Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About Daemon_Blackfyre

Recent Profile Visitors

46 profile views
  1. Daemon_Blackfyre

    General CV related discussions.

    Even in a Chapayev with an Massachusetts and another tier 8 cruiser within 2km of me, 1 min into the match the Graf Zepplin still managed to do 1/4 of my health in a single rocket attack. I mean yes, you can get deleted by a BB salvo, or a torpoodo spread, but if you're a decent player you can angle to mitigate or avoid entirely that damage, if necessary you can disengage and go undetected and then shoot from behind islands etc. you can predict torpedos and avoid them. But there is basically nothing you can do to stop the first wave of planes. As far as I can tell, even if you shoot down half of them before they attack, the first strike will always be full strength, because other planes in that squadron will immediately take the place of the downed ones. If they just changed it so the strike elements were fixed, and shooting down a plane would lessen the planes in that strike, rather than the number of strikes, I think it would be a start towards making the sky cancer less... well, cancerous.
  2. Daemon_Blackfyre

    Holy s*** the Shchors is (a bit too) good!

    I think 100 is a bit unreasonably high... I mean of course 100 would be better than 50, but 1,000 would be better than 100. Out of 4,300 games (had to check there), I only have 9 ships with over 100 games on them.
  3. Daemon_Blackfyre

    Holy s*** the Shchors is (a bit too) good!

    Everyone needs spoons though... I don't think I said the armour was OP, but it's a very survivable ship. Haven't you ever heard of "no armour is best armour"? The ship is so thin that most shots will straddle or will land behind as people always seem to underestimate your speed. And the ones that do land seem to mostly just over-pen. I get VERY few citadels in it, unless I really mess up or else decide it's worth taking the damage/risk for some reason. Sadly WG removed the Belfast before I could get one... Fiji is a very competitive ship, but not the monster it was before the smoke-firing mechanics were changed. The thing with the Fiji is it can do very little to you if you point your bows at them while shooting HE, rather than using your belt to bait shots like you would for a BB and trying to get a 3rd turret shots since the improved ricochet angles of the Fiji will pen you when you think you're safe. Then when they turn to try to torp you, you can wreck them and dodge their torps using hydro. Works 4/5 times.
  4. Daemon_Blackfyre

    Holy s*** the Shchors is (a bit too) good!

    Unless those ships can over-match a 60mm deck, I think it will be pretty much unaffected.
  5. Daemon_Blackfyre

    Holy s*** the Shchors is (a bit too) good!

    That's why I go after destroyers like a terrier first, once they're all dead start picking on the battleships, or whoever's closest. Unless they have good back-up there is practically nothing they can do unless they get lucky with a torpedo, because 2 torps and you're dead. Also if there happens to be no battleships (or tier 9 cruisers) on your flank, I am quite happy to aggressively push up and clear out that flank, solo if needs be.
  6. Daemon_Blackfyre

    Holy s*** the Shchors is (a bit too) good!

    How many would you say was a statistically significant number of battles? 50?
  7. For the record, I had NO opinion on the Shchors before playing it, it had completely gone under the radar for me, so this isn't one of those salty "OP ship needs nerf" threads written after a poor defeat, so all you Stalin-a-boos can just hold it there. This is also only an opinion after the IFHE changes, I've no idea what it was like before. That being said, I have been playing through the Russian cruiser line ahead of the introduction of the new ships soon, and I wanted a Moskva before it gets removed from the tech tree, so I played through the Budyonny (had apparently already got that far years ago) which was alright (though I seem to have a 60% win rate in it, but that's only marginally higher than my average of 57%) but then I get to the Shchors and WOW, that thing is ridiculous! I've just unlocked the Chapayev, and am currently sitting at a 78% win rate for the Shchors, it was sitting in the mid-high 80's for a long while, till I got a few of those unwinnable games where your entire team can't tell their [edited]from their elbow and just inexplicably evaporates within 5 mins... Yeah those kind of games. For context those losses were all tier 9 games. I have not lost a single game in this ship when I wasn't bottom tier... And even in tier 9 games, in this little beast of a ship I'm not scared of anyone, its so versatile. I cannot understand why the average win rate for all players on warships today is so low (only 50.48%). So WHY I think it's so good is as follows: Firepower Fast rate of fire & 12 guns, good gun angles, really high fire chance, punchy AP, rail gun velocities and very accurate. Survivability Fast, decent maneuverability with the rudder mod, only 75mm belt, but must be made out of stalinium given how little damage I seem to take, narrow, so when actively maneuvering most shells miss. Great gun angles again mean you never really have to show your citadel. Hydro. Long range, good ballistics and spotter mean you can choose the range of engagement. Strong deck armour protecting the citadel and negligible armour elsewhere so most hits are over-pens. So this translates to: Against destroyers, you're very fast, have hydro and lots of high velocity, accurate and fast-firing guns, tier 9 dds don't stand a chance. Against cruisers is tricky, usually bait them into showing broadside by spamming HE at them then use the fast reload to punish with AP before they can angle again. Against battleships, you have speed and range to control the engagement, spam HE for fires, while acting like MC Hammer (can't touch this) while they get frustrated at not hitting anything, all the while your preoccupying them with this tempting "squishy" CL and they are not contributing to their team. Honestly I feel like that last point is probably what's contributed the most to why I think this ship is so strong, more than the 80k avg damage, its the >600k avg potential damage. For 5 mins of a game I can be occupying the attention of 3 top tier battleships solo while keeping them all burning like its bonfire night, taking only slight damage while my team can do something useful as they only have to deal with the weaker 3/4 of their team. It is just the hands down king of kiting (at tier 7). He're where I think it's a bit OP, I've also been playing the British heavy cruiser line recently and have got as far as the Drake at tier 9, and I was thinking, which ship would I choose to take while fighting other tier 9's, Drake or Shchors? I'd have to say, so far, only for fighting other cruisers would I pick the Drake. I genuinely feel like a tier 7 cruiser would be more effective against tier 9 DDs and probably BBs too than a cruiser 2 tiers higher... I realise the Drake is perhaps a bad tier 9 cruiser (though it's average stats on the EU sever are pretty good), but I think the point still stands, I can't think of another ship (I've played) that feels so competitive regardless of the tier, genuinely I feel like I'm on a more or less equal footing with the tier 9s. By the stats say the Drake is a good ship and I think that the majority of that line (Drake included) is in desperate need of some buffs. While the Shchors by the stats is in the bottom 1/3, but I would still consider it OP (but not worthy of a nerf as I seem to be amongst the few that know how good that thing is). Well that, or apparently I'm just a super Unicum and didn't know it ( I know which one I'm rooting for!)
  8. Well if you're not going to specify which part of it is pertinent to a discussion on naval artillery, I'd rather not waste my time on another of those drama-documentaries. I didn't say they ween't strong and/or heavily armoured. Just that that doesn't make it superior over the other and that in general, accounts from battles aren't very reliable sources of information. Wtf are you talking about now? I'm not even going to bother trying to answer that as you seem to have lost the plot entirely...
  9. BUT with a few exceptions (notably the early British battlecruisers as well as destroyers etc) most ships were designed to be protected against their own guns and were rated as such with an immunity zone (against her own guns) of x to y yds... I guess they expected ships to fight like-ships eg treaty cruisers vs other treaty cruisers, but I've always thought they should measure them by the opposition's guns (though they're harder to get access to for testing). So you would expect a heavy cruiser (at least a "balanced" one, tough to do on a 10,000 ton weight limit, but wows says the HMS Awful has the same displacement as the Hippers, which is over 16,000 tons standard) to be more heavily armoured than a light cruiser by dint of being designed to fight 8" gun-armed opponents.
  10. Daemon_Blackfyre

    Dreadnought achievement

    You say the increased cost was done away with, instead they just charge you that increased rate every single time. I think they should at least modify it by tier, so you only get charged the max rate when you're top tier. Else you pay say 80% for mid-tier and 60% for bottom tier. I know they want to discourage people playing tier 10's all the time, but if they just fixed the MM so you're really unlikely to get into a tier 10 game as the only tier 8 and everyone else is in OP tier 10 premiums... you know, make lower tiers more fun, then that would balance it's self out.
  11. TL:DW Firstly the Tiger is not "superior" to the Sherman, they're different tanks, with different roles and different requirements, you can't just put them side-by-side and say this is better because of x. Secondly, with respect to ricocheting you just cant look at a '7.3kg, 88mm shell vs 50.8mm of armour' and apply that to a '1.1 tonne, 16" shell vs 25mm steel plate' they have that little in common. Thirdly, soldiers then lied just as much as anyone else, just look at the kill claim numbers vs actual studies, people tend to embellish stories somewhat back then as they do now. Plus if they're being shot at, they'll be having a significant emotional event, so even if I knew they were being "honest" (as far as they knew) I would still treat any account with a generous pinch of salt. Oh and they only experience it from a limited perspective, not exactly a scientific study that's thoroughly examined.
  12. If you actually read the rest of my post you would have seen that I'm talking about magic thresholds. That would like me quoting "Ricochet is NOT an in game mechanic" and going "haha, it IS a mechanic in game!" I am well aware that ricocheting and "over-matching" are in themselves real life things, but not anywhere close to how WG implements them or makes people even think of them. As proof of which, the bow-tanking meta-we see in game is the opposite of real naval tactics. I'm not suggesting the game start modelling transitional fluid simulations, and thin plate deformation as part of high velocity impact mechanics, but they could at least use something like momentum to approximate, and not treat all steel as homogeneous regardless of if it's 1" of soft structural steel or 15" thick cemented armour steel.
  13. Daemon_Blackfyre

    Rename the tier 8 British Heavy Cruiser

    Oh and I found yet another case of judicious use of the photocopier with that ship... The shells for the 8" guns on the new line all have the same exact stats (except for range) regardless of whether they were the mk VIII of the Counties or the mk IX developed for the ~1940 designs: 116 kg shells @ 814 m/s (from tier 6-8) I'm trusting NavWeaps on this one, but apparently the mk VIII should have had an original shell velocity of 884 m/s using the 116 kg shells, which was later dropped with a reduced charge to 855 m/s to reduce barrel wear and increase accuracy (but for most nations who ended up dropping the charge weight once they realised insane chamber pressures weren't actually so practical, WG usually takes the highest one). The mk IX however fired a substantially heavier shell: 134.5 kg @ 814 m/s. As these shells were much longer than the old ones so probably had a significantly lower drag coefficient to boot. So it seems they took the lower muzzle velocity from the later guns, and combined it with the mass of the lighter shells from the earlier guns, and just copy-pasted those numbers for all of them. Which means atm the muzzle energy is much, much lower than it should be, for both marks.
  14. That's as dumb a statement as the OP... Because the over-match mechanics in WoWS have basically nothing to do with real life. How there are "magic" calibers that can suddenly bypass plating, regardless of shell weight or velocity, only the diameter of the shell of all things... but then 1mm thicker plating and suddenly it's immune... Magic. Ricochet and over-match are just a game-mechanic, so deal with it. There's no use trying to justify it by real life at this point. WG does what they want with them. So the OP does have a legitimate point. They stated that the RN heavy cruisers would be a tough, tanky line of heavy cruisers, then don't even give them the 27mm plating of the American cruisers but do give them the most ridiculously gigantic citadels, making them susceptible to deletion, regardless of angle by anything over 14" (which at tier 8 is every BB). It's like they intended them to be bad from the off.
  15. Daemon_Blackfyre

    British Heavy Cruisers: Branch Review

    Oh the Soviet/Russian navy could sink ships... mostly their own ones by mistake though. It's definitely biased against the RN as otherwise with all the paper ships in the game the RN would have otherwise got the G3 and N3.