MAD_3R_Marauder

I agree with this. You can either be good at one thing or mediocre at multiple ones. As long as you only meet similar "mediocre" opponents, things can go well, but woe you, if you meet a specialist. In a hybrid, I sure wouldn´t want to slug it out with a full blown BB, with only half the guns my opponent has and I equally wouldn´t want to engage a full-blown CV with only half the airgroup he has. Add in the _vastly_ different combat situations/styles of a BB and a CV (one wants to get in range of the guns, the other wants to stay _out_ of range of guns and hit with his CAG) and I have a _very_ hard time to imagine such a concept to work very well.

I wouldn´t be opposed to, what essentially are figher-bombers (and yes, being able to choose pre-launch if you want to use ´em a pure fighters of FBs would be good). Those would usually drop their external loads when engaged by fighters, so you could send them out with bombs/rockets, but if intercepted by an enemy fighter squadron, they would lose those payloads*, so nope, even if that enemy fighter squad is defeated, you won´t be able to carry out a shipping attack without reloading) but _still_ be less efficient than pure fighters in a dogfight (the bomb/missile racks are still there and negatively affect their aerodynamics). *Automatically or ordered by the player? More "hands-on" gameplay for CV captains or too much micro-management? If "by player" both DPM _and_ HP would have to go down significantly if keeping the payload (much worse maneuverability due to load --> less able to engage enemy and sitting duck _for_ the enemy at the same time)

Oh, I agree, with the "HE-Spam" CAs, it _does_ add up. Still, looking at this table: Ship Class Base chance of fire Chance of fire w. module Fires prevented per 100 HE hits US DD 5(6)% 4.75(4.7)% 0.25(0.3) IJN DD 10% 9.5% 0.5 US/IJN CL (6") 12% 11.4% 0.6 US CA (8") 14% 13.3% 0.7 IJN CA (8") 16% 15.2% 0.8 US BB (12") 22% 20.9% 1.1 US BB (14") 30% 28.5% 1.5 US BB (16") 36% 34.2% 1.8 IJN BB (12") 31% ~29.5% ~1.5 IJN BB (14") 27% ~25.6 ~1.4 IJN BB (16") 32% 30.4 1.6 Yamato 37% ~35.1 ~1.9 So, in order for this module to prevent _1_ fire, I have to be hit 200 to 400 times with a DD gun 150 times by a CL 100 to 150 times by a CA and between 50 and 100 times by a BB (stupidly using HE, except if I am a DD and then _fires_ are the least of my problems ). Sorry, but that doesn´t sound very useful to me P.s.: Yes, I _do_ love me my numbers

Nice guide, I have to say. I do have to seriously question the usefulness of the Damage Control System Modification 1, however. Assuming a shell has a 10% chance to cause a fire, this mod will lower that chance not down to 5%, but _by_ 5%, meaning the chance will get lowered to 9.5%. Same goes for flooding damage. That is such a minimal reduction, I don´t see it as worthwhile. Shaving 20% off the chance of getting the engine or steering knocked out seems to be much more useful. Not sure on a BB, haven´t gotten that done to me a whole lot - now that I think about it, I don´t think it has _ever_ happened to me, but my Yubari sure gets it´s engine and steering shot out all the time. Personally, I just leave that slot empty on a BB (one could be of the opinion that 250k isn´t all that much and every bit helps, and I´d be fine with that too, but if there is something (useful) else that I can put in that slot, I will). Of course, that is just IMO.

You think unlimited torpedoes are arcade-ish? Of course they are. As is the shooting mechanic, the carrier mechanic, the spotting mechanic, the movement mechanics and pretty much _everything_ in this game. This _is_ an arcade game, after all You want a realistic game about naval warfare in the era this game covers? Hm, let´s see. TaskForce 1942 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Task_Force_1942 Burning Steel series https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Naval_Battles And if you want to dive into the really _really_ detailed (but turn-based) stuff, War in the Pacific - AE http://www.matrixgames.com/products/351/details/War.in.the.Pacific.-.Admiral's.Edition P.s. And yes, I play/played _all_ of those, and I love(d) them. Doesn´t mean WoWs has to be similarly realistic for me to like it. Oh, and thanks for calling me a kid. At my age (51), I take that as a compliment

I got in and just flew out again

"Connection Failed" Seems like the server is down? Edit: Ok, I´m in Edit 2: But I don´t have any silver or gold

I agree, this: Looks kinda stupid Note: This was the first time this happened to me, so when I saw the TBs circling behind the island I thought myself safe for a few seconds, so I concentrated on getting a final salvo off before reacting to them - yeah, didn´t really work out that way, lol.

1. Same tier/number of CV is coming with 0.4.1 2. Could go both ways. If you team plays together (yeah I know, fat chance), the Cleveland and Aoba, in concert with the Wyoming and Myogis should be able to make mincemeat out of the planes . But yes, Warspite/Kongo is a tough nut to crack Div 1 is, of course, a fail platoon, but that is the players fault, not the MM´s (even though one could argue that it should only be possible to form a division with all ships the same tier)

AAA = Anti Aircraft Artillery

Wenn der Gegner nen CV im Team hat, zu _Beginn_ des Gefechts im Chat um AAA bitten (nicht erst wenn die Bomber im Anflug sind). Mitfahren mit den CAs kanns Du in ´nem US BB vergessen - ich sprech da aus Erfahrung Übrigens haben die low-tier CA bis einschl. T5 (Ausnahme: T5 Omaha) auch nicht viel AAA, auf jeden Fall deutlich weniger als deine Wyoming (mit dem Rumpf-Upgrade). Das ist mmn, ein generelles Problem bis T6. Die einzigen Schiffe die halbwegs brauchbare AAA haben sind die BBs selbst. Wenn Du natürlich ´ne Cleveland (oder die oben erwähnte Omaha) dazu kriegen kannst Dich zu begleiten, sieht die Sache schon anders aus Wenn Dir keiner Geleitschutz gibt (leider recht häufig), naja, was oben schon beschrieben wurde (nie gerade aus fahren, frühzeiting auf die Bomber einlenken,...) hilft, aber im low-tier könnenn Dich die Bomber gnadenlos ausmanövrieren ohne große Verluste an Fliegern einstecken zu müssen (AAA zu schwach). Du kannst den Torpedo-Angriff hinauszögern, aber früher oder später erwischt er dich von der Breitseite her. Alles was Du machen kannst ist, ihn zu ärgern. Hab es schon öfters erlebt, daß der CV Kutscher die Geduld verloren hat und dann aus ´nem ungünstigen Winkel angegriffen hat.

Confirmed. I _hate_ US DDs on Ocean, when in my Minekaze

Ranked Battles: Basically Random Battles with smaller teams and a player-base that is split between 3 ranks depending on number of wins (Level 1) and what is basically win-rate (level 2+3). It should sure promote team-work. Still would like either in-game VOIP for the teams or at least the time _before_ battle to set-up/join TS/Raidcall. New maps are always nice. Nicer graphics on the islands are not of much concern for me, but the changed set-up on Hotspot is long overdue and I am looking forward to the re-worked New Dawn and Fault Line. As a non-CV driver, I can´t really comment on the changes to fighters, but it seems to be going in the right direction (making fighter squads a more "hands-on" thing). Also changing the squadron set-up of the CV, so they each include at least one fighter squad as well as re-balancing the fighter damage across tiers sounds good. MM: Hallelujah! Finally at least the CVs will be matched on a equal footing. There is also light at the end of the tunnel for the poor Kawachi drivers, who have to regularly face Kongos Balancing: I agree with those that a buff to accuracy for BBs at up to 3km doesn´t sound like a huge boost, 6-8km would have been a lot better (IMO). Well, we´ll see. The loss of the 10km torps on the Minekaze are no big deal, never used ´em anyway. 6.2km spotting distance, I can work with (add in camouflage and I am down at 6km again - everything is fine ). Mustsuki, ugh. Stock Mutsuki is a pain in the backside as is - not sure the faster torp reload wil make up for that change. My Yubari getting the AA skill? Not sure the increase in range for the Omaha was really needed, I felt it is quite good as is. Buffing the Furutaka, on the other hand might make me buy her back and continuing the IJN cruiser line. Faster turn rate for turrets on IJN DDs, well, I only used those guns in emergencies, so not sure how useful that will be for me. Buffs to the guns of Sampson and Wicker where very needed IMO as was the buff to smoke on all US DDs. The possibility of AAA hulls on Nicholas+ I´m not sure about, but we´ll see. Wyoming gets hit with slower turrets _and_ lower ROF, oh boy! Map-edge sliding: Would still have preferred to just make the edge solid - oh well. Overall, a nice update (can´t please everyone every time and all that )

CoOp is boring because the bots are stupid, not because they drive the same ships as the human team. Well, I guess we have to agree to disagree here, since I don´t think one of us can convince the other of his point of view.

But I _do_ whine about those. I neither want an advantage nor a disadvantage from the MM. I want it to be a level playing field where my skill or my lack of skill (or that of my team) decides the battle. Isn´t that what this game is about?

Oh, then why bother with MM at all? Just throw ships in the game as they come in. T1 ind a T10 match? Hey, that´s what makes it interesting. Seriously though, a match doesn´t get interesting because one team has more DD/CA/BB or CV than the other team, it gets interesting because of the stuff people (as compared to bots) are doing. If a game is designed in a way that a balanced set-up is boring, there is something inherently wrong with the game.

If I understood the mm mechanics in that vid that explained mm for WOT correct, mm takes ships and puts them into teams as they come in. Can anyone confirm that? Because, if that is indeed correct, this is - excuse me saying this as a non-programmer - the most stupid thing I have ever heard. I would make mm put those ships into a "bag" until the bag is full (24 ships) and _then_ divide them as equal as possible. 6 CA? --> 3 in each team 4 of the CA are Clevelands? --> 2 in each team 3 Kawachis? --> 1 in on the other 2 in the other team Edit: This goes for divisions too. Haven´t seen this myself, only in screenshots, where one team had 2 TIX/X divs and the other had two TVII/VIII divs. That kind of stuff I seem to remember that in CBT, there was this line in the MM screen, reading: "If you wait too long, choose a different ship" Might help in open beta too

Ok, alles klar, dumm gelaufen

Hatte heute ein Spiel (auf dem NA server) mit meiner South Carolina und wurde von einer TB Staffel angegriffen, während ich ziehmlich dicht an einer Insel entlang fuhr und wurde von der Insel-Seite her torpediert. Kein großes Ding, der Kampf war für mich eh so gut wie gelaufen, aber ich kann mir nicht vorstellen daß der Abstand zwischen BB und Insel groß genug war für die Flieger auf Angriffshöhe zu gehen, die Torps zu werfen und für die Torps dann noch scharf zu werden Schaut euch mal die angehängten Screenshots an. Edit: Zu früh "post" gedrückt Bild 1: TB kreisen um mich hinter die Insel Bild 2: TBs sind über der Insel Bild 3: Torp Warnung und ich schaue was los ist Bild 4: Bum. Hier sieht man gut den Abstand zwischen BB und Insel

Sorry, wie im Edit gesagt, mein Zeigefinger war zu schnell auf der Maustaste

I don´t know if they actually dropped the torps over land, but the space between the island and my BB sure wasn´t enough for them to arm properly Luckily, I have replay activated and used it to make a few screenshots (I still have the replay, but I am not watching the planes). Pic 1: I see the planes circling behind the island Pic 2: On the mini-map, you see they are now _over_ the island Pic 3: Planes are now at the "coast" of the island Pic 4: Torpedo warning has sounded, I turn around to look Pic 5: Shows how close my BB was to the island I was pretty much dead at that point anyway (South Carolina in a close range fight with a Kongo and a Phoenix and a Wyoming lobbing shells in too), so it wasn´t a big deal in _that_ fight.

To be honest, win-rate is the one stat I don´t care about - well, ok, I do care, but only because a win is better than a loss With a game as dependent on teamwork, this is simply not a stat to get emotional about. As long as I do all right, I´m fine. As for XP, the OP has pretty much the same stats as I have, similar XP, similar av. damage, only a worse win-rate. I was wondering a lot how other people, with similar av. damage, could get a much higher av. XP. I recently read that premium bonus isn´t factored out of that stat, so that might be why many people have a lot more XP while doing the same amount of damage (assuming that is true - which would be kinda stupid, should only list base XP)

How about this match? P.s. We actually won

You can do what I did and just start a new account on the NA server. Sure, you have to "grind" up again, but then, I think people on the NA server play a wee bit different than here and it would probably be a good idea to get used to that at lower tiers anyway.