EsaTuunanen

Weird... I didn't have any real problems with it during closed beta when first meeting map in shortish torp range USN DDs. Bummer, always playing wrong... Unless there's (esp. strike) carrier which might target you, or many gunboats in enemy team which might "wolfpack" Ocean is very good map for decent stealth gunboat to go alone: No cruiser can ever approach closer to you undetected than their detection radius because of no cover! And isn't that the dream of destroyer skipper? In maps with islands you have to always consider there might be enemy cruiser getting inside your detectability on other side of island. And unless you want to risk premature return to port that necessitates "detouring" islands from farther to have chances to get away, if enemies appear from behind corner of that island. Islands simply work both ways denying also destroyer from having good situational awareness. And actually with so many ships having catapult planes, hydro or radar lone destroyer is more likely to draw that shorter straw in situational awareness.

I think you could use some lessons for Gremlin... Two battleships working together would definitely be murderous opponent for enemy cruisers and lone BBs. But unless you know well how to counter destroyers those would be major problem without help from team. So something with destroyer hunting ability could be useful to supplement Fuso's strengths... And not on the list of Molotov's strengths. Anshan again could hunt or at least keep enemy torpedo boats away from Fuso and annoy enemy BBs and cruisers Then again "fully mastered" Gremlin with its plentiful stealth firing ability could do as well as Anshan against tier 7 and 8. One on one fights against gunboats of those tiers wouldn't be strength of either. (not enough HE DPM or HP to withstand slugging it out in even terms) 7km (stock) detectability is more than OK. While at T5 its worst of DDs at T6 it beats Farragut and Ognevoi by clear margin.

Now it's correct. Because damage wise both are rather mediocre for caliber. (while being only 100% gun reliant cruiser tree) Not many people look at it, but IJN cruisers actually have also better AP damage than USN. Except for Ibuki vs. Baltimore's upgraded guns... whose AP alpha is again clearly surpassed by Zao.

Don't forget huge detonation chance bonus for first hit(s) of the match. 8/10 DD detonations happen at full or basically full HP. If surviving to below ~75% hp detonation chance from hits is only fraction. Below 50% hp we're talking basically about single digit percentage of detonations happening. Stronk "random" that WG is using...

Don't lower yourself, you're already above noob. Noob is someone who fails and keeps failing totally because of being dumb as brick and not even wanting to learn. Besides general guides if you're interested from some particular line or ship you can also search for gameplay videos for those ships. Just try to make sure video is relatively recent, some parts of game have changed considerably. For aiming this has one quite good tip:

Well, hopefully destroyers aren't excluded from that fun. Meanwhile "in real world" spotted World of Warships gameplay introduction and Q/A session for Friday in program schedule of electronics&gaming expo here in Finland... Silly you... Because most BBs have so much AA to be targeted easily so instead of capital ships CV's can just attack destroyers which in average can't defend themselves except by trying to dodge.

More like easiest to "derp"... Consistently achieving something needs being able to hit enemies. And half minute reload of battleships is really bad for practising gunnery. Also their mostly (especially USN) slow speed makes situational awareness mandatory for being in the right places when needed. Cruisers should be first line to be played to somewhere around Tier 5 to learn gunnery. With current matchmaking throwing T5 often to meet T7 doing decently in T5 cruiser is good sign of having learned gunnery and situational awareness. IJN and USN lines along are the most consistent at those tiers. At Tier 3 especially St. Louis of USN line and Bogatyr of Soviet line are very strong with lots of firepower and good durability. IJN T3 is more like big destroyer needing to use torps for heavy damage while having just enough armor to prevent AP shells from overpenning citadel. USN line gets that squishy protection at T4. Destroyers are other class for learning game mechanics. After learning their playstyle IJN DDs can be very strong with their high speed long range torps at T4 and 5 after which they take dip in easyness. (T4+5 going to be nerfed to protect straight line sailing BBs) Though IJN DDs have really slow firing (for caliber) and slow turning guns while USN destroyers are "gunslingers" from the start with always way fastest turning guns and top reload speed. USN torps usually need showing yourself to enemy to fire them making them more demanding to use. (USN DDs get long range torps at Tier 7) Though when mastered larger number of torps/launchers (up to T5) can allow player to nuke couple heavier enemies quickly from close range ambush. And their guns can wreck any destroyer getting close and do decent damage to also softer cruisers. Soviet DDs are basically all about guns with 4km range torps until Tier 8. While their guns have always high shell speed with flat trajectory and high relaod speed they have also twists. Like at T5 when getting 130mm gun its traverse time for 180 degrees is 36 seconds which would be slow even for cruiser. (you need to plan ahead like you were driving BB... without armor or hp pool) BBs need knowing that gunnery from cruisers and how to avoid getting torped to do consistently well. You simply can't always expect team mates to do heavy damage (while you "tank" enemy fire) or take out enemy destroyers.

What's your current/old laptop? The cynical truth is that laptops with those CPUs are barely in "light quadricycle" (or what ever you call that "tiny car" which is driven with moped license) class in performance... With five years old high end laptops having more CPU power than those very low end AMD cores. Basically browsing heavy web site full of advertising scripts and Flash/etc multimedia garbage could make them crawl. Integrated GPU is only part in AMD CPUs which has been good compared to Intel's products.Then again there just isn't much of choise/variety in that price class laptops. At least it has 8GB of memory instead of some lame 4GB shared with GPU. (which might be only because they couldn't find 4GB modules anymore) Personally in that price class I would be myself looking at old high end/corporate level (those with ~2000 price tag as new) leasing laptops. In many areas they would be far ahead like display or quality of construction with internal light metal alloy frames instead of circuit boards keeping plastic shells in shape. Also some years old discrete higher end mobile GPUs with own memory definitely isn't slow when comparison point is integrated of such cheap low end CPUs. Even cooling solutions (important for gaming with high CPU+GPU load for long durations) are no doubt better because they didn't need to be cheap as dirt. (though if used in not the cleanest environment might need some cleaning of dust if that hasn't been done)

Game mechanics wise answer is clear. If first fire has been going for some time when second starts and there's going to be more incoming fire for some time without chance to get fast into cover (or enemy going down) waiting until near cover can be better choise. Also section already on fire can't be ignited again until fire has gone out, meaning new hits to that section won't reset timer. And BB which puts out fires just before disappearing into cover without chance to start new lasting fire is definitely frustrating target.

Same applies to rushing in for point blank range torping in destroyer. Few days ago in domination match in Shards which was going bad (most of the team went to suicide at map borders instead of focusing to controlling map center) thought I have just enough HP to survive rushing 50+% hp New Mexico in B cap for point blank range torping. Result was New Mexico firing basically zero dispersion front turrets salvo and causing detonation. Remaining enemies still managed to somehow derp that match against surviving König which had been touring map borders... But not trying to banzai charge would have rewarded better with some sure damage with guns. Then there are all those BBs with strong secondaries to chew destroyer unless it gets close using island as cover...

The problem in dividing players to ranks would be needing big enough player pool. And that would be a really really big problem to overcome. So best would be to minimize number of total fail boats in PvP. Like I've said many times I don't have problem with below average players who at least try to play game and do their part in team. That's why I said looking both damage and WR. Low damage but above average WR over bigger number of matches strongly hints to that sinking of DDs and supporting others/doing strategic jobs. Again if also WR is bad then that's going to hint toward that fail boat category: If survival rate is bad then it's that suicide player who rushes half the enemy team alone. (though in small number of matches these can get carried to decent WR) If survival rate is average/higher then it's that coward running to hide in rear of the map (often complaining not hitting enemy) and not always caught by winning enemy. Average/OK damage and survival, but low WR would hint to knowing how to aim but running away from enemy at long range basically shooting only BBs. Different ship classes again would have some possible variations. BB player could have combination of average damage/low survival, but good WR by pushing agressively allowing destroyers and cruisers to hit enemy team.

While good as idea it might end up buffing BBs the most: Cruisers will still take lots of damage and fast, with random shells still being capable to nuking it. While BBs which can tank hits without fast heavy damage take damage at lower rate allowing them to possibly use heal more even when spending periods under focused fire.

Yeah, its so nice when occasionally you get that team which actually tries to play together and to get that victory as used to be norm in closed beta... Destroyers taking the front positions capping, screening and scouting. With cruisers supporting closely when possible. And all battleships and rest of the team heading toward enemy and map controlling areas. Usually that just leads to curb stomping because MM dredged too much of bottom precipitate of player pool into other team. Isn't there already Co-op where people can just shoot something without need to think anything?

I don't think winrate alone would work at all in any way. Unless having really lots of battles it's very dependent on luck with MM. And even worst fail boaters with thousands of fails tend to be overall at least at 40% level because of getting carried. So margins aren't exactly big to separate performances accurately. But combining for example average damage in ship to that starts to show something. Because those total fail boaters tend to have average damage which would make co-op bots blush from shame. Well, you sir certainly aren't even gray knight by instantly going to "players failing even basics must not be limited" rant mode. Sure game is at the moment (/still) quite total lackluster in offering players advice about game basics and how to play in different ships. But when there are players with thousands of matches averaging damage which would make co-op bots look bad failing their way up everything isn't right.

Yep, accidents happen and that's the part WG got right from the start. Now if they would only remove possibility to report player who sinked you... Or really throw that -1 back as boomerang. Reports should be weighted with reports from new and low/zero karma players having less value. That would go long way for negating those bad players making mistakes getting sinked and then reporting enemy cases. (good player knows to kick his own butt for making mistake) On other end compliment from high karma player could give +2.

What about picture of player whining for WG to nerf torps when he kept sailing in straight line for five minutes and fish took bite of his virtual butt? Destroyer's again suffer from this by being able to detonate from first scratch of the match: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EveryCarIsAPinto Or maybe it's this: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MadeOfExplodium

Well, torpedo protection is only weak thing in armor of German master race BBs. So can't have anything threatening to utilize that against them, can we?

How about everyone trying to play instead of just standing in corner of that football field or kicking ball to own goal? That shouldn't be too much to ask because if not interested no one is forced to play this game and they haven't even paid to install this game. Heck, all those single player games with actual price tag in them demand learning and achieving at least something to get forward from starting level. And no one would consider it acceptable for player to start complaining about that! So shouldn't be too much to ask handling at least game basics to keep playing in PvP say after Tier 3. It's not enjoyable either to be in winning team if other team just "rolls over and plays dead" with match basically completely over before five minutes.

There's difference in at least playing and "standing in corner of football field" or kicking ball to own goal. Those would never get anyone forward in career, but at most kicked out of casual backyard football. Yet those are allowed and basically even encouraged for getting forward in tiers. I mean there are players with 6k average damage in Kongo and sub 10k average in Fuso and New Mexico! (6k in Minekaze, 5k in Farragut...)

Slower ones need more careful positioning/support from team. Fast battleship has chances for running to keep distance from too many enemies and getting to cover. But slow 20 knot ones are basically stuck unless that cover is only short distance away.

Got my second victory out of something like 15 tries while being only Blade. Did 257k damage: 33k HE, 42k fire, 182k torps (32 hits)

There's still that "intelligence" part in AI. While average potato again doesn't have it because getting food doesn't require logical thinking ability in modern world.

Though client gets information to draw shell trajectories with their starting position so for firing ship cheats can't be fully 100% excluded. But obviously that possibility doesn't cover ship "staying quiet". And while cruisers are big enough compared to their smoke cloud that by aiming to center of smoke there's chance for good hits destroyers shouldn't suffer much from that chance. And smoke cooldown and duration are easy to check during match by using Ctrl to move mouse cursor over smoke symbol to see its info.

It's Balless&Brainless [edited]causing the most of lopsided matches. Cruising in circles 10km behind caps... or then sitting on their big fat arse few km from uncontested cap.

Copy all content of client's folder to some backup folder for that version. Everything game needs is inside its folder structure like was standard 10-15 years ago instead of modern [edited]of things being spread around PC like it were some garbage dump. Just remember to not try running that old backed up client directly because that will trigger version check and update. (just open replay in exe)