Meneleus

I take it detonations happen when the magazine is somehow hit. Destroyers do not have citadels but they do seem to have magazines. On occasion I have seen the notification "Magazine hit, cannot reload" or something to that extent. I have even had that in battleships. I don't know if the ammunition type affects the possibility of detonations, perhaps someone better informed then me can comment on this. The only detonation I have actually seen happen is when I detonated a Königsberg with I believe AP ammunition (I used a Königsberg too). I managed to hit him on the roof of his forward turret. I guess it dropped right trough the elevator or started a flash... Cheers, M

Actually the USS Missouri actually saw action in the Gulf War of 1991. Good thing she is preserved as a museum ship. I wish people had done the same with other historically significant vessels such as the Warspite or the Goeben... Regarding the russian cruiser, I guess she will be rather expensive judging from how they have priced the Atago. A bit much for a digital ship for my tastes. Cheers, M

Shirobako? Did not expect that here, loved that anime OT: I think the Minekaze is pretty viable, perhaps even moreso then the Mutsuki. Cheers, M

Hmmm, did not know about the penetration. Might help with slightly angled light cruisers I reckon. I forgot the torpedoes, oh dear. If my head was not attached to the rest of my body... Ah well, I don't use the torpedoes very often as I try to keep the engagement range at 10km or more. They are handy though when fighting around small islands, or flushing destroyers hiding in smoke. Cheers, M

I am getting the impression that detonations have become somewhat more common across the board. This is just from personal experience, not any factual information mind you. As I write I have had 35 detonations in 1937 games and I think almost half of them are from the last 400-500 games or so. Of course it could also depend on the ships I have played. Everyone knows the Königsberg is prone to detonations yet I also have had some in my Murmansk, Pensacola and various destroyers, mostly IJN. I have also detonated opponents, mostly Königsbergs and a few destroyers. Does anyone else have the same creeping suspicion the chance of detonations have been raised a bit? Cheers, M

I think the Mutuski is a fine ship and already presented my thoughts about the vessel in length in other posts. I am playing the Hatsuharu now and I feel I am struggling to make it work. Note that I have only played a small number of games thus far though. The problem is face is the lower concealment rating of the Hatsuharu, combined with the, for T7 anyways, mediocre torpedo launcher setup. I guess I have to practice some more. Cheers, M

Compared to the fully upgraded Omaha C hull the Murmansk has a spotter plane instead of a fighter plane, making it a better sniper. It also has slightly better AA armament. For the rest it is basically the same ship. Of course it is also a premium ship, meaning you earn more silver per match and you can use it to train captains. I would almost forget the Murmansk also has a significantly better rudder shift time then the Omaha! Note that the Omaha can also effectively be played with the B hull. Compared to the Omaha C hull it exchanges gunnery range and some AA power in exchange for slightly greater firepower (with two extra guns, or one per broadside), and a superior torpedo setup (with an additional 3-tube launcher). In this incarnation the Omaha is an effective medium to short range gunship. Cheers, M

First of all I must state that I played the Karlsruhe as it was originally released. Since then it has been buffed slightly, apparently it has better penetration now when using AP shells and the engine is somewhat less likely to be disabled. That said the Karlsruhe was still so hopelessly bad that I don't think much has changed. Compared to all other cruisers it scores dead last on: speed (It is at least 7 knots slower then the Kuma. Yes, that's right, SEVEN knots!) rudder shift time (2,7 seconds slower then the Kuma) gunnery range (0,7km shorter then the Kuma) Torpedoes (While it outranges the Phoenix by 0,5km it has one less tube per launcher, negatively impacting damage and hit rate) hit points (2.300hp less then the Phoenix) armour (at least the margin here is minimal and none of the T4 cruisers are particularly well-protected) Note that I have only compared the ship to the Kuma and Phoenix, the two other non-premium T4 cruisers, and that the noted comparisons are with the next best ship regarding the characteristic, not the best. The only positive aspects of this ship are the concealment rating and the turning circle which are both rated best in their tier, but amount for nothing with the rest of the characteristics being so amazingly bad. Of course some ships perform better then others, even so I always think that every ship has a redeeming quality or shines when you adapt a certain playstyle. The Karlsruhe is THE exeption to this philosophy. I played it a few times then sank all the free experience I had saved up for the Colorado into the Karlsruhe because every game I was hopelessly outclassed not because of poor play but because the ship is that terrible. You literally need to be carried by your team. So here you have it. The Karlsruhe is a disaster. Either use any free xp you saved up to unlock the Königsberg asap or be brave and suck it up. Cheers, M

Why would you consider the Kongo and Omaha poor ships for the T5 division? My experience with these ships is rather good but I have never played ranked battles, hence the question. What ships would you consider the best for ranked play? Cheers, M

In all honesty, did he actually say negative posts are unworthy of attention? I think he did not. I interpret it as saying when an individual has a history of being mostly negative about anything it generates an expectation about future posts of that person. No more, no less. The same goes for people who are being positive about an abundance of things. I am sure most people would agree that, when a person breaks with his/her habitual pattern of responses, it tends to stand out more. It does not mean however that any particular response is worthy or unworthy of commenting on or replying to. Cheers, M

Nice to see so many avid collectors! I only have 14 ships I'm afraid. I tend to play everything, though I have sold all my carriers, I don't like the carrier meta atm. I am advancing a few lines and therefore have the Farragut, Colorado, Aoba, Hatsuharu, Fuso, Ognavoi and Nürnberg. I have kept the St. Louis, Cleveland, Isokaze, Minekaze, Mutsuki and Kongo. My only premium ship is the Murmansk. I am thinking about selling a few ships of the lower tiers such as the St. Louis, Isokaze and Mutsuki. Perhaps even the Cleveland, she is gathering dust atm and I like the Nürnberg better. I might be repurchasing the Omaha and give the B-hull a swing. My Kongo and Minekaze are keepers though! Cheers, M

It depends on what ou want to do with your Pensacola. I decided to improve the AA capabilities of the ship and some skills to increase surivability: 1. Basic Firing Training 2. Fire Prevention 3. High Alert 4. Advanced firing training If I had to do it again I think I would take Expert Marksman over Fire Prevention though, the turrets do not turn very fast and this can be a real hindrance, especially on the stock hull. Note that the Pensacola does have a decent secondary battery that is also improved with Basic and Advanced Firing Training. It does not come into play very often, but surprisingly helped quite a bit in those instances where I needed to engage in very short ranged combat. You could also try to focus on the main battery instead of AA. If this is the case I would replace Basic Firing Training with Situation Awareness and Advanced Firing Training with Demolition Expert. Demolition Expert simply increases the chance you have to cause fires on enemy ships causing more damage. Situation Awareness alerts you when you are spotted. Since the Pensacola is a vulnerable ship with a poor concealment rating it can happen that you are spotted by screening destroyers and fired upon by battleships and heavy cruisers without you spotting any enemies at all, Situation Awareness will allow you to take the necessary precautions. Yes I did not have this ability. Yes, I have been citadelled by IJN BBs at ranges of 20km I did not know where shooting at me until my ship exploded. Does not happen often but, well... you know. Cheers, M

I agree, it has bothered me a little that the WW1-era ships do not have the Imperial German ensign. I believe there is nothing in the forum rules prohibiting the portrayal of said flags, only the swastika and the IJN ensign. Correct me if I am wrong of course. Is there any documentation about the stance WG takes with regards to this issue? If possible I would like to have the ships display the proper flags, especially when the german battleships are available for play. With the Warspite at T6 I think the Bayern-class will probably be similarly rated, it being a WW1 era german super-dreadnought. Cheers, M

I recognize you are invested in the game, else you would not invest your time and energy passionately arguing your point. You can see what is happening in your direct environment. Neither of us have real insight in the bigger picture. Which the staff have done plenty of times... When you use the words "arguments" and "flippant behaviour" you give me the impression you are of the opinion the people you are conversing with owe you respect and deference. These things work both ways however, and by posing accusatory rethorical questions you are not generating a situation where productive conversation can be had. I think your passion drives you to invest a lot of energy in attempts to affect changes, perhaps too much. Thus far you have not achieved the results you'd have liked probably due to the contraints of the medium you are using and I think this frustrates you to no end. Why not take a step back, enjoy the game for what it is at the moment and give it some time? Companies are always slooooow to react to feedback of this nature. Cheers, M

I think it depends on the ships you like and the goals one sets for him/herself. I tend to gravitate towards T4-7 at the moment. I play the Kongo and Murmansk because I like the ships, same with T4-6 IJN destroyers. I also enjoy progressing up the USN BB line and the destroyer line of the SN and IJN, so that's T6 and T7 games. I have yet to buy a T8 ship (wondering if I should buy the New Orleans I unlocked) and T3 games and lower hold little appeal for me. Cheers, M

I appeal to your sense of honesty. Did I say that? I am a pragmatist at heart. I tend to look at issues and think about practical solutions. I reckon the moderators of this forum have no authority about what gets to be implemented or changed in the game. They only can relay information regarding feedback we provide. It is of no use to blame people like Ectar for things that are simply beyond his control. Some key issues are simply influenced by the profits a company makes. Hence I related the two key issues that makes a game a success: the investment of time and money by the player base. If the players invest less a company will have to adjust. As long as profits keep coming in as projected then in the greater scheme of things all is as it should be. You keep hammering about how WG "must" do certain things. They have no obligation to do anything save honouring the pruchases of the customers. Instead, think about what you and other players CAN do. Vote with your wallet and your daily schedule if you think there is a valid reason to do so. I don't buy bundles because I think it bloats the price. If enough people do the same we, as a player base, might convince WG a change of policy is in order because profits are their raison d'etre. If not, well, then apparently most people are either fine with the situation or they are just not bothered by it. Cheers, M

Well, I can't remember anything official but they way some folks were talking about it made it seem like they might have had it on good authority. It would make sense though. Cheers, M

There have been posts about the possibility of splitting the cruiser lines into CL and CA lines and the battleship lines into BC and BB lines respectavely in due time. Perchance some of the ships not used in-game, and there are plenty of classes not represented, will be used when this will be implemented. Cheers, M

Odd, I thought they were going to give the Royal Navy priority before finishing the german and russian trees. Ah well, both are slated for 2016 if I am not mistaken, the more the merrier. I rather like the Hochseeflotte tbh, wonder what they will do with the german battleship tree. Cheers, M

My max damage in one salvo is 53.200 when I oneshotted a full health New Mexico battleship with a torpedo volley from my Mutsuki while stealthed from an angle he certainly did not expect to be fired at. My max damage in a battleship is certainly lower then that. I have oneshotted a few cruisers at 100% health, figure it might be a Pensacola at 34.300. Of course I have been obliterated as well. Remember that one time with my Pensacola, shot to bits with a single volley, straight through the nose and the interior bulkheads into the citadel. Cheers, M

I am often amazed with topics like these and the comments they receive. It is, in my view, quite simple really. WG is a company and companies generally exist to make a profit. WG allows people to play the game for free to attract an audience and offers players a paid premium account and premium content to pay the bills. It is in their interest to maintain a wide player base enabling them to sell their digital products. As a player you are not entitled to anything save when you make a purchase, in which case WG is obliged to honour the purchase. As a player you are expected to have given your purchase plenty of thought and where necessary do some research to check if it is the thing for you. As a played however you do have control about your own investment in the game, that is the investment of money and time. Don't like the bundles? Don't buy them. Game changes not to your liking? Adjust your play or look for something else entirely. It is excellent to provide feedback about the game. It is tedious to listen to rants of players with an overblown sense of entitlement. I would have purchased the Imperator Nikolai I as a stand-alone T4 premium battleship. I have written a comment to that effect. That's where it ends. WG is not obliged to make you certain offers. If they make a handsome profit with their bundle sales it validates their strategy. It might mean there is a large non-vocal group of players who is very content with how things are done. If the bundles WG offers fail to meet sales expectations consistently, or if there is legitimate reason to assume another sales stategy would be more efficient, they will change they manner in which they make their offers. Of course there are also voices for WG staff to be more active on the forum. I agree it would be nice if they left more comments on various appropriate topics. I do think that in the first place a forum is made by the player base itself choosing to participate in the multitude of discussions. Cheers, M

That would depend on your own world view of course, just as your last sentence says something about you. Apparently you make a direct link to the word's original connotation while other people see it as two seperate things and do not have the negative association you seem to have with the word in the context it is used. To each his/her own I'd say. You are free to feel uncomfortable about it. Attempts to shame people into self-censorship however are, at least in my view, not appreciated. I think this forum can do without tiresome SJW antics. Please keep on topic. Cheers, M Edit: Glad Nelson took the trouble to set the record straight in a PM about what he meant, shows I am not immune to misinterpretations myself!

I think this is a matter of personal preference reflected in someone's style of play. I don't know how many people were involved in Alpha and Closed Beta testing. I would hazard a guess the number is considerably smaller then the number of people having played T5 and T6 IJN destroyers though. This is however conjecture on my part, I have no information to reference. Personally I am the kind of player banking more on defense. Though I have managed to improve my gameplay over the course of all the battles I have played I know my reactions are not that fast and I sometimes err when I have to make split-second decisions. Long range and good camouflage allows me to relax and take my time thinking about my actions. For skilled agressive players however I can imagine the Mutsuki feels like a step back. If people do not like it they will do horrible. One glance on my Nicholas stats will confirm I simply could not get it to work for me and I hated almost every game I played in it as a result. I am on the Farragut now and am relieved this ship and I get along better. While the Minekaze is 1,5 knots faster then the Mutsuki the rudder shift time is actually the same. The Mutsuki has 700 more hit points though. Regarding the launcher setup I would agree that three double launchers are preferable over two triple ones. I would wholeheartedly agree that the stock Mutsuki torpedoes should be replaced with the same type as the Minekaze. I would offer people a choice to two different styles of play and do a lot about how the ship is viewed by many people I reckon. I do think the Mutsuki-Hatsuharu transition would come as more of a shock though. Speaking of the Hatsuharu I admit I am worried about the playing her regarding the sudden drop in concealment and the slightly inferior mobility... Ah well, I will find out soon, only a few more games ;) Cheers, M

Soviet, USN and IJN destroyers are, at least at tier 6, very different vessels regarding gameplay. Seeing the difference between the Farragut and the Mutsuki are very small both ships seem to have their niches. The Ognavoi seems very powerful but the sample size of the given information is very small compared to the other destroyers and could very well distort the picture. Regarding the difference in gameplay between the Minekaze and the Mutsuki I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I do not consider the torpedoes of the Mutsuki to be inferior, they trade speed for range. In essence they exchange offensive power for security. Given the fact the Mutsuki is going to encounter more dangerous (higher tier) opponents this strikes me as a logical development. If most people insist on playing it like a Minekaze they will surrender the advantage they have gained and commit to an attack which is less effective. The increased casualty rate and the drop in effectiveness are the predictable consequences. Cheers, M