Jump to content


Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About Grimsley

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

231 profile views
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. Grimsley

    New Ships!

    Pan-Asian with deepwater torpedoes.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. Grimsley

    New ship preview: Monarch

    Even with the gun advantage over Vanguard, I think more people would have been happy to Vanguard. And even if that meant letting Vanguard fire her guns with extra charge loaded - which she was capable of - that would not be nearly as ahistorical as creating a fantasy ship, so I don't see any argument there. If KGV ends up as a tier 7 premium, you have to understand how this looks, right? Britain built only 2 classes of battleships around the WW2 era. If that happens, that means that both would then be paywalled with paper in their place... in a game where the main spotlight is very clearly WW2 themed/refitted battleships. That is not acceptable. Also, if it really is 100% 'KGV' as the admiralty wanted her, why the silly name? If this is an alternate universe where this is KGV, then shouldn't it be called... KGV? Then why not a 14" KGV but with buffed guns? If players care about gameplay more than history then this is not an issue, correct? In fact it would probably please people more: the gun layout is more unique, has an extra rear gun, and they can at least point at the ship model in game and say, "I know that ship". But they won't necessarily care about the historical specifics, ie. that the guns are buffed up. I have to agree with it being said that this has simply been badly thought out. If KGV was always 100% set for T7 then the devs should have absolutely chosen Vanguard. Alternatively they should have been willing to simply buff KGV if going heavy on the gameplay trumps historical stats side. Both are better options that make more people happy than this does.
  13. Grimsley

    New ship preview: Monarch

    Model looks beautiful as always, although it almost looks like it has more Nelson-esque turrets, which might be a bit off. But the concept... so, so disappointing. Especially after having had the T8 2x4 1x2 KGVs parading around the live server getting everyone's hopes up. It's basically Scharnhorst and Gneisenau all over again, except even more extreme this time. And look at Scharnhorst now - an extremely well received premium, and honestly on more top lists than Gneisenau is. I don't buy the gun calibre nonsense at all - like Scharnhorst, the devs can certainly find ways to balance smaller than average guns if they cared to even try. Honestly it's irrational but one of the things I am most annoyed about is the name. Seriously - Monarch? Not even going to name as a 'what if' Anson or Howe or something? Way to sever the last link to an actual KGV that you even can. A unique KGV bringing something different to the table would've been a big reason to get hyped about the line. This? Meh... serious hype killer right here. It could make a neat premium. But if it is indeed the way around that it almost certainly looks like its shaping up to be, with the significant KGV class relegated behind a paywall to be replaced by lower effort paper, there's going to be a massive amount of disappointment. One last thing: let's say that Vanguard comes as the British T8 premium battleship, as so many have long expected. So wait, we're now going to have the actual historical WW2 British battleship designs as the T7 premium and T8 premium respectively? Does WG not see how messed up that is... paywalling the actual WW2 ships and filling the high tiers out with only paper in its place?
  14. Grimsley

    British ship

    Best tip I can give is to learn your concealment distance: ie. the exact number. Have it memorised and use it as the measure between yourself and the enemy. Unless its against a weaker or solo enemy, being aggressive in this ships usually means = get as close as you can while staying out of spotting range. You can deploy in smoke at the edge of this range and if you don't fire you won't be spotted once. If you suspect a torp ship is in range you can pop hydro after you're reckon they would have had time to react to the smoke. If they have not approached, you can even retreat (again without firing, after you've left the smoke) and not be spotted. However, generally it's always best to have an exit plan (islands are good). Main things to watch out for: hydro ships, radar ships, aircraft, skilled DDs. It's not that destroyers themselves are much of a threat (you are very good against them in fact) but it can be an issue when they're acting as a spotter/shadow and there's a lot of backup behind them. If a destroyer or aircraft is around always be mindful that this is as if the enemies you do still see will have effectively 'extended' their spotting range. Playing them well is basically 50% positioning awareness (yourself, enemy ships, routes, torps) and 50% understanding how to use concealment/spotting to your advantage, and if you can do this they wreck face.