invicta2012

Because it shows how much of a failure the rework is. One of the major motivations was reducing the skill gap between good and average players. Threads like this - which is only someone asking a fair question - shows how little improvement there has been.

We're not arguing, really! But I know the OP - because I've been in games with them grumbling about it - struggles to make credits on top tier Tech Tree BBs, so perhaps showing Smolensk games as a counter argument wasn't the most relevant move. Any way. Have a nice weekend, everyone, I'm done here...

NC is good, been trialling Missouri and Georgia and liked them both, so I presume Iowa is also decent (Missouri is a little bit better in terms of armour, I think her withdrawal was largely financial, would be nice if we could have that hull back with as a normal Premium credit earner). WV41 is fun, and Texas plods along being Texas - no longer the AA monster of old, but it still has lots of guns and hits very hard. Alabama and Arizona did not impress.

Ohio is not a Tech Tree ship. Neither is Smolensk. Both give more credits per game than Tech Tree ships. I don't agree with the OP but let's be honest about the credit returns on high tier Tech Tree ships.

Indeed. Although it was my third, and it's very boring to play. I hope it gets nerfed, soon. I have seen this fellow in action and I'm not surprised that's what they think. And that's all I'm going to say on that score.

I like the Aviation cruiser idea. Even if it was just a CL - like the Oyodo - the ability to park up and give vision to the team could be game-winning.

Smolensk is not really representative of Co-op returns, @Yedwy It's quick and it always does damage, so it racks up the credits. BBs are often a bad pick because the slower ones often struggle to get into a match before it's over. Even good games can lose you money (see below, I'd have lost credits with a standard account despite doing nearly 100k damage). You need a Premium account and, usually, some Premium ships to subsidise this mode at high tiers. This Gascogne game isn't as good in terms of performance, but I make 100,000 credits more compared to Richy.

Isn't it a variation on the Hipper design? I know there were Hipper class ships designed to have Nurnberg style triple 6 inch turrets, and Mainz looks very like it.

They're sort of British/French hybrids. Based on playing Visby quite a bit they're good at skirmishing, whittling the enemy down with floods and fires, using speed to withdraw. But they rely on having a clued-in team (yes, I know).

That's more of a logic puzzle than a sentence, really. It's also very funny and not at all over the top. :) OK, we won't call them mines, we'll call them "Swedish Torpedoes". Bork bork bork.

The sort of magnetic mines released into ship lanes as a random hazard - the "slow torpedoes" people were joking about above - are a possibility. If you've ever played Sims then you'll know how they can confuzzle people. What might make mines work is adding the concept of "drift", so that when you lay mines they are taken in a specific direction, i.e towards the enemy, at a low speed. A DD which could choose to lay these mines rather than get into torp range might be more comfortable to play in a CV or radar meta.

It's Ok to go a bit south. Most BBs have the range to hit the carrier in the South from close to the convoy. QE/Warspite have a spotter, so does Dunkerque, and Dunkers and Izmail have the speed to get a bit behind and catch up. It's people playing New Mexico and Bayern who drive me nuts wandering off down the bottom of the map, especially when the end zone is in the N. Yes, they get the carrier, but then they may as well be on the moon for all they can do. See also: BBs who are behind Raptor in the repair circle for the whole match.

I have no particular axe to grind here, but having played against it quite a lot, it looks good.

So, today, I have been trying out doubloon rental ships. Vanguard, Gascogne, Georgia and Roma. (There's a Missouri in there somewhere, but what's the point). They seem to be of the nimble and fast battleship variety which I like very much (and was thinking of buying). Initial thoughts Vanguard - great handling, poor gun angles, big citadel, mediocre guns. Hood is better. Gascogne - you have to give a lot of broadside to get all guns on target, but I love the speed, handling, secondaries.... French BB guns rarely have an issue with pen, no problems here. I like it more than Richelieu. Georgia - great fun, a good substitute for JB on the Tier IX coal ship list. Playable in all game modes, too. Roma - Didn't like this one at all. French gun turrets (constantly getting knocked out), British citadel (much too exposed), German BB dispersion (before they buffed it). I can see why they're thinking of putting SAP on the Impero because this is a completely WOnKy pACkaGe which rarely hits where you aim. Could be devastating, could blow up an island, no-one knows which. Three times I had broadside cruisers 10k away and three times every shell went exactly where I didn't aim it. Not recommended. So from the Premium bundles, we have good info on not buying Vanguard or Roma, have proved that Georgia is worth the coal, and I know have a previously unrealised hankering for Gascogne. Although I realised that I very much enjoyed Lenin, too. Hmm.

I think the game is considerably more resilient than people think, and the "if they did this I would leave" nonsense is what you get from Gamers (capital G) who throw a sulk every time their mastery of the meta is threatened. And of course mines were a part of naval warfare, and sank at least five battleships. The problem with them is that they're a defensive, area denial weapon- not sure that's what the game needs - and have a huge risk of causing damage to friendly ships.

Looks hilarious.

If Hyuga is really an aircraft carrier, then it should have 5s fire duration.

STO got ruined by PvE? STO was always a PVE game, wasn't it? All the Cryptic games have PVP as an afterthought.

Narai was being farmed to a quite ludicrous extent. I'll happily play it if it gives me a reward which is up there with a random game, doesn't need to be 12k BXP or whatever shenanigans people were getting up to with it.

I did wonder if it had been tweaked, but having played it a lot over night I don't think so: those three BBs near the end have been a constant feature. The bots like to shoot at cruisers - to the exclusion of everything else, it seems - but otherwise it plays as usual.

They'll wake up to it eventually. The thing about Operations is that they hit a nice sweet spot between co-op and randoms. They can be saved by decent play and not be completely derailed by eejits, which is a nice thing to have at the moment, and the rewards are quite nicely pitched between the two main modes to make it worthwhile to play.

A T-61 style boat would be nice, 70 second reload might make it viable....

Ah, now you may be on to something.... a trial for sub technology?

Reasonable, yes, but we don't see vast numbers of German destroyers as it is, and reasonable won't sell many premium Tier IXs. This is still a pre-war design that will be going into competition with late war ships, without having lots / fast firing guns or torpedoes. It will see Mogador, Daring, Marceau, Friesland... do you reckon it can keep up?

So does Chung Mu, which is very good. But those ships are nimble, their guns are DP and the shell arcs allow you to make good use of cover. The German DDs feel slow and clumsy, their guns are slow to load and at Tier IX Z-35 will be up against really powerful opposition. You may have noticed that the existing CVs are not popular to play against and that WG struggles, more than any other ship class, with making each CV line distinctive without being overpowered, especially at high tiers. Personally I don't really care what the ships are like to play, as I won't be using them, but if they add another level of irritation to a declining game experience, then that's nothing to celebrate.