El2aZeR

- gets outplayed by better players - blames p2w How about you go blame yourself? Considering your hilariously poor score you apparently did jack in that game, so you were a liability to your team. Making sure you're not a liability next time would be the logical conclusion, but instead you choose to come here to demonstrate your incompetence to the world? If you honestly believe you should have had any chance of winning that game, not because of what ships your or the enemy team played but because of the skill disparity, then oh boy do I have some bad news for you. Git gud.

- get an AA cruiser - pick DFAA - wait until CV planes are close - use DFAA - watch as all planes get killed Alternatively: Stick with a cruiser that has DFAA. But I really like the idea. Please let them chase me so I can pick them off one by one. I can farm some potential damage this way, too.

.... I have no words.

Not to mention fighters didn't have strafe (so they were utterly worthless against massed strikes) and DFAA didn't exist either.

Actually according to this that's no longer true. Though regardless, DoY most likely remains more flexible and powerful than any contemporary cruiser.

Once had a Colorado trying to run me down. In my Enterprise. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Just so I can add insult to injury: Amagi vs Conqueror citadel hitability test Using my Montana to shoot stuff. Aimpoint was the waterline for both ships. Conqueror Amagi Results: Extremely close range (~2,7km) - both no citadels Close range (~6,9km) - Amagi reliable single citadels, Conqueror no citadels Mid range (~11,2km) - Amagi reliable multiple citadels, Conqueror one lucky citadel Long range (~15,3km) - Amagi reliable multiple citadels, Conqueror reliable single citadels Total citadel hits: Conqueror - 4 Amagi - 9 Fun fact:

Ah, nevermind then.

I did. Results can be found in literally my first post in this thread. I have also disproved every other nitpick in your post above. My experience is based on hard facts gained from several hours of testing in the training room. You sure you want to argue against that? You can literally see the impact points on the flat rear end in my screenshots. USN BBs have the worst shell arcs of all high tier BBs, thus the highest chance of reaching something low in a ship, along with the best auto-bounce angles. If a USN BB can't reach it, neither can others. I also already tested it through the bow at 37 friggin' km with my Yamato. No citadel hits were observed. Looks like you're the only one living in delusions.

I think it was 0/2/3 actually. With the torps dealing as much damage as normal DD ones. On the other hand the bombs were utterly useless (as 1000lb bombs didn't exist yet). Haku was still far more hilarious since she had 0/5/3.

To be fair the stock turret traverse is indeed awful as all out. Moving her upgraded turrets to stock would make the grind much more comfortable. That said Pensa isn't a bad ship as others have already stated. Just ludicrously unforgiving. Then again we all need to remember that she's going to get moved to T6, which would make her hilariously overpowered if T6 MM wasn't as awful as it is.

Clearly. I see all scientific evidence is completely lost on you. Conqueror does not take more damage than any other friggin' T10 BB from AP shells. It is completely, utterly impossible if you angle and the enemy is shooting AP (and is not a Yamato). Stop with this [edited] notion that Conqueror takes more damage. You have been proven wrong by science, deal with it. Conqueror has almost no weaknesses when dealing with incoming fire regardless of shell type, with the only fault of having a barely hittable citadel at range. She is the 2nd most protected BB in terms of effective armor and perhaps the best protected BB overall. She has super-heal which surpasses the performance of any other regardless of damage type, she has sufficient armor to protect her against anything but Yamato, she has speed, she has maneuverability, she has stealth. In short: SHE. HAS. NO. WEAKNESS. IN. SURVIVABILITY. Next you're going to tell me the earth is flat. Jesus. Also Huh, now you're actually stating Conq more liable to AP pens than other BBs. Interesting turnaround. Flatter arcs means low chances of reaching something lower in the ship, especially if it is below the waterline. It's precisely what you do not want when trying to do so, as you need to be further away to achieve the same result against a ship that has worse arcs than you. The only BB that has worse shell arcs than Monty/Iowa in Conq's MM spread is NC. I simply chose Monty to compare her to an equal tier BB. (Also hitting anything accurately with the NC is a diceroll more often than not comparatively speaking.) No, you gave us two ways of accepting our deaths. Conqueror will kill you long before you can kill him with either AP or HE. That it barely requires effort from him to do so is just insult to injury.

Oh my, you can barely tell that that was a main battery turret once. Someone sure hit her mark.

Woah, how have I missed this thread? It's amazing! *looks at creation date* Oh.

Test results are in. All shots were taken using my Monty and with a perfect flat on stern target. Short range: Mid range at which Monty can citadel a broadside Conqueror as confirmed by previous tests: As you can see, no citadel hits whatsoever. Maybe it's possible at longer ranges, but my Monty was struggling to hit it even at just 10-11km. And that was a stationary target, moving ones will be a totally different story. I'd conclude that the prospect of hitting the citadel of a Conqueror through penetration of her aft (if you know what I mean ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) ) is an incredibly unrealistic prospect. Maybe Yamato will be able to hit the aft citadel bulkhead at extreme ranges through the aft deck via overmatch directly, but even that should be incredibly rare if it is even at all possible. I already tried that through the bow at 37km after all and got no citadel hits whatsoever. Also to those who still think Conq somehow takes more AP pens, I present you this: Also superstructure pen test at close range:

No, you can't. There are clear advantages and disadvantages and in the context on how torpedoes work, IJN torps can be considered vastly inferior. In the context of how healing works in general contrasted to how the super heal of the Conqueror works, it's pretty clear that Conqueror has a major advantage in that regard no matter what shell type you choose. Yes, in theory AP shells are more effective. In reality, still applies but not by the huge margin you're making it out to be. When a Conq angles you have no choice but to shoot the superstructure and most of your shells will overpen. The few shells you'll get penetration damage with will cut down the HP he will be able to heal (assuming they actually do damage and not just get eaten by modules), sure, but the advantage still lies with the Conqueror. And that advantage is by no means insignificant. You lose regardless of the situation, so you choose the lesser evil. Great question, actually. I'll come back to that in a minute.

HE bombs are actually better against higher tier BB targets, as they yield roughly the same damage but offer more utility. AP bombs on the other hand are devastatingly effective against high tier cruisers, but in 9/10 times you do not want to attack those anyway. Generally speaking your build looks fine. I would swap the steering gears upgrade for the propulsion one as you want to reposition often according to the flow of battle. You have DFAA and your fighters as your main line of defense against air strikes anyway and you'll see them coming from miles away, so having a faster ruddershift is often negligible while getting up to speed faster helps far more often. You also missed an upgrade slot with the concealment upgrade (which I very much hope you took considering the awful concealment of USN CVs) and I reckon you decked out your captain with additional AA and/or utility skills as well? Your fighters are actually still a bit faster than Taiho bombers (unless ofc they dropped their ordinance), but if you feel like they're too slow, keep in mind that your job isn't necessarily to hunt down and kill enemy bombers. You don't need to catch them in a flat out race. What you do need to do is protecting your buddies. If you can chase enemy bombers away, great. If you can shoot them down, even better. But the main purpose is to deny your opponent the opportunity to strike, which you can achieve with both. Perhaps you also need to work a little bit more on your positional fighter play? For example you can pull your fighters back a bit to make it seem like your allies are exposed, then swoop in to capitalize once your opponent has committed to a strike. Don't pull back too far, though, lest he actually gets a strike in. Also keep in mind some of your allies don't want to be seen, thus are unsuitable as bait. Under no circumstance should you use the plane speed upgrade. The trade-off isn't worth it.

If a CV is avoiding you you're doing your job. Unless ofc you're off in the middle of nowhere and not covering your teammates as you should, then you're utterly worthless. Sadly such basic teamplay isn't rewarded outside of "be glad that you don't die to air strikes lol" and the occasional compliment, thus isn't acknowledged by the majority of the playerbase either. I do agree that forcing cruisers to choose between DFAA and hydro is ridiculous as all out. (Especially when a friggin' BB is now being tested with such capabilities, effectively turning it into a better cruiser. Because obviously when BB overpopulation is a problem, all you need to do is replace cruisers with BBs!)

Precisely, it is the closest thing you have, but it isn't a counter. If a Conqueror angles you'll also deal less damage with AP while she still holds a major advantage in healing power. If you shoot HE on the other hand you'll potentially deal more damage, but the heal will negate all of it. Regardless of what shell type you choose you're going to draw the short end of the stick. Quoting definitions completely out of context does not favor you. In game terms AP shells cannot be considered a counter to neither the Conqueror as a whole nor her heal. She is almost without fault when survivability against AP shells is concerned, with Yamato 460mm shells being a sole exception. Mind you I'm not promoting others to spam HE at a Conqueror, but AP shells aren't the magical all stop solution against her which you're making them out to be either.

Oi, don't give them any ideas.

Buggy replay I would assume.

Yes it is. It used to be the only way to citadel a Cleveland back in CBT.

My point is that AP is not a "counter" to Conq's heal. When a Conqueror angles he takes less damage against AP shells and still maintains the ability to heal more of it than any other BB. With HE you deal more damage against an angled Conqueror but she can also heal more. With AP you deal less damage. Conq also heals comparatively less if you happen to get penetration damage, but still more than any of her contemporaries. A true counter would deal more damage while negating the advantages of the heal, therefore AP shells cannot be considered a counter to the Conqueror. Painting it as if such is the case is extremely misleading and completely untrue.

Fix something about CV UI? You funny comrade, now go to gulag!

And just like every other T10 BB a Conqueror can angle so your AP becomes less effective as against any other T10 BB unless you're playing a Yamato, as she also heals more AP damage than other T10 BBs. "Shoot AP" therefore doesn't make her weak, nor does it counter her heal, Conqueror still holds undeniable advantages over contemporary T10 BBs in terms of survivability regardless of what shell type you choose.