Jump to content


Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About Grimsley

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

277 profile views
  1. Grimsley

    HMS Hood

    To be brutally honest, that you think the armour is weak gives me a red flag about your playstyle with the ship. Nearly all battleships like angling, but Hood might as well have written the book on being made to be angled. I'm talking diagonal to your target, rear turrets as far forward as they can be at all times when pointed at your target. Yes, the thickness is not that great when you are broadside... but her belt is long, with 127mm plates extending all the way up her top deck (!), which itself is 51mm deck and she has good gun angles. You angle yourself to an enemy and she's a tank: all those plates now transform into delicious autobounce/shatter zones. Combined with the health pool, I've certainly absorbed huge amounts of potential damage in her. She's especially good at kiting away at an angle. So what if you don't angle properly? That 127mm plate is now a big juicy zone for enemy AP: thin enough that it goes through, thick enough that it arms. A huge armour advantage is now a huge disadvantage. That's why when you say that her protection is weak I am immediately jumping into thinking that you are broadsiding way too much. Aside from being a big target with a chunky superstructure, I wouldn't say that she particularly stands out at being terrible against HE either. Again, all those plates and the 51mm deck cause any HE shells that hit them to shatter. Compare that to a KGV, Colorado or Nagato with their 25mm 'HE eat me please' plating almost everywhere for example. Regarding the questions: 1) AP nearly always unless I specifically know that I will be shooting a DD. She's not an HE slinger like the tech tree UK BBs. Her HE shells are worse than a Queen Elizabeth. On the other hand, her AP has enhanced auto-ricochet angles compared to normal. 2) Mostly mid, but it depends on the situation. Like most battleships, she tends to want to be as close as possible to improve dispersion while not compromising yourself to torpedoes or over-extension. 3) I can't say that I've ever made this as a conscious decision, so I can't advise. Captain skills: I would rather take priority target than expert loader. I don't like the non-special captain EL in general (just fire what you have then reload), but what with the 'nothing special' HE it seems especially pointless to me. On the other hand, PT is pure information. It helps you know when you need to angle and when you can get away with being lax, when you should back off a bit, suggests when destroyers fire torpedoes etc. I take it on nearly all of my ships, including battleships.
  2. Maybe her fighter consumable summons Sea Furies? But yes, while I like the Wyvern I thought they would at least have the Sea Fury as the rocket plane. For lots of other aircraft carriers they seems to have the fighter double as this aircraft. This is also another good opportunity to point out that this article also confirms that Implacable was commissioned in mid 1944, but in-game her description card currently incorrectly lists her as entering service in 1945.
  3. Grimsley

    Bug Reports

    1. Description The ship tooltip for HMS Implacable (tier VIII British aircraft carrier) has the incorrect 'entered service' date in the port. It is listed as 'entered service' in 1945. However this ship was already commencing combat operations in 1944 and took part in anti-shipping and minelaying operations off Norway in October and November. 2. Reproduction steps Highlight the new carrier 'HMS Implacable' in port. The ship description tooltip appears. 'Entered service: 1945' is listed. 3. Result Minor; simply an incorrect piece of information. The date is incorrectly listed as 1945. 4. Expected result The date should be listed as 1944 instead. 5. Technical details N/A. Can be seen in port in the current live version:
  4. Grimsley

    Vanguard: lacking something to be good

    While there are small touches I would like, thinking about it realistically my only major issue with the ship right now is the MM. The current situation for T8s being drawn into packed T10 games is... not great.
  5. Just to post the names (from the person who posted the CV images) as they sometimes hint at possible tiers: PBSA106.png, PBSA108.png, PBSA204,.png PBSA210.png, PBSA508.png. I assume the order is from top to bottom left column, then top to bottom right, as this ends with the icon with camo (premium) which maches the PBSA5 prefix. Judging from the icon and filename the premium leaked is probably HMS Indomitable as a T8, which would make sense if an Illustrious is the T7 as Indomitable is modified illustrious class with more aircraft.
  6. Grimsley

    HMS Vanguard - T8 Royal Navy premium BB proposal

    Wargaming Ev1n actually confirmed in a reddit thread a month or two ago that Vanguard will probably be tier 8 in the game.
  7. Grimsley

    Duke of York

    Yeah saw that this morning - if the updated SEA group page AA tab is accurate thankfully it looks like they may have brought the historical AA back with the latest update. Probably worth waiting for closer to release to see which one they opt for in the end. Needless to say I really hope that they keep the IRL configuration rather than spoil it as a lazy tradeoff to shoehorn the ship into a certain consumable/tier.
  8. Grimsley

    Duke of York

    Looking at the pictures, it looks like her historical 1945 AA scheme has been gutted by WG since the first announcement picture. Her quad pom-poms have all been removed and there's now a very obvious unused space on the aft superstructure where the quad bofors should be. Yet it's not a post-war 'reduced manpower' config either as there are too many Oerlikons. "We try to keep premiums are kept in historical configuration". Sure.
  9. Grimsley

    New Ships!

    Pan-Asian with deepwater torpedoes.
  10. Grimsley

    New Ships!

    PoW would be even more of a copy paste of the current KGV. Whereas Duke of York can at least be in late war setup, like we can see here, with the aircraft handling gear removed, boat deck reconfigured and more AA. This also lets WG reuse the work they put into the late war KGV model that we saw when it was first teased. I think they're really missing a trick on this one. They know that lots of RN fans wanted to play a tier 8 KGV class and the tier 7 KGV is already hitting average damage numbers well above its tier with the crazy HE damage per minute. Now along comes a KGV class with a late war configuration and it's the perfect opportunity to balance one up to tier 8. Plus it's not like the current UK tree is drowning in tier 8 premiums, that a tier 8 wouldn't sell for more, or that people are going to be excited by yet another tier 7. They don't like money I guess.
  11. Grimsley

    Flamu: Nerf Conqueror already!

    Respectfully disagree. If it turns out that the survivability aspect needs a nerf, I think that Sub is right that the heal (ie. the specific scale of it) should be the first thing looked at. Firstly, having low magazines was an IRL RN obsession with most of their late designs post Jutland. The magazine in KGV for example is extremely low in the ship. So a high citadel design makes little sense for RN BB designs for players who like keeping at least a minor nod to the actual ships. Of all the BB lines, high citadels is pretty much the opposite of what they should have bar Nelson. Secondly it follows the theme of the line. It seems unlikely that they would adjust all citadels at once, so it's much better to keep consistent 'traits' all the way up a line. If most of the other battleships have a low citadel, it's an unusual choice for the top tier to now be changed to have a completely different design. Keeping lines semi-consistent is important to WG, as they have noted ("if we did it today, we would never release Izumo in the Japanese line as it's too different"). Meanwhile on the other hand the super heal is actually the odd thing out in this line: the tiers 3-8 don't have it. So gutting it actually makes the line more consistent while nerfing the ship at the same time. Win-win for those players who supposedly 'don't like big differences tier-to-tier' (and yes, I am aware that many forum and reddit goers are certainly not these types of players). Nerfing the citadel mainly helps ships that have strong AP, but it does nothing to help ships that rely on HE: the conqueror could still end too strong against a large subset of ships. Similarly good players know how to best mitigate citadel damage, yet still abuse the much more powerful heal attribute... so the ship could still end up broken in very good hands against a large majority of players. By contrast the heal represents pure HP in most situations, which is one of the base strongest attribute to have. A nerf to the heal nerfs it against nearly all ship types for sure. Lastly (a small detail and purely speculation) it does sound like it would be easier for WG to simply adjust the numbers on the heal than to modify the ship's model. All they have to do is adjust it up and down by the amount they think the ship needs to be nerfed. On the other hand it sounds much harder to properly adjust a ship by the height of its citadel.
  12. Grimsley

    About King George V and armour angling...

    No, no, no. You don't fire AP in this ship unless they're broadside to you within 10-12km. Even then preferably when they're already on fire. Not only is the AP distinctly meh in this ship, but the HE is from God. Why would you fire anything else 90% of the time?? I'm averaging more than 85k in this thing. Use. HE. Also it goes without saying, but you aim high in British battleships most of the time. Not waterline. Waterline is only for broadside cruisers and certain close non-German broadside battleships with AP. You can't get HE pens on most belts. Even if they decide to torp charge, if you do an angled kiting move away from a Scharnhorst or a Gneisenau they can't touch you. If you're losing to one in a fair fight you're doing something very wrong.
  13. Grimsley

    We need to talk about RN BB's

    "KGV would not do well as a T8" they said... 80k+ average damage and 65%+ winrate so far says otherwise. And that's with the 25mm T7 bow and with only the mid rather than late war AA suite. How exactly did they come to that conclusion? If it was T8 it would probably actually be balanced.
  14. Grimsley

    New ship preview: Monarch

    Pretty much how I imagine a perfect outcome would be as well. Monarch would make a really cool premium IMO (hell I'd probably buy both it and Vanguard). What I really don't like about this current reveal is that it suggests shunting KGV out of the line to fit Monarch in, thus making all of the real post 1920s British battleships premiums. PoW also sounds like it would make the best T7 version of the class as the historical max AA is the worst due to being sunk.