EsaTuunanen

Murmansk also has original AP penetration meaning it can citadel Omaha through deck from longer ranges while Omaha can't do that. And while having one launcher per side torps have 8km range at 55knots. Also its credits coefficient is high.

So does vulnerability to some BB caliber HE really matter? With Kirov having only very flimsy, even weaker than Kuma, 50mm belt armor it used to be approriately easiest Tier 5 cruiser to citadel and very vulnerable to DD caliber APs. But can't have Soviet cruiser being weaker than others, so couple batches ago it got major buff with now very hard to hit citadel. So while Omaha hull is still this easy nut to crack Kirov isn't: Also actually Königsbergs don't seem to anymore detonate like they did in fall: https://www.dropbox.com/s/bqlk3kki2xmekgt/shot-16.01.21_15.14.30-0800.jpg?dl=0 And Königsberg is more picky about hitting point for getting citadel hits. You forgot Murmansk's AP penetration. For comparison Gremlin gives half of that.

Actually bow should pointed at anything which might shoot, including destroyers. Omaha is easiest Tier 5 cruiser to citadel. While having only very flimsy be even cruiser standards 50 mm belt armor (50% thicker in Omaha) Kirov got "reballasted" deep into water to protect that weak armor making hitting citadel lot harder. (of course while keeping faster than some DDs light load speed) Furry Taco C hull is very strobust and while thinner armored Königsberg is more picky about hitting spot.

I don't think they've changed AP penetration disparity.

Well, can't confirm that because of hidden stats. I have no problem with concept of detonations. (some e-sport would be different question) But at least for destroyer there seems to be some kind first hit detonation chance bonus, instead of detonations happening actually randomly with certain average chance per hit. Possible way to favor bad players who don't need to consistently hit target to sink it?

First thing to change would be preventing player from reporting enemy who sinked him. And/or shoot that negative karma back automatically. Guess maybe chat misbehavior option could be kept, but at halved (or less) weight for that report. I think value of report should be weighted as in giving reports of players with good karma level lot bigger value than reports of those with no/little karma. (same for compliments) That should be very effective at limiting effect of all those "I showed my broadside and he citadelled me/I kept sailing in straight line eating fish salvo after salvo" failboat whiners. Along with "everything to me without slightest effort silverspoon up the arse" not so good average damage players blaming others from kill stealing. Not forgetting all those "can't read minimap/think at all" [edited]blaming others for their mistakes/bad play. After all in every sport person has to show understanding of the game and earn respect before getting any kind referee or authority status. Low value/weight reports could be treated that way.

Guess it should come with incoming fire auto avoidance... Warspite has weak hamsters powering turret traverse so ship turns lot faster than guns. While Minekaze got its gun/turret traverse speed buffed (+now 360 rotating guns) from reality same isn't applied to Warspite.

Another tricky balance thing... So that BB can't just always "point&click" instant kill cruiser. Then again there are those ridiculous times when cruiser can just keep closing and survive even showing side to BB from close range with only minor damage when RNGesus makes most of shells fly to everywhere else than aiming point. Would be logical that cruiser would have to hide behind cover to do torpedo ambush from short range. Or aproach from other direction than guns are aimed, instead of being able to keep closing in open and being relatively safe unless derping really badly. Makes slow USN BBs more vulnerable than IJN BBs which can better maneuver to avoid getting rushed by cruisers.

Even if that cruiser shows side to non-distracted BB with guns pointed at it from sub 5 km range...

Also fully upgraded Phoenix is nice with lots of guns combined to high speed unlike St. Louis. It just needs wiggling and maneuvering around to avoid fire/bounce APs because of being lot less durable than St. Louis. While guns get bigger that avoiding hits from battleships/getting focused is how whole rest of the cruiser line plays. IJN BBs are all around faster than USN BBs up to tier 7 so in that sense they're easier because they can better move around map according to situation and can more easily keep distance if facing superior enemy force. Low tier Soviet cruisers are actually quite well protected. Bogatyr is basically St. Louis strong and also Svietlana is very stong ship. Even Kirov isn't anymore that easy to citadel despite of flimsy by even cruiser standards 50mm belt armor. Couple patches ago it got ballasted much deeper into water to protect its citadel better. (while keeping light load speed) Despite of 50% thicker belt armor Omaha is lot more easier to citadel.

On the other hand if destroyer which suicide rushed sinking first (excluding that higher first hit chance to detonate RNGesus) without even taking someone with him by point blank range torping got highest XP it doesn't exactly flatter skill of rest of the players. Though I guess some kind coefficient basing to did destroyer also do damage/or spot enemies could be applied to capping reward. Would be hard to balance. Good battleship or cruiser player can still do notable damage in otherwise bad team, but if enemy got all the other competent players destroyer is easily screwed. If enemy declines to sail into torps and team runs to have group humping at map edge while showing their broadside for enemy to citadel, destroyer can't do much anything than keep out of enemy's way. That balancing XP rewards would work lot better with better ranking system for more balanced skill teams, instead of bad players getting so easily out from first bottom tiers. That would make it also more easy for other classes to count that team mates have at least some basic intelligence to help them in jobs their ship is not so good at. XP and credits coefficients vary ship by ship. Some ships get good XP/credits easily without doing especially heavy work, some need sweating blood to get high XP/credits.

The less armor your ships has and the bigger the guns on enemy ship aiming at you the less you want to show your broadside to it. You need to plan ahead so that you don't get surrounded by enemies. Especially being only target for enemy is bad thing. Try to use for example islands to block firing line for enemies on your sides. Battleships have big enough guns to do damage do cruiser from almost any direction, but bow showing cruiser is less tempting target for them to shoot at. Against same class ships you can lessen damage lot by not showing broadside. While HE isn't affected by hitting angle it doesn't do high instant damage. And remember that all lighter armored cruisers wear only "flak jackets" and aren't immune to weapons of even smaller ships And you'll want to watch this: Low tier cruisers don't really have enough range for proper plunging fire.

First tiers are best for getting some idea of gunnery. Also it's good to play ship more than necessary for getting next tier ship. That gives more time to learn and in some ships upgrades give big boost to firepower. (like 50+% more guns...)

Are you using any mods?

Supposedly beta tester and spamming HE like some scrub! Battleships use AP. Non-penetrating HE hits do zero damage.

BB stands for Balless&Brainless... Like two of three battlesheeps heading to useless direction in this: I think they were Colorado(?) and definitely Kongo. (had speed to run faster away from enemy) And nope, they didn't find their balls even after that part of using my destroyer as bait/distraction for that Atlanta...

There is already unrealistic auto-bounce after certain angle unless overmatch mechanics is triggered. While bouncing non-very shallow angle BB APs would have required considerable armor thickness. For example 16" super heavy USN AP would have penetrated something like 10cm of armor from shallow angle of 15 degrees with just roughly half of shell's muzzle energy remaining.

One more detonation into pile. Of course by single/first hit from full HP. That makes four out five of last detonations from full or high hp. As bonus had such [edited] team that I was first in XP with one cap and miserable ~15k damage. (with over 150 more than next)

There's basically only two situations in which it can work without enemy team being already in disadvantage: 1. Enemy is dumb as brick. 2. No one's home at that area. Especially lonely cruiser against multiple enemies turns fast to submarine if enemy has any IQ. Neither does BB any better if trying to take half the enemy team or even less with enemy having some DDs. Properly played destroyer again should be pushing forward to cap, spot targets for team's big guns and to harass enemy's attack.

Any "cartridge" casing for propellant would lessen danger of its ignition all the time from storage to loading into gun. Also protecting powder during normal operation. USS Mississippi suffered two propellant fires inside turret during its career and then there's Iowa's 1989 turrret explosion. Apparently propellant charges in magazine were stored in some kind of "canisters". But problem would be propellant bags readied for loading to gun and inside turret in powder handling rooms and transfer mechanisms. In battleship that could be easily something like ton of powder "waiting for the spark". And even blast doors and other safeties wouldn't be 100% protection for containing risk. Most of Iowa's turret 2 spaces and magazine were flooded after explosion because fire inside turret was making some turret structures glow red near more powder. Lack of armor could definitely be advantage in case of magazine detonation. Force of explosion is always stronger inside enclosed space and heavily armored citadel is like some cave not letting overpressure and heat escape easily.

Won't work if there's no friendly ships/planes close enough to spot enemy planes. Or if you're spotting them you're also spotted. With most other ships at least on higher tiers having strong AA destroyers are just the easiest targets for carriers unless staying next to cruisers/BBs. And despite of hitting big fat slow BB with dive bombers being up to RNGesus fast and slender DD doesn't seem to be that much harder target.

Before turret hitpoint buff it would have definitely been weak with high chance of losing at once 50% of fire power and 0,7km longer detactability than Gnevny. Relatively it should be now lot better with turret being able to take some hits instead of IJN DD wrecking turret with first hit. And if slow gun traverse is problem in Gnevny that area is improved lot. But 7,7km detectability is still there.

Sims didn't get any direct nerfs. Overal game mechanics chances caused that. Faster rudder of ships made bigger ships harder targets for long range fire from USN mortar and tuning down of "chronic" closed beta smoking nerfed shorter range torps heavily. In closed beta long tiem deployed and long remaining smoke was actually viable for getting closer to target for launching those 5,5km range torps. (with latest game mechanics it doesn't even work that well for breaking contact)

I wonder if 130mm AP could do 2-3k per salvo like to New Mexico...

I think this would fit to Destroyers sub-forum, possibly with same for 130mm.