Admiral_H_Nelson

I hear what you say, and have some sympathy with it, so let's develop it further. 1) Cyclones change the balance between ships - that's the whole point after all, to provide a changed gameplay experience. 2) Ships were balanced without cyclones, and some types are adversely affected by it - for example a cruiser with good long range guns (German or Russian being two prominent cases) aren't balanced for close range 8km fights which pop up "out of the blue" in a cyclone type environment. 3) If cyclones are becoming more common (and WG have extended them in recent patches, according to their own notes), then shirley surely there comes a point where cyclones need to become part of the balancing factors.

Good for you mate! I am pleased that you have found a ship to "bond with" like this. (It also happens to be the ship that I consider to be the most handsome in the game right now) My stats seem roughly similar to yours (though not in the same ships, obviously), but I haven't found that "Special ship" yet. I did get the Scharnie, and tried her in a few co-op battles, but have not got the hang of her. Carry on enjoying your ship. Hope to meet you on the High Seas ( but on those figures, not if you are on the enemy team and playing in Scharnhorst!)

Dresden or Emden. Just keep the left mouse button pressed down and pew-pew-pew-pew at everything except my own team mates. If no enemy are in sight then I attack the islands, the wrecks, the water - everything!

I am apprehensive about these proposed changes, even though Russian cruisers are my favoured ships overall. Hopefully, WG will put them on a PT server first, collect a lot of data, and examine it carefully in an unbiased manner. It would give them wiggle room to ditch or modify the proposals. They have done it before after looking at PT results. No loss of face would be involved.

I did a poll on this subject back in January and collated the responses, but of course it is out of date now. http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/37930-most-handsome-and-most-ugly-ship-in-the-game/page__st__60#topmost Back then the most popular ship in each class was:- BB: Tirpitz CA/CL: Atago CV: Taiho DD: Tashkent My own votes would go to:- BB: Scharnhorst CA/CL: Mikhail Kutuzov (since it is the closest thing we have to a real Italian ship so far) CV: Midway DD: Tashkent

Any feature on a ship is factored into how it is balanced against it's peers (at least in theory). Therefore, any cruiser that has torpedoes mounted on it should be giving up something to a cruiser at the same tier that does NOT have torpedoes. Now, I think that it is a "good thing" in general, and to the liking of MOST PLAYERS, that it appears that the RN cruiser line will be getting torpedoes. However, for my own personal enjoyment (and my own personal play style), I would rather have cruisers that were weak in torpedo armament so that they could be stronger in others (Guns, AA, HP, etc). Sorry if this offends any RN fans out there. Not saying its right or wrong - all taste is personal after all.

This is interesting. I have a Mogami rusting in port, but never got on with it. (Never got on with any tier 8 ships to be honest, because I am rubbish) It seems to me that there might be a place for the 155mm guns on Mogami, provided that you have a captain with the level 5 skill "Concealment Expert", which reduces detectability by 12%. In such a case, you appear to have at least a 1.8 km invisifiring window (if you stick to the "A" hull). My working is here, so that the sensible people who posted up-thread (and who know more than I do about this matter) can hopefully tell me what they really mean. I would like to think that this means that there is a place for a 155mm Mogami as a DD killer/Invisifiring HE spammer - however I am here to be educated!

Love this comment. I am sure that you try your utmost to win in any battle that you play, and you have many "tricks of the trade" and experience to rely on to make you a good player - but it does you great credit that you have not lost sight of the fun part of the game. (Also, those "fun builds" can sometimes add a whole new interest to playing a particular ship, so it's not just self-indulgence to create such a build.)

I agree absolutely! I have plenty of unplayed ships. Since i am not an impatient kid, this doesn't bother me. I'll get round to playing them someday, when the time is right.

This ^^ +/-2 is OK, provided that you get to be top tier roughly equally to compensate for when you have to struggle as bottom tier. That is obviously not happening at the moment.

Hilarious! .. and brilliant at the same time. The classic military method, i.e. seize the initiative and keep the enemy off balance. The carriers gave your plan the vital support that it needed in order to achieve success. Good guys!

Prinz Eugen is a very handsome and capable ship (especially so if she gets a T9 gimmick, as suggested above. IMHO however, the real need for the German line at the moment is a mid-tier captain trainer. Japan (Ishizuchi, Kamikaze), USA (Texas, Marblehead) and Russia (Murmansk, KK, Molotov, Imperator) all have mid-tier premiums to farm credits and train crews. The fact that Germany does not have such a ship, and none apparently planned, is a glaring omission in my view.

Looking at this discussion from a slightly different perspective.... Why do you HAVE to take a "one point skill" anyway? Why not just have a list of skills (with point values), and let each captain spend their points on skills exactly as they like, e.g You have a captain with 5 skill points, and you want to make him an AA specialist so you take: BFT 1 point AFT 4 points Why should you HAVE to take a tier 2 skill and a tier 3 skill before you take a tier 4 skill? WoWS skills don't match "real world" training in any way.

What's your point, miseryguts? Are you even aware of the background to all this, i.e. the comic rivalry between two variants of English, and the way that the Septics (*) always assume that we are happy to use their version all the time? (*) A bit of Cockney Rhyming slang for your education. "Septic Tanks" = "Yanks"

On cooldown?

I like Budyonny - but playing it is a "bittersweet" experience. On the one hand, I have easily the best damage, XP, kill rate of all of my Tier 6 cruisers (Compared to Nürnberg, Aoba & Cleveland). On the other hand I have the worst win rate - 47.6%.

Nice one! That made me laugh!

I am not a BB guy, but I might be tempted. I had a model of the Scharnhorst when I was a boy, and I always thought that it was a very handsome ship. Somehow, I would feel happier if the Scharnhorst was the "regular" ship, and the Gneisenau the premium. I'm more comfortable with the regular line having ships as they actually existed (and even then they still need paper ships to fill out the tree)

It's all related to the special physics of the WoWS universe. The physics that allows you to play a battle with the same ship that was destroyed in battle 5 minutes earlier.

They are not out yet. After England have lost to Wales & Slovakia, then Russia will qualify easily as a third-place team by beating Wales. Remember all of the first round of games only eliminate EIGHT teams.

"Cruisers" . . . . Wait! What? My Pensacola and Indianapolis are going to get torps in the next patch? Why haven't Wargaming put this in the notes?

Liked. A very generous post. Actually, if 82% of the players actually support cyclones (s WG claims), then in purely democratic terms, those of us who oppose cyclones are WRONG. It's obviously better to annoy 18% of your players, than 82% (though even better to annoy 0% of course). A PLEA FOR HELPSince I am in the minority, and will have to put up with these cyclones from now on, could forumites give me some advice on how to cope with them please? Cyclones have been a total disaster for me in the approx 10 battles that I've faced one so far. Since I play cruisers (mostly Russian these days), I am playing a class that has more trouble dealing with cyclones than DDs and BBs. Russian cruisers particularly are not meant for sub-8k brawling either, unless you are a very good player. (The most common outcome for me so far is to meet a BB at 8k and either get wrecked take very significant damage before escaping.) When a cyclone hits, I've tried politely asking the team to stick together in groups for mutual support, but I sadly only speak English, and the other guys either don't understand me or just ignore me.

I was kinda hoping that Scharnhorst would follow the pattern established by Mogami - smaller guns on the stock ship, followed by an upgrade to bigger guns.

thank you! I'll stick to ships no higher than Tier VI then. I must avoid the wretched cyclone at all costs. (Yes, I have experienced it - about 10 times - and yes, I hate it that much)

"After we analysed the statistical data and feedback from players, we made the "Strait" map unavailable for battles where Tier VII ships are present" Yay! I'll dust off my Tier VII ships to play...Shchors, Indianapolis, Blys "Visual-only weather effects were replaced with cyclone weather conditions (with a10% chance of a Cyclone occurring during battle) for battles between Tier VII-X ships..." .... on the other hand . . . maybe not. ON A MORE SERIOUS NOTE - A QUESTION When Wargaming talk about "battles between Tier VII-X ships", do they mean battles where the lowest tier ship is VII, or do they mean any battles that include Tier VII ships (i.e. where Tier VII ships could be top tier, but there may be Tier V and/or Tier VI ships also)?