ThinderChief

​When you see the work the amount of work they produced so far and knowing how it's done, i'll be the very last to complain about it right now... This gave have reached a very high level of visual quality and playability (with a system that doesn't hang like mine that is), their assotiation with Autodesk and other companies was well worth it, it's a high ranking CG package they've got now... Now, about the choice they make, i guess it's a constant ballance between the 3Dartists/programmers and technico-commercials both with their different requierements, it's also a commercial thing, but for as long as quality is there i'm OK with that too. But well, who are we to complain?

You're... The pain in the butt invisicamping spamming HE? I play Cruisers and i kind of like them, the USN branch suits me well and i am aiming for Des Moines, originally i didn't want to touch a BB because of a natural dislike of anything heavy i got from WoT, but ships are different and BB quiet enjoyable to play. I grinded the USN line up to Baltimore before this damned update made my system obsolescent (lack of memory so i'm stocked in Co-Op with average-to low fps and high ping), but i'm sure i'll love the Des Moines... But i HATE positively those HE spammers, playing like they are totally incapable of scoring a pen and who spend most of their time carpet bombing the area in your general direction hoping to torch you. My answer to that have been to buy the Dunkerque with her 2 X 4 330 mm and if you dare spam me with this hot cr@p, i promise you i'll stuff your citadelle no matter what, and i do time and time again, it's a Battle Cruiser classified as BB for the game but the perfect Cruiser hunter-killer, good vs BBs as well, the kind that scores citadels on a North Carolina at 18km. Now, after my PC upgrade i'll be back in random with it and look forward to teach some of those guys a lesson in courtesy, LEARN TO SHOOT and pen, i can do H.E as well and will WIN this one too.

You should give a go to the Des Moines then...

Yes it's a question of personal preferences, my hit ratio fell by 2% but i start engaging from max range, from closer range it's my secondaries which are causing trouble to ennemy ships now, i will see when i get those 130mm to fire as Manual AAA if the trade is really worth it, but so far, if you play aggressive it's a solution. I'm still stocked in Co-Op but i got 8 kills (5/3) in two games, and not only DDs and Cruisers, BBs suffers too when your Secondaries are working for you, front 0* angle to a little angle you always have at least two turrest firing forward and it's HE. I realised i could only get 19 skills as total so i did reshuffle the whole thing a little, i put the emphasis on the 130mm, going for Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armamant, ps during my last game (5mn ago) i scored a citadelle on a North Carolina at 18km, got only one kill but 84.542 damage, my secondaries did hit 26 times, oh yeah and i noticed pen with HE on Cruisers as well occasionaly. This ship ROCKS!!!. ​Here is how it looks at the moment:

​​L'AA manuelle, c'est aussi mon plan mais avec les 130mm...

WHY don't they just sale the damned ship as Premium? Do people think that a tIX BB is reserved to the elite or what? It should be made available to anyone who wish to spend a little money in a Prem!

Windows 10 being an uterly complete piece of garbage, it missuses physical memory like no other operating system i used since Win 95, it's by FAR the worst Windows of all, THAT BAD. So, OK, my system is marginal when it comes to memory; 2GB of Corsair 1333 is barely enough to run the game but it did it until the last big update, then once a sudden, i couldn't play my tVIII and tIX anymore, i did research my North Carolina and Baltimore in Random, but now, only Co-Op runs <> smoothly although with a bit of lag and low fps and not above tVI... So i ordered 4 GB of Corsair 1600, which took a week to reach me after the courrier managed to try to deliver first time at the wrong number, then i realised that it was impossible to use it because Windows 10 doesn't support the ASUS BIOS allowing to run it, in short it doesn't recognise the DIMM at all and i got a black screen from boot. Result: I need to sale it all to Computer Exchange (or perhaps exchange vs a graphic card or playing mice if i'm lucky and they've got something proper), loosing 50% of its value in the process and order a 16GB combo when i got the funds, meanwhile i nurse my Dunkerque Captain, but i got to log out after each game to avoid game freeze, so you can imagine the fun... Good aspect of this: I managed to reduce Windows 10 use of memory by 10% though, got rid of Cortana and lowered some of the system background programs percentage of memory use, sort out the hotkeys etc. Cortana on its own was using up to 36% of it, i'd shoot Bill Gate when the game freezes on one frame and i loose a shot or am unable to reply to fire etc, in a good game i'm happy if i can do 30.000 dmg/1000 XP in those conditions. That's my reason for playing Co-Op, but it's a good practice room... You're much too encline to bow to the "good" players, it doesn't help much for the arrogant and egotripping ones who throw the word "noob" at new comers like an insult and brag about their stats and how good/better they are. FACT is; they NEED lower skilled players or else, they would have to face equally skilled players and their stats would look a tad different. It's time people start to pay respect to lower skilled and beginers, i'm not the kind to bow in real life and if i got a rebuf from an "elite" i rot him/her with some bad English, players invest their dimes in the game, lower skilled players are ALSO customers, the very least those who manage to live of it (or wannabes) could do is to respect those they use as targets to make their bread and butter. In short, wolves respect their preys because they need them to survive, they are at the top of the food chain, but stay humble, if humans CANT do that, they dont deserve mine.

​ Frankly, considering the number of KIA/Executed/Deported Mem/Women in my family during the last WW alone (i wont mention WWI, my granny did tell me pretty hair rising stories too), i hardly see what is wrong with being patriotic, after all we have an heritage from them, looks like it became fashionable to "spit in the soup" as they say in the Bourbonais, but no, i respect my ancesters, praise them and their courage. Pitty people of new generation have such short memory... Nah, the only reasons for getting rid of this camo would be historical or so as not to attract too much (or to rapidely) unwanted attention as is my case, i noticed, not using any other mod, that i can spot another Dunkerque with this paint job a lot faster than i would recognise any other ship, so considering how much some players wants to nail her, it might be a good idea to go "historical". Here is my pick. http://skin-wawan25.blogspot.co.uk/p/dunkerque-mod.html

That's why i'll use a camo mod when possible, plus it's a dead give away for those who haven't recognised the ship at first sight, with this paint job, they will.

Moi aussi, mais il faut choisir, contre les avion lance-torpille, je choisis de leur faire face le plus vite possible pour eviter de ne pas pouvoir maneuvrer quand ils ont lance, ca m'a evite de me prendre la bordee totale assez souvent et une bordee de torpilles peut faire plus de degats qu'n BB meme tVIII. Comme ils combinent frequement avec les dive-bombers, il y a toujours des cibles pour les 130mm, je cible donc les dive bombers avant meme qu'ils n'arrivent a portee. Pour le SBM2 seulement, c'est 6.000m de portee maxi +20% soit 7.200m et un extra 20% avec AFT, 8.660m contre 6.000m stock. Toujours ca a prendre, pendant toute la maneuvre, les 130 peuvent tirer. Il n'y a qu'une tourelle vraiment placee a l'arriere, les autres sont placees sur les cotes, dont deux tirant de face, ca fait 6X130mm par bordee minimum si la tourelle arriere est en angle mort, 10 avec. Je viens de me faire une partie avec un P.A tVIII, des bots en Co-Op qui souvent sont plus de efficaces P-A qu'en Random (j'ai joue le North Carolina et Baltimore assez souvent en Random avant cette update de la mort subite qui est bien trop lourde cote memoire, mon systeme rame a mort maintenant), 11 kills AAA, le meilleur score que je n'ai atteins avec le Dunkerque jusqu'a present (14 contre un P.A tVII juste a l'instant). En Co-Op, le Dunkerque est ma platefome AAA la plus efficace apres le N-C, avec 0.98 d'apres les stats tout-publique, pas editee avec les derineres missions.

7% of 244m is 17.080000000000002. http://www.percentagecalculator.net/

Manual AA: That's what i chosed to do, plus trading the 17m extra dispersion (ridiculous) provided by Aiming Systems Modification 1 on main guns, for Secondary Battery Modification 2 with +20% to secondary battery maximum firing range and -20% to maximum dispersion of secondary battery shells. 10 km range for the dual purpose 130mm and higher accuracy, since from stock they work rather well vs DDs and even Cruisers, with this skill it should be showing when you have CVs in a game, previous to that, a good tVII/VIII CV would slaughter you in no time.

Bon, je suis nouveau dans ce jeu, donc, impression a prendre avec pincettes mais... Au cours de mon apprentissage sur ce bateau, j'ai remarque que les P.A me ciblaient presque en priorite meme en Co-Op, trois raids et c'est BIG Badaboum comme dis Liloo, alors vu que j'en ai marre de me faire couler aussi rapidement par ces raids aeriens, j'ai decide de troquer mes modifs d'artillerie pour ameliorer la portee de mes secondaires. La raison primordiale est que je suis en train de me raprocher de la qualification Manual Fire Control for AA Armament qui permet d'utiliser la modif Secondary Battery Modification 2 plus efficacement. Avec Aiming Systems Modification 1 on gagne 17m en dispersion ce qui est ridicule compare au total d'origine de 244m, et depuis que j'ai change je ne men rend pas vraiment compte cote precision, il score toujours des cita d'enfer meme a portee Maxi, alors que dans le cas de Secondary Battery Modification 2, c'est tout de suite 20% de portee en plus et -20% en dispersion. Tout couple avec la qualification Manual Fire Control for AA Armament, qui assure une augmentation d'efficacite de 100% en moyenne de degats, ca devrait compter, tant en MM qu'en AA. Regle comme ca, ca donne: Artillerie Principale (330mm). ​Portee: 18.2 km. Dispersion Maximale: 244m. Degats Maxi: HE/4.800. HP/9.700. ​Chances d'incendie: 36%. Artillerie Secondaire (130mm). Portee: 6.000m. Dispersion Maximale: -20% (La valeur stock n'apparait pas (?) ​Degats Maxi HE/1900. Chances d'incendie: 9%. Evidement c'est une question d'opinion et surtout une experimentation, je reste ouvert aux suggestions... Bon jeux a tous.

​You end up getting those point one day or another if you play her enough anyway, and at the moment I play Dunkerque almost exclusively. The main reason is i'm still lacking in memory despite the delivery of 4 GB of Corsair DIMM today which my motherboard doesn't want to recognise because of Windows 10 lack of support for the right BIOS and impossibility to set up the correct 1600 MHz clock speed and voltage (despite the fact that it is designed for 1600 MHz DIMMs), I just find out it has issues with THIS particular Corsair DIMM with later Windows (7/8/10). So I guess it's new motherboard and processor now, but even so I play Co-Op with low tiers, forget about Random, as I got hellish 150/200 ms lag and 10-0 frame rates and get killed most of the time on the grid. I haven't played her enough to clinch those skills yet, still about 80.000 points from ​Manual Fire Control for AA Armament which is the next one I really want to get next but today, I did swap Aiming System Modification 1 for Artillery Plotting Room Modification 1 and although I loose a little (17m) in terms of main gun dispersion, I gain 16% range with the Secondary and it works (plus you got more AAA), I barely noticed the loss and am still around 37% hit ratio so let's wait and see... Anyway it's a blessing as much as a pain as I nurse my Captain and will have a better set up when I go back to Random.

That's until you're targeted by a CV of higher tier, I promise you it caused more trouble than two BBs, 3 raids and BIG badaboum, so not only I am training my Captain for this skill but I will also give my fighter the Dogfighting Ace's one to add to her AA capabilities, it will help.

​Cheers! I was thinking of this solution exactly, also range vs a little higher ROF, I will try those solutions and see if my hit ratio suffers or improves and you're right, Dunkerque is not the most accurate when it comes to gunnery, just as well she has loads of guns per volley, having said that, when they hit, the targets notices.

Frankly, I think we should leave to W.G to define what THEY consider as legal or not, some mods can be useful, if they are free and available to all, and W.G doesn't ban them, then they are legal. Note that many times in WoT, W.G implemented one of those mods to a new release, and alternative developers are useful to them and us too, so I am not against mods, I am against mods that provides advantages not available to everyone and more to the point, makes the game unplayable to those who haven't got access to it.

Geeee. I wish this had been done in WoT. Thanks anyway and well done! That's no luck and that's NO SKILLS either and yet, you have a mafia of false elite operating this way in WoT, with total impunity, reason why I vacated over here and frankly, I do not regret my move. Yes those cheat show them where you are, you have a "flag" above your head when hidden, out of sight, they also show them when you target them as your line of sight becomes a laser bean for them, they have automatic lead-on increasing their hit ratio to a level their skills alone surely wouldn't, some of those cheat can even target specific components to disable it, and the worst of it, they throw their poor stats at "noobs" or average player like an insult. They get banned? Good ridance!

​LOL! Justement le truc que je HAIS le plus, c'est ces mecs qui se planquent derriere une ile ou un nuage de fumee et reproduisent le bombardement d'Ivo-Jima a la HE souvent a deux sur la meme cible, la plupart d'entre eux ont d'ailleur un taux de tir au but assez bas, c'est pas dire mais ne serait-ce pas pour compenser? Les DD encore je comprend mais les Cruisers??? Personelement je ne me fait pas mousser avec le logo "torche" mais par contre les citadelle me donnent plus de satisfaction, j'essaie de bosser sur mon pourcentage de coups au but, mais un bon %age c'est quoi dans ce jeu? Vu que je suis nouveau dans ce jeu je ne savait pas ca tiens... Bon ca ne me manque pas vu que je ne connais pas "la bonne epoque", mais en bassinant W.G on pourrait peut etre retourner a ce niveau d'efficacite des HP? La il pourrait y avoir des surprises, y'en a qui effectivement doivent profiter de l'aubaine sans se soucier de leut talents de tireur. Ouvrez donc un topique chez les techies, je signe... Au sujet du tir a distance, je fait ca beaucoup aussi mais le Dunkerque m'apprend aussi a "brawler"? (faut pas se planter sur l'orthaugraphe, la) et je trouve meme ca poilant...

​I'll go back nurse her Captain and practise before i have to stop bashing bots giving myself the impression that i'm nearly good, when i get my Corsair DIMM tomorrow (hopefully without another DHL delivery issue) it's Random and the real players. Wish me luck. Oh, I nearly forgot, if anyone knows how (bar the upgrade) to improve on her gun dispersion...

​Thanks! Interesting test you've made there, it does support many people's impression, mine was more based on the way she turns from the start of changes direction quickly at any speed, but this is even better. What your conclusion shows is that to compute a turn rate you need to apply the same parameters to all, in particular speed, because obviously it does change the result greatly in terms of turn radium and therefore turn rate. Note that I only could compare to the Arizona because I went through the line up to North Carolina, and she didn't give me this impression of responsiveness. It's very much the same than for the rest, how accurate and how often close to the maximum accuracy the game engine (mechanics) is in this case depends on a number of factors and i have enumerated a few. I did read the article​ which link you provided us with and the conclusion were, well, inconclusive since the author based them on a belief, including that HE is better used than HP etc. Since I do not use HE most of the time I think I have more chance to experience those little "exception", as for the final angle of the shells I am certain that in many cases it is way superior to the 28* you demonstrated and I also explained how I could have figured that out. I think our friend here have done it for us and we have the answer, but aerodynamic theories have a lot in common with hydrodynamic theory in that they obey to the same laws of physics, only the combination of gas changes and the nature of the vehicles. Motion always imply a start and a pic, that's onset and you can base your first impression on this only, as I said it remains subjective until someone does the test. The ingame stats doesn't give you any clue about her instantaneous turn rate, as I explained it depends on her response to rudder input and she seems to have a lot more of it than many other ships of her class, she initiates the turns faster than most, and apparently her sustained turn rate is also top but considering the fact that she has a higher speed, it doesn't show in her turning radius data. So I was right to point out that as is done in aerodynamics, figures should be given according to the same procedure; at equal speeds to give a better idea, or as have done Mucker. A full test would imply a computation of the onset, or lateral acceleration in the case of a ship, which is how many */sec she would give you from command input (regardless of ruder shift time), how fast/high this acceleration would be until she have reached her sustained turn rate, stats doesn't give you that, not even response time to rudder input. That's one of the reason why I use stats as a basis but not as a rigid absolute value, they are "all public" data, not test Captain material if I may say and I think "subjective" until I get proper data as is the case now.

​Magnifique! J'en veut un!

​By pure enthusiasm, I am a newbie so I rev about something new for me that I like... Just for the story.

It makes absolutely NO difference as they are extremely capable packages with very similar capabilities, then ships are a LOT easier to simulate/program than football players using actors with motion capture. And I used Maya as well, it's not so different in terms of capability, 3DS Max being perhaps a little more capable when it comes to animation because it was developed with the movie industry in mind, meaning animating 3D objects to add to life footages, I should know I contributed to develop this particular Beta release, 4DS Max 4 to be precise. From then on this package capabilities never ceased to develop further this way, you have entire cities and characters made on 3D added to natural terrain you wouldn't know, I don't know of more recent Maya packages tough... I never said otherwise, what I said is still clear, this remains game simulation with its margin for error, for a start, if you had worked in a 3D department you'd know about the human factor, not saying they are incompetent, but packages does only work with the data you enter in the first place, then a mention for the fact that they themselves (packages) CAN be faulty or not so precise, updates/bug fixes are NOT uncommon in this business, even with the most capable packages available for the game industry. For military and civilian stuff tough, the cost difference makes damned sure those issues are pretty rare, in fact there are two distinct categories, Maya and 3DS Max being "artistic" packages, CATIA industrial and trust me, this one works well passed down the 100.000 mm and is a LOT tighter as a modelling package than any of the other, in fact, it's simple, you nearly CANT do real watertight 3D with them when CATIA will NOT let you do otherwise to finish a piece, watertight means NO 3D structural fault possible, but conceptual, yes it CAN be done wrongly, same for aerodynamics and hydrodynamics. It's NOT the data they collected, it's the data the game works with at the end, and the way it was compiled/applied and then as you put it yourself, capped, taking into account the 3D margins I mentioned previously from 3D to simulation combined, I find nothing surprising to see some departure from what the ideal results should be with that all, which in turn might well end up in pen when you say it is impossible for X/Y/Z reason. I know what I saw and the other player and myself did not tell you stories... Asking for proof is a little pulled by the hair to say the least, you know those packages or the whole process are NOT fool proof and you still ask for an evidence of it, my evidence is my personal experience of the game industry (including motion capture although briefly) AND industrial 3D/Simulation packages, it's more than enough for me to take all W.G figures as basis but NOT as absolute, fool proof and rigid as you take them, having said that I uses them just as much as you do, AND I keep praising the quality of their work as well, my comments are not dumb critics only a more realistic view of what the game and its 3D/mechanics can be.

​Clear? Well you posted data on turn rates and rudder shift just after I mentioned this ability she has to initiate the turns from start (I started her up 109 times from the grid so I noticed her response), and it got nothing to do with MY comment? Who was _Kyoshi replying to? Errr. Yesssir... Plus NO you are not, you stick to data and you do not know HOW they are computed, perhaps you should try to do a little 3D and see those lovely curves used to animate/simulate an object and its behaviour, that you can adjust precisely with handles so as to (precisely too) simulate a motion onset value on ANY object, be it motion, trajectory, rotation, deformation and the rest of it. I guess from comparison with A-C flight envelops, ships performances at every levels shouldn't be very different, only on two axis instead of 3, so you might be testing for W.G but there are a few things about "mechanics" that's eludes you and that I might understand more because I've been there and done that, consider the fact that the data you bring up as bible says might be, how to put that? Well, a little flexible... So no you are not able to admit it are you? I give you a tip, it would look like something like this when not translated into​ algorithms. Now as you can see, it's a REAL A-C DRAG scaled curves and for ships it goes very much the same way, some drag more than other, some are more responsive than other (we say snappy) some have lower response times to command input and even if one have a longer turn radius it might well respond faster instantaneously. Below the tool I used in 3D Studio Max to be able to SIMULATE VERY PRECISELY those behaviours, and that's 3D of course, I don't know which tool W.G uses to model and simulate their ships and other vehicles but in principle they should have those too available to them, in view of the quality of their work, myself have been doing fluid simulation with FLUENT, with models from CATIA as well and I can tell you that it CAN be very accurate but it is ONLY simulation with margin(s) for error, even at the highest (civilian/military) levels, ask Lockheed Martin and Boeing... That's one thing. The other being that I do not believe that the computation on shell ballistics (and resulting penetration) is so rigid either, people tried to share their experience with you, you wouldn't get your nose off your bible, tough, it doesn't make you right, it only puts you in a position where you cannot be certain of one thing because you did not experience it by not trying, especially after admitting that you do not know how W.G computed all the data you stick to. As I said before, that's two (or more) experiences and two (or more) PoV. ps the curves on 3DS Max are given on frame/sec (scale at the bottom) and the axis are linked to a transformation tool, the SAME principle is applied to motion with onset totally controllable using the handles. Those behaviour curves CAN be translated to algorithms for simulation (that's one way to do it among other but it has the merit to be VERY simple to use).