the "well they are too slow to use" how about you restrict their underwater time to maybe 5 mins before recharging their batteries(that would add a whole new aspect to the game)on the surface they really weren't any slower than some of the battleships in the game. My worry though would be that they would "slow" the game down and make heavier ships very reluctant to push and I won't even start to think of the rage on the board when "noobs" in subs start sinking Battleships!

If there is no impact why do it at all. Personally, I would sooner use my reports positively with people that have made my experience better. Reducing it to the lowest common denominator seems counter-productive(although I'm not saying there aren't times when it is valid). My point was there was an example where someone assumes one thing without knowing all the facts

I only report "poor play" if it's ridiculously stupid, I always think people should be careful what they consider poor. I recall a game in a DD where I had 4 kills and ended up high scoring with over 3000XP near the end of the game I'm trying to recap A and lose my engine and I'm on fire I repair lose my rudder so am now sailing away from the cap zone nothing I can do..... result, the battleship that's left and his 2 division mates(who together had less kills and less XP that me combined)neg rep me for poor play for being a noob for running away from the cap zone, telling me I'm a noob for running off and not capping!

I have no issue with not having a flag(although I was sure there is one in my flag tab...but anyway). I am thankful that I got to play the game early and in some small part helped the release.

How do you feel about Battleship accuracy? seeing as battleships couldn't hit....... well the side of a battleship! for hours and for example the Battle of the Falklands lasted 8hrs!!!!!!!!!!

Surely the Hood (admiral class)will come on a 2nd fast battleships/battlecruiser line at tier 6 or 7?? 8 seems a little over the top even if they include the refit she was supposed to have. What's the betting that WG will say we have listened to the feedback from the playerbase in regards to the RN light cruisers and lack of HE and RN Battleships will just get HE instead of AP!

Thanks for getting back to us, that is indeed good news although not something I will personally be buying.

​I stand corrected, I was aware of the York and County classes and the earlier one with 7 1/2 inch guns which I forget off the top of my head. But I wasn't aware that others had even been considered after that.

Well true, but the Royal Navy didn't even design or plan to have them after the mid 20s.

​I'm not commenting on the strength of Battleships whatsoever

​It's like saying Remember you're a womble was Mike Batt's greatest hit!

Totally support this, however, there is no guarantee that the delay won't still result in a substandard product. I have said a number of times, forgetting any agenda that WG might have had in the past (you can believe that or not). The huge issue right now is the overall mood of the majority of the playing base(made up of a high % of Battleship players)is overwhelmingly opposed to the introduction of an effective light cruiser line (using traditional methods of engagement against heaver units(basically everyone!!)), that is not totally WG fault the RN simply didn't build heavy cruisers at the end game level.

My experience of playing both classes I would suggest that they require different skills I wouldn't subscribe one to having "more" Carriers require alot of multitasking, Arty its more about making the right choices quickly(because the aiming is so long you can't afford to change your mind). As for being able to fire hitting the whole of the map, I didn't find that the case for the tree I went up, in fact the majority didn't have that ability.

For a minute, take a step back and answer this. What would the state of the game be, if the German Battleships had tanked as badly as the two new Soviet lines did? How many topics would we have on the board then, about the game long-term. To me, even as primarily a cruiser player(and fed up of facing 8 battleships every game!), this shows the potential interest in the game, if WG get its development right.

Right it's called gold-ammo but its just like a Warships premium consumable and can be bought for in-game silver(the term gold refers back from the times it was the only purchase payment option and the name never changed). Each shell varies but basically you get higher penetration and(normally)slightly higher damage.

I would take issue with the whole arty takes no skill, to play arty well in WOT it, without doubt, requires a skill(although not the same one as the rest of the game), indeed on a strategic level they are much more important when effectively used because you need to know where your team needs your support the most. In fact, as much as arty is hated it makes camping of the heavy units much harder. I guess that was what they had in mind for carriers in WOWs although it was implemented properly.

Really enjoyed WOT played 13,000 games and can understand its appeal(compared with 4,000 Warships), I will pop back every now and then for a game. However, I think for me I love warships although my period of interest is normally slightly earlier(the transition to steam through to the end of WW1). In terms of the game it just feels more epic sailing around in large warships. In terms of the gameplay, I like the pace and as others have said tactics seem to be more of a factor. And while I understand that Clans are greatly anticipated (and would be a benefit to the playerbase as a whole). I don't miss the toxic level that comes with Clan platoons farming for credits and xp at every level in the game (perhaps they could consider adding an option to turn off playing against/with divisions). I'm really looking forward to the addition of new content, my one big worry long term is unlike WOT you can't really do alot with the maps, they are all flat(go figure!)and have islands or not............ maybe they could have floating icebergs??? I do think they should look into more AI controlled options perhaps land based airfields? maybe land targets Carriers could attack (ports, industry etc), I think the key to making Carriers more interesting is to add options and in turn if there was a chance of running into land-based aircraft it would make balancing more even(for example US cruisers with the best AA at higher tiers that only matters 1 in 10 games yet how do you balance that power??? for the games you have aircraft to fight or for the games you don't).

Don't really think the RN cruisers will be an in game counter for German Battleships,

You have to understand that for many people see this is the first major addition to the game in 10 months(discounting ARP and Soviet Ships)AND even if they hadn't been they would have been greatly anticipated. I really don't know what WG could do to "balance" this unless they held off and introduced the KM BB's with the RN Cruisers. However for those of the playerbase that have been waiting since release for them that would be dreadfully unfair. I should point out while I have played them a little I'm more of a cruiser player myself so I'm not saying that out of self interest. The cold facts are that it takes so long to model lines that unlike WOT a great many people will have played thru each line that interests them when a new line is released, that is especially when you consider that the Soviet lines haven't been very popular despite there basic strength.

I was quite shocked I thought my play-style would result in earning less(I'm not very good!), but I have found I have been making more money even at tier 10 which is nice!!!