Capra76

Doesn't Neptune get 10 km torps as stock? I know that Edinburgh goes from 8 km to 10 km with the upgrade so I'd be surprised to find that Neptune has stock torpedoes that are worse than hers.

Grind essential modules in co-op up to T5, T6/7 can be done in operations, T8 can just about be ground in co-op and save your free XP for T9/10 where the economy makes co-op punnishingly expensive. Also bear in mind that the module grind and captain re-training happen at the same time, so co-op is a bit of a 2 for 1 deal.

If PT is anything to go by, it should be do-able with any T8+ cruiser, or even BB, but there are some four star missions reserved for the USN that make it a bit easier.

The campaign is a lot easier on the PT server, normally no more than 2 or 3 co-op matches per stage; there is however a bug with the final mission for stage 3 where you have to earn 30,000 XP (it should be 3,000).

It's still a bug, and 4-6 random games is still the better part of 2 hours play to get past it when it's supposed to be one game in random. Also, what happens when the developers stick an extra "0" on the end of all the requirements for the live server and you end up with "earn 300,000 XP"?

There's a bit of a bug in the "hit hard" campaign, the final mission for part 3 is to earn 30,000 XP whereas I assume for PT this was supposed to be 3,000.

The sound doesn't seem to be right, too quiet, no engine noice etc.

A song for BB players (especially in RN T7 premium BB): The Grand Old Duke of York, he had ten thousand men, he marched them up to the edge of the map, then he camped there and did aii;. and when there were DD he would camp, and when there were CV he would camp, and when there were neither of those he was too far away to do anything usefull at all...........

Really, more fundamentally, the problem is the whole XP system in the game. Damage is all that is rewarded, so players farm damage and to hell with playing the game and the thing is, this works.

I think those things do give XP, but the amount is pitiful compared to what you might see from a badly aimed salvo off a BB. Capping XP IMO in general has been over-nerfed to the point where it's barely worthwhile anymore.

Wouldn't this make the game-play even more about dmg/XP farming and even less about playing the objectives? Risk v reward? Take an uncontested cap away from the action and hold it for the game = massive risk free profit; take a high risk contested cap and see it flipped shortly after = little or no reward. Also, this means that your XP reward becomes dependent upon your teams actions in defending the cap, which introduces a conflict with your earlier ideas, since if you're playing to finish in the top 3 you don't want your DD picking up XP from holding a cap.

3 stars is easy, 5 is challenging unless you luck out with your team. 9/10 times the ships will break through into the base before the main attack starts. AFAICS you need your team and cruisers especially in a position where they can cross-fire into the third wave, the problem is that they get dragged towards the second wave or otherwise sit too far back and take too long to re-position so you get isolated and focused down, which can then turn a 3 point victory into a defeat. There might be some mileage in sitting out the second wave and camping south of the island in H6 so that you're in position to destroy the third wave as they go past whilst having cover from most of them.

Is the double catapult fighter worth considering as an alternative?

XP from capping has been nerfed into the ground, what else is there other than DMG?

With Montana/Conq, the module is in slot 5 so WG clearly want to move them away from the stealth BB build, but since that's so powerful it has to be a very significant buff somewhere else.