Capra76

Gotta say I don't like this map (in the Konig anyway). It feels like an incredibly campy map that keeps both teams away from each other then the moment you try anything remotely aggressive you end up being focused and wiped out. Maybe it's just me, is there a way to play this map?

Babykim, on 10 October 2016 - 11:06 AM, said: 2. The RN cruisers are still being tested. They appear to have found an interesting niche for them. So version 3, subject to a bit of balancing, seems to be the final version and I would guess will be with us in the next few weeks.

Are there any resources that give tips about optimal strategy and how to play particular maps or any other expert level tactical resources?

Good question, some possible answers: DD didn't have the range, even the late ones are limited to ~5,000 nm and the earlier ones much less; most BB were built when radio was in its infancy so controlling huge numbers of DD would've been problematic; it would've been incredibly costly in terms of manpower; early DD struggled in heavy seas; torpedoes were still a fairly new weapon; just a few guesses, there may be others. I suppose you could make a case that the RN would actually have been better off in WWII without it's newer BB but with many more DD.

Or why not realistic DD numbers, how about games with 1 BB and 50+ DD?

Also I suspect a 3 BB cap would make the number of players wanting to play BB even larger. The only thing that can really hurt a BB at the moment is another BB, if you cap them and especially if you cap DD as well then you're severely limiting the threats to them, so why would you want to play anything else?

Ok, but note that Iowa is still in first place on T9 with Yamato in a close second in T10, and that's despite the T7/8 KM BB players being likely to be overwhelmingly existing Iowa/Yamato players grinding the new line.

But then the reason why there's so much rock about is because paper has been nerfed into the ground so we now have a game of rock-scissors, which rock will always win.

That's not quite true, there was quite a lot of design work done on 8" CA by the RN once war broke out and Trainspite did mention a few possible designs in his RN Tech Tree thread, also the 13 County class ships were comparable in number to the IJN although unhelpfully they're all of the same class, which obviously makes building a line out of them problematic. Anyway, I think my point was that if everything at T9/10 is fantasy then it kind of is WG's fault if they can't make it work.

I'm curious, but did anyone except the US build cruisers at the end game level?

Still down

Moskva has the best turning circle of any T10 CA and is probably the only ship that really benefits from this module, but why the best performing ship needs a buff that that the others can't benefit from I don't know.

With KM secondary guns and hydro-acoustic? That could be painful.

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit (Russell Brand excepted obviously).

The thing about the smoke is it's going to cover a very small area (just one puff AFAIK) that lasts a good amount of time, but it'll be very difficult to use for smoke firing being an incredibly tempting target for torpedoes and probably very difficult to use for escape as well. I'm not sure they're any further forward with version 3, the whole concept of an Atlanta style cruiser minus HE at T9/10 just doesn't make any sense.

The rumours for version 3 are: smoke is back but in a more limited form; engine boost gone; AP damage is back to where it was originally; ballistics back to where they were originally, i.e. even worse than version 2, which was terrible; 40% heal consumable remains but in a slightly different form; still no HE; so essentially it's back to the original concept, with HE gone and smoke heavily nerfed but a more powerful repair consumable.

I think the more significant factor is that IJN were designed for relatively short range local operations whilst Us ships were designed for much longer range long endurance work, so the strength of the US ships was they carried a lot more fuel, had longer lasting gun barrels and I would guess better crew accommodation making them more comfortable ships to operate, but none of that is modeled in the game. As a simple example Yamato had a range of 7,200 nm but the Iowas could travel almost 15,000 nm, you see a similar thing with KM/RN, the German ships were designed to sail around in the north Atlantic, the British ones were designed to sail to Australia.

10 or 12 guns firing 150 shots per minute would be pretty unique, in fact the question is how to balance that. The way it seems to be going is they are balancing ROF with "freedom" ballistics so they could be devastating at close range but unable to hit anything beyond 12 km, which is fine in principle but the problem is that the ships that are performing well are the long range snipers and the ones that can't pull off that trick are suffering.

Tip: DD cannot cap alone, they need heavy firepower to scare away the things that would do them harm. Tip 2: the enemy BB are most likely as eager to stay at distance as you are, if you're going forwards they're probably going backwards.

I saw a post on another site that said it took 3 seconds to deploy, which implies only a single puff, your post said "you can only cast a cloud of smoke" (my emphasis) which perhaps would be better translated as "only cast one cloud of smoke" because "only cast many" wouldn't make a great deal of sense. But it's Google Translate so............. Doesn't MK have something similar? I don't have any real experience of that but, based on other posts, it could be viable with hydro-acoustic and engine modification 2, if the cloud is big enough to give you some room to maneuver.

RU DD are top in terms of WR and damage in most cases, but ignoring them and just focusing on IJN/USN I'd say T8+ USN DD are definitely better, T6/7 is pretty equal maybe with a slight edge to USN, T5 and lower is IJN territory.

The problem is you only get one bubble of smoke rather than the ability to lay a continuous screen about 1 km long, which is going to make anyone firing from it an incredibly tempting target for anyone with torpedoes, which is to say almost everyone, also I suspect it won't be too hard to score gun hits against anyone sitting in there as well.

The details for version 3 of the line are on the info from Russia thread: speed boost is gone and smoke is back, but in a much weaker form; damage repair remains but is now 2% for 20 seconds (so developers still think this needs to be able to regenerate up to 200% of its health to be competitive - worrying); the developers have addressed the gun ballistics that worried us by making them worse; AP damage is back to where it was originally; shell "hardness" (Krupp?) is 2,672 (is that good or bad?); armour "file back to the original thickness and crispy" (does that mean they've nerfed it?); I don't really know what to make of this.

I'd rather not name the broadcaster since he/she was sailing on the edge of their NDA. Co-incidentally I did end up against Jingles sailing an Amagi a few weeks back, he ended up top of his team with I think a confederate award, we won, I sucked.

That's fair enough, but I'm not sure why they didn't integrate the heavies into the current line with the intention of splitting the lines in future. As far as I can see the major (i.e. mostly complete) lines to come (after RN CL) are: KM DD RN DD, BB and CV RM DD, CA/CL and BB MN DD, CA/CL and BB USN CL which at the rate of 2 or 3 lines per year, together with pure fantasy VMF BB and maybe CV should comfortably take us beyond 2020, and that's far enough in the future that I'll worry about it when I get there.