Khul

I'd like to echo the above: this is another step towards World of Battleships, & I don't like it. Their agility buff (& indeed the ridiculously agile USA BB line) means they are much less likely to be damaged by the alleged "hard counter" of destroyers' torpedo fire or damage from the air. Whilst the technical stuff is nice--the new sounds, the shell damage mechanics etc--I admit I don't like the direction of the game, it seems to be mirroring World of Tanks' "ALL HEAVIES ALL THE TIME HAHA CORRIDORS FTW YOU SHOOT ME I SHOOT YOU"-potatofest. When I first picked this game up there were alternatives to just using one class to the exclusion of all others, & still the ships that carried were the battleships, despite the viable alternatives... but WG makes them stronkererer whilst slamming all other classes with the nerfbat? Sigh.

FWIW, I always use the 10km torps on my Minekaze & love them, & the Furataka has "Type 8" torpedoes with a 6km range. I really don't get the loons who want to use short range torps on IJN DDs, if I wanted an American DD with terribad guns I'd... Play a US DD & tape over the left mouse button or something.

Are you the dude who got torped in his Cleveland this morning? Because the very next words out of your mouth (after swearing & calling your opponent "over-powered", 'cos he got you when you weren't paying attention) were that your Cleveland is NOT overpowered & definitely not the most laughably overpowered ship in the entire game. Just a head's-up, if it wasn't you then apologies. I'll stop bunging up the thread now...

I am confused: are you against the concept of warships having armour or against the concept of armour meaning something in-game? As to the similarites: why, yes, anyone would think that the core of both games involved huge machines covered in very thick bits of metal flinging smaller pieces of metal at each other at extremely high velocity. Funny that the two concepts overlap. FWIW, I myself was shocked when I downloaded this game & it didn't have unleashable terror-dolphin consumables, & also shared your disappointment that a game called "World of Warships" & apparently based on WW2-era naval warfare included such monstrous concepts as armoured ships shooting one another, rather than the aforementioned terror-dolphin launchers (& exploding lobster howitzers).

Ha. Dude, there is no way in any of the multitude of Hells that I am sitting still in my DD & valiantly throwing myself away after the rest of my team has evaporated. Last night was a perfect example. I was on three kills, only one other player on my team had downed a ship, & the enemy was capping. So, I obviously dutifully flung myself at their teeming Clevelands & battlecruisers, the panoply to encapsulate the unspoken nobility of our comr-- Actually, wait: no I didn't do that, because I was the only one who'd done any work at all, by my own lights, & I'd worked bloody hard. So, I continued to play the game on my terms, & I kept playing bloody hard, & I torpedoed two more ships (but didn't sink them, admittedly) whilst remaining undetected & resetting the cap enough so that I did not suffer a loss. Did it piss the opposing team off? Yes, I hope so. Did it give me immense satisfaction? Yes, yes it did. This has happened to me whilst playing a DD before. It will again. With the siege mentality that I find (quite appealing) that settles over me whilst playing a DD, there is no way on the planet I'm going to suddenly give up & sail politely into a bigger ship's guns, just so he thinks I'm a great guy. I'm not a great guy. I'm a sneaky-ninjasneakyhiddentorpedoingbastard in a tiny tin can. The sea is very large (as are enemy battleships & cruisers) & my ship is so very small. Am I going to play defensively in the scenario I've outlined above? Damn straight I am. If you want a kill that badly, come find me at the end... But watch out for the trails in the water.

^ This

Same here, started a game in my Fuso, got dumped out twenty seconds in following red lag light. Had to restart the client as it wasn't responding. Now "in queue". Probably getting many messages of "FUSO NOOB" in chat (more than normal, I mean). PS: UK here.

Right, sorry I was confused when you started listing historical/in-game numbers of guns & said "So the AA abilty of the Atlanta is cut in half at best.. most due "game Balance reasons"" that bit was what confused me as it relates not at all to what you are saying now. & was wrong.

Um... I fear you are confused. Or cannot count. In-game number of guns on Atlanta: 4 x 4 = 16 28mm/1.1" 8 x 2 = 16 127mm/5" DP 8 x 1 = er, 8 These figures are more than you quoted for the in-game amounts of AA (two extra single 20mm mounts)! Unless you are somehow counting the torpedo tubes as AAA armament?!?!? & as for your Cleveland "analysis"... You do realise that the only thing they've done is remove the "ability" of the main armament to be used on aircraft--which I believe even has historic precedent, as the 6" was somewhat impractical for AA purposes, right? & that the in-game Cleveland from the figures you yourself quoted has more AAA barrels than its real-life equivalent, less the 6" guns?

Ugh. What a disgusting litany. D'you kiss your loved ones with that mouth?

Do you mean "Are you stopped at the time?" Because if so I genuinely don't have enough information to provide feedback on that; I almost never stop in a DD (unless I run into something. So, thinking about it, I am stopped like at least 20% of the time, I suppose!). All I can report is that if one is doing normal DD stuff then it can be an utter bane if a good CV player latches on to you & decides that, today, your greatest advantage (stealth) is going to be negated. In my few CV games I often use my empty fighters in just such a fashion, because I've played enough DDs to know how annoying it is & how it forces the DD captain to go somewhere safe.

I would respectfully suggest you are NOT right above him, then. In my DDs, you know when there's a decent CV player on the opposite team 'cos you just cannot shake their fighters, no matter what manoeuvres are undertaken & no matter how much smoke is emitted. The only thing you can do is run & hope he decides to light up someone else.

Thing of beauty & wonder, thank you.

Not noticed this on any other class, but I am unable to click on the mini-map when playing a CV. Or rather, I am, but i have to guess where my cursor is pointing before I double-click. Happens windowed or full-screen.

Run out of plus-ones, but QFT. I got a personalised response to an incredibly long rant about the "flavour" of the game & my fears for what will happen to ship-to-ship combat that I sent to support (the main thrust of my argument is the incredible boredom that will set in if they add the damned thing to the client itself, as it will become a glorified browser game imo), but the response was couched in much the same mealy-mouthed, shifting-the-goalposts damage-limitation speak as Tuccy's post, above. I am not brimming with confidence, myself.

If a carrier gets set on fire, you cannot launch or land planes.

"Dripping". With potential. With happy fluids. & also my attention, dripping away if they don't sort the "mod" situation out ASAP.

I am only speculating here but I'm assuming as--from posts where supertesters & alphas have alluded to it, dotted all over the forum--the armour models aren't working yet then yeah, for now high-numbers of guns have a massive advantage over ships with only a few turrets (the ol' spray & pray). I hated the Aoba with a passion & couldn't do jack with it. But on my final game it finally seemed to "click", I achieved a decent sort of performance (not good, but like decent) but by that stage I was thoroughly sick of it & sold it. I will say, having bought the Mogami, that installing the buffed rudder add-on is as far as I can tell a must for Japanese cruisers, imo, 'cos my main complaint with the Aoba (well apart from nearly unusable torpedo launcher placement & its fragility & it utterly glacial turret rotation) was the fact it steered like a pig & made dodging very difficult indeed. My Myogi is capable of dodging even 6" shells, as long as I'm paying attention & have a bit of room, at about 10km.

QFT (sorry, ran out of plus ones)...

He basically doesn't care, but is quick to point out he's not speaking for WG. Again, the "Oh but it only tells you where it thinks you should be shooting" defence is wheeled out, along with "advice" along the lines of "Why aren't you dodging then?" & a hearty dose of "You can't prove it therefore they definitely didn't have it" responses to individuals who claimed to be on the receiving end of it. Sigh. EDIT: Ninja'd.

[Waits patiently to see if WG are brave enough to ban said "aiming-assist device" & therefore deserve my filthy, filthy lucre]

None of my money's going to WG until they find a way to ban the various aim-assist add-ons (I'm not calling mod or cheat or hack because then some pedantic troll will turn up & attempt to bait me, & I don't have time to engage with the neurologically atypical today). I love(d) this game. Can we have it back please WG? My wallet awaits your decision.

Well, there's your problem, then. To expand as it seems my bluntness & attempts at humour are unwarranted: what is at fault in what you are describing are not game mechanics problems. You have admitted such yourself, in the bit I have quoted. Have a better day.

& now you will hear them whine that there is nowhere to hide behind. Hide behind. In an 800 foot long, 100 foot tall, 30,000 tonne lump of metal. They want. To hide. Behind things. Back to the valley in Lakeville with you all!

FWIW I for one detected the sarcasm in OVanBruce's earlier post without any problem. This suggests to me that either A) I am particularly attuned to the nuances of language or B) we share the same sense of humour or C) other people aren't very good at picking up on it, for whatever reason. I leave it up to the reader to ascertain which of these outcomes is the most likely.