El2aZeR

Well, to be fair playing Operations alone usually makes you lose faith in humanity even faster than random battles.

Completed it a few days ago. Without using a single French ship, too.

WIth the CV population as it is nowadays it is impossible not to run into unicums T7+.

Just make it so that allied ordinance is incapable of setting fires or causing flooding. With that you actually have to try to tk for the system to punish you, while true accidents are left off the hook.

Any ship can struggle to do so depending on target armor, angle, ballistic properties, penetration power and distance. For example just recently I had to engage a broadsiding Edinburgh at extremely close range in my Hindenburg and I scored nothing but overpens on the citadel area. Only the few shells that managed underwater penetrations actually scored citadel hits. Penetration is not RNG, dispersion however is. Aiming for the waterline is one thing, actually hitting it is another. BBs are the most inaccurate class by far, if RNGesus says no then no matter how good your aim is you won't see success. Best thing you can do against that in an Iowa is to take the accuracy upgrade, as that'll transform her into the most accurate BB in the game inside ~12km. RNGesus will always be capable of trolling you however no matter what you do. Overmatch means that damage is guaranteed, yes. What type of damage however still depends on the penetration formula. Overmatch basically guarantees overpen damage but nothing else as the fuse threshold still applies. If you overmatch a thin plate full broadside, that'll usually be an overpen. On the other hand if that same plate is angled heavily enough for your fuse to get armed then that's guaranteed penetration damage. E.g. if you hit a broadsiding 25mm plate with a 406mm gun that'll usually result in an overpen as the required armor thickness for the fuse to arm is 68mm (afaik). However, if that same 25mm is angled heavily enough so that the effective armor thickness becomes 68+mm then the fuse will arm accordingly, giving you penetration damage. This is ofc assuming the target is wide enough for the shell to not leave the ship before exploding.

As I mentioned above, aim for the waterline. Underwater hits (which are completely realistic btw) are also a thing. Shells that hit the water first have their fuses activated, if they then continue on and penetrate the citadel you will score a citadel hit accordingly.

By applying a bit of logic a hit location that may grant you a citadel hit in a Colo will not necessarily do the same if you're captaining an Iowa/NC. It simply can't be compared this way because these are three different weapons you're talking about. Ballistic properties such as shell arcs, speed, penetration power and underwater ballistics are entirely different from gun to gun. Iowa fires the same shell as NC but uses a different gun to do so, changing ballistics significantly. Colorado has a different gun and shell altogether. 0 damage hits always occur when hitting modules, regardless of whether they penetrate. At long ranges your gunnery is inevitably more inaccurate than at short ranges, thus you'll be hitting what you're aiming for less often. At 12km you're less likely to have shells slam into AA guns and the likes unless you actively aim for them. As for actual citadel hits, try aiming for the waterline to go for underwater hits. Citadel overpenetrations are a thing and Iowa has the best ballistic properties out of the three you named, thus is the most likely to overpen.

I don't see how this is going to be any different from normal random battles unless you impose some entry restrictions. I mean yeah, you cull those that will never find out about such a function, but those that find out about it will most likely overestimate their skill level and enter "competitive random" anyway. Whether the ratio between good and bad players is 1:100 or 1:50 hardly makes a difference in my eyes. It may also encourage skilled players to seal club by simply queuing for normal random battles. Could still be worth trying, though. Maybe I'll be proven wrong.

Nothing has changed from my perspective.

Yamato and Monty are fine. If anything the other BBs need to have their gimmicks taken away.

Git gud peasants. (I did not spend a single dime on that btw.)

I would just like to note that WG is fine with the implementation of USN AP bombs in their current state. Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/7m0lrm/wows_qa_18/drqq7ze/ Thus USN AP bombs are actually intended to be an anti cruiser weapon.

lol AA It seems like the year of the CV has finally arrived.

Can enter battles now. Would still like to know what in the name of RNGesus is going on, though.

ಠ_ಠ

And don't I know it. ¬_¬ The thing about CVs is that they follow what can be considering an outdated meta, a time when this game was considered and understood as a team game and not full of players that couldn't give two [edited] about teamplay. What's even more infuriating is that the devs apparently have taken to encouraging self-sustainability instead of promoting what makes up the framework of their inherent design. I honestly shudder to think what WG will do with CVs in the upcoming rework and whether or not it will follow this new philosophy of "everyone must be capable of doing everything", because that will ironically leave CVs even more powerful than they are now. What they've mentioned so far certainly goes in that direction.

What I meant is that a single player can save a team full of garbage in what is supposed to be a team game is ridiculous. I mean no offense to @MortenTardo, I'm sure he's a very good player.

If you want to be rewarded for good play this is (sadly) not the game you're looking for. There are plenty of topics about how the economy of WoWs is too focused on damage, a principle that applies to every class BUT, ironically, CVs. I'll see if I can provide a replay anytime soon. Although the point is still to put yourself in a position where you cannot be struck. E.g. I just had a game in my Hindenburg where the DDs did not needlessly overextend. They stayed ahead of the fleet providing intelligence and harassing enemy ships, pulling back to AA cover when they saw planes on the horizon which enabled me to get 28 strike planes before the game ended after 8 minutes as we reduced the enemy point count to 0. Needless to say the enemy CV wasn't able to do jack and all DDs ended up pretty high on the scoreboard. That you are even capable of winning in a situation where your entire team is camping is a testament to how garbage the average player is. Balancing around this premise is futile as it will result in a cluster[edited] for everyone involved. A thoroughly subjective point of view that can be adapted to almost any mechanic found in the game, really. Regardless of whether or not you like it, if you want a team game you will need at least one prominent mechanic to force teamplay and deliver quick, unrewarding punishment to those who do not follow along. CVs are that for WoWs (though not the only one), that they are not respected as such is a failure born from poor design decisions made during the last two years.

A single bow camping BB? Sure. A small group (like 2-3)? Not so much. Heck even a single BB can be a hazardous target depending on how many AA skills/upgrades he took. The inherent ability of a CV is spotting, thus they are the natural counter to DDs. Which ofc begs the question, what are DDs supposed to do? Vision denial - doesn't get hampered at all by CVs, it is in fact a direct counter to a CVs inherent ability to scout Area denial - doesn't get hampered at all by CVs, even spotted torps serve their purpose Screening - barely gets hampered if you play correctly Fire and AA support - yeah, no, doesn't get hampered So out of the inherent roles a DD is capable of playing only a single one is at a detriment when facing CVs and that's only if you misplay. In a game without CVs ofc scouting, cap contesting and so on get added, but those are the result of the metagame (formed by players in an environment without all classes in play and of sub-par quality in terms of skill might I add) and has nothing to do with the inherent roles a DD is supposed to play. Funny how it works for me, yet not for you. And if the rest of your team camps, do you honestly believe you should have even the slightest chance of winning? Personally I believe CVs are excellent for gameplay under the premise that this is a team game, though they do need overhaul in many aspects. Just because the vast majority of the playerbase is beyond incapable doesn't make the inherent design bad.

- Kraken - High caliber - Dreadnought - 4 full friggin' caps translates into 2k base exp. Wat.

Yup, they have been ever since... well, forever. Radar and hydro came as a band-aid after CVs have died out, implemented in the usual fashion of avoiding the actual problem at hand typical of WG. So first of all, how come you are constantly spotted? DDs have the smallest air detection value by far, it is often small enough to allow you to operate a considerable distance from your allies while still being close enough to run for AA cover if needed. If you're constantly spotted in a DD by aircraft you have severely misplayed. Spotting for your team takes a backseat in priority as you have a CV yourself, ideally he's the guy who provides most of the spotting information for your team. This actually means considerable freedom for yourself, which is one of the reasons I actually like having CVs in the game when I'm playing a DD. Contesting caps is pretty easy. Lay down smoke cover for your team and have them push up with you if no cover is otherwise available. If your team doesn't want to follow, you don't contest. And quite frankly you do not deserve to be able to take that cap or even have a chance of winning if your team prefers to camp in the back. This is a team game, deal with it. Torpedoes are more than just a means to deal damage. Even spotted torps can deny vast amounts of areas or force an enemy to make an unfavorable turn. If you know that the torps you launch are going to get spotted, either don't launch them or use them in the most effective manner possible in that situation. Also if you play a DD that is solely reliant on torpedoes (aka IJN ones), sell those DDs as they are obsolescent (or at least stop playing them). If you do need to operate independently for a short time, just watch the minimap. Bombers need 2-5 minutes to rearm depending on what nation the enemy plays, how far away he is from the front line and whether or not he was stupid enough to take Evasive Maneuvers. Fighters are a valuable commodity that also cannot simply remain over a cap indefinitely unless the enemy has already pushed up (at which point they rightfully deserve the advantage). And if the enemy CV is concentrating on the other flank, even better! You'll not need to deal with any aircraft in the first place. You are not an independent lone wolf in a DD. You are the most valuable team support ship. Play like it.

Regardless of what he meant, increasing dispersion will just make potatoes hit random citadels more often. A decrease in BB dispersion may (emphasis on MAY) actually have positive effects on gameplay as it would allow you to dodge in a more reliable fashion while rewarding skilled players for good aim or prediction abilities. But alas, the game caters to potatoes, so who am I kidding?

So a competent player that plays the direct counter class to yours makes your game not fun. Who would've thought? But I guess it is too much to ask for to adapt your playstyle. It's weird that others have so many problems dealing with CVs in their DDs, yet the last time a CV has actually managed to kill me, whether directly with an air strike or indirectly via spotting, without my team falling first in a DD was maybe a year ago. And if I remember correctly I still heavily contributed to a win. CVs are a mild annoyance at best if you know how to play around them.

3 cruisers coordinating with each other are capable of demolishing a single BB, BBs are therefore worthless. Wat. And really, the BB still has pretty good chances of winning if he's not completely incompetent. Killing a cruiser in smoke by following the tracers isn't rocket science. It's even laughably easy if you have a spotter equipped. Also if 3 BBs lose against 3 DDs that is in fact an indicator that BB vs DD interaction is well balanced. It would be imbalanced if the BBs had even the tiniest chance of winning barring any horrible misplay from the DDs. Why? Because this is a team game. You are not supposed to be able to do everything on your own. And neither is WoWs a game which aims to have each class be capable of exerting the same amount of potential influence of a match. The very fundamentals make such a thing impossible, as is the case in literally every other successful game that employs an asymmetric role distribution.