black_falcon120

Hmm, so you're proposing a ship class which historically were: Slightly faster and much smaller than DDs. Designed for short range action Very few designs were made, and actually produced meaning the tech trees would be hard to make. had no form of ASW, but you're proposing to ignore this. Could only fire their torpedoes forward, and only had two of them (E-Boats). Please don't add these, playing them will feel like bringing a knife to a gun fight and shooting at them will feel too RNG dependent... The only positive thing is that this will make secondary builds (slightly more) viable.

Is this the official position of the price drop in euros on the eu server?

True, but a lot of those are either low tier (tiger, Royal Sovereign), Sister ships of existing ships (San Francisco) share names with another ship (Albany), or are not very interesting, in that list, the only really famous ones are the San Francisco, Washington, Seydlitz and the Admiral Scheer. The Tone and the Dido class are the most likely to be interesting imo. But I do not want lower tiers flooded with obscure ships only there to confusion newbs... Also I forgot to mention WV '43....

I wish they would add hms illustrious and hms courageous (4 15 inch gunned cruiser), Royal Oak, and shinano. WG have put almost all other ships I’ve heard of in game. wg have said no to the 18” hms furious, and the kitakaze unfortunately....

It was posted a page or so ago. Apparently it’s performance varied. They didn’t say if it was too weak or strong, but if it was too weak I can’t see them removing it

Honestly I’d go even further and say that subs counter DDs. another factor is that I see so few DDs on the field, that even if they could crush submarines, I can’t see them being a deterrent, the real balancing question is to what extent cruisers and battleships counter submarines. Carriers to a lesser extent. I cannot see this class being played if it’s sole job is to hunt battleships but it will be overpowered if cruisers are helpless finding the balance will be hard. my main advice is make depth charge attacks cost the submarine oxygen in addition to damage. The serious weak point of the Dd is just how close it has to get, if a DD gets within 5km the submarine should be spotted, get within 3km and it should be depth charged, which should force it to the surface, then destroy it with guns making the fight more interactive. Potentially submarines should have deep running torpedoes as well, unless the submarine double pings the destroyer.

The torpedoes do sooo much damage to Destroyers it's not even funny, submarines counter DDs not the other way round it appears...

I mean, I can see both sides of the argument, I can't see a class being fun with just torpedoes as you're too reliant on the stupidity of your enemies. On the other hand, if I wanted to play a hyper realistic submarine simulator, I'd play another game. And I can't see it being fun to play against without some sort of counter play, e.g. blowing them out of the water with main/secondary battery. That said, I seriously doubt the torpedoes will be similar to mk. 48s in other games set in modern times. I suspect they'll have to get within 100m or so to activate homing? edit: if it works against DDs, that would be broken, smokes would become death traps. edit 2: anti-submarine weapons are probably a good idea though, it'll let CVs hit submarines as they historically did.

Isn’t there an aa nerf in the next patch?

As a former 43%er this game is hard to understand and I got better fast when I started engaging with this forum. The game doesn’t really have good feedback loops to pick up on when you play badly, you have to know a bit to know how to improve. If you seriously are interested in how they think you could do worse than looking at my first post asking for advice....

Just curious, does the game model the Yamato’s type 91 ‘diving’ shell in game?

The refund policy changed. You can restore unlimited ships but only once every 6 months.

What is the y axis scale?

both codes are ded for me....

They’ve already announced the Friesland that should cut win rate slgnificantly. you can’t tell which DD your attaching early game so you have to be more cautious.

I realised after a few games they were still playable, (or at least the E is) if you have a fully specced captain, but from what I've seen, if your cap has below 10 points, it actually is unplayable. btw good night, I need to turn my laptop off so I can sleep.

You spend X hours a week playing a game to prove how broken it is to a player base you hate?

Then why are you still playing it?

I still have fun in my E, does that make me strange? IMO the main problem with the rework is just how OP captain skills are, the way the CVs are, they just feel overpowered to an absurd degree.

This is Probably an unpopular opinion, but one gimmick (victory) wouldn’t be enough for Portsmouth to stand out from all the other ports which are also dockyards. IMO we should get a museum port first. I like the idea of the azur lane port but find it to anime like...

I do this all the time in my enterprise and no one has ever done this for me, this demonstrates clear evidence of anti carrier bias in the community :(

Port slots and bunk slots stopped dropping about a year ago.

Just the Friesland

They just nerfed the defaa cool down so it’s +100% rather than +200%

With carriers its More complex. It isn’t the ships with death bubbles it’s the slow grind of ships with middling or low aa grinding down plane reserves. The no fly zones almost without exception were in existence in 8.4, 8.5 hasn’t really affected them much. the other thing is that scout runs now cost more if you stray into aa range for a second you can lose planes which makes attacking early game harder