Jump to content

Alex_Connor

Players
  • Content count

    68
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1225

About Alex_Connor

  • Rank
    Leading Rate
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

138 profile views
  1. Sharks still winning?

    That’s not how it works... There’s no Sharks vs Eagles matchmaking, Sharks and Eagles are mixed in both teams so event has zero effect on your win rate.
  2. What Were Your Greatest Gaming Achievements Today ?

    Take Atlanta for a spin. Tier 9 game, alright. Okinawa. 11.1km range because no AFT. Yeah, this is going to hurt. Somehow ended up top on XP with 2 kills in a winning game. Probably a tier multiplier to get top because not crazy damage, but very hard fought battle outnumbered against more than half the enemy team on A including FdG, Roon, Bismark + Tirpitz and a few tier 7s while the rest of our team pushed round to take the flank. Also had an amazing fun game as top tier in the Hood, sometimes you just have to go YOLO and rampage through panicking lower tier cruisers and destroyers as a 34kt 50,000 ton missile with every gun blazing. Only regret is we smashed through both flanks so hard the game barely lasted 10min .
  3. Adding H.M.S Repulse?

    Graf Spee is just fine at tier 6 because it gets cruiser matchmaking and is put up against things like Leander or Pensacola instead of being sent to fight the 12x 356mm gunned New Mexico or Fuso head on. As a battleship (for matchmaking purposes) Repulse compares closely with the Kongo on armor and speed, Kongo would have 8 guns with 21.6km range and Repulse would have less guns and a lot less range but benefit from better armor overmatch thanks to the caliber. Renown on the other hand would have the upgraded turrets for longer range plus a full modern AA suite which is enough to make the ship a tier 6.
  4. Adding H.M.S Repulse?

    Repulse would be a tier 5 IMO, wasn't much modernised and at best comparable to a WW2 Kongo. Renown on the other hand would fit at tier 6 with the added deck armor and modern dual purpose secondaries.
  5. Rightful Heir to the Cleveland in Operations?

    No one even mentions Dallas... Really that much more fragile?
  6. Separate Tier 10 from other tiers in battle.

    Point about tier 8 Premiums suffering is a good one, I bought a Prinz Eugen in the summer sale, still learning to play it so results aren’t amazing but when 11 out of 13 marches so far have been tier 10 and being the only tier 8 on my team with 11 tier 10s is not uncommon I would not even consider buying another tier 8 Premium and am seriously reconsidering going above tier 7 in tech tree.
  7. [GO NAVY!] Resource Tactics (team-switching)

    I tried Eagles for 1 day (6th Aug?), got 357 points over 12 matches, no offer to switch. Every day that I play Sharks get the offer to switch within 3-5 games.
  8. Indefinite queue times for CVs in the night, please

    I don’t mind a few strange battles with few ships but half the time when you get dragged into oneof these battles one of the CVs is going to be afk...
  9. USS Alabama

    I don’t think Russia even had radar in ww2 lol All the Russian ships with radar are post-ww2 which is maybe why Russian radar has better range.
  10. USS Alabama

    US were pretty far behind on radar going into WW2, they only made the tech leap when British radar (and a bunch of other tech) was given to the US in 1940. So in late 1941 at Pearl Harbour US had their first experimental search radar, meanwhile UK and Germany had fire control radar and were putting search radar on basically everything that floated right down to armed trawlers. To be fair US caught up pretty fast developing UK tech, their mid war radar was still pretty crap, but from 1944 onwards the US came out with probably the best fire control radar of the war and they were building radar in such huge numbers that they were even supplementing British radar types for the RN and RAF.
  11. Question for anyone with both ships, how does Scharnhorst as bottom tier feel compared to Kronshtadt as top tier? Because I've run into a few Kronshtadts playing as Scharnhorst and they do not in any way feel intimidating. It's a lot like fighting another Scharnhorst except Kronshtadt players are way more prone to camping in cover (probably because used to getting shot at by tier 10). I know Kronshtadt has radar and tier 9 modules, but everything else looks like minor trade-offs between the two ships. Scharnhorst has better armor, better stock range and torpedoes, Kronshtadt has the edge on reload, slightly higher shell damage and 2 kts more speed. Hitpoints, concealment, AA, max range (if range mod on Kronshtadt), shell velocity, all more or less tied between the two ships. Don't get me wrong Scharnhorst is great fun regardless of MM and can make a big impact playing as a supercruiser in tier 9 matches, but unless I'm missing something obvious about the Kronshtadt (like much higher gun performance or something?) the two ships look like opposite sides of the same coin.
  12. [GO NAVY!] Resource Tactics (team-switching)

    Anyone else considering just getting a bunch of normal camos instead of the tier 10s? I'm not particularly interested in the Des Moines or Worcester and the camos themselves are sort of fugly (in a well modelled but really not my thing way), meanwhile 195+95 points and 1x container purchase for 10+10 would give enough points to get 150 sharks/eagles camos. Which would go a very long way towards ship grinds and both types look pretty good...
  13. Could fix the problem by changing the formula to “ divide by (subscriber count + 20k)” or similar reasonable figure, that way the smaller and mid-sized channels have a chance but you don’t end up with the smallest channel automatically winning. Edit; NVM, already been suggested.
  14. RN DDs and their significance for DDs in general

    Royal Navy conservative? We invented turbine propulsion, the dreadnought, the battlecruiser, the aircraft carrier and the destroyer. Plus a few that didn't take off like large light cruisers and submarines with battleship guns, but hey, not all ground-breaking experiments can be winners. Plus we either invented or produced the first successful version of pretty much all the "gimmicks" like hydro, radar, radar jammers etc and went on to stick those "gimmicks" on everything that floated to the point they stop being gimmicks and just become standard equipment. Seriously if you run into a british armed trawler early in WW2 it probably has radar. I'm not crazy about HE battleships because no self respecting battleship would fire HE at a naval target (or probably even carry HE in the first place) but British DDs with hydro are a great fit.
  15. RN DD announced

    Based on what I've seen ingame with supertesters and of course the videos, Brit DDs are cap contesters and ambush predators, combining very solid firepower with high stealth and long duration hydro. Considering just how good these things are going to be at killing destroyers it would be more than unfair for Brit DDs to also be capable of running down their prey, and Brit DDs have all the usual destroyer tools for dealing with bigger ships. There are a few niggles to work out like swapping wide spread torpedoes for narrow and the Daring/Jutland should probably get improved 1/5 overmatch on their HE since they get smaller caliber 114mm guns (but with heavier shells) compared to 120mm on the tier 4-8 (btw 120mm would work all the way to t10 without IFHE, it overmatches all the same things as US 127mm guns do). Otherwise good, I'm really looking forward to the line coming out.
×