Procrastes

Well, I doubt that CE can ever be a bad choice, on any ship. Greetings in return!

Whether to choose IFHE or CE on light cruisers, that is indeed the question. I have chosen IFHE for the captains on my Perth and my Belfast. Since they have the smoke consumable, and pretty short detection range to begin with, I feel that the ability to put out as much reliable damage as possible while in the cover of smoke, should be a priority. I have chosen IFHE for my Budyonny captain. My tactic is to try to do as much damage as I can per salvo, while using the range to help dodge the return fire, and damn the humungous detection range. This doesn't work out very well, because I am quite simply not (yet) good enough at the game, but I still feel it's a valid tactic and I'm sticking to it. I am currently undecided about what to do with my Duca D'Aosta captain, when he gets his first level 4 skill. IFHE is very tempting, especially since the chance to set fires is lower than on the Russian cruisers, but I do feel a lot of pain from incoming fire, and a lower detection range would be most welcome. Maybe CE is the better choice, here? The French cruisers, who knows? I plan to get AFT as the first level 4 skill on my Friant captain, but I have a long way to sail before I am there.

What I am thinking, is that with a captain with Advanced Firing Training, the Friant will have the range to be a really efficient firestarter. That works with my Bogatyr, anyway - and unlike her, the Friant has both speed (to keep the distance) and torpedoes (if that fails).

Being well past forty, I'm not sure I have enough years remaining to me to complete all those stages they refer to in the campaign briefing...

The St Louis was dethroned long ago, by the Bogatyr. I quite like the Friant myself. But after having played a number of matches in her, I took my Bogatyr out for a spin, to test the two ships against one another. And, oh, how merrily those little French boats burned!

But, you buy doubloons with real money? What's the difference? (I'm not trying to be sarcastic here, but unless a doubloon ship would be cheaper in comparative values, I really don't see the problem!) To answer your question, though: Wargaming does this to make money. One day we may perhaps see an online gaming company run simply for non-profit purposes (although I would be suspicious as to what those purposes might be). Until then, we should get used to the idea that Wargaming, and their employees, want to earn their subsistence. And I can't really say I begrudge them - if they stop doing that, the game would cease to exist.

Does anyone, ever, expect the armour of any cruiser to reliably bounce anything above and beyond DD peashooters? Avoiding damage in cruisers is accomplished by not getting hit in the first place. Which can prove to be a challenge at ranges closer than 14 km, I grant you that... this will be a fun ship to try out! Edited: I did a bit of reading up. according to Wikipedia, the "design of the Duca d'Aosta class cruisers derived from the preceding Montecuccoli class with a slight increase in size and a significant increase in armour" (my underlining). So the Duca D'Aosta is apparently quite well armoured, for an Italian cruiser!

But those instances of exceptional use are sooo rewarding. I've managed, just the once, to pull off the schoolbook Tirpitz maneuver: Sailing in between two enemy battleships (in this case, a Gneisenau and an imposter Tirpitz), and sinking them both with simultaneous torpedo volleys. They sank me as well, of course - but what a way to go!

Saw it, bought it, can't play it already - because I'm at work and then I'm going to a Stravinsky concert with my wife. But come this weekend, I'll dig out my old Dino de Laurentis albums and go to sea in style! Life is good.

Just add this to the game files: Edited: They simply must have captain's portraits with those old-school handle-bar moustaches! There really is no substitute! I have been pining for those moustaches for my Kaiser-era Kriegsmarine captains for so long already...

Me, I use my fighter planes, not my scouts. Fighters shoot down enemy planes and look out for torpedoes, at the same time. And since they don't go as far abroad to look for trouble, they don't get shot down quite so often (I hope). Too bad they nerfed the size of the petrol tank - but truth to tell, that felt like a well merited change. Having them planes up for close to five minutes was indeed like some kind of semi-permanent hydro!

You might want to check out this thread: http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/78244-064-update-tirpitz-getting-bismarck-secondaries/

You are quite right. And judging by the comparatively small number of occasions where my torpedoes have made all the difference, I agree that hydro is probably the more versatile equipment choice.

I would say that torpedoes are also good when you are fighting ships that do have torpedoes. They know that you can bite back, and that you can't be auto-yoloed to death with a torpedo charge.* But otherwise you make a compelling argument. I guess the Bismarck is still a competitive sister ship! * And then there's that special AAAAAHHH...!!!-look on the enemy captain's face, when he sees you bearing down on him in with the bow of your Tirpitz like - and I quote one of those magnificent How to Tirpitz-videos out there - "a giant, armoured middle finger".

Holy smokes, but that would ruin me completely. Morally and financially. I wish they would, but I hope they won't!

Thanks for sharing your theory concerning my personal battleship playstyle! It is quite irrelevant, but I have to give it its due: It is also completely wrong. I play my Tirpitz quite aggressively, usually taking the first opportunity to get in close and personal to the enemy. I don't have the gunnery skill to consistently land battleship salvoes with any accuracy at long range, anyway. So I guess that makes me one of those "brawler-Tirp-players" you speak of, and who will benefit the most from getting Bismarck-grade secondaries. Good for me, I suppose! But I honestly haven't been shouting out for this kind of buff. Rather, I have been planning on getting the Bismarck as well, putting the Tirpitz captain in her, and trying out the two different playstyles in different ships. Now I'm not sure if that's going to be so very meaningful, any more. I'll probably still be getting the Bismarck - she's the Bismarck, after all - but she will have lost a big part of what made her such a great choice from the silver ship line. I think the bottom line, as I see it, is this: Having different ships with varied playstyles, is good for the game. Making one ship good at everything, doesn't automatically make it overpowered - but I does tend to take something away from other ships of the same nation.

Bismarck level secondaries probably won't make the Tirpitz OP, as such. Better? Yes. Too good? I doubt it. But it's a far from necessary buff, as I see it.

Just kidding! I'm getting this ship ASAP, as well!

Sooo... we can expect to see the Duca D'Aosta appear over the horizon sometime tomorrow? That's great news! I've been off the grid during Easter holidays, and when I came back and found this thread on the forum, but no Duck in the shop, I first thought she'd sailed without me!

I love my Tirpitz, but I must say, I don't think she's in any great need of a buff. She's a great ship. And giving her the same range for her secondaries as those of the Bismarck, why, that's a major kick in the nuts for the latter, balance-wise. Has Wargaming given any reasons for this?

This is how I do it as well, apart from communicating in the battle chat (which I am often too weak in my keyboard-fu to do properly in the heat of battle).

I must confess, I haven't even been able to find the Karma score on my profile. Where is it displayed? I wholeheartedly agree that nice people and good players should be appreciated in the game! I always try to compliment people for playing good, or just being plain nice, in the battle chat. But I have read enough posts about people being down-karmaed out of spite, simply for playing a good game and sinking some enemy ships, to be cautious about drawing any kind of conclusions from such a number. There was even a guy that wrote, on this forum, that he always reports artillery players in WoT simply for playing artillery.

"No ship that small has a cloaking device!" The combination of smoke and radar and hydro is what makes the Belfast the "James Bond" ship of the line! I honestly don't think any of those should be removed. It would sort of "unmake" the idea of the ship. The tier 8 module slot, though... it is a bit over the top, I grant you. I'm not saying I want it to be removed, mind you, but you could probably make a good case for it. The Belfast would still be the Belfast, even without a cloaking device.

I wouldn't really call the Belfast overpowered. She's a very good ship, but not, in my opinion, so ridiculously good that she can be called broken. I think the lack of torpedoes is what makes her stay on the right side of the OP line, if only barely. This makes it possible to rush her if she's in a smoke screen, and if that happens, she's usually too slow to run away. Having said this, I must agree, again, that she's a very strong ship. I am a mediocre cruiser captain at best, and even in my less-than-sterling games in the Belfast, I tend to do comparatively well in her. Her twelve-gun high explosive 152 mm barrage is silly strong, especially at medium range or closer. The ships that do rush her might win the day, but they'll know they've been in a fight, that's for damn sure.