fnord_disc

They're not synonms if you work with them every day. But whatever. They're just elements ripped from history with little regard for history and accuracy. Most players don't give a [edited] whether it's accurate or not as long as it feels historical. Feels. Not is. The game is designed to feel historical without being historical so that players can think to themselves "that's some cool [edited] WW2 ship I'm looking at" without having to deal with the difficult aspects. Pressing a button to stop flooding and fire? No list? No counterflooding? No damage to fire control? And you expect historicity? Don't make me laugh.

Sorry, but models and simulations are what I do for a living... It has nothing to do with """gamerspeak""". The dictionary refers to a different kind of simulation when it talks about computers. A simulator is not a simulation. Google military & flight simulators and you'll see what I mean. This game is not a simulator. It isn't a simulation either because a simulation does not allow unrealistic behavior. You can make your simulation ignore certain aspects of the real system for speed or convenience, but academics would never allow a simulation that deliberately represents reality in a wrong way such as how ships handle on the water in WoWs. WoWs models (not simulates) certain parts of naval combat to give the game an air of authenticity, but ultimately it's just some basic modelling and not a true simulation.

Accuracy is the same or better as Amagi, I forgot which, but the 2.0 sigma is hard to beat. But I feel like you're right with the overpens. I make sure the shells dive through water when I shoot at paper ships because I think so too and it's easy to get underwater citadels against those ships.

No, this is all wrong. You don't know what a simulation is. Simulators are a clearly defined branch of software and your personal terminology doesn't matter one iota.

It doesn't make sense balance-wise. It's a mystery to me why the ship was overperforming with AP DPM similar to Nagato and a host of weaknesses.

Cruisers can't citadel a Nagato unless they're closer than 5 kilometers and you're showing perfect broadside. Nagato bounces 14" pretty reliably at range and with good angling you bounce 16" too or limit it to a couple of bow penetrations. Maybe you don't really understand what a citadel is...

A flat 10% damage reduction is a pretty crazy nerf.

If those are indeed the stock T4/T5, then I understand your criticism 100%. Are we sure that's the stock Kaiser? How can it have ball rangefinders? edit: I'm asking because Bayern is accurate. The hull and bridge represents Baden 1918 and König only has more stuff on the mast and one more bridge level. Neither has the ball caps on the rangefinders. Lots of stuff on the mast + one more bridge level than it should.

No, you don't understand the point of me saying all those things. I'm not saying my ships have to be in it and yours deserve to be left out in the cold. I'm saying we need to look at what is absolutely necessary, design a timeline around that and and cut the things that don't fit. Everyone, no matter which time you like, has to let go of some ships. Everyone who plays this game has seen some of their favorite ships ignored and not implemented. I still have no Kaga or Akagi CV! You and your allies keep trying to paint yourselves as victims and whine how you're not getting the ships you want. The game has been like that for a lot of people for a long time and they don't spam into 15 topics whining about their favorite rust buckets!

Yeah see and that's why it's not in the game and only a part of all those British tubs will be in it too.

Tosa class is indispensable and needs to be in the game eventually. Kii... Kii is arguable. Nr 13 too.

Ignore most of them. Obviously?? A lot of American and Japanese classes were omitted too. The idea of this game is not to have 10 tiers of pretty similar dreadnoughts.

The only way I can rationalize what he's saying is that he has no idea how to use armor correctly. Basically he stands no chance in the higher tiers... Nagato with better armor would be ridiculously overpowered. The ship is borderline OP even now.

It has better armor for its tier, but that doesn't make it a better ship. Nagato will win at medium and long range any time because Nagato has much better penetration and is much more agile. I can dodge Fuso all day from 18km, but you will not dodge me and I can easily pen your armor even at angle. This is a pointless discussion. I have played both ships and I am a good player and I'm telling you that you're wrong and need to learn the game better. Trying to justify your misperceptions is a waste of time.

I'm absolutely certain that I will beat a Fuso player of my own skill level ten times out of ten with Nagato. The only range where Fuso has a slightly advantage is about 8-11km, and in any other range window Nagato is simply much better. I'm sorry to be so blunt, but if you can't understand this, then you're just not good enough. Fuso is not a better ship than Nagato.

Tryhard supertesters ruining everything.

Bad players saying hard ships are bad. More news at eleven.

The Chinese have the old Tone version without any special mechanics. WG withheld the ship on other servers because of criticism that it doesn't have any interesting mechanics for its planes. I would take it as proof that they want to give us something unique.

It's being rumored by those in the know that Russian T9/T10 battleships will have fin-stabilized, terminally guided AP shells with 20m dispersion at 25km.

It has better armor than Fuso. The enemies you're facing just have much better penetration in-tier, so the armor can feel worse. If you're eating a lot of citadels, then the problem is squarely with your own playstyle and Amagi will be even worse for you. Amagi actually has worse armor than Nagato and unlike Nagato, you have to fight against Yamatos. No amount of armor will protect you from citadels if you broadside to 16" guns and to be honest, I think the problem here is your map awareness. Nagato has reliable and useful armor. My personal experience is that I eat citadels very rarely, maybe once in every 3 games or so. A lot of people have been telling you that Nagato is a strong ship that just plays very differently from Fuso and somehow you keep ignoring them and claiming that the ship is somehow at fault.

Stop putting your misperceptions into every thread about Nagato that the forum has and learn how to play a T7 battleship correctly... For the record, Nagato has much better armor than Fuso.

Amagi has worse armor and is a larger target.

Honestly, the only reason Nagato isn't being nerfed is that a lot of people can't adapt to her after Fuso and pull the stats down. Which I'm grateful for, since I love the ship.

Not really a downside because ordinary penetration salvos are just as bad in this game. And at long range accuracy is so poor you're not going to eat more than one citadel realistically, so really, what does it matter? Citadel is what, 13k? just getting 3 penetrations on the upper belt is the exact same damage and you'll often get more penetrations than that at short range. Having poor deck armor isn't really that much of a problem in this game, you know? The only difference is that penetrations can be partially repaired, but you still eat more of them.

At close range, all BBs are weak under the turrets because the barbettes can be penetrated.