_Flyto_

If he's a good player, you can't do anything. All that you can really try is trying to lure his fighters into an engagement with your fighter squadron while your torpedo bombers attack elsewhere on the map - but he probably won't fall for this more than once!

Well, there are official videos, FAQs, etc stating that the turning circle does not decrease at low speed. I certainly haven't noticed it decrease (although if you haven't started turning, you travel less distance in the rudder shift time, so going slower does make it easier to avoid islands. The slight sideways drift that ships have at high speed may also contribute). Yes, this is very odd. I'd love it if things were realistic, and in particular if different sea states affected different ships differently - not necessarily making aiming hard, but slowing small ships, affecting visibility for ships with low mastheads, that sort of thing.

It's not quite that bad - with the range upgrade module (I forget what it's called) the B or C gets 17.something km, which is about as far as I can maintain accuracy at anyway There's a spotter plane for the rare occasions when 20km is useful! The New Mex A-hull is horrible (it's WW1 vintage), but I think the Fuso's is even worse, so...

I would have said "Omaha", but there's that annoying T6+ restriction. That makes me think "US and Russian destroyers". Sadly I don't have any of those, and I'm currently trying to hunt DDs in my Cleveland.... which doesn't turn quite fast enough to be safe from torps, and is a bit too visible to everybody else on the map to be safe from... everybody else on the map, when concentrating on hitting that minekaze ;-) I sort of like the idea of keeping HE in the Warspite and going DD-hunting, though, just for the surprise factor

Yeah. As I said, I wasn't too disappointed by Minekaze -> Mutsuki... but I've just got a Hatsuharu, and I'm going "huh?". The traverse rate is down again, and the whole thing is slower, less nimble and less stealthy... and for what? A bigger gun calibre and two more barrels, but only if I can actually get them on target.

My take on it (as somebody who does just-about-OK with DD and BB, but sucks at CLs), is that cruisers are the most unforgiving class of mistakes. If you screw up in a battleship you have some health and some heals - you may not survive the second mistake, but you'll probably get away with the first one. If you screw up in a destroyer (mostly meaning that you get spotted when you didn't plan to), you have speed, manoeuvrability and smoke to get out of the situation. If you screw up in a cruiser, you get sunk. Or I do, at any rate

I did, thanks, despite failing to hit anything in most of my games *blush* Will hopefully be back again soon, if you'll have me.

I don't appear to have permission to join any channel. (At least, any of the ones that I tried). Am I missing something? ;)

hmm, OK, might show up tonight. What sort of time are people usually on?

How... competetive are y'all? I'd like to play with people on TS, but I'm not all that good, so I don't want to be with people who are going to rage at mistakes! Plus, I can't commit to regular nights or anything. Would I fit?

This may be controversial, but I actually prefer the Mutsuki to the Minekaze - although not by much. It's better for stealth torping, because you have a much wider gap between max range and spotting distance (though don't try actually shooting from 10km most of the time). In this scenario the reload time isn't a major problem - it usually takes most of that time to position for the next shot. When the fish hit (which is admittedly a bit rarer because of their lower speed), they do more damage. Because of the wider margin for stealth launches, I get accidentally revealed far less often in the Mutsuki, allowing me to keep control of the engagement. If I *do* get spotted, well, that's the time that the longer reload hurts. It's much harder to spam torpedoes at close range. On the other hand, for the first time in the IJN tree, the upgraded Mutsuki has guns that turn, and can actually shoot back at things. I still won't go up against a USN or Russian destroyer if I can help it, but at least in the Mutsuki I can return fire and have a chance - a good chance, if my opponent is also Japanese. The Minekaze was a wonderful ship. I think that the Mutsuki is also good, but requires a more considered, strategic, style, where going the whole game without being spotted is often the aim. That's probably not for everybody, but I like it a lot. (EDIT: Also, with the stock torps it's horrible. I wouldn't blame anybody for free-XPing that upgrade)

As an alternative, don't bother with a 4-point skill at all (at least at first), and get two 3-pointers: Superintendent and... the one that reduces the cooldown on damage control. I don't have a Kongo yet, but that's been my approach on US BBs - all about survivability.

Pret Pretty sure it's a bug.

Agreed that a fighter would be more useful most of the time. Except on the Warspite ;-) But, (fortunately?) we don't get a choice there!

That's true, but it also makes it really hard to tell whether you *can* hit a target over an island. The number of times, using the spotter, I click on a visible target and my shells hit the hill in between us.... Some kind of indicator would be lovely.

I've only recently unlocked the Furutaka, but so far I'm loving it.

My take on this, in summary: WG is designing a good game first of all, and this trumps accuracy - but historical parameters are used as "inspiration", to suggest the directions that the ships go in. It's good that different navies have different design directions to their ships - if they all played the same, why would I bother using ships from more than one country? That means that specific comparisons of ships will appear "unbalanced" (for instance, if I go up against a US destroyer in a same-tier Japanese one, I'll finish on the seabed more often than not), but that doesn't mean that they don't balance well in the broader scope of the game.

This probably isn't something the forum can help with - you should contact technical support.

It's worth pushing through to the upgraded hull as fast as possible. It's not shown anywhere, but the hull upgrade improves your range. With that and the better FCS you can shoot to 14km, at which point it actually becomes quite a nice ship to play (and fairly similar in feel to the New York that comes after).

Abuse aside, still nobody has answered the original question about the acceleration module. I suspect that nobody actually knows (although plenty of people know the answer to a different question, and are very keen to give it). If I ever have the spare cash lying around for a million-credit module (currently saving for a New Mex instead), I'll test it and report back....

IJN battleships get good from T5. USN ones arguably do from T4. You won't get much less than a 30 second reload - that's one of the characteristics of battleships - but it's less painful when you have more than 3 turrets.

I'd actually consider this for the ship + premium time.... except, AIUI, premium time starts when you buy it, with no "click to activate"? So most of it would be wasted on time that I'm away from my PC visiting family over Christmas.....

I really don't understand all these many threads saying that ranked battles should be rewarded based on individual performance. AFAICS the main difference of ranked compared to random battles is that xp-earning actions don't matter so much, and *winning* is the focus. It should (and does, in my limited[1] experience) promote better map awareness and better teamplay. Sure, sometimes you'll lose matches despite playing well, due to an awful team. That happens. But on average, over many games, if you are better than the others at that rank then you will win more than you lose, because your contribution to all those teams is above-average for the rank. I can understand the frustration in seeing a star taken away, but rather than being upset about individual stars, far better to focus on the net gain (or loss) over 20+ matches. [1] I'm stuck at Rank 10 because I don't have any ships above T6, but I would find it strange if the noticeably better team-play in the lower ranks is absent from the presumably-better players above that.

If you can get 35fps, I'm not really seeing the problem? (except that you'd like things to be prettier, which is fair enough, but doesn't stop you from playing)

I'm struggling to understand the reasoning here for thinking the DD must be close. Multiple salvos of torpedos in quick succession? Either he has many tubes (perhaps one of the ships that spins to fire both sides) or a short reload time. Distance makes no difference. Short time that the torps are visible before they hit? Nothing to do with the range that they're launched from (unless their travel time is less than a couple of seconds, in which case you can see the DD anyway). Consecutive spreads coming from very different directions? *That* would be an indication that the DD is nearby (or that there's more than one, or some planes as well), but you don't mention that at all...