Admiral_H_Nelson

"Pensacola and Omaha are the same" Eh? Confused.

I wonder what the ship in the background is? Looks rather like a "Revenge" class to me. HMS Resolution maybe?,

Cruisers used to have good skills, before Wargaming changed them. - Basic Firing Training = 10% less reload time to main battery - Expert marksman = faster turret traverse time. Especially usefull when fighting nimble DDs. (Not needed. It's not as if Cruisers are supposed to be the counter to DDs, is it?) - Advanced Firing Training = 20% increase in range of main battery. Let's be fair, WG said they had to change these skills based on their analysis of the game data. They didn't want Captains with lots of skill points using their skills to be OP against players in mid-tier without them. QUOTE "...a player who has mastered the Firing Training skills and then returns to tiers III–VI gains a big advantage." END QUOTE http://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/updates/Update-053-FAQ/ Or rather, they didn't want CRUISER captains having this ability. It is perfectly OK to put a 17/18 point DD captain into a "Kamikaze R" at tier 5 and go seal clubbing.

Thank you for posting this. I had no idea that this aiming correction even existed.

Those Martian Machines are clearly OP, and need a nerf.

I feel your pain. I struggle against top-tier opposition, especially when the gap is two tiers. However I have not had the same unfavourable matchmaking when playing tier 6 ships that you have. My pain is in tiers 4 & 5. (Data from my Post Patch 0.5.3 Games Database) Tier of my ship Top Tier Mid Tier Bottom Tier 4 21 8 31 5 47 29 60 6 32 31 32 ALL 100 68 123

Great, great point! IMHO this is one of the points that should be always be kept in mind when the subject of the Tier 5 "Concealment Expert" skill comes up. Sure, it's a great skill - vital for some ships even - but so difficult to get for the casual player. For example, my Pensacola captain has 11 skill points and has 62,564 out of the 74,000 XP that he needs for his 12th skill point. In total, he actually needs another 428,436 XP to get to the magic 15 skill points. My average XP per battle is 983 (official WG figures). Even if I can boost this with Premium/Flags/Win bonus to about 1600 XP then this still represents a lot of battles to be grinded. (428,436 XP divided by 1600 XP = 267.8 battles.)

A brief personal update. This event has been great for me personally. Sorry for long post, but I need to get this off my chest. My playing time (and skills) are limited, so I knew that many of the missions & milestones were well out of reach. By my estimate I should get 200-240 diamonds by the end. However, as I posted earlier up-thread, I am happy with this. I get some freebies just for playing the game - and they are freebies that I want. I have also had two other bonuses from the event which I did not expect:- 1) After doing some research, I tried Carriers in a few co-op battles. (I never played them PvP for the week 1 mission, because I couldn't get the hang of torpedo drops.) I gained some valuable insights into the mechanics of carrier play AND a new-found respect for those clever CV captains who can really help their teams when they play well. It also confirmed that it is a gameplay for which I am not yet ready, especially since there are other demands on my limited playing time. I think carrier drivers are a bit like goalkeepers in football. Vital for a good team, but a different experience of the game to the other players. You need a different temperament to enjoy them. 2) I've been playing battleships again for the week 2 missions. I gave up on battleships after finishing the grind through Kongo. (I must be the only player in the game that hates that ship!). I just hated those low-tier BBs. Encouraged by the missions, I bought the Texas and the Fuso. To my immense surprise I have been OK in them. Not brilliant, but definitely helping my team. I was even top scorer in one game! Even more amazing...I am actually ENJOYING PLAYING THEM. (If my clan mates are reading this, they will think that my account has been hacked) None of this would have happened without the GNB event, and I am sure that I am not the only player who has gained as I have.

Well, I suppose that I will have to get one also, or be "less competitive". Last week I bought a Pensacola and kitted it out with modules & transferred a captain to it. (Haven't taken it out yet though because I've been concentrating on the Tier 6 missions for Great naval battles). Looks like I wasted my money. It seems that if I take a Pensacola into battle and happen meet an Indianapolis with a Captain at the same skill level as me, then he's going to kick my head in.

[edited] - off topic

Thank You for explaining this. Much appreciated.

Excellent analysis of the problem . Regarding Divisions/Platoons, I feel that the "tail is wagging the dog." I understand that friends want to play together, and that many time the MM handles it OK. However at other times, 21 players have to play in an unfair battle to accommodate the wishes of three people in a division. (And I am sure that the guys in the division don't want this either) Without divisions/platoons matchmaking would be a lot easier (and fairer). I've seen too many unbalanced matches lately due divisions upsetting the MM so it's getting on my nerves Apologies if I seem a bit bad-tempered about this. If people want to play together they can always play in a team battle. That way they can have more than three people playing together as well.

I'm still not entirely clear on how the missions work, with respect to carrying over stuff from one week to the next. I get this bit: Week 1 mission - "Win 10 battles" - you actually win 11. Week 2 mission - "Win 20 battles" - progress shown is "11/20" What is still unclear: Week 1 mission - "Play 10 games in a Carrier" - you don't play ANY games (progress "0/10") On week 2,3,4 etc can you go back and do the week 1 mission?

Well, it's an official Wargaming video. Wargaming should know how their own game works. They'll be telling us next that there is a 3-second delay between the "Situational Awareness" warning being turned off, and you actually being undetected.

I am well aware of the old phrase "Don't shoot the messenger" - so my comments are directed at Wargaming. (Thank you for telling us about these possible changes, BTW) I applaud the fact that Wargaming want to discourage fail divisions. What bothers me is Divisions getting rewarded more than the sol player. I've heard that most players do better in divisions than they do as a solo player. That's great - but my experience is the complete opposite. (It's a long story and I won't bore you with it here.) I accept that I may be in a small minority, but I don't want to be punished for being a solo player.

I like the way that the guy in the video recommends that you get two level-4 skills, a level-5 skill and three level-1 skills Given that you also must have a level-2 skill and a level-3 skill, is this a giveaway that they are planning on allowing 21 point captains? (starts at 3:04)

I got this survey question after a battle where our side had a tier 2 ship (in a division) in a Tier 7 game. They "wanted to play with friends" - which is nice, but it affects the whole battle for everyone else. The tier 2 ship got sunk in the opening minutes and was last on the team score with some paltry XP. I am not impressed with these fail divisions, so I responded negatively to the survey.

"I have bought the Ibuki and I am having fun now." - that is great news. Glad that everything is "Ola Kala". What's the point of playing unless you can enjoy it? I am glad that you are having fun now. I still have Mogami. She doesn't have a captain and is rusting in port. I only played a few games on the live server in her, but many more in Public Test. Don't like her. I may try her again someday. And then again . . . I may not.

Well . . . could be. The English version has at least one other typo in it! "Fixed an issue, that lead to bots shooting more accurately tha intended in version 0.5.5" The typo is "tha" instead of "than" I'm British, but I trust German thoroughness and attention to detail! I vote Tier 8 for Indianapolis!

Which patch notes? These ones (http://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/updates/patch-alert-0551/) say:"Premium US Tier VII Cruiser Indianapolis has been added to the client for testing purposes. "

Oh! That doesn't sound good for me then. However, I shall still buy it - I do like my Russian ships, even if it is just to stare at them in the Port!

That IS impressive! Not bad for light cruiser guns. I wonder what the maximum theoretical range of her guns was?

Maybe the OP was on to something. From today's patch notes for 0.5.5.1 "Fixed an issue, that lead to bots shooting more accurately tha (sic) intended in version 0.5.5" http://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/updates/patch-alert-0551/

Other key points about Furutaka are: a) it "rewards good gunnery" (to borrow a phrase that I hear many times in this game). b) The gun range is limited - even a DD such as Gnevny with AFT outranges you! c) The turret arrangement is awkward (strong rumours of a "C" hull to fix this) The guns hit harder than it's rivals at tier 5, but only if you aim well. A missed shot hurts much more than those ships with a higher rate of fire. Taking AP for example. Damage/Shell Range Broadside RoF Shot/Min DPM Furutaka 4700 13.0 6 4.0 24.0 112800 Kirov 4100 16.3 9 4.0 36.0 147600 Murmansk 3100 14.8 7 8.6 60.2 186620 Königsberg 3900 16.5 9 8.0 72.0 280800 Omaha-C 3100 14.8 7 8.6 60.2 186620

I completely agree with everything you just said. (I wish all forum discussions were like this!) For information, the tiers of my ships in the battles was: Tier Games 3 1 4 57 5 123 6 73 7 5