Procrastes

"It came to pass that as the Kitakami sailed out among the Supertesters, it was noted from on high. Yea, verily, for at that time, El2aZeR was looking down from the high abode, and beheld the Kitakami, and saw that it was bad [for the game]. So El2aZeR came down from the high abode, and smote the Kitakami - with thunder and lightning did El2aZeR smite it - and the Kitakami was pierced with many torpedoes, and knew not whence they had come. Thus perished the Kitakami, the meme cruiser, the One Trick Pony, and there was much rejoicing among the faithful."

Oh dear... please accept my apologies for any mishaps or mess-ups that I might have been the inadvertent cause of! I played some half-decent battles yesterday, but today's escapades have so far been nothing but a shambles...!* * Except for the battle where I was in my little Kami; that one went fairly well. But I don't recall what map that was...

Once upon a time... ...during the first world war, the top brass in the British military decided to not issue aircraft pilots with parachutes. There reason given for this dashing policy was that "having the option to bail out might induce pilots to indulge their less manly impulses" - i.e., to jump rather than fight it out in a sticky situation. Needless to say, none of the top brass were active pilots at the time. When someone sensible suggested that parachutes should at least be issued to a few select squadrons in order to test if the bail out-hypothesis had any basis in reality, this was downvoted on the grounds that "if parachutes were employed and were to actually save lives, there might be cause for disaffection in the ranks if parachutes were then to be removed". The end of the affair was that parachutes were not issued, except to balloon crews who were incapable of doing anything but jump anyway - with or without a parachute - if they came under attack. When the second world war came around, and the top brass included a lot of people who had been active pilots themselves during the previous conflict, parachutes were standard equipment for all flying personnel. This, needless to say, had nothing but positive effects on morale (and survivability) of aircraft crews. Time passed, and the year 2021 came around with such new inventions as the 'Deadeye' skill in World of Warships. And for some strange reason, I find myself uncharacteristically sympathetic to those dimwitted old nincompoops from a hundred years ago...

This was an interesting angle on an old question; thank you! I would argue that there is a difference between "camping at the map border" and "putting the pedal to the metal and charge in all guns blazing". The optimal battleship gameplay probably lies somewhere between the two? And sure, I will admit that if the battleships of both sides all stay at their respective starting border, there will be room in the middle for cruisers and destroyers to have one wingding of a party - at least until the fun police arrives, if there is any in play. But I still say that this wouldn't be as fun as if the battleships also took an active part. Again not counting the carriers, WoWs is still a paper-rock-scissors type of game - and if you remove one out of those three, the gameplay will suffer. I would also like to state, clearly, that I don't mean to say that Wargaming is doing anything out of malice. They are not; they run a business venture. And as such I can hardly fault them for trying to make a good buck. But I have seen, of lately, some choices on their part that I can't help but to interpret as them prioritizing short term gain to the long term health of the game. The sale of the tier X ARP Yamato for money is just one example. Again, it is their company and their choice. But as a WoWs player of many years, I have some personal interest in the future of the game. So when there is a situation where I see room for improvement, I consider it to be in everyone's interest - including Wargaming's - that I speak up. I try to do so with forethought and moderation. Oh, and one more thing: I am by no means certain that the theory I related in post #8 above is correct. It is but one of several that I have heard tossed about during the past few weeks. There may very well be an excellent reason, based on battle statistics and game balance, for why Wargaming have introduced the 'Deadeye' skill. But if so, I have yet to learn of it.

I recently heard the theory that Wargaming have introduced the 'Deadeye' skill simply in order to cater to those battleship players - many but surely not all of them newcomers - who prefer to stay at the back and lob shells at max range until either their team wins, or everyone else (except the carrier) is dead and they are hunted down and killed. Let's face it; if you don't know anything about the game, if you have watched no videos and are just logging in for the first time in a big, cool battleship - then staying at max range and keeping up the artillery barrage is not an unreasonable way to perceive how to go about it. Especially since a newcomer who instead tries to push directly in towards the enemy, is liable to get himself sunk humiliatingly quickly. Learning to spot how and when to push, is - at least according to my experience - one of the hardest things to master in this game. It's not too hard to see why some casual players would just choose to remain in the back row. According to the abovementioned theory, the 'Deadeye' skill could be a way for Wargaming to toss those players a bone, to make them stay on and keep playing the game. Having the 'Deadeye' skill might make their battles a bit easier, or at least provide a bit of a morale boost. Even if the 'Deadeye' skill might be good for business, this does not mean that it also is good for the game. On the contrary, and from the perspective of the players, I think it's a terrible skill to introduce, since it encourages and legitimizes bad gameplay. No matter what the individual player may find entertaining, having battleships regularly sitting at the back and lobbing shells from max range is bad for the overall gameplay experience. In the past, there was at least no obvious incentive for newcomers to keep playing that way, but now - with the arrival of a dedicated BB sniper skill - there is. I will be very interested to see what difference, if any, the 'Deadeye' skill will actually make. My own guess would be that those battleship players who choose to play with a careful measure of advance and retreat, who position themselves close enough to make a difference and to be able to tank and push in, will keep getting better results than the long range snipers - irrespective of whether any of them takes the 'Deadeye' skill or not.

This... ...was a nice post! My commiserations for your frequent colour fluctuations, Captain @triumphgt6, and my compliments for handling it like a gentleman. I can relate; I've had some of my best chat conversations in this game as a result of accidental team kills performed on, or by, fellow gamers of equally good manners. Shared misfortune can bring people together, or so they say. I have yet to torp an ally with Commander Jingles on board, however. I can just imagine his inimitable sarcasm dribbling all over my screen, letting me know that I have finally been accepted into the venerable Window-Licking Society. Usually he only threatens me with that fate, promptly declaring that "We've sunk an enemy cruiser" or some other such nonsense after I've put down a perfectly legitimate enemy target. He is a treasure to have on board, but I'm beginning to doubt if my poor nerves can take it much longer...

If you are, then so am I. I can't imagine that 'Deadeye' will give enough of a boost to the toss-out-a-bag-of-marbles-and-see-what-happens that is German battleship gunnery, to make it worthwhile to drop the oh so emotionally satisfying secondary builds. I don't want to sit at the map border and take pot shots while my valiant team mates in destroyers and cruisers put their lives on the line for me - I want to be there, winning or sinking with them! There, I said it. I guess I'm just a big old softie.

That's true, so you did. Thanks for letting me know! I don't use any mods, so that is probably why it failed to register properly...!

I must confess that I don't know. I haven't really given it much thought, until now. From what I can recall, I hear German voice-overs from German ships even when I am driving a ship of a non-German nation... or at least I think so. Again, I'm not sure. I suppose we shall have tio trust that one of those valiant data-miners will ascend from their hidden depths, to bring their troves of data gems to light!

Are you talking about Dasha? If so, then yes, I agree - she does represent the option of a female commander. But for reason I've stated in a previous post, I personally would rather prefer to have the option for women commanders in the regular national archetypes. If you are referring to the various anime captains, then I must say that they are a bit of an acquired taste. I have several of them myself, but more as a result of trying to bolster the ranks of my mid-level captain rosters than out of preference. Now that we can buy regular 10-point commanders directly from the Armory, I doubt I will be getting many more anime captains other than through the occasional purchase of a nice anime premium ship. So no, I haven't ignored those women commanders already present in the game. I just don't see any harm in having some extra customisation options for our regular commanders!

With all respect, I've understood Captain @Bindolaf_Werebanes suggestion so as to mean that we should all have the option to choose women commanders - not that such a choice should be forced upon us. And as far as I can see, the only representation in the game of a player's choice that would be apparent to another player, would be the voice-over of the quick-commands in the battle chat. That is, we would hear a woman's instead of a man's voice. If that would be annoying - and I grant you, the voice-overs of those female anime captains we already have in the game can be a bit annoying - that could probably be fixed with some kind of filter button. With such a filter in place, I can't see how giving one player the option to choose the virtual gender of his or her virtual commanders, would have an impact - negative or positive - on any other player in the game. But maybe I'm missing something?

I'm no expert, but from what I have picked up in such magazines as, for instance, the Economist, women in today's Russia are expected to conform to very conservative roles - being good wives and mothers, basically. There is also a lot of sexism (and vodka). So I don't doubt that what Captain @Humorpalanta wrote is perfectly true. I should add that Russian women are not to be discounted in any way. Julia Navalnaya, to mention one example, is standing in the forefront together with her husband Alexei Navalny in opposition to the Putin regime. And she is widely respected inside as well as outside of Russia.

On the other hand, Soviet Russia was the only nation (as far as I know) to employ women fighter pilots - the so-called "Nacht-hexen"* - during WW2. While it's true that this was motivated mostly by desperation and a will to use every available resource in the battle for survival, the Communist ideology was - on paper, at least - a lot more egalitarian than the societies of most other nations at the time. * "Night Witches", in German.

This is an excellent suggestion! And I also agree that if we are going to have Dasha Perova as a commander in the game, there should be a portrait of her in uniform. (A full uniform, thank you very much.) But I since WG has now decided to put up ordinary 10-point commanders for sale in the Armoury, I can't see any reason to get myself a Dasha.* Just having the option to simply select gender for the ordinary commanders, with the appropriate voice-overs, would be much more preferable. * A Dacha, now - possibly on the Black Sea? - would be quite another matter.

I would say that as long as you are just looking for a ship that is fun to play - albeit perhaps not always the most effective in any given battle - you can't go too far wrong with the Scharnhorst. She has been dubbed "the Swiss Army Ship", and for good reason - she can handle herself in most situations, and uptiers fairly well, although she does struggle a bit in a too BB-heavy environment. My advice would be: 1. Get the Scharnhorst! (And buy the special 'Arctic' camo while you're at it; see below.) 2. Kit her out for a full secondary build! Deadeye is for pussies borderhuggers the less pugilistically-inclined to begin with, and she won't hit squat with her guns at max range anyway. 3. Take her into battle! Once there, try to play with a measure of enthusiasm and intelligence, and focus on making a good dent in the enemy lines rather than necessarily surviving into the endgame. Pure gameplay considerations aside, the Scharnhorst is also - at least according to me - the most beautiful ship currently in the game. Especially dressed up in her special 'Arctic' camo; if you decide to get her, you absolutely should try it out!

This pretty much sums it up, I think. While I guess it's true that many players tend to use the report function to vent off steam, and while this is a better way to go about it than spewing hate in the chat or elsewhere, it is still not an ideal way to use the report system. Pressing the report button too often or for the wrong reasons, only helps to devalue it as a tool for monitoring player behaviour (if that is indeed an intended purpose). With this in mind, I tend to be liberal with compliments but frugal with reports. Unless someone behaves badly in chat - which I will almost always report - I will usually only report deliberate misplay or other forms of intentional game sabotage, and even then only if I have witnessed it myself. But being generous with compliments, or even a kind word in chat, can never be wrong as I see it. As for one's own personal Karma number, I would like to reassure our readers that it carries no weight except for - perhaps - a mild curiosity value. It does not, for instance, correspond to any kind of spiritual credit rating within any of the existing belief systems across the globe.

The Orkan needs to coordinate well with her team - or at least with a division mate - in order to fully utilize her strengths. For her special gimmick, the radar, to be effective, she needs her team mates to shoot at what she spots, since if she shoots herself she will immediately be spotted in return, being as she is without a smoke screen. While this level of back-up can actually quite often be relied upon in a Ranked battle, it is encountered less regularly in normal Random battles. The Lo Yang is much more self-sufficient, and has a tool box that will allow her to perform well in most situations. Her hydro is very good indeed, spotting ships at a distance of 5,5 km if I recall correctly, and her guns and torpedoes are good if not exceptional in any way. She has the long-lasting American smoke, which is good for team play purposes and can - in conjunction with her hydro - allow for some sneaky ambush play in a knife-fight with another destroyer. So in general terms, I'd say that the Lo Yang is by far the better ship. The bottom line, of course, is what best suits your own personal play style. Best of luck! Edit: Verblonde beat me to the punch, as usual, and provides - also as usual - more informative advice than I. Except for the fact that I rank the Lo Yang as quite a bit better than the Orkan as an all-purpose ship, I agree completely with everything written in the above post. (And yes: Go for the Cossack!)

Top Commanders can now be bought for money! As I'm sure most of us will have already figured out, it is now - with the advent of patch 0.10.0 - possible to buy 21-point commanders for money. The process is a bit more complicated than it perhaps needs to be, but still fairly simple. It relies on the fact that you can now a) buy 10-point commanders for 1 500 doubloons each, and b) exchange commanders for elite xp, by dismissing them and paying an amount of doubloons relative to their xp level in order to get back their full value in xp. Buying a 10-point commander will cost you 1 500 doubloons. Trading him in will net you 183 000 elite xp for a cost of 1 663 doubloons. Assuming that you start out by getting one 10-point commander for 1 500 doubloons, and then buy and trade in more 10-pointers in order to get enough elite xp to push the first one up to 21 points, you will need to get a total of sixteen 10-point captains - fifteen of which you trade in - in order to complete the whole operation. This means that you can now buy a fully trained 21-point commander for a grand total of 48 945 doubloons. At the current exchange rate, that would equal a total cost of around 160 euros in real money. I have based my calculations on the skill point costs that are provided on the Wargaming wiki page for commanders (https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Commander). I would encourage anyone who might feel so inclined to check my calculations; math is by no means my strongest suite and I may quite possibly have made an error somewhere along the line. Possible errors in calculation aside, the main point - namely that you can now recruit top-level commanders for money - still stands. Is this a good or a bad idea? (See spoiler!) Cheers!

I was not aware of a previous thread on the subject. It was not my intention to post a "double thread", sorry for any inconvenience!

...oy. Well, you must agree that it makes a colourful impression on the battlefield? As for target audiences, perhaps they should balance the deal by making a special ecclesiastically-themed camo for the Crusader? In Hoc Signum Vinces!

A capital idea! Pity that I can't give more than one 'like'; your post would have got them all!!!

I agree completely with Captain XDMeloniXD:s opening post! While perhaps not quite as breathtaking as the Maple Leaf colours of the Haida, that Mysore pattern is quite fetching indeed. I'd gladly cough up a reasonable amount of doubloons for having access to that as a permanent paint job!

I read a text from Wargaming the other day - think it was in the general news article about update 0.10 - where they stated that they are going to keep a special eye on the Flint and the Smolensk in the months to come. Presumably they intend to evaluate how the new skill system will affect these two ships in particular, and what further adjustments - if any - might be called for with regards to them. If you ask me to take a guess, the most likely change to be implemented is for the Flint to receive the same range upgrade as the Atlanta. It would make a lot of sense. The reason why they've decided to wait a bit might be that the smoke consumable makes the Flint perhaps a little less hard hit by the loss of the Advanced Firing Training skill - but again, this is just guesswork on my part. Whatever the case may be, my advice would be to wait a few months and see what change - if any - might be coming the Flint's way. (As for what Wargaming might be planning for the Smolensk, I don't have a clue. She lost out on her gloriously filthy 19 km range, but let's be honest: She never really needed that. She's still a strong ship; especially considering the fact that she is one of very few ships that can use the new "Heavy HE and SAP Shells" skill without a penalty to her concealment.)

I think that the general idea with the new skill system - that is, having separate skill trees for the separate ship classes - is a good one. It makes it much more easy to fine-tune the individual skills to fit the ever-changing game-meta - and, let's face it; the game meta is going to keep changing. One can only hope that most of those changes will be good ones, although that - with submarines reputedly on the inbound - might perhaps be construed as wishful thinking? Aside from a few 4th-level skills that could benefit from a better description as to exactly how they work, I've found the new system to be fairly easy to get the hang of. Whether or not the various skills are actually balanced and good for the game is of course another matter, and one that bears a lot of further study and evaluation. One can only hope that Wargaming will keep their minds open and their ears to the ground, and that we - the players - will be kept in the loop. As long as this holds true, I am prepared to go forward with an optimistic outlook. Sail ho!

Nice thread! I spent virtually the whole of last weekend fiddling around with the new skill builds. I haven't played very many games with the new set-ups yet, but here are some initial thoughts and impressions. Dazzle: This is the obvious contender with Radio Location as the second tier 4 skill for destroyers. I have picked it for most of my DD:s right now, to put it to the test if nothing else. If it turns out to give any kind of substantial survivability it might be a keeper for gunboat destroyers, both the knife-fighting ones and the open water kiters. Having to let go of Radio Location is kind of painful, though, and the latter skill will probably remain the favourite second pick (after CE) for IJN torpedo boats. (Needless to say, if they ever nerf the "Dazzle" skill - which many voices are already clamouring for - the Radio Location skill will immediately bounce back as the given second pick!) Dead Eye: Oh boy, a skill that outright promotes the border camping play style for battleships; what could possibly go wrong with this? I have picked it for my Thunderer captain and will give it a try - but I will do my level best not to let it induce me into becoming one of those despicable border humpers delicate wallflowers. For the rest of my battleships, I have gone with a full-on secondary build - altogether more fun, and not necessarily less effective (provided you put your team first and don't make it a priority to survive yourself until the endgame). Also, the requirements for when the Dead Eye skill takes effect seem somewhat hard to keep track of during an on-going battle. Maybe some kind of in-game HUD notification - "Dead Eye active!" - could be useful? Until that might be implemented, I suppose it is best to just keep playing with the "business as usual" sign put up across the bridge. Top Grade Gunner: Another 4th-level skill with a somewhat ambiguous skill description. What exactly is the "standard detectability range"? Does it increase if you also pick the "Heavy HE and SAP Shells" skill, thus providing a nifty synergy bonus if you take both these skills in conjunction? The skill description doesn't say. WG needs to work out some clarifications on these and other skills, and keep the free skill respec open until these and other question wrinkles have been ironed out. (For the time being I have taken this TGG+HHSS skill combo on my Mainz and Graf Spee; let's see how that works out!) Outnumbered: Yet another 4th-level skill with unclear activation requirements. What hostile ships count as "visible"? Does it count if a hostile ship is made visible by radar/hydro? If so, must it be your own radar/hydro or will the radar of an ally do? In the latter case, does the skill trigger only after the delay between radar/hydro activation and the point when the hostile ship becomes visible to the rest of the team as well? These are just those few questions that immediately popped up in my mind. Doubtless there will be others. Irrespective of what the answers may be, I kind of lean towards the same observation earlier made by Flamu, that any ship that is able to activate the "Outnumbered" skill is likely either horribly mispositioned or already fighting a losing endgame battle. I haven't picked this skill for any of my captains, so far - but maybe there is something to it that I don't see?