Procrastes

It just up and flew away, and you never saw it again? That's sad. But you know what they say: If you love someone, set him free!

Now that was just mean. Also: Funny! Edited: Please tell me the guy was on the enemy team...?

A (and +1) for effort! Good job! Also: I have looked and looked, but I can't seem to locate the torpedo stats for the Perth in you list, OP?

I sailed in the same team as a Graf Zeppelin test ship this morning, and about two thirds of the way through the battle the carrier captain stated that he had run out of planes. I don't know if that information is significant in any way, since I surmise that this can happen to any carrier.

Ok, but "the Dictator" isn't really much of a catchy nickname. Maybe if we made it into a shortform... ...nah.

Really? Then I guess we might be talking about two different guys. I have assumed that the Giulio Cesare was named after Gaius Julius Caesar, 100 B.C. - 44 B.C., whose last name lived on as the later word for emperor in the Germanic languages. Such as "Kaiser" in contemporary German, for instance. The English word "emperor", on the other hand, stems from the Latin word "imperator", which roughly means "victorious commander". Originally, in the Roman Republic, it was a title that could only be awarded to a commander by his own soldiers; customarily after a successful battle. One notable Roman general that was awarded this title in the old-fashioned way, was the above-mentioned Gaius Julius Caesar. So with this in mind, I thought that "the Emperor" would be a rather fitting nickname for the Giulio Cesare, in the game! But maybe I thought wrong?

Nifty; then they can call the Giulio Cesare "the Emperor"!

Yeah, even I usually do quite well in the Clemson. Relatively speaking, obviously...

Several times now, I have run into situations where an enemy ship - most often a battleship - runs into the map border in a way that seems nothing short of intentional. Then it remains there for the duration of the fight, halfway inside and halfway outside of the map, shooting and receiving fire. This has set me wondering about the mechanisms of the map border. More specifically, can it be used to shield oneself from incoming fire? Can shells or torpedoes pass through the map border, and do damage to ships - or part of ships - on the other side? If the answer is no, then that would seem to offer some regrettable possibilities of abusing the map border mechanic! If I see an enemy ship that straddles the map border, with most of the superstructure on the outside, should I still target the part that lies at the border, or even outside of the map?

You are assuming - correctly, as I hope - that Wargaming wouldn't regard a change to deep water torpedoes as a buff. I think you are right, but I can't say I'm certain. And there is a mechanic to change torpedo type from port isn't there? I believe you can choose between two types of torpedoes on the Lo Yang, for instance, by switching the relevant tech modules in port...?

Either that, or they will replace normal torpedoes with deepwater ones on the Pan-Asian premiums. If that happens, I will regard this as a huge nerf to my Lo Yang and Anshan. One of my main uses for torpedoes is to attack enemy ships that are hiding within a smoke screen. If my torpedoes suddenly stop working against destroyers, that very useful tactic suddenly becomes invalid. I might as well stop contesting caps altogether, which is otherwise something I regard as a primary destroyer duty. I welcome diversity in the game. Thus, I have no problem with the addition of deep water torpedoes - as long as this is an added option, and not an enforced change. If deep water torpedoes are introduced, they should be added as a new, free module option, that can be selected before going into battle. For reasons stated above, this goes doubly if the change will also affect the Lo Yang and the Anshan.

Spiffing! Thanks a bunch, both of you!

Well, my guess would be that they wanted to try the Giulio Cesare out with those super-accurate guns, and see what happened. Flamu's video review* happened, and they hit her so hard with the nerfbat that she bounced off the seabed. Who knows, she might get buffed a bit again before release, if she turns out to be crippled in her current form...? *Backed up, I'd presume, by a load of other test data.

I postulate that those AA mounts will have the same magic intangibility trait as the most for'ard gun on the Okhotnik? You know, the one that doesn't prevent the gun right behind it from firing straight ahead?

You have played a lot more battles than I have, Blackcoffe. But for what it's worth, here's my... Friendly Advice for New Captains 1. Don’t hug the borders. While rushing in too fast can certainly get you sunk, active gameplay is always better than passive gameplay – and it’s a lot more fun. Seek out the enemy! 2. Don’t sail in straight lines. Doing this will get you sunk in no time. 3. Do not fire torpedoes from second line. The basic rule here is this: When one of your torpedoes strikes an ally, it is always your fault. Don’t gamble with your team mates’ hit points; that is simply not fair! ------- Welcome to the forum!

I have to admit, I got the Red October package partly because of the hilarious camouflage. I have a weakness for hilarious camos, as anyone who's had the misfortune of sailing within sight of my Cleveland in her outrageous "Christmas Candy Cane Camo" can verify. I swear, that camouflage pattern should give a -8 to the accuracy of incoming fire; it is truly that ugly to behold. And to imagine looking at it through a targeting scope...

I suppose that Wargaming might be making an intentional over-adjustment here, and that they plan to fine-tune the accuracy after the new results have been evaluated. No matter what, I believe we can be fairly certain that the supertesters will be given ample opportunity to review the ship again, with the downgraded accuracy in play, before it is released... no one wants a second Graf Zeppelin-debacle! Edited: Dang it, I just saw that someone's put up a dedicated Giulio Cesare Dispersion Nerf-thread. Oh well... anything further on this matter should obviously be posted there.

Let's not go into the flag debate again? Please? It only leads to hurt feelings and closed down threads.

Wargaming has probably watched Flamu's video on the Cesare, and assumed that if he can do it, everyone can do it. Thing is, he can probably still do it. The rest of us scrubs, though, will be better off to just equip the ramming flag and hold fire until we are already lodged in between the enemy smoke stacks. Edited: Okay, that came out wrong.

I rather like this operation, in part because it puts the players on the offensive, for a change of pace. The only real problem is when the team plumb dumb forgets about the last objective, namely getting the hell outa Dodge, and succumbs to wave after wave of incoming enemies. Unfortunately, this happens rather frequently... I actually think it's sort of funny. But if I had lost out on a 10-point captain and a free premium day for no good reason at all, well, that would have been less amusing. So I extend my sympathies to those of you who have endured that. Edited: The problem outlined above lies with the players, not with the operation set-up as such. All it takes for the operation to work out fine, is for the team to actually read through, understand and follow the objectives. Maybe the countdown clock toward the end could be set to give a bit more of an early warning, instead of just counting out the final twenty seconds or so when it's already too late to do anything about it anyway...?

Then I'd say that we are indeed on the same page, here. The situations you have outlined above give a neat description of how and when a drive for kills, rather than damage done, can be bad for the game. And this also happens to be one of several reasons why I never pay any attention to my stats. I refuse to let in-game statistics or mission parameters get in the way of my fun.

I agree completely. Most of the people concerned - Wargaming included - should be aware by now that killstealing, if pursued as a consistent tactic, is bad for the game. Which is why the recurrence of various forms of missions (such as that current, oil-gathering one) that require a set number kills, instead of a set number of damage done, is so puzzling. Edited: And since it looks like the estimable Mr Yamamoto's special talents are also geared towards killstealing, this sense of puzzlement intensifies.

Contrary to what many seem to believe, normal rules for civil conduct are not mysteriously suspended just because one happens to be communicating over the internet. There is no more call for insults, or general bad behaviour, simply because one believes - often erroneously, as it were - that such behaviour carries no consequences when projected through a computer screen. We are always morally responsible for our own actions. Bearing this in mind, I try to behave the same way in the chat as I would anywhere else. And on those occasions when I feel that I have stepped over the line, I don't try to shift the blame onto the victim by saying, for instance, that "he acted so bad that I couldn't stop myself". We are all beings of free will, capable of abstract thought and self-restraint. Whenever we say that we can't control ourselves, what we're really saying is that we choose not to. One of the best things about World of Warships, as I see it, is the generally good way in which players behave toward one another. Greetings are usually exchanged at the start of a battle, often with the enemy team as well. Suggestions and tactical advice are normally given in a polite, or at least non-bullying, manner. Compliments between players - again, often across the team borders - are not uncommon. While there will always be some few instances of truly vitriolic behaviour, I feel that this is the exception, and that we, in World of Warships, enjoy a game with an overall nice community spirit. I hope we can keep it this way!

Getting the Cleveland wasn't what made me stop playing the Omaha. Getting the Murmansk, was.

Those are some beautiful colours, on a beautiful ship! Yum!