Viridem

A coal container gets you 520 coal on average, a SC currently gets you 1k coal on average. Remember that the containers you get from the battle pass and daily login count towards getting a SC. You get for example 29 "more signals" containers per update with the standard BP, which only get you 100 coal per container on average. The proposed changes would give 750 coal on average per SC, but with a drop rate doubled, meaning that you would effectively get more coal than before. So more coal for you from dailies. I don't like these proposed changes, but you can't complain about something when the opposite would happen... EDIT: My mistake, we would get at best the same amount of coal, in practice definitively less than before. You were right.

Let's assume we do get double the amount of SCs, we would get on average per year from SCs: -as much steel, free XP, signals and blue economic boosters -50% more coal (EDIT: I'm wrong here, we would get as much coal) -research points, which are currently absent from SCs -commander XP, which is also absent -grey economic boosters, with a 20% drop rate... -31% more tier V-VII ships -50% more tier VIII-IX ships -20% more tier X and rare ships -38.5% fewer green economic boosters -36% less doubloons -71% less premium time For pointers, we currently get on average per SC: 1k coal, 125 doubloons and 1.3 days of premium time (EDIT: my mistake, it's 1.5k coal, not 1k) Of course, since no one is expecting WG to double the amount of SCs we get from daily logins or events, all these numbers have to be lowered. The more one has tier X ships in port, "source" of SCs during events, the more they would be impacted. In practice, with the proposed changes, I think we would get shafted off everything but coal (EDIT: nope, shafted for coal too), RPs and commander XP (although with a ridiculously low amount: 15 RP and 3 750 commander XP per SC on average), and ships which may end up staying roughly the same (?). As for the economic boosters, considering the huge supply of the grey ones WG gives us, it looks like a nerf as well. I don't know about you, but I have so many of them I'm considering selling some of them for credits, while I have almost run out of all the colorful ones... This doesn't look good. EDIT: I forgot to factor in the fact that SCs replace standard containers. So for example, currently a SC gets you on average 1k coal MINUS the average amount of coal you get from the standard container, when gotten via daily drops. By lowering the content of each SC, WG makes that difference smaller, effectively further decreasing the value of each SC. The impact will vary a lot depending on which containers you usually pick daily, the number of SCs you get from events etc. So the numbers above have to be lowered even further....

I know this comment wasn't meant for me, but here we go: Battle in Iwami, EU record for damage at the time, which I still hold today Battle in Tokachi, EU record for damage at the time, beaten by one player since then Battle in Harekaze II, EU record for ships sunk, shared with two other players Ultra-clutch 3 130 base XP Mogami battle Some old ranked carry in Kii Carrying in Fuso An old carry in Hayate And to adress something I glossed over earlier: First, we don't solve that over and over. There are games we can't win no matter what. Nobody ever said otherwise. Second, it's funny how in the very first screenshot you did only 8k damage in 5 minutes, with TWO main battery hits, and are still full HP. Maybe your teamates wouldn't have died that fast if you actually did something useful? I don't know, it's hard to tell with just a screenshot taken out of context. That's pretty how much how "we solve that": we try our best to prevent it from happening to begin with. You should try that, or maybe try harder. Oh, by the way, you can check more of my replays here if you want. There's a Shimanto game where I completely shut down a CV. I'm not playing that well in it, but I shoot down 80 planes, which is always satsifying to see . Check it out!

I'm not quite sure I understand your point. Do you care to elaborate? I have re-read your post on this topic, and I'm still not quite sure where you're getting at... This win streak didn't bore me at all. Most of these games were very good, with only a couple being one-sided stomps. A rare occurence.

I'll skip all the pointless drama unfolding on this topic, and just come to say that I agree with OP. MM is toally rigged and unbalanced. Look at these results I got, despite being the most incompetent player ever, contributing next to nothing to these ranked battles. Some get robbed of their well-deserved victories for people like me to win. What a travesty. Ok, jokes and sarcasm aside, I see often people complaining about loss streaks, giving us a small sample of around 10 battles. Even a super-duper unicum with a 75% WR can get those. It would be uncommon, but statistically it's guaranteed to happen to anyone with enough battles. It's basic statistics. I will sound very harsh, but more often than not, it's pointless to engage with someone who fails to understand that. You're basically speaking to a brick wall. Those who don't understand either don't have what it takes to understand - which is fine -, or could understand but are not willing to - screw them -. You're free to try to explain, but in my experience, it will be pointless. Discussions on the internet either come quickly to an agreement, or aknowledging each other point of view without adhering to it ("respectfully disagree"), or lead to nowhere. Here I see things leading nowhere... Similarly, win streaks like the ones pictured will happen. Interestingly enough, the people complaining about loss streaks will never complain about win streaks, let alone remember them. Sometimes they will brag about them, say how they're so good at the game and that it was 100% definitvely not because they got lucky with MM. The debate about overall WR, recent WR, and stratification per tier and ship type has happened ad nauseam. Here again, it's basic statistics... And to be clear: I'm not saying that all these victories are all me, or that this is representative of my average game session (I wish!). I was in good shape today and performed very well, but I did get lucky with good teamates too (and even some good RNG!). Many compliments were given. The two losses? I screwed massively in that Iwami battle, and under-performed with Yukikaze (I mean, I did bring a Yukikaze in ranked, I was already asking for trouble...). Not pictured is a Akizuki loss, where I saved a star, and can safely blame teamates (bad CV player notably) more than my own performances (that could have been slightly better though). Overall, the losses were mostly mine, the wins were mostly a team effort. To be very fair to OP: these loss streaks are very frustrating when they happen, and seem more common in the WE. It feels like more and more matches end up in a blow-out with very unbalanced teams, which here again is quite bothersome. OP may be part of the problem - not being good at the game and refusing to aknowledge it (I dunno I didn't check) - but nevertheless you don't necesseraly have to be good at the game to realise all the games you just played were gonna be losses no matter what. Yes, I might be part of the toxic ones towards potatoes, but come on: potatoes are part of the playerbase, we play WITH them and have fun WITH them. The moment we click on "Battle!" we agree to all play and be nice to each other. (You know, the thing CV and submarine players don't do.) Potatoes have the same feelings as everyone else. Mostly. So to all player who get mad when this happen: yes, it sucks. There's little we can do to prevent it from ever happening. Accept that it will happen, and try to ask yourself "What can I do to prevent this?" The answer: get better at the game, and when you start seeing a loss streak happen, stop playing for the day. Trust me, the loss streak WILL continue if you keep at it. If you refuse that, then... you're on your own! We can share your frustration, but don't expect people to accept you throwing a tantrum. You'll get the belt!

The whole design of the ship, a big and clumsy poorly armored cruiser with average concealment and long gun range, is a bad design. Unless you were to make some characteristics absolutely bonkers, like maybe the reload speed, there's no way to make such a ship interesting to play. I don't think buffing the accuracy would help. A whole line of destroyer leaders, in continuation of the other cruisers like Tenryuu, Kuma, Yuubari, Agano and Gokase, would have been much more interesting. I imagine small and fast ships with great concealment armed with either improved 140mm guns (they made up the 150mm ones, they can easily imagine triple 140mm guns with improved balistics for example) in continuation of the Kuma, or 152mm guns (here again, with improvements to balistics, reload etc, with a triple mount for example) in continuation of Gokase. Something like a big DD with a citadel, in a way. Giving these ships pin point accuracy but low DPM to compensate could have been an interesting gimmick to explore, too. I think it would have fitted Japan better, historically speaking, to have small ships with thin armor and that reuse weapons from other ships (140mm or 152mm guns, torpedo lauchers intended for DDs), rather than very big ships with brand new guns and effective AA. There's no way late in the war they had the ressources to build such big ships, create brand new main battery guns, and somehow figured out how to make effective AA guns, especially dual purpose main battery guns. Their other dual purpose guns, be it the 80mm, 100mm, 127mm, 152mm or 155mm guns, were all fairly ineffective as AA guns. I don't believe they would not only have figured out a system to make them work, but also somehow decided to make a new caliber for them. None of this makes sense. I don't know if the idea I propose would have been better than the current one, but at least it would have made some sense. Right now, while Agano seems relatively realistic, and Gokase following the existing schematics pretty well, I find Omono to be questionable and every ship starting Shimanto to make no sense at all. They don't feel like Japanese cruisers, the idea behind their design is bad, and they make no historical sense at all. What Yodo truly needs is to have never existed.

Mogami? Mogami. Always Mogami. Second highest HE DPM, only bested by Cleveland, although your fire chances are lower. The ship's main weakness, being shot at by BBs, doesn't matter much in this brawl. Be cautious around ships like Congress with nasty AP. You can't be overmatched, but you want to angle well. You have 27mm of side plating despite having CL guns. It will help bouncing AP shells a tiny bit. You have a decent size and won't shatter any HE shell, but the ship is good at dodging. At least, as long as you are. Your HE won't shatter either (except maybe on Congress' belt and other small parts easy to not shoot at). The only negative would be that one of her balancing factors, her torpedoes, aren't really usable in this brawl. I might want to make a review of some sort and copy-paste it every time someone asks advices for a tier 8 ship. My answer will always be the same :) (Maybe I should make a full-size and complete review of the ship?)

4 ships surviving? I give you 3. (I sunk 3 of the DDs, and the Annapolis with a blind salvo of 20km torpedoes...) A thank you to the Smolensk and Z-46 for the teamwork by the way. Top of the scoreboard in my heart <3 But if you want gabage MM, I can give you this too: I think their KGV was in div A. And yes, our tier 9 cruiser, in a MM with tier 6 ships, ended up at the bottom of the scoreboard. I was on the same flank, and he really was this bad... Apparently, even on the week end, making a division of carrier and surface ships of different tiers is asking for trouble. Don't do it. You know what, just don't div up with CVs or submarines. Why would you even play with CV or submarine players to begin with?

So to complete the dockyard, you can either buy the starter pack for 5500 doubloons, or buy two stages at full price for 3000 + the premium BP for 2500. The second option gives you all the premium BP rewards alongside the ship, so that's actually a better deal if you know you can finish the missions. Either way, ranked should allow me to get the ship without spending money, once again. Third premium ship I get this way in a row :)

It feels like there are more and more bad players creating threads to complain about other bad players. Am I mistaken ? Is the playerbase going down the drain that hard ? Are redditors leaking on the forum ? Something else, or all of the above ? Ah well, all things come to an end...

One battle in each ship, got bored very fast, never gonna play it again.

The most recent was probably my performances in I-56. Just garbage. Sure, I didn't play subs since the halloween event years ago, but some of the mistakes I made were not ones a veteran should make. Like let myself get caught by german hydro in front of 4 BBs closing in on me at very close range. It didn't end well... (In my defense, I got plagued by uncarryable teams and I find the ship to be absolutely unfun to play. I don't know about you, but when the ship isn't fun, I tend to lose patience and play sloppy.)

Well I got myself the I-56, as it came out today, and this has been a horrible experience. (I got plenty of doubloons from ranked etc I'm not using, so in a way I got it for free). I haven't played subs since the halloween event, years ago. Sailing the ship isn't particularly pleasant. I mean, it's not bad, but there's nothing particularly interesting. The diving/surfacing aspect could have used more work. When you're inbetween surface and periscope depth, you can't see the ship at all, which can scew up with sailing and dodging stuff. When surfaced, your camera is very close to the ship, with a "flat" angle to the sea. It makes spotting enemy subs' pings hard. It doesn't help with staying aware of everyone's position, since your camera is so far up your stern. We were sold fantastic underwater environments. I haven't seen anything interesting down there. Did they really spend tons of time making things look good there? Because if so, it was quite a waste... Tons of HP, although that hp didn't last long once I started getting attacked. 7.1km concealment when surfaced, 2.6km when at periscope depth. DDs and especially subs are quite tricky to counter. Well, you can shotgun DDs with no problem, even without homing torps. You have "short" duration batteries, only 2 minutes, but they reload super fast. Using the consumable that extends your battery duration, you can stay quite some time under water. The torpedoes are great. Good damage, good range, great speed, 35 seconds reload. There isn't much a BB can do if you manage to catch one without support. He's gonna die, and that's all. I didn't test the homing torpedoes. They only have 6km range, and besides, I have some humanity left in me. I'm not gonna use homing torpedoes... The main gun is a nice touch. It feels like a regular ship, in a way. Forget about fighting subs with that: it's gonna dive. It can be very useful to sink DDs though. Very very useful. At medium range the shells have a long flight time and start getting hard to land. One considerable issue is that the ship doesn't have access to submarine surveillance, that consumable that is basically a submarine radar. You have hydrophone, that gives you map spotting for surface ship and submarines at persicope depth or surfaced (and said ships get a gray outline on your screen), but it's short, teamates will generally ignore the submarine you detect this way (since it's map-only), and it's only really useful in combination with homing torpedoes. Without sub surveillance, if a submarine is below periscope depth, you can't do anything. Even if it's right next to you. It's completely stupid. The opponent however can spot you with that, get all its teamate to attack you, ping you and land torps on you with ease. Good luck figuring where he is exactly, as you have even less indications of the ping's origin than on the surface. A tier VI sub can hard-counter you with that. Fantastic design. It's worse than radar. You generally know where a radar ship is, you can see where the shells are coming from, you can dodge. None of that applies here: it can be super hard to know if you are in range of the submarine, or even if it's in the same area as you, you can't really see where crap is coming from, and good luck dodging. What I mean is: if you think fighting a sub while in a surface ship is bad, doing so in I-56 is even worse. You have absolutely no weapon. None. Almost all of my deaths were because of a sub using its submarine surveillance. If you see that a submarine is on the same flank as you, leave. Subs are cancer, in many many ways. Because of all of this, any agression can get punished hard. I only had success by playing passive, and finding an opportunity to get in a good position and totally wreck BBs. Once you get in that position however, you feel absolutely dirty. You have the second highest torpedo DPM, behind Salmon... I mean, it's nice to destroy ships like that, but with this ship it feels absolutely unfair. I feel bad for the opponent: he did nothing wrong, and gets punished for it. I'm playing WITH the reds, not against them :( I don't want to grief... In short: ship is boring to play, the good moments in it make you feel like a bad person, fighting submarines in it is the most dreadful thing ever. The good thing is that at least your opponents won't have to dodge a thousand homing torpedoes. I'll probably get a few more games jsut to be sure (and try to salvage these horrible stats I got), and then shelve the ship for good. We knew submarine were a horrible addition to the game, but oh boy I didn't expect things to be that bad. Horrible game design through and through. Garbage.

I tried to get into it with I56, but it's disapointing to see that you can't queue up like with other operations. The in-game "looking for division" system is of little use for this, and the apropriate sections on the forum, reddit and discords and basically deserts. I guess I'll play a couple of coop games before trying it in randoms...

Two matches with barely-carryable teams. The first one ended as expected. Lost only because I got plane spotted by the CV after his death and Georgia got a fire on me while DCP was on cooldown. Because, of course. Second one had at the same time way worse teamates and much better ones, in the form of a unicum triple division. MVPs of this match. We had at some point 3 ships less, and no capture point (while they had two), and of course we were way behind on points. Replay. When four players have to get results like that to win a very close match, you know the rest of the team wasn't achieving much. The past few days have been horrible, difficult to get good matches. Good thing is, I got a nice 2.6M credit profit there. Anf I finally got past 400 karma. Useless, but appreciated.

The ship can launch six torpedoes at once, not four, as we can see in the very first post. Even with four, at 5700 base alpha, it's enough to one shot most DDs this submarine will encounter. Remember, with torpedo aiming master, a double ping increases the damage by 15%, making things even worse, as only three torpedoes will be enough against most DDs. Alliance can outspot the majority of DDs it will encounter when surfaced, all of them when at periscope depth. Submarines can also see ships when submerged thanks to their hydrophone, without the detected ships being aware of it for some reason. When a DD is approaching a submarine, there's a good chance the DD gets shot at by the opposing team, gets pinged by the submarine and has to dodge the torpedoes (using its DCP in the process) before even spotting the submarine. Spotting the submarine isn't even guarateed, as it can dive below periscope depth. It has good enough maneuvrability to escape your depth charges, too. It can of course get back up to periscope depth and attack you using its rear-mounted torpedoes and ping you if you manage to sail above him and live. Good luck getting rid of the ping again, as the submarine reload faster than your DCP does. It can also surface very quickly and one shot you from very close range, thanks to a short arming distance on the torpedoes, something some ships would appreciate having (like many DDs, or notably the recent Japanese CLs, among many others). This isn't that hard to do, contrary to what some people have suggested. It can just ram you, too. Thanks to the special saturation they get, there's a good chance it kills you and lives. Everything I just described can be achieved by almost every single submarine against a DD. There's a good number of players, very good players with lots of experience, bringing your attention to these issues. Yet you release a new submarine that is even better at countering DDs thanks to their incredible homing capacity. With all of this in mind, telling us to basically "just dodge" when we have a video showing us how difficult it is to dodge these torpedoes in a DD is quite tone deaf and in a bad taste, if not reflecting poorly on the considerations WG's representatives give the playerbase, as well as on their mastery of the game. And your other defense? DDs still have a high game impact? That is not what this is about, it's about the interaction between DD and submarine feeling extremely frustrating and unfair. This right there is not fun. Submarines have special mechanics for stealth, ship detection, main armament, damage and movement. They do not have to answer to getting detected and shot at like other ships have to, they do not have to answer to hydro and radar. They can go stealth whenever they want for very long stretches of time. The main way to damage them is using a special weapon that is given unevenly to ships (some have depth charges, some have planes, some have nothing. Planes have variable range and potential alpha). These weapons have to be manually aimed and can sometimes take a long time to sink a submarine even when correctly used. At the opposite, surface ships have to answer to these torpedoes like any other torpedo. No special saturation mechanic, they get detected the same way, flooding works the same. The submarine doesn't have to accomodate for anything. Not only that, but they have access to homing torpedoes, they're given an additional clutch. Add insult to injury, many of them can spot you and attack you from outside the range of your ASW planes. As far as I know, only submarines can attack you from outside of your weapons' range while undetected, with the exception of some very long-range torpedoes that have questionable impact (and CVs, but that's another can of worms). While it can take a long time to sink a submarine with the correct use of your ASW, a submarine can always sink you very quickly, either thanks to very high alpha strike, or by very fast reload, when not both. Things are very asymetrical, feel unfair and are not fun to deal with. Your answer? "Dodge better" and "Muh game impact". Get a grip.

Yes starting with Omono. Even without IFHE, these ships aren't good fire starters, so you don't give up on much anyway. Since you're often shooting from long distances, and with that long flight time, it's hard to accurately aim for thin parts of the ships. With IFHE, you increase your chances of your shells doing damage when they land on your target. Even at close range. Imagine seeing a nice unsaturated bow or stern, which you could shoot for an easy 10k damage, except it's 32mm thick and you don't have IFHE... You could load AP, but then there's a big risk it's gonna bounce... You could do without IFHE if you have a 10 points captain for example. It's not a necessity.

Agreed, tier 8 is by far my most played tier both in ranked and randoms. I look at my tier 8 ships, and I don't see a single one I'd find unpleasant to play, or would perform poorly, even against tier 10. (Unless it's against a submarine or a CV of course). Maybe it's my ship selection, maybe it's my playstyle, maybe it's something else, but to me it's where the game is at its best. Tier 6 and 7 are also very nice, tier 4 and 5 can be fun, but at tier 9 and above things go down very quickly...

Got a few matches in them now, I could confidently make a small review of the line. In short: Agano is horrible. Gokase is great. Omono and Takahashi are mediocre. Shimanto is decent and might be worth keeping. She's not as strong and fun as Mogami, but still fairly nice. Yodo is decent but absolutely uninteresting and frustrating to play. The line is disapointing and full of extremely questionable decisions, be it from a gameplay perspective, ship design or historical point of view (I don't think Japan would have ever built the tier 8 to 10, even if given the opportunity). But I still think it receives too much hate, the line is better than many people say. Maybe is it because these ships have a skill floor a bit too high for your average potato? I did say that Gokase is great for example, but if you struggle being downtiered, forget about this ship. Learn how to survive first...

Well, the homing capabilities of these torps seem absolutely outrageous. As if hunting a submarine in a DD wasn't a hard enough task already...

Glad to see you.. erm.. nerfed Agano? I mean, the torpedo damage seemed strangely high, but it looked like a balancing aspect for an otherwise bad ship. Now she has basically no redeeming value at all. The main battery reload buff isn't gonna cut it... Maybe if you buffed the rudder shift, but you somehow took the very strange decision to "balance" the line by giving it horrible maneuvrability, so I suppose it wasn't gonna happen. Not sure why you'd make one of the two primary aspects of a light cruiser - sailing - so unpleasant.

AA defense expert isn't enough anymore for me. I tasted it, and now crave the double AA defense expert. On Russian CVs.

As it looks like now, I'll probably play it a few times for the duck noises, and that's it. They crack me up.

I like math and stats a bit too much to not butt in.

Got a dev strike against an Edinburgh with an AP salvo from Shimanto, in ranked, at brawling distance. Looking at other cruisers' AP shells of similar size at this tier, their balistics and pen values are relatively close. (Except the Russian's, of course). It's just that they don't have improved pen angles, or short fuse time, or even good damage... Unless you're almost certain to get citadels, it's not worth risking overpens, shatters, bounces and potentially missing on a fire. Not for that little additional damage. (I suppose you could use them to damage an unsaturated mid-section of a BB that is too thick for HE. I gave up when I realised I'd have to learn exactly where to shoot each BB, and which ones have sides too thick to even pen...). The same applies to the 152mm guns. The 155mm guns actually have good damage on their AP. It's a rare sight, but Mogami shooting AP is a viable strategy.