_Flyto_

Saw a dead ship spinning around upside down for the first time last night

This small difference is very probably experimental error.

The ships are scaled up, but that doesn't have any bearing on the speed of things if we're working with "real-world" metres. IF the ships are scaled by the same factor as the speeds (which I'm not sure about), then one could argue that another way of looking at it, which is nicely consistent but perhaps harder to gets one's head around, is simply that metres in the game are five times larger than usual except when reported to the user, and that islands are tiny :-)

If the torp covers 8km in 51 seconds, 8000/51 = 157 m/s. Divide this by 60 to give 1 knot = 2.61 m/s, in game world. In reality, 1 knot = 0.51 m/s. 2.61 / 0.51 = 5ish. (it's actually a bit over, but either that's down to measurement error or WG haven't used a nice round number) If you prefer to work in km/h, then since there are 3600 seconds in an hour, 8 * (3600/51) = 565 km/h (not 44 km/hr as you said). Divide by 60 and 1 knot = 9.4 km/h In reality, 1 knot = 1.85 km/h. 9.4 / 1.85 = 5ish.

That's almost exactly 5x reality. So looks like knots are 5x too fast in game, not 6x as I had understood.

I have never bought permanent camo on any ship, yet now I seem to have it on at least Fubuki, Kagero and Yugomo. Possibly also Hatsuharu, I haven't checked. This is very nice, but I don't think it was meant to happen? But do we get to keep it? Would be a generous gesture :-)

I'm liking the Yugumo. It seems to be what the Kagero should have been all along. And Kagero is more comfortable at T8 than it ever was at 9. I can't figure out how to play the new T6 Fubuki, though. It has really poor concealment now (6.8km with camo). This means that it gets outspotted by the US destroyers, as well as outgunned by them[1], outturned by them, and outrun by them. If one spots you they can run you down and demolish you, and while the answer to this might be "stay at range", you have no control over this because of said concealment problem. Feels *very* uncomfortable trying to cap in this ship. Am I missing something here? [1] Actually, the Fubuki's guns are pretty nice for T6 in terms of the number and power of them, but the standard IJN DD turret turn problem means you can't shoot back at an enemy DD and dodge their shots very effectively.

Wow - before I can get home from work and update, there's an update to the modpack! Thanks as ever to Aslain and all the mod maintainers.

Getting bored of saying this, but SCHARNHORST IS NOT A BATTLECRUISER. Scharnhorst is almost the opposite of a battlecruiser - historically BCs had battleship armament without their armour; Scharnhorst has battleship armour without their armament.

Based on the "I haven't played her since open beta" criteria, I suspect. Opinions of Colorado are deeply polarised, and I'm pretty sure it's because she was originally horrible, and was later fixed to be a rather nice ship, and the people who hated her before haven't played her since or realised that they're criticising a ship that doesn't really exist any more. EDIT: To be fair, some people hate her and all the other US superdreadnoughts because of the low speed... and that's fair enough, but it's not unique to Colorado, and it's something that some of us don't mind :-)

Hmm. I don't know what people like Flamu were told privately, but what I remember reading from WG somewhere wasn't that they were planning a "gunboat" and a "torpedo boat" line, but that they wanted one line to be about close-in stealth, and the other to be about longer-range standoff shelling and torping. I can see the merit in that, as it's two different ways that I found of playing the T8 Fubuki (with the second being all that worked for me before I had a 15-point captain). But for that to work well you sort of need long range torps, and ideally good enough concealment for useful invisifiring. And since WG seem to dislike any torps of more than 10km range now, and the Hatsuharu-replacement seems to have concealment that is too poor for either of those roles.... with such a large spotting range i'd have expected a RoF buff or something to push it into the latter role, but apparently not. *shrug* wouldn't be the first time WG had an idea and screwed up its implementation

Yeah - I, and many others, free-XPed away the stock hull on Colorado. But folk may not want to do that with Missouri incoming.... Your priorities should probably be to ditch the stock hull and buy the range upgrade - then she becomes quite a nice ship.

They don't seem to be setting out to change the premiums, but I do have trepidation that the nerfs to the guns and the torps may affect all ships - including the premiums - that use those gun and torp types, depending on whether there is such a thing as a "torp type" internally or whether it's handled on a per-ship basis. I hope I'm wrong; we'll find out tomorrow.

It's neither of those. I exclusively use Q and E in this game, and on the rare occasions that this happens the rudder shift indicator moves - it's just that the ship doesn't respond. (guessing the indicator is client-side?)

How generous! I'm _Flyto_ and I'd like an Arizona :-)

For the doubters, this 40-sec video shows the problem nicely. It shows two demonstrations - the first when things work correctly, the second when it goes wrong and you're left sitting in the open, stationary, wondering why your smoke is a few hundred metres behind you. Which is embarassing, as well as usually fatal ;-) It's probably a bug, or it might be an unintended effect of something to do with smoke deployment triggers/thresholds that was fine with longer smoke durations but doesn't work for the RN... either way it needs fixing.

Amen. Has led to more Belfast deaths than I can count.

Meh. If you're going to get into a slugging match, you want to do it angled and facing away from the enemy - because 2/3 of your firepower is at the back! Agreed, though, that this ship (and the Kongo) is all about situational awareness and being in the right place at the right time. You have much bigger shells than anything else at that tier, and if you can put them in the right place (tricky, with the guns...) they pack quite a punch! If hunted by a destroyer, my advice would simply be to turn and run - T3-4 destroyers don't have much of a speed advantage over you, and even T5 ones may give up and pick on somebody else :-)

IIRC (and it's been a while), game knots are six times faster than real ones. As others have noted, speeds given in m/s scale differently to speeds given in knots. I think they are still sped up, but not as much. Ships are also something like five times too big (check out the 1km-long star destroyers^W^Wbattleships), but that's probably less of an issue for what you're trying to calculate.

This weekend has a discount on XP -> Free XP conversion. This would tie in really nicely with the upcoming USS Missouri, which we're told will be sold for free XP... but unless I've missed it somewhere, we've had no confirmation from WG of how many free XP it will cost. Errrr.

It would seem an odd choice if so. Sure, some people might convert lots on the off-chance, but many more are likely to be reluctant. If I knew how much XP was needed I'd work out the cost and make a choice based on that. Without knowing, I shall likely ignore the discount (and be far less likely to buy a Missouri when it does come out, since it will be ~42% more expensive).

Hmm. Obviously this is situational, but on most maps I had most success with Myogi by getting in close - because with just six rather inaccurate guns, at long range I failed to hit anything! I found that the trick was to use islands so that the only ship with a line of sight is the one you want to kill... kill it, then move...

If I were ever prepared to pay for the permenant camos, then I would definitely be buying now for two-for-the-price-of-one :-) Still think they're too massively overpriced, though.

You are confusing the purpose of the "increasing amounts of XP". You are thinking "I've invested more time, I should get a greater reward". Wargaming are thinking "diminishing returns" - or, a way for people with limited time to play to get something without wrecking the economy by giving those who play more too much free stuff.