wilkatis_LV

This thread is already a bit ran down, but here are my 2 cents for it: Don't skip it, just play it correctly. Your best chance generally is to play her as a bow-on 2x3 gun BB with a large and awkward secondary gun not a 3x3 BB. If you give your side to enemies you can be citadelled by pretty much every BB you meet (not sure about Scharn & KGV), quite likely even some cruisers with better performing AP (like US CAs, but that still is just a guess). Stern is kind of weakly armoured aswell, but it still would give you a better chance than your side. She's great when people are firing AP, especially bcuz of how small her superstructure is. Sadly right now in the spam HE meta she's getting crapped on a little too much, so you can't afford to play her too aggressively, at least not initially. And as for upgrades - the engine upgrade while not giving you much in the terms of speed gives her engine quite a lot of "pushing power" making her acceleration way better than it originally is. Looks like a waste of time for whatever the speed increase was, but actually is useful. Also her guns are accurate, and as all 3 are quite close initially (a.k.a. not spread out throughout the ship) their spread never really goes too wide. The barbettes are a little on the weak side, so expect the middle turret to get knocked out a lot

6 hits, so I'm taking a guess you could fire all 12 guns at him. So in other words he made a bad-ish decision of when and from where to engage you. He literally gave you the best chance to defend your ship. Admitably, if it was in the channel - not much of a choice of the angle, so rushing you there was probably the best he could have done, but having just 1 option doesn't make it a good option.

He was right next to you right in front of your guns. At low distance like that you should be able to punish him and defend yourself with reasonable accuracy, altho at that range unless you hit him while he was bow / stern to you there should probably have been 6 overpens not 6 pens.

Has to be dmg saturated, that was all the hp that area (presumably his bow?) had left

The answer is simple - if the nation X had navy around WW1 and / or WW2 era their ships will most likely make it into the game sooner or later. Just because your nation isn't represented as much as you'd like doesn't mean it will never get its ships. Seems to be a popular thing to complain about from UK / FR / ITA

and 0 points relevant to the topic apart from: Actually, I can. Yamato: GK: Montana: Conq: Now the question is just if you are educated enough to differentiate between these numbers As you can see Conq goes up to 32mm plating, next closest would be Monty with her 38mm. Lets compare their "HE-penetratablity" (that's not even a word, is it?). 32mm: Can be pen'd with 195+ mm HE at /6 Can be pen'd with 150+ mm HE at /6 with IFHE Can be pen'd with 130+ mm HE at /4 38mm: Can be pen'd with 231+ mm HE at /6 Can be pen'd with 178+ mm HE at /6 with IFHE Can be pen'd with 154+ mm HE at /4 Now, what ships can pen these armour values? 32mm: BBs - all of them, no matter the /X DDs - none (unless I've missed that some DD has /4) CAs - All CAs at 9 and 10 have 203 or higher caliber guns. /X doesn't matter. At 8 you also have cruisers like Kutuzov with 152s. Can pen with IFHE. 38mm: BBs - all of them, no matter the /X DDs - none of them CAs - All german cruisers of t8+. Others with 203s or larger calibers if they run IFHE (not commonly done unless you are Notser). And then keep in mind there are 50+ mm platings aswell. So Mr. Imsogoooood - not weaker in any aspect and definitely can't show it huh? "Throwing around imaginary facts that aren't true" So once again - get on the topic or keep shut, you are literally not providing anything useful here

If you're not why do you sound like you are? :) And yeah, my 30 Conq games in 6.12 really show how much I love my new toy, and how much I play it. Oh w8, might be one of my least played ships lately... The only place where I play Conq is CB. Why? I despise the Yamato, and Conq is the only alternative. I would still pick it over GK if I had that, but not over Montana. Quite simple really. Just because you're b**thurt and can't figure out how to deal with a ship doesn't mean the ship is OP. There have already been enough examples of WG nerfing balanced ships just because enough potatos were outraged about them and refused to learn how to play against them, join their ranks, you'd fit right in. Enough cases already, we don't need another one. 223 battles, a.k.a. he's still in the lower tiers. If he wants to - let him talk about Orion or something, that's in his field. Tier 10 is way too far for him to grasp, so let him keep shut. As for me - yeah, I don't play 10s, apart from my divison want to play them. And even then I'd rather go with Izumo than the Yamato - I've had more than enough games to realise that just having good accuracy and nice gun caliber doesn't make up for the massive list of that ships shortcomings. And as it happens - check my 9s, cuz those usually are the ships I choose to play when division goes 10s. 3.4k games, yeah, about 2k of them since this spring. Was a bit busy before that. 0 rank 1s - and that is relevant how? PS - din't participate. S2 - didn't have 7s, couldn't go past 15, didn't bother. S3 - if you check the details - last time when I was still playing DDs, did good in every aspect apart from WR, didn't play the game enough to care. S4 - didn't have 8s, couldn't go further than 15. S6 - actually had started playing the game, got to 8, couldn't be bothered to go up bcuz of lack of rewards that I would need. S7 - Very limited time due to work, still got 5, didn't have time to go higher. None of them have been tier 10, every single one irrelevant to this thread. So yeah, your b**thurt is spilling over the sides, and you'r lac of any argumets that would actually be on topic shows that you simply don't have anything on-topic to say. Go cry in a corner Rental ships were there for a reason. As for my picks - selection between a pile of s**t that barely can get enough turret traverse to track a target at 20km, and is screwed if you go within 15 of someone, or a ship whit which I can exploit a gap my CAs / DDs have made, break through it and take enemies that way? In other terms - don't use the keyboard and camp the spawn or actually do something and play the game? Yeah, not the best of arguments for the Yamato. And I'm perfectly fine with having little to none presence at long range firing, the improvements at close and mid ranges make up for it more than enough. Yamato could tank far more as she actually has some armour (apart from that idiotic weakspot), but if you put Yamato in a position where she can tank - chances are she can't really fire at anything that's moving. So taking more dmg is just something I'd have to & can live with. There is a cruiser with better concealment than other cruisers. There is a DD with better concealment than other DDs. Who would have thought that there would be a BB with better concealment than other BBs? Had no idea that's how it works! Any other tier 10 BB has armour, a quality that Conq has never heard of. Every other BB can take the hits, Conq will take them in the sense that they will do damage. And with 2x heal cooldown you're literally caught from behind with your pants down if you come under fire while you can't use your heal. Recently watched some old WT AF video... what was the tactics called... "Boom and Zoom"? You come in, you burst at the enemy, you get the hell out, reposition, repeat. Something like that. That's literally how you have to play Conq. Come in, drop a couple of salvos, retreat with your heal running, get away, wait for the 2nd heal to be almost off of the cooldown, go back in, repeat. But let me guess, that would be too hard of a concept for you, it's not just "sit here and click that button" like your Yammy... Stop polluting threads with your off-topic bs. You pretty much still haven't said almost anything topic related. Definitely nothing original. So stop wasting the oxygen, go camp some map border or something

Like to see that you still are arguing with actual arguments, really keeps the discussion going. No sound of b**thurt coming froum you at all 223 battles... why don't you let big boys talk and get back to your kindergarten? :) Also sure, I'd take a ship in which I'm doing badly as my 1st pick for CB... because that would make sense Literally what 9 out of 10 "Nerf Conq" comments sound like Problem with the cruisers having BB concealment not the Conq having cruiser one Overextend even a little and your 2x longer heal cooldown bites you right in the a**

This would have to be tested if the "award" is linked to the achievement or to the action. If you get it from achievement - Yamamoto in CB is just a normal captain with colourful tracers. If it's from the action - still should get you benefits without the achievement itself. But since you're asking I'll guess that it's the 1st one, and in that case - yeah, Seagal and Dunkirk actually do give you benefits while Yamamoto doesn't. Then again if you could guarantee getting that extra consumable & heal+reload boost each time with FB & 5 kills - with a coordinated 7 player team that would be much easier to set up, just always feed kills to that one guy

There are no achievements in CB. Generally the giveaway for that one should be that there is no "First Blood" for whoever gets the 1st kill. Also no "Dev. Strike", "Detonation", "High Caliber", "Confederate", "Clear Sky", "Solo Warrior", "Fireproof", "Dreadnought" or any others that you can name. No achievement, and no flags that would be associated with it.

Aren't you mistaking WoWS for WoT by any chance? Anyway, no, console peasants don't get to play together with PC masterrace You have to be on the same platform to play together

Dark Theme, hell yeah! For the "reactions" I expected to see our very own clumsy captain? I mean, we have some great emojis with him Also welcome the new ones: The background image tho, when you're scrolling up / down it sticks in the place where it was and starts "shaking", and then when you stop scrolling then it drops back to "correct" position. I guess that one's a minor inconvenience

And then there's me in a Colorado firing 7 salvos at a Leningrad 6....9km from me with 27 shells splashing next to him and 1 hitting. Well, at least that 1 was there...

Much insight, such wow. Great answer, 10/10 on topic, I think you just solved the mystery!

What would a player do when he/she comes up against a question in game that he/she doesn't know the answer to? Or maybe simply while searching something else that somehow happens to include this thing? (skipping the part that the average potato wouldn't do it, that's not the point now) There would be 2 obvious places where to search for the answer - there are the games Forums, and then there is the games Wiki page. Forums might have people who have some very specific knowledge about some very specific thing, but it could mean long waiting time for the answer. Wiki should be correct about the game, but maybe doesn't contain some specific things. Now we arrive at my point. Some might have noticed that the "Nerf the Conqueror" thread has been getting a bit long (pun intended), but out of it there have come some interesting points, even if not directly relevant to that original topic. One of these points is "Detection by Air" and camos interaction with it. (Aircraft spotting range will be a different topic slightly later) As I seem to recall, and everyone to whom I've asked seems to agree with me - camoflage reduced the overall detectability regardless of the way how you would be spotted (air or surface). And yet if you look at the Conqueror - 15.66km base detection for both, but 11.8km surface and 12.1km air after applying all the concealment things. Where does the difference come from? If you go to WoWS Wiki about this topic: http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Camouflage it states " -3% to detectability range ", which to me implies both - air and surface. If you look at the camos in-game, a different picture appears: This time it states "-3% to detectability range by sea" meaning that it affects only surface spotting range. After asking this question to "Game Mechanics Support", if we ignore the answer where I was referred to look for this in the World of Tanks Wiki, the answer I got was "The detectability is reduced overall. Nothing has changed". When I pointed out the situation of Conqueror and how it's shown in game the answer changed to "I recalled that different but that is in fact correct, it does not hamper the spotting by air a bit." So to sum up - first of all everyone to whom I ask this seem to recall it the way how it is in Wiki not in the game, then there is the point of me going for help to GMS and ending up educating them myself on the topic I was asking about, and of course in the end it means that Wiki, if not exactly wrong, is rather misleading as far as this topic is concerned. Maybe any comments on this from someone who's WG representative here in the forums? @MrConway @Tuccy @Crysantos

the number is 73 oh, turns out it was a spoiler under a spoiler. Well, this will be for those who like me missed it.

overstatement of the year 1 in a 100 would still mean we have hope, I'm afraid that number actually is far, far lower

If [insert country] had navy around WW1 and WW2 periods, then sooner or later they will most likely be represented in the game. As for Australia - their ships most likely be in the Commonwealth tree. HMAS Vampire is a perfect example of that.

Because those are Co-Op missions. It's a PvE event not a random game, you are supposed to try and get your best chance for winning

I tend to be that "up front guy" aswell, could be just supp / tank instinct from other games And when Monty with pretty much the worst all-round HE can outperform your supposedly good HE... damn I have probably like 5 games in Orion, not too many indeed. To me personally it's the case of "nation specifics should start at 5 or 6" so the Orions /4 pen may go for all I care about that tier. Also wasn't it the case of Orion and ID being pretty much the same ship 2 tiers in a row? Starting the pen increase from ID and not giving it to the Orion then would then at least give a notable difference between them, but that's just theory crafting from basically not playing them. I mean you can. And it's as stupid as it sounds. Same as just spamming HE with no regard to what's better. Or never using your guns on IJN DDs. You can, but you don't have to. That's one of the things that make potatoes a little obvious That is exactly the tactics I often use 1...2 HE salvos on their bow till the enemy feels confident enough to give me his side and - surprise surprise - here's the AP! That's why I said "If I'm confident enough in my ship..." With something like the Amagi I'd be rather confident for such hit to score, with something like a Bismark I simply wouldn't bother. And if I had HE instead of AP load that just makes the choice far easier to make It's one of the last chances to actually stick with your team instead of joining the party at the border Well, she's not OP. It's just the difference between having "good enough" armour or not. If you have it - you don't need to compensate for something related to it. If you lack it - you really need something that makes up for the loss, like the superheal. I'm going to guess you don't read through all 5 billion quotes and answers I leave every time -> me and... god damnit, why can't people have simpler names? Me and El2aZeR already pretty much agreed that trading Conqs heal for getting armour at least on par with Montana would be a fair trade. This sounds an awful lot like "Too much to read, can't be bothered to read it all or even just search for answer to me so I'll leave a generic answer dismissing anything you've said there" I also figured out that Air Detectability thing - Catapult Spotters have 15km vision, while others get that 11km. So there's a very limited number of ships who can take advantage of Conqs "worse" air detectability. I've somehow managed to bounce BB AP on DDs so I do know that that's always a possibility Yeah I do see the point for this. I mean, the argument for the 1/4 is literally that it doesn't change anything, BBs have enough pen anyway. So I'm with you on this one, as soon as that makes such a big difference it's not ok nymore Literally because of potato floods in BBs. I'm guessing there has to have been a potato wave in CVs at some point as we got the Saipan... Just figure out a way to get enough potatoes to play DDs and / or CA/Ls and you'll see something easy magically popping up there aswell. One might even take a wild guess that PA DDs with their invisible torps and smoke that's as close to a permasmoke as you can get already are probably easier than others... But I'm not a DD player, so that's just a wild guess in a topic I know rather little of. That's pretty much the idea. Don't take away HEs ability to damage it, but make AP more efficient against it...

Yeah, the degrees are shown wrong aswell, it's a wide angle so definitely can't be 69. It's one of my 1st sketches where I tried calculating like this, must have just screwed something up there... Let me see... Oh, the angle is 111°, making the distance... 15.2km. Damnit, red the angle from the wrong side of the protractor So that's not actually LoS issue Thanks for pointing it out

Personal preference not a game issue. Anyway, run other camos on it or even go with the bad decision and have no camo at all. Noone forces you to use the one that you don't like

Cheers!

Weren't we talking about burning ships down? Anyway, go back and check this thread and multiple threads before this on since RN BBs were released - I've quite consistently kept the opinion that there is a reason that nations get their "national traits" at tier 5 or 6 (long range, better speed, hydro that others don't get, increased HE pen on cruisers, great AA and so on). Tier 3 and 4 RN BBs should have had the /6 HE pen, /4 should start at 5. Have said that multiple times, and I'm keeping to that opinion unless someone can give me a good reason why those 2 would need that high pen HE. Orion was a 5x2? Shows how much attention I've paid to it. Ok, Also jsut checked the reload is 5s better not 7 or whatever I guessed previously, but whatever. (should have red the next sentence where you already mention that lol) And the AA difference between 1 guy throwing rocks at incoming planes or 3 guys shooting them up with hand-held slingshots really isn't much, you're not going to shoot anything down anyway. Turning circle? Take a look at the Ishi. Slim and long. That view alone yells "it can be fast but it's not going to turn". Now look at the Orion - much shorter, bulkier. "Speeds overrated, but we don't want extra drag while turning". Imagine that turret traverse with crappy turning... Oh w8, that's a Yamato, don't even need to imagine it. I'll admit that I haven't really played t4 BBs for a while, apart from a rare game in the Ishi or those - like 5 or so? - games I have in the Orion. And the thing is... Cruisers have so little armour there that AP scores barely anything but overpens on them. Of course, there will be exceptions, as a 4 you can meet St.Louis and Furutaka, both of which are great AP target practice. But yeah, as an HE spammer without any real experience to compare them I'd still say that the Ishi is better. Exactly. The citadel itself has more than enough protection by being submerged and behind the main belt. I've never seen the need for those 53mm sections to be there. Actually... Lion could be the next best thing Lion has the whole roof at 19mm, and the rest of the armour profile is pretty much the same as Conq (apart from few mm on the main belt) but as it's shorter - also its citadel is actually a bit closer to the stern plate. I'm not sure how the depth of those citadels stacks up - are they the same or at different heights? Another stat that would be nice to have. Basically I'm guessing that if you can score a stern-on citadel on the Lion, you could do that on the Conq with its citadel roof changed Here's some more - I asked them again, now they told me that HE and torps (since I can't find the article anywhere I added a question about exact healable %) can't be repaired at all, only the Fires and Flooding can be. And that camos do actually reduce air detectability, which they don't. Game mechanics support, know and understand their games mechanics about as good as the average potato Well, yeah, you have 12 shells fired against 9 (or can be downgraded to 8vs6 / 8vs3). The 8 vs 3 shells, a.k.a. Yamato stern to Conq -> the Conqs RNG has to be really bad for him not to outdamage Yamato. In the other 2 cases the 33% extra shells don't make up for the accuracy loss, especially in a moment when you need to hit 2 per every 1 of the enemies hits (assuming all penetrations here for simplicity). Of course there are also situations of "crossing the T" there one ship is broadside to the others bow / stern - and in such case the broadsiding ship, while being more vulnerable, simply has the advantage in the damage potential it can throw out (12v6 / 12v3 / 8v9) towards the other one. Of course RNG is an a**hole from time to time, play any BB enough and you'll see games where you can't miss even if you would want to, and you'll see games where you can bury your guns up where the sun don't shine in the enemy and still miss all of your shells on it because magic. Yeah, I can see how that one works. I have my IJN, RN BBs set up as tanks, KM for secondaries (altho I almost never play them) and my US (especially the Missouri) for AA. Then again, I almost never play the Missouri solo (as shown by the WR in that ship) which usually gives me at least 1 if not 2 people to cover me if I'm in a pickle. While playing solo I'd always prefer some extra tankiness and safety. Well, turrets and barbettes are non-damaging hits (apart from knocking them out and setting fires). Annoying as hell, but not killing you. Hits on RN CLs... Yeah, I can see those being more of a problem, but then again (bit of a non-point which I myself would call out as "AP vs HE" is not a comparison) - wouldn't AP be more reliable and efficient at that? That kind of eliminates the idea of "1 in a 100 shells", as you actually get a reliable meaningful target to go for, even if it's just 1 ship line out of all that you have available But that's also why it has the better heal. Takes more dmg than others thus gets the ability to heal more. And for AP - I mean, yeah, AP will have problems against angled 32mm (that angling part there would be important), but there still is the superstructure to go for (not sure if you read that, but any comments on the idea of changing the superstructure from 19mm to 21mm to make it more interesting for cruiser AP? Anything above 21mm would interfere with HE abilities to pen it, that's why I chose that point. And setting superstructures damage saturation point rather high (altho I actually have no clue where is it right now). I mean, looks good from my point of view but I'm sure there are some points I've looked over or simply missed which could make this idea quite unviable - thus asking for "opposing sides" opinion). But you stand a way better chance for penetrating 32mm than 38 or even 50mm For most people the heal seems to be the biggest problem that they complain about. Well, that and the inflated idea of magical HE with 100% fire chance per hit while actually it barely gets higher effective chance than others do. WGs always catering to the lowest skill levels of their audience, and thus we get the noob friendly lines where they are popular. But you can't say there are some ships that aren't "skilled-player-friendly". Most CVs require some skill to do well. Yeah, you can hit 1...2 torps per autodrop with your TBs and and your DBs are bound to hit something sooner or later, but to perform well in them you have to be quite a bit better than the average player is. Or RN CLs (altho I really dislike the "smoke too short, can't stop from full speed in it so need to double the duration!!!" that they did to them) - most ships need as little as to just look at you and you already are in serious danger of blowing up, but if you can make them work they can do wonders. Much higher skill floor than the average cruiser, but also tends to be greatly rewarded. I was going to add Nurnberg, but... No... Can anyone actually make that ship work reliably? I mean, if there's a Nurnberg in the match there's a good chance he'll be one of the first ships to die, and that same in a DevStrike. That might just be a case of high floor, low ceiling. Also now that I think of it - are there any ships (apart from BBs bcuz of the BB vs CL dynamic) who can reliably 1v1 RN CLs? Well, I've said it previously - accent the weaknesses. The Air detectability was an obvious one and turns out - WG has f**ked that one up. Then there's AP but it's not quite as good as it should be. Citadelling from stern is still under question, more "research" to be done. And then the 1/4 HE pen - you got me on your side for that one, if it's not just insignificant 1 in a 100 and affect the class And line that supposedly would have most advantages against them - yeah, don't like that one then. I fail to get the angle for what they are going with the FR BBs right now. As far as I know what they have currently in testing - good range and accuracy + speed boost -> are they actually supposed to stay as far away as possible, just snipe, and when they are too far from action or if their flank is failing just pop speed boost and relocate? But that's a completely different topic -HE alpha pretty much on par with IJN -BB HE pen increase almost irrelevant, apart from firing at RN CLs which afaik is the only case when it gets wrong -Fire for 1 in 5 shells instead of 1 in 6 shells. Oh no, that's truly horrible! Such buff, so much wrong with that one!!!!!!! Just... HORRIBLE! It's not the magical 1 shell for 100% fire chance that you make it out to be -Debatable. I really like it. Most people for some reason despise it. Then again, same exact scenario is with the Izumo... -Gun range is one thing, ability to hit targets within it is another. Also since you mentioned "through the line" somewhere in that same post... no idea about 3 & 4 range, 5 through 8 are well below average (I'm sorry but 18.1km in Monarch when most cruisers outrange you is just pathetic), Lion is the 1st one of them to get reasonable Firing range and Conq, while having long-ish range really doesn't get that many benefits from it. -Gun accuracy. Gun fikin accuracy. Literally this: Your 12 games at t3, 4 at t4 and 11 at t5 tells you ALL about RN BB accuracy, don't they? You must be an expert on this topic, please enlighten all of us with your wisdom! Here's a short lesson on how to approximate the areas (differentiate between them) of effective firing range and fingers crossed something will land. Round your firing range to full km, then split it into 2 areas -> "closest 2/3 of the firing range" and "furthest 1/3 of the firing range". Effective can generally be extended by aditional 1...2km if your RNG is kind that game Lets take Monarch, Lion and Conq as your 3 examples. Monarch - max range 18.1km (~18km) - effective range up to 12km...14km - fingers crossed something will hit range 12 to 18km Lion - max range 20.7km (~21km) - effective range up to 14km...16km - fingers crossed something will hit range 14 to 21km Conq - max range 24.3km (~24km) - effective range up to 16km...18km - fingers crossed something will hit range 16 to 24km Same trend goes through the line starting from at least tier 5, maybe even before that -Concealments a nice thing indeed. Through the line half the time cruisers outrange you and you lack any armour to protect you from their HE spam, and you don't even have a good enough heal to get that health back, so you better hope you can hide. But eventually you get to 9 and 10 where that's not the case anymore and... Well, you kind want to dictate your engegements with other BBs so you have better concealment than they do... Just turns out there are a couple of cruisers whos concealment is already at BB levels, so people get upset when you can outspot them too. -Superheal comes in combination with lack of armour. It has been mentioned A LOT of times in this thread that trading super heal for adequate armour would be seen as a fair trade by "both sides" -A type of citadel protection that is nothing new and has been in the game at least as long as the Amagi has existed. -Lacking armour made up by heal, as mentioned previously -Low HP pool, tough luck. Someones bound to have the highest or the lowest HP pool, With Adequate armour or with a powerful heal it's really not a problem. Looking at your list I can safely say you have no idea what you're talking about when you're referring to higher tier RN BBs I think I may have a job offer for you. Try to get a place in Riots balancing department - they're famous for bringing the most idiotic ideas into their game without any regard for the word "balance" Yeah, he has extra penetration which is pretty much meaningless apart from a moment when you are firing with HE at a RN CL. BBs already have more than enough pen on their HE even with /6, those few armour zones Conq can pen that others can't are literally a 1 in a 100 shot (apart from RN CLs which I do see as a problem) Yeah, because penetrating 27...30mm of armour with HE is going to be a problem for which BB exactly? A tier 3 Kawachi with its 305s has 50mm HE pen. A broadside Hindenburg would have at least been a bit more of a case, because then you would have that 1 in a million chance of hitting that 110mm armour belt. So you're telling me that Conqs extra penetration is bad because tier 3 BBs are good enough to penetrate that same target with the same amo type? I really don't see your point here So just because some of the best players we have in this game can make wonders with the ship it should be nerfed? You know, the Dunning-Kruger effect goes both ways -> potatoes think they are great, and the actual good players can't see how potatoes fail at things that are "so damn simple" for them. I like the playstyle of actually playing with a team instead of sitting back doing nothing. Izumo was great back when people actually used AP, sad to see how in this HE meta she's left in the dust to rot away. But there come RN BBs - they can heal the HE, doesn't hurt them nearly as much, while the AP could prove to be a bit more of a problem. I still dislike the need to sit back between my heals and wait for them to come off cooldown, but it's at least a ship that I can afford to go ahead with together with my team. WG is actively fighting BBs ability to do so, and when we again have a ship that is capable of such play - oh look, it's seen as a problem. Do you really rather see windowlickers scraping borders in your team rather than a BB who can actually help your team? Or is it maybe the higher likelyhood of running into an enemy whos for some reason helping his team instead of hugging the border some 30km behind everyone? Ahh, that explains it I mean, in all this time I'm yet to see 1 Conq whos actually running the 457s, everyone always has triple barrels Well, for the Kaiser and Nassau I'm really not the person to comment, I just stuck ramming flag on them and got whatever secondary buffs with the low point cpt I had and the upgrades I could mount and went yolo with them. Completely not a serious gameplay, but hell was it a fun one Anyway, it really can. You can go spamming HE in any ship that has the option, and you will always end up with at least some damage. You really don't need to switch to AP, but you can do it. And if you do a "meaningful choice switch" you'll do far better than just spamming 1 type of amo. Both - with RN BB and when playing something else. And the reason for firing at that broadside target is that I'll do more dmg to it. Give me 2 bow-on targets with AP loaded and I'll fire at one of them just because I can. Nothing is going to happen if I don't fire, something might if I do. Just empty the barrels and adjust to the situation. Also in that same example you used - lets say there's a bow-on ship at 5k hp (let's also say non-DD as DD angling really doesn't help them too much) and some whatever ship at full hp broadside to me (again non DD as they tend to be annoyingly fast thus harder to hit). I might very well go for the angled one (well, depends on my confidence with the ships ability to hit) just to get his guns out of the game as I'd need 2 pens / 1 pen + 1...2 overpens to finish him off. Exactly the point of I've played enough to recognize what I can do in that situation and quickly weigh out what's the best option for me in that moment Literally every single change that concerns BBs in last year or so can be described with "borderhuging BBs not affected, those few who actually play like they should - haha, sucks to be you" The difference is that Monty already has better armour. Conq gets up to 32mm, Monty goes to 38. And as far as HE hits are concerned that makes a lot of difference. My point about HE was quite clear - don't fire it at him when you could be hitting him with AP instead, he'll repair that HE with no problems. But if he's just used his heal and you are confident in your ability to kill him - HE's going to have the quickest damage potential. I said this multiple times already, I really start to get annoyed by having to constantly repeat myself while you completely ignore this. Jesus that's a long one, probably should have split it up in 2 or 3 separate answers

*khm* Maybe another name? A little easy to... "misread" it