Admiral_H_Nelson

This. ^^ My skills have improved at a slower pace than my progression through the tiers. By the time that the grind is completed I know that I can buy the next ship, AND FULLY UPGRADE IT IMMEDIATELY. It's irresistible. As the great writer Oscar Wilde said "I can resist everything except temptation".

Yes, but you are a good player. (Sorry, I had to check your stats - they are very good) You can use your skills to compensate for the difference in tiers. Average players can't do this so easily. Huge respect to the good players - but this game feels very, very different to those of use who are merely average, compared to players who are very good at it. Being in a game where most of the other ships are ONE tier higher than me doesn't bother me. I regard as a challenge. I tackle it enthusiastically. However, when I see that most of the enemy ships are TWO tiers higher than me then my heart sinks - purely because of actual past experience of how such games tend to turn out.

Thank You. You pointed that out very tactfully. I appreciate that. I am an Idiot!

That is the natural order of things. These are stats from Warships Today, EU Server Premium/Award ships with 250 battles minimum in the last two weeks. Table shows ranking of each ship against its peers in the same tier. Ship Tier Type Damage Ranking Albany 2 CA/CL 1 Emden 2 CA/CL 3 Mikasa 2 BB 1 Aurora 3 CA/CL 1 Iwaki Alpha 4 CA/CL 1 Yubari 4 CA/CL 2 Imperator Nicolai 4 BB 1 Arkansas Beta 4 BB 2 Marblehead 5 CA/CL 1 Murmansk 5 CA/CL 2 Fujin 5 DD 1 Gremyashchy 5 DD 2 Kamikaze R 5 DD 3 Anshan 6 DD 1 Warspite 6 BB 1 Atlanta 7 CA/CL 5 Blyskawica 7 DD 1 Sims 7 DD 4 Mikhail K 8 CA/CL 1 Atago 8 CA/CL 2 Lo Yang 8 DD 4 Tirpitz 8 BB 2 Atlanta, Sims and Lo Yang need to smarten up a bit!

Chester the Molester (sometimes used on the NA server, I believe) New Orleans = Narleans (ditto) Derzhi = Derpski Mikhail Kutuzov = Mikhail Citadelovitch Ishizuchi = Itchy-scratchy Atlanta = Waste of Money There is a name for the Karlsruhe which is a play-on-words in German and isn't complimentary. (Can't remember what it is, though) Hopefully one of the guys who speaks German could tell us if they happen to see this thread.

As a dedicated cruiser captain, I feel your pain. Must have been a detonation?

Maybe the way to stop this necromancy is to have a mechanism that automatically closes a thread after there have been no new postings for a set period. (month? 3 weeks? dunno) The actual topic of this thread is a good one, IMHO, but needs a new thread..

Interesting stats xeransa - well done for putting the effort into collecting and publishing them, I added a little extra analysis of my own. I added an index whereby the strongest ship in each tier (in terms of damage) gets a rating of 100, and the other ships a value relative to that. e.g. a rating of 90 means that the ship does 90% of the damage that the best ship does. This gives: Ship Avg Dam Diff in Damage Index Mikhail Kutuzov 37192 2326 100.0 Atago 33825 1108 90.9 Mogami 33425 -3591 89.9 Admiral Hipper 32177 -373 86.5 New Orleans 29608 44 79.6 Aoba 24842 118 98.7 Nurnberg 22369 -811 88.9 Cleveland 25173 -1372 100.0 Murmansk 29003 -4168 100.0 Furutaka 18769 -294 64.7 Konigsberg 22379 -1514 77.2 Omaha 21119 -1606 72.8

Do you? You might be asking for a bit much there, but good luck anyway. (TIP: Ask for 70 knot torpedoes with 20km range while you are at it) All I want is some version of radar for IJN cruisers. In the same way that IJN cruisers at Tier 5 get SOME sonar - but not as good as the sonar on German ships. Cruisers need all the tools that they can get to hunt DDs - IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE THEIR DAMNED JOB! (Rock-Paper-Scissors . . . .and all that garbage) They have a case for radar this because they had it in real life. (It's not like the case of torpedoes and high tier USN cruiser, where they didn't usually have torpedoes in their final configurations) If they have to nerf IJN cruisers in some other way to preserve balance, then so be it.

I think that this is a very good post. Why? 1) It starts by acknowledging that other people have different views on the subject - which is a great beginning for friendly discussion. 2) It shares evidence of the posters own past experience with the ship, including some tactical tips for others to try 3) It explains the posters strategy for dealing with the ship in the future, including the (new for Mogami?) feature of premium camo and what captain to install in the ship. Everyone agrees that there needed to be a nerf of Mogami, I think. My worry is this. There are several possible outcomes following the 0.5.3 nerf, including. a) The nerf was about right and Mogami's performance is balanced against its peers at Tier 8 - Good. Problem solved. b) The nerf was not quite strong enough and further slight nerfs are needed - Good - just a few more tweaks and we are there c) The nerf was a little bit too strong, and slight buffs are needed to get back into balance. - Good, rather like c) d) The nerf was too strong, and buffs are needed to bring Mogami back into balance. - Potentially Bad. A fair proportion of players will just give up on the ship and maybe even sell it before the buffs come. By the time that the buffs come it will be too late. I think that you should always move very gently with nerfs. Maybe Wargaming actually have. A months worth of stats should give us a better picture.

Now that was a well argued post - I was happy to give it a "like". I agree with a lot of it. But even where I don't agree I respect it - because it was a well reasoned response. There is nothing to say that we can't have different points of view, or see where the other person is coming from. I will now go and find someone else to annoy.

But if your team mates won't or can't do that spotting (maybe its later in the game and they are all sunk) then its "God bless the child that's got his own."

1) Wargaming stated their reasons for the nerf to BFT and AFT on the "Update 0.5.3 FAQ" WoWS Web page http://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/cbt/Update-053-FAQ/ Skill Changes Q: Why was the effectiveness of the skills "Basic Firing Training" and "Advanced Firing Training" reduced? A: There are several good reasons for this hard decision. . . . a player who has mastered the Firing Training skills and then returns to tiers III–VI gains a big advantage. The lower the tier, the more noticeable the advantage. So Wargaming's point is that a player is using advanced skills to gain an advantage in tiers III-VI and that this is a bad thing. 2) Now check out this thread; "Kamikaze R, What is it good at?" http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/43628-kamikaze-r-what-is-it-good-at/page__pid__890597__st__20#entry890597 Post #32 states: "I put my Kagero captain in it, with concealment expert, and faster shorter range torpedos. Great against on coming targets, not easy to dodge 72knot torps. ;)" So a player is using advanced skills to gain an advantage in tiers III-VI (since Kamikaze R is a tier V ship). I fully support this DD player, BTW. He should be allowed to use his skills since he has grinded very hard to get them. 3) My Question: Why is this a bad thing for Light Cruiser captains to use their skills in tiers III-VI, but acceptable for destroyer captains?Surely this is double standards?

Nice shots .. . . but the "soundtrack" takes a bit of getting used to for an old 'un like me! It must have made your day! I bet that you couldn't stop laughing for ages!

1) My original comment may qualify as "ridiculous". It is a matter of opinion if describing it as such is correct, or maybe a little too harsh. 2) I'll be honest, I took exception to your wording: "...you really should understand...". As a native English speaker (which I assume that you are, since your location is stated as the great city of Manchester), this comes across as patronising. (See also phrases such as "...if you really must know..", and "..you really should do better.." for the usage that I am talking about) 3) I cannot see any comment where I said that my IJN CA should be able to do everything by itself - as you claimed: "...your (ridiculous) comment about your IJN CA not being able to do everything itself in this team game.." I'd like to take you up on your offer of help. Please point out the comment and I will edit it out of the post. OTOH if you cannot point this out then I think that we can safely conclude that you are mistaken. 4) I am, of course, well aware that ships have different strengths and weaknesses. However there is a big difference between different levels of ability and a binary on/off situation of not having an ability at all. So, for example at tier 6, the German cruisers get better sonar than Japanese or American cruisers - but at least they DO GET IT. What is being proposed here is that IJN cruisers don't get the radar ability AT ALL, not get it but at a lesser level of ability. 5) I am also aware that this is a team game (or supposed to be). Even the best teamwork fractures late in the game when ships become dispersed and after losses have been taken. This is when the whole argument that a ship can be countered by team play goes completely out of the window. A 3 v 3 fight with ships scattered is a completely different situation to the 12 v 12 at the start of the match.

What? Ships have different strengths and weaknesses? Really? I wasn't aware. I see the game in a whole new light now. It explains a lot of things.

A good Q & A session I thought - and thanks to Carnotzet for the excellent job in translating. This answer stood out for me: Q. In another Q&A you said: "Firing from smoke is an intrinsic tactic for DD's. We don't see anything wrong with it but would like to offer a counter solution to it (radars)." Here's my question: Do you plan to add radars to every ship? I like to play with IJN cruisers. So I'd like to know: will they be equipped with radars or will they still be helpless against invis-fire from smoke (since "IJN hadn't any radars" or something like that)? A. We only plan to add radars to US and VMF cruisers, and only at high tiers. It's not so much "they hadn't radars" as we think about what the game needs. IJN cruisers have good torpedoes and good HE shells. There's no need to strengthen and diversify this ship class tactics for now. OK - but it doesn't matter how good your torpedoes or shells are when YOU CANNOT HIT WHAT YOU CANNOT SEE!

. . . or in other words, "No we didn't get rid of Mogami. We just renamed it to 'Mikhail Kutuzov', but now you have to buy it in the premium ship instead of getting it for free"

My replies to your excellent post are in blue.

"Shame that you stopped progressing at Nurnberg" - yes, it's a shame. I wish that I could like them, but I find Heavy Cruisers very frustrating to play. I don't like battleships either. I am 99% convinced it is because my gun aim is poor. When you have a low rate of fire you MUST be accurate. I have some Japanese cruisers with 203mm guns rusting away in my port (Furutaka, Aoba, Myoko, Atago). I also tried Yorck, Admiral Hipper and Pensacola on the 0.5.3 Public Test Server, but I didn't like them. I really wanted to like the Hipper because I used to have a model of her, and she is one of my favourite ships in real life! Some day, I plan to go back to Furutaka and make another attempt to learn how to play heavy cruisers better. As for "Vigilance" . . . well I find it useful because I am bad at spotting torpedoes. Once I have seen them then I can dodge them like a boss , but you have to pick them up early. None of the other tier 3 skills appeal for to me for cruisers anyway, especially since I run premium damage control.

Well played!

Well, if you don't mind me paying you a compliment I would say that your impressive skills had a lot to do with your success. Before New York, you played Wyoming, also with very impressive results. A 71% win rate, 44.5k avg damage, 1.4 avg ship kills/battle, 0.9 avg plane kills/battle and 43% survival rate. So I don't think that it is surprising that you were able to use your (IMHO) well above average ability in playing BBs in both ships. However for those of us with more "average" skills the prospect is different. I was a very bad Wyoming player. My stats are shameful. A 41% win rate, 23k avg damage, 0.4 avg ship kills/battle, 0.4 avg plane kills/battle and 33% survival rate. It was a god-awful grind (and I used free xp for the last 7-8k of it) which I am not anxious to repeat. "But it might have helped that I went up the IJN BB line first, where you have to angle all the time or you're gone." This sounds like excellent advice. I have completed the grind in Kongo (as a by-product of doing the BB missions for the Kamikaze R challenge). I was more effective in that ship (52% win rate and 36k avg damage), but still didn't enjoy the "all or nothing" element of the play.

Yes. It's also been promised in a Q & A session on the RU Forum. QUOTE Q. When will you release tier 5-6 premium ships, what nations? A. We have many plans, during all this year, we will release premiums around those tiers, there's even a French ship. END-QUOTE Post #1040 in thread: "Some interesting info from RU" http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/31444-some-interesting-info-from-ru/page__st__1020#topmost

Some of the worst offenders even fly the famous pirate flag - the black skull-and-crossbones flag!

A matter for discussion, I think. The Mogami is certainly not performing as well as it used to, according to the Warships Today stats - but it is not the worst. Here is the data showing ALL battles, data from the last two weeks, and the difference in average damage. Ship All Battles Win % Av Damage 2 weeks Win % Av Damage Damg Diff Mikhail Kutuzov 69,962 53% 36,963 9,025 55% 40,974 4,011 Atago 621,723 48% 33,864 28,946 54% 40,148 6,284 Mogami 422,985 52% 42,262 24,795 52% 35,695 -6,567 Admiral Hipper 156,926 51% 34,692 23,181 51% 34,493 -199 New Orleans 267,096 49% 31,970 18,093 50% 32,172 202