wilkatis_LV

Enjoy the fact that it was a short game, not a drawn out 20 min defeat where you did everything you could and it still wasn't enough.

It's one of the updates (if you ever pay attention it goes like download - install - download - install - download - install). There are more to come, with the 0.7.0 being the last one after which you can actually play. We're 2 hours overdue tho, and no info on it

Fuse sensitivity not fuse times. How much armour you need to arm the fuse, not after how long the shell will explode Wiki says they've been doing this since 0.3.1 - WG Support says that not all ships have it in 0.6.15 - meaning that this has to be the slowest standardization in the history of gaming Ahh, I was wondering when you will show up with your impaired reading skills. Time goes on, you don't change As I said in the original post - GC should have had these standard values right from the start, the fact that it didn't was a screwup on WGs side. Now fixing their mistake looks like / is just another buff to a ship that already has 60% WR

Since there always is a lot of crying about every change to BBs (either by BBs about nerfs or from everyone else about any kind of buffs) I'd expect this one not to be an exception. So let me try to be ahead of it and actually explain why. As it happens - just a few days ago I was researching how AP fuses work, and so I have a pretty good idea how this change came to be. 1st of all - yeah, as little as it might be it is a buff to an already heavily OverPerforming BB. Less armour to arm the fuse means more penetrations and less overpens, especially on lightly armoured ships (probably mainly cruisers for main batteries, DDs for secondaries). That can not be denied, but that's not the point. So the change in question: Since there is no mention of "AP fusing" in-game your best bet is to check Wiki - and surprisingly enough it's actually mentioned there (under "Gunnery & Armour penetration") GC has 320mm main battery guns 120mm AP firing secondaries - both values are not among those 4 given. Of course, we can try to see if there is any easily noticeable correlation between them by plugging those values into a graph: There we get a linear progression by which we can calculate the armour thickness necessary to arm your AP shell fuses. There comes a little sidenote I was informed about while talking to Game Mechanics Support This standardization has been going on since 0.3.1 as mentioned wiki (keep in mind game went live over 2 years ago with patch 0.5.2 - so this is started either in Alpha or Closed Beta testing) and apparently it's still not quite done. Also during that conversation we ended up with the "best guess" being that those values are subject to normal rounding. So, now if we plug in GCs gun calibers in the formula we end up with: 0.1644 * 320 + 0.5647 = 53.17 ≈ 53mm 0.1644 * 120 + 0.5647 = 20.29 ≈ 20mm Both of which happen to be the exact values they are being changed to. So the is correct (altho that noticeable or not part could be debated) So the better question(s) would be: @MrConway Seeing how GC is one of the newest BBs in the game how comes it didn't already have correct fusing values at its introduction? And why is this standardization taking well over 2 years to fully implement?

I mean, there is a reason why I never fire at a Fuso unless there is no other target. I never score a damaging pen on them, only turrets...

Correction: tier 8 ships are top tier approximately as often as a GC faildivisioning with higher tier ships

Here's a review for you: Musashi is just a worse Yamato, and Yamato is meh in the first place. Great guns and terrible everything else - and Musashi gets all of that (both good and terrible) nerfed. Plus it's the same "sit back, don't move and just snipe" playstyle. Great as a collectable ship or if you have so much free XP saved up that "why not" and already own the Yamato (if you don't already own the Yamato - just free XP the Yamato then, you'll get a better ship for a possibly lower price depending how far in the line you are) - if you want something to play get the Missouri while you still can.

There already are plenty of armoured secondary turrets. For example take Kii - she has those DP 100mm turrets - HE doesn't hurt them, you kill them with AP. Pretty sure same goes for those secondary turrets that RN ships QE+ have. And I bet other ships with secondaries in turrets have exactly the same point about those.

On mondays stream they said that the "Top Recruiter - the one who recruits most accounts to tier 5" gets those 4 ships. Basically as domen3 said - either a streamer referring all of his viewers or someone with enough time to create and level up a whole lot of accounts. I mean, could also be a joint operation of a clan, where everyone is leveling up multiple new accounts for some one guy just to make him win. A birthday present or something like that, you know

Adaptive top belt - whatever is the ships server / global WR that's your torp protection percentage Better do good with it You call 40s a short cooldown? It's like double what Umikaze has!

Thanks! So here's an updated graph (the one that I gave Negativvv), I also removed the impossible angles that wouldn't happen thanks to normalization: @MrConway I'm not any kind of game balance specialist, but for a ship which already has 60% WR you can clearly see the AP efficiency increase - draw a horizontal line through any point and you'll see by how many degrees less the target has to be angled for your shell to arm its fuse and penetrate (or draw a vertical one and see how many mm less you need at that same angle). This is a clear improvement

GC has 60% already meaning that even potatoes are doing well in it. Hell, at that point why not just give it everything - after all if Kamikaze lands 5 of her 6 torps she can still kill GC in one torp salvo!

Ahh, so more expensive = less potatoes and more unicums playing it. Gosh dang, I thought Derpitz is infested with potatoes, turns out it's so horrible unicums constantly do the dumbest things you can imagine while playing it! Anyhow, congratulations - you have the worst GC stats I've ever seen! Now that has to have had some effort to pull it off with that ship.

Because over hundreds / thousands of games by all kinds of players it pretty accurately shows how the ship is performing? Texas. Revolution. All 4 ARP Kongos. All of them can use captains from other ships - like all premiums do. And there's a good chance people are running 19pt cmdrs in Texas and Kongos as the oldest BB lines. Yet all of them are 50 to 55% WR, not 60% like GC. See the difference?

The TDS buff to GC was completely unfounded, ship was already clearly OverPerforming And no, armour necessary to arm fuse works just one way - as soon as you reach it your shell arms. The only section on BBs where this would be a real question - supersturcture, and low tier BBs tend to have very little of it. Of course, hitting a very flat side may be too thin for that fuse to arm, but that's more of a "if then" case. BB armour generally is thick enough, meanwhile for a thinner target with less armour to arm the fuse you need to angle it less for a pen. Here's a graph of armour and their minimal penetration angles that GC needs to score a successful pen (could have ignored the last 6 or whatever degrees due to normalization but doesn't matter). That gap in the middle is where GC would autobunce before arming the AP fuse (59° is 27mm, and then can overmatch anything up to 22mm which is at 65°) And its WR, as well as personal anecdotal experience, show that it performs more than good enough 2 weeks: Orion is behind in WR by 3.85%, 8438 in DMG, by 0.3 in K/D, by 5% in survivability, and by 4% in hitrate 1 week: Orion is behind in WR by 4.45%, 11 679 in DMG, by 0.4 in K/D, by 4% in survivability, and by 4% in hitrate "Yesterday": Orion is behind in WR by 6.41%, 14 145 in DMG, by 0.4 in K/D, by 3% in survivability, and by 6% in hitrate Same thing, absolutely

This has been discussed again and again. Turrets and barbettes - 0 damage penetrations Secondary guns / turrets - 0 dmage penetrations AA guns / turrets - 0 damage penetrations Spaced armour (for example torpedo bulge) - 0 damage penetration if the shell explodes before entering the ship itself Damage saturated areas - half damage penetrations Damage saturated-depleted areas - 0 damage penetrations

Thank RNGesus we won it, with a BB it seems like no matter what you do there is always that one DD who'll get to keep his star

Took me 14 games to go from Stock Gallisio to unlocked Algerie She's good at long range HE spamming, and to some extent kiting, also those gun angles are really annoying for the 2nd one. Played with 10 pt cmdr so had CE, but not IFHE - and I think IFHE would have made playing that ship far more pleasant. One of very few CA/Ls I actually enjoy(ed) playing, probably will get her a decently skilled captain in the foreseeable future to play some more. Oh, right - that sluggishness thing -> do you have those Engine Boost Special Mods? with those you can basically get yourself under permanent speedboost (apart from short CDs between those 4.5min charges) - and that seems to help quite a bit.

You can just left-click the module once (without mounting or even researching / buying it) and your ships stats will update to what it would be like if it was mounted. If you have the Artillery dropdown open you'll see Conqs guns changing from 4x3 419mm to 4x2 457mm. You actually can compare any changes in the game that way - for example BB (not sure if other classes do that same) hull upgrades decrease your rudder shift time - but it's not in the list of changes when you look at it. If you click on that hull and have the Maneuverability dropdown open - you'll see that it actually does.

Interesting thing really, I enjoy playing tier 8 & 9 far more than playing tier 10. But again - that's kind of a personal preference thing 1st - why would you nerf balanced ships? No reason to do so 2nd - already stated by WG multiple times (mainly on their weekly streams) that RN BBs look fine and there are no changes planned for them in the foreseeable future

@KarmaQU_EU can you add TL;DR at the end of your posts? If I wished to read some wall of text I'd just read a book.

No number of battles under the profile pic not shown = hidden account, usual sign of a potato 410mm shells = IJN BB Senseless complaining = typical sign of a new player or potato So answer to every problem you have is: learn to play

Everyone seems to focus on the "some ships are removed from the permanent sale slot" and completely ignore the "other ships are to be periodically available for purchase" part of that article. Those ships aren't going everywhere, the only change is that they will be available "here and there" not "all the time" actually increasing their sales as "get it while it's here - you don't know when you'll get the next chance!" So basically another thread of overreacting where half of the posters don't even know what it's about and the other half didn't bother to read through all of it

How so? Heroic achievements are those with golden crown around them - like high caliber or kraken. You clearly did your part, your team clearly was the part that let you down. Getting that +50% base XP / Credits that people get for the win would be a reasonable rewards - you did really well, and you got rewarded for it. Getting sleepy so not sure if I'm explaining this in any sensible way, makes sense to me anyways.

Doesn't WoT have some kind of "courageous resistance" thing where if you get some heroic achievement you get treated as a winner even if you are on the losing side? That's all I'd ask for.