HaachamaShipping

For T9, Neptune is kind of fine. Even if stats tend towards the lower end, it's not as bad as some other ships that absolutely get left behind in the dust by same tier competition and it's within the acceptable parameters, I guess. I agree though that Neptune can be a pretty harsh experience though, as you have little to no tankiness against anything that overmatches you in exchange for some pretty solid AP dpm. Thus, while the Neptune is maybe ok, it's often just not very fun to play. As others said, if the ship should get buffed, I'd buff its concealment. It is kinda lulzy how Albemarle on the same hull as a heavy cruiser has better concealment than the Neptune and giving Nep the same concealment would make it a bit better already. But hey, if I learned anything from Albemarle, it's to appreciate the 8 torps per side, great dpm and radar Nep can get.

BB line, yes, but cruiser and DD-wise, they aren't too bad. So while the 40% is indeed low, it shouldn't be surprising, even if, admittedly, Russian BBs have become much more memorable than the forgettable DD line.

Kirov existed, Krasny Krim existed, Molotov existed, Makarov existed, Chapayev existed, Kutuzov existed, Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya existed, Gremyashy existed, Gnevny existed, Minsk existed, Leningrad existed, Ognevoi existed, Tashkent existed, Neustrashimy existed. That's a lot of things that are past T4 and were pretty real.

Issue is... the only thing the Odin can do to an angled Albemarle is spam HE at it. And Albemarle with its superheal will burn down Odin way before Odin can HE spam Albemarle down. In the last few days, grinding through Albemarle and now having Drake, Odin really just seems like a complete joke, because you it has neither overmatch nor dpm to threaten angled cruisers and the only thing that makes the ship in any way annoying as a cruiser is the 50 mm plating. But for a ship like Drake, not even that is an issue.

My first impression was "Eh, they had to cram that half-exposed breast in there, didn't they?". Doesn't help that this is what by now one can kinda expect from Azur Lane and that while she isn't necessarily the bustiest of the new designs, it's the only one where you got them like this. Which seems to be more down to the pose though, as Drake with similar coverage left a better impression with me. And just because more explicit stuff exists doesn't make it better.

Frankly, I didn't like her at first, but she has an actually decent design, if she doesn't pose to emphasise her chest.

At least they weren't testing a number of Kageros to obscure Shikishima was coming, the way the Japanese did with Yamato.

Meanwhile the most remarkable impression I had from Odin is me killing it after already killing a Lyon and Trento, while in my Albemarle. Maybe it has things to make up for its garbage guns, but sure as hell, I find it hard to take high tier BB serious if an Albemarle can laugh at it.

What is inaccurate? That the citadel resembles an octagon more than a hexagon? That octagon and hexagon have proper definitions? It's not "everyone" who claims it is "hexagonal". And just because a large amount of people believe in it doesn't mean its true. Large amounts of people believed the earth is flat (and still a sad few do). The shape of Yamato's citadel also is hard to put into the same category as the other IJN ships, except those based on the Yamato hull. Most are octagons, but only the Yamato-based hull has as clear cut an octagon where you are this easily citpenned through the cheek. For most others (most comparable citadel shape is that featured on Ishizuchi, Kongo, Mutsu, Nagato, Ashitaka, Amagi and Kii) the octagon is mostly slight breaks in what otherwise would be a slight curve, which combined with the citadel usually not sticking up too much leads to vastly different results compared to Yamato. Some like Myogi and Izumo meanwhile differ wildly, with Myogi being more cross-shaped and Izumo being technically some decagon or dodecagon. Anyway, it isn't pedantic to point out that an octagon is not a hexagon, especially when you point it out to people who you assume are not familiar with Yamato citadel aka people who still associate a hexagon with 6 vertices and an octagon with 8, not people who think Yamato's cit is hexagonal because some folks can't count corners.

Triangle is a word that exists and is fairly universally understood. But it is not an accurate representation of the citadel shape, nor is hexagon. And this isn't about a lengthy treatise on the citadel shape, it's using a correct term to refer to the correct amount of corners the shape has, which is 8, not 6. Which also makes a difference, though more easily noticed on ships like Yoshino that have a similar cit shape (though with some oddities and some of the sides are smaller), as a hexagon might have allowed it to just lulzily bow-tank shots, as it would then internally carry some V-shaped citadel like the front of an IS tank, instead of getting absolutely devastated if eating frontal shots. And it isn't exactly more exotic to utilise the term octagon compared to hexagon... Bug can be colloquially used for any insect and even arachnids. Hexagon is not colloquially used for octagons. That's like calling the Yamato a submarine tender. The term has a clear definition and isn't used outside the definition.

Actually, I wonder how it reacts to AP rockets. My guess: Poorly.

Just because it isn't the case doesn't mean it's an acceptable state of affairs. But as said, you can't just ask for this in one aspect, yet ignore violations in others. That'd be hypocrisy and undermining the whole idea.

RN CVs are the worst, but they are still CVs. If you removed Haku and Midway, Audacious would crap on CBs instead. Not as powerful, but still way out of proportion and negating for example concealment. Because the main reason Audacious is not complained about as much is that it just kills things slower than the other two, so people don't pick it usually. But you can play stuff like randoms or ranked after a few days, when most CVs suck, to basically carry your team around even in a RN CV. Even if your bombs don't pen most of the Kremlin for example, setting 2-3 fires (and likely nuking most of its AA in the process, because Kremlin) in one pass is pretty broken, especially when you can just turn around and do it again if it damecons (which it will only do 5 times anyway, 6 with Kuznetsov).

All ships should be equally good. None should be a wasted slot. A Kitakami is a wasted slot, the way some DDs are in a match with a competent CV. CVs shouldn't render other ships wasted, but neither should any other ship be useless even if just because it frankly sucks. and if the fundamental balance can be ignored for one, then it can bev ignored for the other. you cannot argue that in one case people should ignore it and just not play it if they don't like it and in the other case argue that some balancing issue has to be fixed. Because yes, CVs can ruin the game, but they most of all do that for certain classes and people who like to play those classes. BBs, while they can be annoyed for example didn't suffer at all in popularity from the CV rework. Nor did cruisers. And as a CV player, I still get matches quite fast. Because in the end, people just seem to still like playing the other classes, even if WG wouldn't do anything (as they did for most of the time).

If you don't want a T9 prem, Thunderer beats Georgia. Yes, it does not go 40 knots (almost), nor does it have silly automated armaments shens, but 12 km concealment and 10.4s rudder shift on a BB is its own meme. And the main armament is hands down superior. Great AP, insane HE. And in regards to tankiness... just dodge (with the lolrudder) and laugh as you get more potential damage than half the GKs that have to yolo and suffer. Thunderer is the top competitive choice, a ship with absolutely subterranean skill floor (load HE, snipe from 24 km away), but an immense skill floor (imagine a ship that can absolutely abuse its 12 km concealment with its insanely accurate 457s). Yoshino is ok too, less insane, but at least quite comfortable and with a high enough skill ceiling. It's if you want a decent ship, but not the borderline disgusting performance of Thunderer. Also, pretty lulzy to look at a minimap and see two circles covering half the map, because of your insane range on guns and torps.

Alright. Can we stop nerfing CVs then? If people think other ships aren't fun, noone forces you to play target. and some still like playing them, so it's fine to have grossly underpowered trash.

I would guess with German CV release.

Just beat it in a secondary duel!

Wouldn't say Iowa is poor in it, just less encouraged to, as it can make a good flanker too. But in terms of getting crapped on, it's not really worse than NC. Also, worth noting, all these BBs have better than average accuracy, not 1.7 sigma that is halfway towards shotgun.

I meant more like disengaging in general. Ships at 23 knots would need to think carefully where to go and something like Colorado can do decent even with 21 knots, because it is more of a ranged specialist among the T7 BBs (high pen, high accuracy, good range). Colorado can push, but if it leads a push (which due to speed isn't often anyway), it has the hardest time repositioning ever and must be careful to not be left without anything to do after half the match. More brawly ships, even if they are 28 knot Ohio or 27 knot Massachusetts are far less hampered by such concerns, they obviously might also end up pushing someone into the map border, but when they do, they afterwards have it easier to rejoin than a 23 knot Kansas or Vermant would have.

Yubari and Mikasa have some redeeming features and also sit at low tiers (also Svetlana is not a papership. I think the T3 RU BB is the only real papership down there and short of T4 RU BB, most of them are within normal performance parameters, a good few are utter crap, powercrept by their own mediocre, yet still better same tier brethren of the same navy). And the excuse "not all ships need to be competitive, as long as they are fun" is silly, because at that point, you basically don't need to balance anymore. Some lunatic will find the greatest pile of garbage "fun" and if not, WG can just claim there is, who can disprove it?

Realistically, slow ships are poor brawlers. A 23 knot BB means you don't dictate the range of engagement and you wouldn't want to commit heavily anyway, as disengaging is basically impossible. And as a self-defense it's not exactly necessary, as getting rushed, you get 12 guns to one or twoshot people if they actually do rush close.

I mean, you cannot launch 40 at once, as you'd need to turn the ship, but point is, most of the time you get crap all to do, unless you absolutely stagger the launches. In which case, you are stuck with a torpedo that is absolute crap at the tier it's at, nevermind how bad it is at T10. Also, Shima is such a great ship, I bet there are so many who think "I'd love to get a ship with more, but worse torps, worse guns, worse mobility, no concealment advantage on other DDs and instead of getting overpenned you not just get full penned, you might get straight up citpenned."

Why not call it a triangular citadel then? I bet more people know the term triangle than hexagon and if we ignore the number of corners anyway for easier terminology, might as well go all the way. Is it accurate? No. But hey, people usually know what a triangle is.

Sorry, but I take my 20 km Shima torps over T7 Yuudachi trash. Also a proper hp pool, some actual AA and a set of guns that isn't going to get you gunned down by some Kagero.