fnord_disc

Hack into the server, give yourself a Scharnhorst and go into the training room together with 4 Fusos, 4 Yamatos and 4 Colorados. Go broadside on and write down the range you need to citadel them. Then put a curve through the points. If you're not willing to do that, you'll have to trust me when I say that Scharnhorst has much better penetration that Kutuzov.

Where are we supposed to get this data?

Scharnhorst's ingame armor penetration is probably somewhat lower than the values given on navweaps. I need the ship to test, but I'm quite confident that at 10km Scharnhorst will only hover around 350mm penetration, not the 400-something navweaps suggests. It's a result of the changes to the USN Empirical formula made by Lesta, but does not specifically target Scharnhorst or German ships. The values given on navweaps usually do not correspond to reality and only roughly correspond to the game. Don't forget that.

I'm a beta tester. Trust me. I know what I'm doing.

WG can't use the historical armor values because the ships would be invulnerable. You'd never lose HP, never sink... Even the 200-something milimeters that they have now is German Steel, so the game calculates it like 500mm belt armor.

If you think Bayern's stats are bad, you need to be wearing a straitjacket.

I assume you meant to write 68 here, but anyway: whether is applied before or after the game tests for auto-ricochet is undocumented and a point of contention. Based on training room trials with the bugged Tachibana shells, I would say normalization is applied before auto-ricochet (like in your example), but I'm not certain. It would be better to only explain normalization as a reduction of impact angle. All WW2 naval AP shells are APCBC... This should be common knowledge. The actual impact physics in real life are a little more complex than what you describe there.

That's because the nerf is of a debatable nature. 900 less AP damage, but 0.2 more sigma. It depends on how you play.

Bayern will be the stet pedders wet dream. Complete faceroll at the low tiers.

The German ships all look so weak and underpowered that I can't wait to pla— I mean, complain on the forums about them.

Hi, I've spent a lot of money already on the game, like the Anshan I bought without a bundle and the Ishi when it was on sale, so I think I deserve some freebies. Since I really want the Scharnhorst, I was thinking we could maybe have a quest line for a free Scharnhorst on EU to reward the loyal and friendly player base. Like an ARP quest, only with a Scharnhorst at the end. Fifteen-point captain would be nice, but I don't want to be unreasonable. Would really get us all hyped up for the German battleships which we're finally getting after waiting for like two years since the end of the beta. Thanks, Paris.

You have 300 battles in Hermelin you dirty seal clubber. It's people like you who ruin this game for newcomers and I'm glad they're putting a stop to this.

Launching also ahead only makes sense if the enemy is sailing at an angle - it does not make sense if the enemy if the enemy is at full speed and right angle to you, because there is no way for him to eat those torpedoes fired ahead whatever he does. But if he's angled towards you or away from you, the torpedoes fired at the marker would miss him at the stern if he goes onto a more 90° angle because he gets more relative velocity that way. It makes sense to also fire ahead of the marker in such a situation.

Well-known Wargaming shills are hyping a T7 Campbeltown. Stay away from this death trap. And leave it to me.

No, I prefer modern designs aesthetically. I'm not a big fan of the Imperial designs to be honest. From an aesthetical point of view I mean, they were good designs from a historical PoV. But it will be a great captain trainer and probably a lot of fun at T3.

If damage is your thing and not win rate, then the other Japanese destroyers, even Fubuki, will cause you to hate them. It's pretty normal nowadays to end the game with less than 10k damage in a high-tier Japanese destroyer because at high tier people don't get torped very often for a variety of reasons. I'd say you still get on average the highest XP of any class due to the ridiculous capping XP, and the win rate is also all right, but damage of torpedo destroyers is poor after Hatsu and won't recover.

Hatsuharu isn't a bad ship, but it's worse than the ones that come before, and it plays a bit differently (use guns more). Fubuki is strong and in my opinion worth the grind through Hatsu, but if you didn't adapt to Hatsu, you will struggle with Fubuki. Yes, Fubuki has 9 torpedoes, but the guns are also excellent and need to be used if you want to be successful. Personally, I think the T9/10 of the Japanese line have seen one too many nerfs, so I hardly play my Fubuki these days. There's nothing magnetically drawing me to Kagero and Shima except for history reasons. The playstyle of Minekaze, spamming torpedoes everywhere from stealth, is gone and will not come back later in the line.

I want a German bundle with Albert and Scharnhorst.

Yeah, the beauty of overmatch. Bayern is just so strong.

The Chinese are extremely touchy about non-fantasy war games, history, nationalism, etc. For example, the Hearts of Iron games are all banned in China for a variety of reasons, but essentially because they're too historically accurate.

I'm kind of surprised that he's not even able to get citadels through the barbettes.

Yeah, that's a great idea actually. And remember that a torpedo also does 8k before torpedo reduction, so a 40.6 AP shell with 12600 max damage isn't in a completely different ballpark. It's definitely feasible imo, it just needs to be balanced.

This was what I meant, though. I'm aware the AP bombers were TB with level runs, not DBs. That's why I selected it for this suggestion thread on unique gameplay mechanics. The mechanic wouldn't even be that unique. Large-ish drop circle and a longer approach for it, similar in size to a torpedo bomber run maybe. Might still be hilariously OP, but it's just a suggestion. Yup, definitely a danger.

No, this is wrong, but I'm tired of talking about it. Maybe it's a problem with your English or maybe you just want to understand things your own way. Also, do you really understand the difference between accuracy and precision? Because you're using the two words like they mean the same to you and they really don't mean the same thing. No, it makes a big difference during maneuvers because if the FCS controls the deflection of the guns directly, it can also decide when it wants to fire over a longer timeframe. The German system is forced to fire once the SVZ closes the firing circuit, but this is only a very small timeframe as the turret passes through that deflection. The turret commander cannot keep it at that deflection for a long time during maneuvers and even the stationary case is not easy for him. Did this, historically, reduce accuracy much? No, it didn't. But I'm convinced full RPC would have been even more accurate. The French ships that were examined by the Germans had an indigenous French system for RPC. This system was faulty and unreliable and it was this system that the Germans disliked. The Italians used a license-built version of the American system, but with inferior manufacturing quality. Neither is comparable to full RPC as mounted on American ships. Source: Campbell, Naval Weapons of World War 2 I'm not going to respond again. Think of yourself as the victor if that's important to you.

Actually, it depends on the deck armor a lot. Yeah, if you penetrate, it would be like 2-3 citadels with AP shells for incredible damage. But if they don't penetrate to the citadel or at all, it's a lot less. It depends a lot on how it's implemented exactly, i.e. what WG decides is the speed when they hit the deck, the angle when they hit and how large the dispersion pattern is. I think it can be made balanced, personally.