invicta2012

Indeed.... but that's because the athwartship armour on a Yamato is 340/350mm - so you will citadel a Yamato/Musashi from close range in, say, a Jean Bart or Richelieu with 380 mm guns, but you can't in an Odin with 305s. Odin's secondaries will damage the Yamato, though, where as JB's won't (last game in the JB I tried it.... 250 hits for 9k damage) so you should probably be going for cruiser tactics with Odin - bow/stern/superstructure AP pens, torpedo and secondary damage and hope the DOTs finish it off before you take too many of those 18 inch monsters in return....

You may be right, and my suggested fix may not be the best solution. But the point is that on a normal map, during normal conditions, that reticle is *very* difficult to see.

Thanks for taking a look. To try and explain a bit more, I've got a picture of the aiming reticle from Furious' rocket planes - which is nice and bright ... Whereas Rhein's reticle in the same lighting conditions is almost invisible (and this is on a clear map without smoke, explosions, fires....) Is there any chance your devs could increase the intensity of the reticle display to make it comparable with other CVs?

As usual, the ship with the most guns wins. Cheshire has six, Albemarle has nine. If all else is equal, and we assume that each cruiser can land 2/3rds of a broadside on a target for full damage over the same period of time, an Albemarle salvo will do 6 x 3300 (19,800) damage and have six 17% chances to set a fire. Cheshire will do 4 x 3850 (15,400) damage and have four 24% chances to set a fire. Cheshire has a better fire chance per shell, but it's better to have more chances overall than to have a higher chance per shell provided that the base % fire chance between the two per shell is not more than about 50%). If Cheshire had been built as a mini-Drake (the Tier IX RN CA having a better armour scheme) then she could make up for her lack of DPM and DOT damage with durability - but she's just Albemarle with different guns, and she only really trades DPM for the occasional advantage in armour penetration. Which isn't worth it.

I used to be an attendant on a ride like that.... could never play it myself, it would take me about 0.01 seconds to be ill. It's very difficult to see, and other CVs do not do this. The Rhein's rocket reticle is extremely narrow in the vertical, and the attack version appears first in a pale yellow and then in a dark green which is almost impossible to distinguish against the sea. It also has a problem with appearing substantially in front of the indicator reticle (often behind the ship being targeted, which is not where you expect it to be) and then moving towards the planes, not the the target (i.e. towards the viewer) which is completely counter to the expectations of the player. I gave up with both the rocket planes (for the above reasons) and the bombers, which are slow, vague and, as I said, make me feel sick when I play them. At Tier IV AA isn't an issue and you can merrily stick torpedoes into anything you want without fear of being deplaned. As we know CV play is a damage race, you just keep on damaging things, and those torpedoes are so easy to use against anything it's silly to waste time with the other weapons.

I have other ships like Rhein. It's perfectly possible to have fun in it, but it's annoying as heck. That actually makes me feel sick. First person views which lurch around in the vertical make me nauseous.

I have just unlocked the Rhein and I have to say those rocket planes are very unpleasant to play. I can barely see the firing reticle, and its behaviour is so odd (it seems to track back towards the planes and then go forward again) that it's very hard to follow. Torpedoes are very easy to use but very poor damage, and the bombers are a bit nausea inducing with all that corkscrew view stuff going on.

Must have missed that. Got a link, old chap?

The best argument for Operations is that they encourage mastery. They are a series of predictable events where good scores and good rewards come from practice and understanding. And that's what you want players to be learning at Tiers V-VI-VII and VIII. It's also a rewarding experience for more experienced players because you have more chance to direct and carry a weaker team, rather than having to share the frustration of failure, as happens too often in Random and Ranked where a carry needs players of really strong ability and skill.

CV rework. Translated as: the dev behind the operations has left, we don't know how to integrate the new planes with the operations, and we can't be bothered to spend money to pay someone to work it out when it's all hands to the pumps sorting out the messes we've made elsewhere. Latterly they said that they don't really know how to balance Tier VIII operations with all the ships and tech which have come into the game. There may also be an element of sulking over the fact that their last few event game modes weren't as well received as they could have been - missing the point that it was largely because they were tagged to unattractive ideas like the Benham grind. But eventually they will have to come back to the idea that there has to be more to the game than random battles and new ships.

And so it should. Check the penetration curve, it has the same relationship to Donskoi as it does to Hipper, armour penetration which is 40-50mm better at all ranges. It's about 100mm better than Kirov.

Albemarle has great guns/HE, excellent heal, 8k torpedoes.... if it wasn't for the fragile hull it would be a brilliant ship. Tallinn is very Soviet - rather like the BBs, it has obvious weaknesses but if you can work it into a comfort zone, it's really strong. But OK if you didn't enjoy it....

A +1 from me as well. I enjoy Tuccy's contributions, he definitely brings a different perspective on the issues under discussion. I'm more familiar with Jingles and Drachinifel, and although it's always nice to hear them it would be good to some other national experts involved - are there are any from the French or German WOWs community who might be available?

Breslau was a Magdeburg class, one of her sisters was Strassburg, who was ceded to Italy as War Reparations and became... Taranto, the current Italian Tier III. She'd need rearming, of course, as she has the Czech/Italian guns rather than the German ones Breslau carried, but the hull is already in game. There was Dynamo, Hermes, Cherry Blossom, and Ultimate Frontier.

No, 12 shells in a salvo, rather than Hipper's eight, any of which will penetrate 50mm more armour than a Hipper can at the same distance. It's a Soviet Hipper. Same turtleback, similar armour, with Soviet AP railguns, strong AA, radar, and suicide torpedoes. You have to work angles where that AP can be effective because it is very effective. I know Flambass and Flamu gave everyone the idea these were super all-round gun ships but they're not, they're just very strong in certain situations.

Guns and AP penetration. 12 shells with at least 50mm armour penetration over Hipper's AP. If you see a cruiser broadside in this thing you can wreck it at distances you wouldn't expect to do so. Otherwise it's as well balanced as Hipper.

What do people want, though? It's almost as if WG got Tier VIII cruisers right with the Baltimore, Cleveland and Mogami and there's nothing else to make.

It's a Hipper with Soviet guns, so it won't be the same as the existing Soviet line. But it has lots going for it. And you can't blame WG for wanting to make a cruiser which a) doesn't spam HE and b) doesn't explode when a battleship looks at it. That is what most people have been asking for.

8km is fine, especially with the fact they are a better balance of calibres than other German BBs (128 and 150, no 105s here). And manouevrability is fine in most cases, dodging torps isn't hard - obviously those whizzy Swedish ones can be problematic but you can always throw some points at captain skills if you need help with that.

You can get an element of both, though. AR, BoS, BFT, DamCon 1 and 2, Aiming Systems Mod 1.. that gets the secondaries out to 8k on a 3 second reload, you take 25% less damage from fires, Adrenaline Rush buffs everything's reload time... it's not a bad mix.

Emerald is a fine ship these days, but when she was released she had 10mm on the bow and 25mm citadel deck. (Now 13 and 40). Which meant that anything with 14 inch guns or bigger would overmatch your deck (instant citadel along the whole centre of the boat), and you could get citadelled by German cruisers firing HE. Everytime you got spotted every gun on the enemy team would turn in your direction... it was nightmarish.

I would have to say that I failed heavily and often in the RN ones when they came out. Danae, especially, is extremely vulnerable if not angled well. It's a great ship with huge potential, but you won't learn how to unlock it if you're exploding all the time. And I played the original Emerald, too, a ship that made you feel like you couldn't even afford to get spotted. God knows how that works in the CV Meta.

They're a mixed bunch. Weymouth isn't really meant to see BBs at all (but she's actually quite tanky, could easily be a Tier III or IV), Caledon is a big destroyer, Danae is an ambusher. The AP can be effective against armoured targets but it needs proper aim and confidence in using it. For a new starter, I would go with the French cruisers, as they've got a better balance... Duguay Trouin at Tier IV is a good ship with a powerful torpedo broadside.

There is a huge difference between Kirov and Molotov's shells. https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/79430-premium-ship-review-molotov/ The guns are the same as Kirov and Tallinn, it's all very common for Tier V-VIII Cruisers to have similar gun performance and be varied by soft stats and shell values.

It's not very good. I recently dumped mine. I know people say it has Tier VIII guns, but then so does the Kirov and I wouldn't play that again either... it's all about the hull, and Molotov's is an explosive glass one.