Meneleus

Now THAT would be awesome... Cheers, M

To each his own I'd say. Kenliero's view appears to be that dealing consistent damage is what a carrier is best used for. In his hands it probably is. If you'd counter that you think a carrier is more utilitarian then that I will not gainsay you. The problem however is that reconnaisance is at this moment not rewarded, save for the pleasure you gain by doing so of course. The satisfaction of one's teammates is not the standard I would use to measure a carrier's impact on the game, but rather the apparent contribution the player made to victory. Dealing a good amount of damage usually provides a tanglible contribution on it's own, from what I gather it is not the sort of contribution you would favour. Cheers, M

These Scandinavian seafood dishes strike me as endless terror.

Well, could have been worse... You could have been celebrated with surströmming... On the other hand one can argue in that case the women would have jumped overboard for an impromptu wet t-shirt contest. Cheers, M

I feel happy for you Cheers, M

Well, it is all guesswork at the moment, though I agree that the T10 RN ships will likely be paper designs. Regarding battleships the line will have to begin with HMS Dreadnought, eventually developing into the T6 Queen Elizabeth class I think (HMS Warspite's sister ships). T7 is a guess, perhaps King George V. For T8 we might see HMS Vanguard (same calibre and speed as the Bismarck) and the Nelson-class for T9, since she is one of the rare examples of RN battleships with 16 inch guns that actually existed. The Brits apparently had some extreme pre-treaty plans and designs that possibly rival the Yamato in scope and armament, I guess we will see an apt monstrosity at T10. Whatever the case, I do not think we will see battlecruisers in the RN battleship line as there are more then enough battleship classes to fill the tiers with. With carriers I expect a similar pattern, with existing ships filling the ranks up to T9 and topping the tree with a T10 paper design. With carriers the Malta-class has been dropped a lot as the prime T10 candidate. I think the RN had plenty of destroyers to fill every spot. I don't know what they want to do with british cruisers though. They seem to have had a lot of them, most of them light cruisers armed with 6 inch guns, or rather 152mm guns, which seems to be the staple cruiser gun for the RN. Some cruisers were armed with a 4x2 203mm setup but these were older designs. I have no idea with what they will come up with. Cheers, M

He is not using an ad hominem attack. He actually puts forth an argument: the strike arrangement of the Ranger is good because it offers excellent damage capability. You have not rebutted this position. The irony... Cheers, M

I also wrote directly after that: "By introducing this chance element the "perfect" torpedo strike will be far less common. Of course, to compensate for this, some of the changesto make torpedo strikes more difficult should be rescinded. Perhaps airplane turnaround time and speed should be tweaked to guarantee carriersremain competative in dealing damage. It might also be an idea to make dive bombers more competative in this regard." Perhaps I should have been more clear in my wording: The AA consumable might, in this scenario, temporarily improve the AA efficiency of the ship [instead of increasing AA DPS and causing panic as it does now] It might, I have not read the magazine. I reckon I'd have included it for the sake of completeness regardless. Cheers, M

I don't know if I can give you any useful advice. You seem to be a carrier player foremost and that is the type of ship I have played least of all. Regarding DDs and hit rate I guess 45% hit rate is fine with the Blyskawica. The closest thing I have to compare it to is the Ognavoi, got 47% in that one (same difference). I am sure some will do better but heck. Personally I am on the Nagato and have it fully upgraded. I will be going for the Amagi, so I would certainly recommend that. I have found the Colorado an enjoyable challenge, so you might want to pick that one up, yet if you are about to unlock the Amagi... Regarding DDs I am trying to get to the Mahan, but I fare really poorly with US DDs. I am hoping the Mahan will be a true hybrid with the ability to launch torpedoes from stealth. The Nürnberg is basically a souped-up Königsberg. I find it enjoyable, at T6 it is affordable. If you are looking for a new experience however it does the same thing the Königsberg does, only better. Regarding cruisers I am close to unlocking the Myoko, and can buy the New Orleans if I have saved up enough credits. The North Carolina had precedence though ;) I am not too sure about cruisers, especially the USN cruisers. I might leave it be at the moment and go with the IJN line, I don't know what to think about the Yorck. I would like to get the Admiral Hipper eventually though. I have something with the German army and navy, don't know why (eagerly anticipating the german battleships!). There's my thoughts. Best advice I can give you is do what you think you'll like best, and don't be afraid to make a "wrong" choice. It's just entertainment. Cheers, M

Vanhal, on 01 December 2015 - 11:12 AM, said: Credits is where this game (and all other WG games) restrain players and ultimately force them to either buy premium or experience inhumanely grind. That's why events were always about XP, credit ones are incredibly rare. Oh, and unless you are very good player, T8+ is basically pay to play, or said above inhuman grind to play. Really Vanhal, "inhuman grind"? Honestly, don't you think you are overdoing it? Sure, if you take events, the first win of the day bonus and the extra modifications into account I'd agree with the statement that credits seem to be the scarcest resource, even when taking the occasional credit injections you get when levelling your service record into account. Having said that I personally have managed to do fine up to and including T7 without a premium account, so I imagine others to be able to do the same. I have started playing T8 today, so I have no experience what it is like on this level. The impression I have thus far is that without a premium account the going is going to get tough, I don't think you will make a lot of profit without one. Having said that I do feel that with T8 you are entering what could be called "endgame" for lack of a better term, and WG does have to pay the bills. I reckon people who get this far into the game enjoy it and would not mind taking premium. Heck, even I have bought some not too long ago. Cheers, M Ollie1982, on 01 December 2015 - 02:38 PM, said: So what is this BS you have on the site FREE TO PLAY??? If we have to exchange gold for credits at higher Tiers it is no longer FREE TO PLAY! This is idiotic and WG is slowly digging its own grave! Shame on you money hungry people.. i thought you guys made this game for the community and players! Sorry, but I think you are acting like a whining entitled child. Nobody is forcing you to do anything, let alone pay to play this game. Do you really think a company is going to sink in resources and time to develop this game for free? Do you honestly think all their employees are volunteers? Feel free to level critique at WG, but please do so in a constructive and realistic fashion. I think it is time you pulled your head out of your arse to stare reality in the face. Cheers, M

Some things have changed since Aerroon made this guide, but it might still be the best guide out there, covering all the basics. Cheers, M

The evil avatar combined with your brutal honesty has its own peculiar charm. Thumbs up. Cheers, M

Gabe is just another word for success. Cheers, M

Hahaha! I just assembled a small and simple Bismarck kit and am busy painting it as a side project. Who'd have thought Cheers, M

I second that. I wonder how they expect to compete against steam sales for instance with offers like these. Ah well, the holidays still have to begin, I'll just wait and see it anything interesting pops up. That is, an interesting ship without the additional trappings at a fair price. Cheers, M

The Hatsuharu does not seem to offer significant advantages over the Mutsuki. The only significant opgrade it has is the B hull. While it sacrafices the single-gun turret it does offer additional hit points and a better rudder shift. I use the Steering Gears Modification 2 to further reduce it to 1.8 seconds, making it pretty agile. The turret traverse is horrendous when you have gotten used to the C hull of the Mutsuki. It is so bad in fact that I have taken the Expert Marksman captain skill in order to properly defend myself to some extent because the standard traverse does not keep pace at all when manoeuvring. The Fire Control and Torpedo upgrades are not worth the XP and credits in my view. Gun range does not need to exceed detection range of the vessel and the benefits from the torpedo upgrade are too small to justify spending 16.400 experience points and 1.300.000 credits (Roughly +1k max damage and +3 knots at the cost of a slightly increased reload time). I'd rather spend the money on something else and use the XP to unlock to Fubuki sooner. All in all, I think the Mutsuki is a good ship and I probably would take it over the Hatsuharu as a T7 ship if I could. Cheers, M

Another vessel suffering from the same problem (being obliterated by citadel penetrations through the bow and helm) is the T7 Pensacola. Had it happen a few times. All in all it is frustrating in the sense that you can do everything right and still get "deleted" by a battleship. I am under the impression it is the risk you take for playing the ship, while it can be managed it can never be completel taken out of the equation. I have had a decent amount of success in the Pensacola, and I have a measure of success in the Nürnberg as well, taking winrate as an indicator. Thus far I feel I have not excelled in the latter in any game I played but I must have done something right in those games. Cheers, M

No worries, I hope they are of some use. Eager for the Myoko myself, only some 19.000-odd xp to gain my my Aoba to unlock her. Fingers crossed! Btw, please notify me when you have found out the value of this "patience" people are talking about. Can't wait to hear what it is! Cheers, M

I have played the Pensacola when I had become a bit more familiar with the game and made a 56% winrate in it. Fully upgraded it is a fine ship, well balanced strengths and weaknesses in my opinion, the only trouble being that it works differently then the other cruisers that came before it. I have not unlocked the Myoko yet, so I can't judge for myself how it compares. The guns are certainly the strength of the ship. The 203s pack a punch, handle well and are accurate. The AA capability of the ship is excellent. The weaknesses of the ship are the suboptimal armour and the vulnerable citadel. Especially battleships have no problems destroying you, being able to citadel you at times even when only presenting your nose. The manoeuvreability and speed of the ship are unremarkable, and the turret traverse is rather slow. I found the ship worked best against other cruisers and battleships when used at distances of 10-15km. Learning to switch from HE to AP and back as circumstances dictate is essential, as is preserving your hp. The stock version of the ship is pretty poor. Aim to upgrade the hull and turrets as soon as possible, spend free xp on this if you are able. This will alleviate somewhat the problem of having a slow turret traverse. Be sure to take the Expert Marksman skill on your captain. I hope this helps. Cheers, M

Well, an excellent idea nonetheless. Adding additional worthwhile options to the game that force a player to make interesting choices will only serve to improve it. Cheers, M

An elitist attitude like that will not get us anywhere. If standard of play is a problem, and people like to see it improved, sets of well-made tutorials and information accessible in-game might be a solution, or a partial one. On a side note, it seems the sealclubbing is strong in this one. Giving people a mouthful while statpadding in an Umikaze... *sigh* Cheers, M

It might be the case some people do not understand statistics very well. Some people however do, I boldly presume some of your detractors can be counted amongst this number. It might also be the case that you do not understand or value their arguments. Who can say? The hypothetical situation you have sketched does not say if they had the same impact on a game. The game is impacted by more than just capping and dealing damage, as I imagine an experienced player like yourself will know. Some people might be under that impression yes. Just like you seem to be under the impression that detractors of carriers in this game are sheeple. But I guess demeaning arrogance right? There is more at play here. Take your own statistics for example. You win rate, kill rate, average damage and xp earned are bloated by playing carriers. The discrepancy with other ship types in the game is glaring. You will have to realise that this has left many a person with the impression the carrier is simply much too effective at what it does, and that something had to be done. To expect every change to be correct and effective is not realistic. It is an ongoing search in order to find an equilibrium most people are satisfied with. I don't think your suggestion will keep things simple at all. Messing with the presented data gives the uninitiated a very skewed perspective, especially when damage done in a match does not conform to your expected pattern, which it will not in, I am prone to suspect, a lot of games. Aside from that I simply want information to be factual, not to be distilled through some arbitrary filter in order to cater to carrier PR, or for whatever reason for that matter. If you want people to be able to inform themselves, I think enabling players to access the detailed report from every participating player in the match would be a better move. Cheers, M

Hmmm, guess there are a few that jump out... Good-looking ships Kongo: Because it is the Kongo. Duh... Imperator Nikolai I: regal, majestic and powerful. Sleek and beautiful turrets, minimalist approach has a certain sobre appeal. New Mexico: Beautiful superfiring turrets and superstructure. Poor-looking ships Furutaka: The strange arrangement of a series of particularly unattractive turrets makes this ship look like a gangly mutant. Wyoming: another oddly turreted freakshow... Ryujo: Looks like a floating bus.