Karasu_Browarszky

Well, a half solution is better than no solution.

I just realised Wiki has no article on the actual ports we have in the game... How many of them are military bases, how many are commercial ports, and how many are something else, such as anime... I'll have to check in game. Naval Bases/Yards Hawaii Kronstadt Kure Naval Base (fictional; location unknown) Novorossiysk Sarushima Base (anime; Sarushima Island is actually part of the Yokosuka Navy Yard) Ports/Harbors Dunkirk Fjords (albeit a very minor harbor) Hamburg London Marseille New York Rotterdam Philippines (location unknown) Zipangu (possibly based on Shimizu Port) Special Ports Azur Lane Dorm Designer's Table Dragon Ocean Spaceport St. Petersburg (while St. Petersburg has a port it's not on the Neva next to the Winter Palace, and the Admiralty Shipyards are about 2 kms to the west at the river mouth)

But why aren't the enemy ships ever affected?

For me the problem could be the ping or not, but what usually happens is that I seem to 'pepper' the target with AP shells, hitting all over the place and I get overpens, dings, torpedo belt hits and very occasionally 1 or 2 pens with a salvo. Unless I miss completely, but those are pretty consistently the results I get. Also, if I get a citadel hit, it typically causes about 10k damage....

If you haven't noticed, you can access the campaign both from the website and through Armory in the client.

These are the relevant screenshots for me. The combat missions show the 3 missions which you activate by choosing the mission under Number 1 north of New Guinea in the Bismarck Sea location. The side mission is to the right. As you can see, the battle sign means those are active for me. The side missions don't count, but you have to complete the three main missions before you can advance to Number 2 in the Marianas, then onto Number 3 in the Philippenes. Take note, after clicking on the Number, you still have to actually pick the mission from the screen that opens to get it activated.

I think the time limit is kind of tight, though. If you plan to do the whole campaign next weekend there won't be many days left. I think it was initially about 12 or 14 days in all. Others might tell you how quickly you can expect to finish the campaign. I seem to be struggling much more than many other players, who quickly completed the campaign in about 1 or 2 days' time....

The spotting mission is the Bismarck Sea side mission next to mission 1. You don't need to complete the side missions, but they award a couple of special signals if you do. IIRC, the 4 defended ribbon mission is the second of the Mission 1 tasks you have to complete to progress. Surprisingly difficult, and I'm not sure if it's easier in coop or in randoms...

Trying to get those 4 defend ribbons for mission 1....... and the 40 spottings.

No fixed plan. I get a ship if I want it and if I got the resources, possibly using a coupon if one is available.

TBH, the randoms are what they are. If we want historically inspired real campaigns, the only feasible way to do them properly are the Scenario Battles. Mind you, what we have seen so far are PvE operations. IMO, it's entirely feasible to introduce PvP operations as well.

@Sunleader Impressive rundown, cheers! I have a huge mental block which refuses to understand how a BB with sooo effing many secondary guns can possibly get outgunned by a DD with much fewer guns which, factually speaking, should perform pretty much identically compared to the BB secondaries... which there are so much more... ..but apart from that, I would probably not have thought of angling away from the DD, although I probably would have intuitively sought to do that. The build you provided looked good, but the basic problem here is that when it comes to secondary builds all those options and points are off of something else they could be used for. In practice, then, can you justify running secondary builds just in case that you might need it, or should you opt for some other builds that have wider and more general potential to do well in most battles.

Well.. I could live with that because balancing the ships (such as BB's) would mean that changes are necessary. If it's boring for some... they could opt for playing the other classes... However, if you had combat roles, the BB's would be engaging the BB's so everything being relative they would all be balanced. In my own battles in terms how accurately I hit the target I achieve historical accuracy. Well.. if it is a game it should be fun and engaging, however... .... this does not sound like a game should be IMO.... Yes, when the conditions are good despite WG having effed up things royally, the battles can be enjoyable.

Hmm... well, no, not for the pre-WW1 era ships, arguably not for ships of that era either, but gradually being introduced along with active sonar for the post WW1 era. If you go by historical accuracy, and as there seem to be subs in the game, I definitely think they should go with the historical accuracy here. Well.. how much of knowing what you are doing applies to the secondaries? What you can do is either not have a secondary build, either go for manual secondaries or not, and what else can you do? Broadside the DD to get a maximun number of your secondaries to bear on it? Well.. I said a 'single DD' vs a BB, not counting the damage that torps can do, I'm talking about how things should be in terms of gunnery. If you had a DD division attacking an undefended BB, then it's a whole different ball game. BB's should be balanced in terms of numbers, but the average MM is ridiculously skewed in favor of the bigger ships at the cost of the light elements (DD/CA's), and at the cost of dynamic gameplay as well. What WG should do is balance the ships as per firepower and then balance the games as per the number of combatants for each ship class. I'm open to having the missing numbers of DDs/CA's bolstered by bot ships if necessary, because I have a sneaky suspicion that if you make the BB's more powerful in relative terms a lot of people would opt for them.... The main problems that come from poor balancing are stale matches without dynamic engagements and I can tell you that there is a huge difference if the battle is campy or dynamic (and you probably know that yourself as well). Additionally, every ship class should offer a unique play style in terms of how they engage the enemy ships, what tactics they use and how they interact with the other elements. Combat roles, as I keep saying. You can't have dynamic tactics without enforcing combat roles in the game and balancing the stats around them.

Apparently I'm still the only one here who thinks that a single DD should not be able to outgun a BB...

Can you elaborate on that?

It's in the Armory too.

I'm with you, mate....

Same thing occurs on ASIA.

Or you can open the preferences.xml in something like the notepad, change the settings and hit save.

Which key would be for 'Self Destruct'?

I got the popup, but never checked for any e-mails.

Naturally, we are all horrified and disapprove of this sort of behavior in the strongest possible terms.

I wonder if there's something in the equation we don't know, then. Especially as this is without premium account. What about the expenditures? Are they going to stay the same or rise with the new economy?

When up creek without a paddle, Google comes to rescue. https://gentlemannaguiden.com/svenska-flottans-500-arsjubileum-i-world-of-warships/