Shirakami_Kon

In the supposed case this tech tree would become available I think WG could also rework the XP needed for each captain point and allow a few more points cap. + 2/3 points or something like that because that 9999999 points in the end just look ridiculous. If they don't want to give captains a higher point cap then just put a limit to the XP they can get and at some point they just stop earning XP and points for skills, but that 9999999 XP needed for the last point it's just ridiculous.

I don't know how you can't play for fun, unless you get paid for playing, which would be awesome if you like what you play. That said... I play for fun, always. But I see a difference between that and being an idiot, perfect example, the omnipresent ship in Two Brothers that decides to go through the channel. You'll always die doing that at the start of the match, everyone knows, and yet someone always try it and die in less than five minutes? What fun is that? I don't know. I don't care that much about stats, I try to always improve and try to get higher things like my win rate, average damage and stuff like that, but at the end of the day that doesn't mean I play for fun since I'm not the best player around, I'm just happy to not suck at the game and I don't have to demonstrate nothing to anyone, but at least I try not to ruin the match for everyone else.

Wouldn't you miss the "if you press T you can seen the other players stats" message coming from the enemy team?

Yeah, I know, I aimed at the waterline. Still overpen.

I thought wind alone intensified fire, not extinguish it... Wouldn't that actually make hard to extinguish the fire and maybe even spread it more on the ship IRL?

I really like those 4x4 guns on Akizuki, they look promising, I'd like to see her as a gun boat. At least that was what I thought until out of curiosity I looked her in wikipedia and saw that the max speed she gets it's 33 knots. 33 knots for a DD in tier 8 it's... horrendous, I mean... she'll face T7 Gneisenaus that reach 32 knots, that's just 1 knot less... and that's a BB! All other DDs are going to be way faster that Akizuki, Atago reaches 35'5 knots, Mogami 34'5, Chapayev 33'5, still faster, the only T8 cruiser slower that Akizuki will be the New Orleans with 32'5, half knot slower. With just 1 torp launcher Akizuki won't be an effective stealth torp ambusher, even if she can do that, because of just 4 torps per salvo, so her main point must be the guns, but with that speed... I see a sever problem for her. Of course, there's ways around it, she could use the terrain to her advantadge, islands and such, and shoot behind them, but what I mean is that she won't be a good gunboat in open water, because she will get spotted and will have a hard time disengaging from battles like any other gunboat that could just stop firing and run away from there with a good speed. Akizuki seems to be going to lack so much speed to do that role efectively.

Meh, I think the RN CLs are going to distract some playerbase from the German BBs (and thank god for that, because the BB spam is real, weakened thanks to the DD mission now, but yes...). There's going to be a RN CL spam the first days, obviously, but I don't see that being as much as with German BBs, I like cruisers myself, I played almost half of my battles with them, but from the stats that were "leaked" if those are true I don't expect those to have an underwhelming presence, even with the smoke. They seemed to be cruisers with damp paper for "armor", which may be good these day to survive just getting overpens from everything, since today I played Minekaze and found an Omaha at 5 km from me, full broadside, I launched torps and thank god for that, because at that range I "unleashed the tremendous 120 mm AP" of my BB Minekaze, and just like one, I only got overpens that made me regret the idea of "at that range I can citadel that thing, right? Right??". Well, nope. So I expect RN CL and their extremely paper thin armor to get wrecked but they may even last longer in battle because of that instead. Who knows. I don't know what exactly will happen with the RN CL, but for now I'm not really looking forward for them because of the speculated armor they have, and maybe there's more people like me, so I don't expect them to become the same as German BBs and have that much spam when they arrive and even if they do I don't think they'll unbalance anything by any means, even if all of them get smoke, because yes, one may think at first that that would be OP, but I actually think it's gonna be a problem of everyone, specially for them, because... We'll get the usual smoke from DDs. And the one from those new CLs. So what I expect it's such amount of smoke that no one's see s*it. And trying to fire under they're smoke it's the last think I thing those CLs are going to be allowed to do. People knows to look from where the shells come out from smoke and they're not tiny BBs, so they're gonna get murdered if they do that, and let's not talk about the smoke torpedo magnet.

Flooding, while you can get set on fire multiple times and more consistently than floods I think floods are worse, because you can kind of prevent being set constantly on fire not rushing the enemy team suicide mode and looking the minimap so you can at least use that to not found you out of position alone surrounded by enemy ships. Floods though... yeah, they're not as common as fires, but the speed penalty it's annoying, also, I'm not sure but a single flood seems to inflict more damage than a single fire, add those things together and you are forced to use your repair to end the flood of your ship. With BBs specially, you can just let a single fire just burn and then heal again, but floods are way more annoying. As for seaborne or airborne... While not 100% efficient, you can dodge seaborne torps by just knowing to push WASD properly, airborne torps... depends on the CV player, the disparity of players seem to be quite huge, you can get the typical CV player that auto drops torps and they are just like regular seaborn torps, as easy to dodge or even more than those, or you can get the "technical" CV player, cross dropping you perfectly, so... I say airborne are more dangerous because of the second type of CV player.

After I think it's more than half a year not touching DDs, after reading the new IJN DDs split I decided to get XP with my Minekaze for when the new DDs come out, and while not impressive results at all I had a lot of fun with my forth battle. It's seems it's easy to clean the rust of IJN DDs or something. Also I get the almost legendary T5 battle against some poor T4s, which may have some influence on, omg, being able to even shoot a few shells with and IJN DDs and winning the battle caping against 4 enemy ships. (No Solo Warrior though, a shame, would actually been my first one, FINALLY, but seems to still be bugged).

Yes, I know, but since OP asked for flags for XP too I said that too. Anyways I tend to use the XP flags on really low tier ships, for example when reserching the new german BBs, I had free XP to free XP the Nassau, though I heard it's OP at tier 3 I get bored at those really low tiers, and I use the XP flags to accelerate the research of Kaiser, and currently on König (even if I'll keep König, that ship's too good), I'll start to thing about stopping to use them on the Bayern to start to get more credits for buying the next ships though.

+30% DPS for the AA guns when you manually select a target for them, as said above. If you have captain skills then you can add that too, but you can get that bonus even with a captain with 0 skills.

That's because of the fantastic MM improvement that came with the last patch (maybe patches? I don't know which one exactly, but a pretty recent one). Everything's working as intended.

You can also play random battles, GET flags for more XP and credits and USE them there too so you can get rich. (At least at some tiers).

And he bragged about that? Lol. Not that I have played that much T10 myself, but ina Yamato I wouldn't "defend" myself by saying I did just 120k damage with that ship. Now, back on topic, yes there are a lot of people that ony think about damage. I'll admit, I do that to when I see that I got a team that it's just getting wrecked, when I see that my team starts to have a 5/6 ships dissadvantadge, if I haven't died yet that much I tend to charge in, deal as much possible damage as I can before dying, and get all the xp and credits I can before losing instead of just hide and do nothing. That said, I'll never ever complain about DDs holding their fire wile trying to cap an area or if their low HP so they try to get some stealth torps and try to keep contributing for the team instead of just keep shooting and just getting sunk when they can still do some more work. I'll be the first one to point at someone that's just being coward, but each situation should be considered apart from the others. And I'd like to see the damage done by each player of the match, because yeah, it would encourage some people to just care about damage, but it's also true that there's always players that just hang back, how many times have you seen the "typical" low tier IJN DD that when all the other DDs in his team are dead stops pushing and capping and retreats and just hangs back? They don't help the team anymore and just hang back, being almost pointless because a lot of players still think that if they survive the battle they'll get better results for themselves (mostly credits) that if they fight and get sunk. Seeing the damage done would show that, while you still have to have situational awareness, if you manage to deal more damage, you get better results in xp, and credits, even if you get sunk and I think it would reduce this "oh, I'm hurt, I'll just retreat for this match" since it would show that if you keep fight and dealing more damage anyways you'll get way better results which also would make some people (because there's obviously the one who will hang back anyways) that will lose that fear to taking damage, specially on BBs, which are the ones that need more to loose that fear to getting shot at and are actually the ones that can gaing more and more easily profit out of losing that fear. Overall I think it would help the community of this game showing that dealing damage actually helps you, even if there's going to be fanatics of stats, obviously, which we have already anyways.

A few days ago while playing with my König I saw a nice, perfect broadside Aoba at 10 km from me and I though "Look at that, guess who's going to get wrecked", a few moments later after getting a perfect hit in the citadel area except for the fact that I was so greedy that part of my salvo hit the water for aiming a bit too low at the waterline I was rewarded by three overpens (common thing this days) but... BUUUUUUT... 3 bounces, from an Aoba giving almost a perfect broadside if not completely perfect. I'm getting used with this new thing of getting penetrations that deal 0 damage, but bouncing shells of an Aoba giving broadside is beyond me, but well, maybe it's working as intended.

I once shot HE at a DD, I was using my manly Imperator, at a Clemson I think, 8 shells landed, I wrecked all the guns, torpedo launchers of the side of the DD I shot, the engine and the rudder, all at the same time, full combo. But because of that the DD itself took 0 damage, and you know what the little piece of scrap did? He used the repair, regained everything because nothing was perma-destroyed and followed the battle like if nothing had happened at all. At that time I told to myself that I'll never again use HE with a BB against a DD. AP may just deal overpens, but at least that's damage, I don't care about breaking DDs pew pews or the so mighty torp launchers, I want the DDs dead. So the next salvo was AP, again 8 shells (the DD was about 5/6 km, so easy shot). Deleted. That was around a month and I've been shooting AP at everything no matter what it is in BBs and so far I find BBs AP against DDs way more effective than HE, sure, they're all overpens, but the overpen damage hurts quite hard DDs considering their HP pool. I remember deleting between 12-15 DDs almost full HP that dared to come around 6 km to my BBs so I can land a decent accurate shot on them with AP.

Well, yes, the problem with that, which has been discussed many times already, is that this game can't be considered a real simulator, so don't expect things like range of guns, AA armaments ans such thing to be historical. I know some BBs had secondary guns ranges of around that, but expecting that ingame... There are problems to find balance between all ship classes to add that too to the problem.

Since when did the secondaries maximum range has been 15 km? AFAIK with all the range upgrades for secondaries and captain perks the longest range for secondaries in the game it's around 10'6 km for Yamato and Bismarck.

I'm sure Skybuck it's a better player than all of us joined together. I mean, he's capable of playing this game with that lag and grafics. I find more strange his capability of playing the game like that than the problem he points out with the torp. The day this guy gets a computer which can handle the game in the required performance any other of us mortals needs to play the game he will destroy all 12 enemy ships by himself. I just hope he doesn't because of that.

Back when I started playing, 155 Mogami wasn't nerfed that bad still and was the only reason I started researching the IJN cruiser line, and reached Mogami late, so I know that feeling. As for your case, I don't own Iowa or Montana, I just got to New Mexico on the way to Colorado, but from the stats on paper I really agree with what Tyredian89 said. As I said earlier, I don't own Iowa or Montana to make my own comparisons, but on paper, now Montana is now unusable,she can work pretty well in good hands, even with just knowing what you're doing (at least I played Iowa and Montana on public test server, but well, the battles there are way too different from the real guns since nobody cares about repair cost because you have infinite creditsand everyone rushes the center to the map and everything becomes a pirate style battle). But yes, for me just from raw stats it seems as Tyredian said, Yamato has tremendous guns, Kürfurst has insane close range armor and yes, Montana has insane AA, but how things are now that's the most irrelevant aspect of those three so Montana it's the BB that shines less now at tier 10.

Very good sugestions, the only problem I see is that while I strongly agree that the Fire prevention skill (and even the module) need to stop being [edited] garbage we would need to adjust the buff of that with a buff for Demolition expert, because as it is now, Fire prevention is as worth as air supremacy in a BB captain, it feels like it does absolutely nothing to the point that you prefer the ridiculous buff that expert marksman gives to the big guns a BB has, even if that skill is intended for DDs or very low tier cruisers, because if for two captain point you reduce the fire chance per shell you recive to 3%, with Demolition expert as it works would mean that only the people who spend 4 captain points of that gets a 6% chance no matter what, that would make BBs to OP, almost fireproof and Demolition expert would jump from one of the bets skills in it's row to the new Fire prevention skill as it is now. As an idea to improve Fire prevention but balance it with Demolition expert would be... Yes, please make the % bonus of Fire prevention additive, not multiplicative, but buff Demolition expert acordingly. For example: let's say that Fire Prevention becomes a raw -3/4% to the chance of fire of the shell that hits you, that would make the skill quite good already, almost certainly even a no brainer skill and help every type of ship, not only BBs, but since you could get that skill very easily (just two points) Demolition expert should be buffed to compensate for that skill and get a bonus. My idea would buff Demolition Expert to +6% chance of fire. That way Demolition expert would compensate for the "new" Fire prevention skill and still retain it's actual bonus which should retain, especially because you have to invest 4 captain point on that, which is not as easy as just two for Fire Prevention. I see flaws in my idea, for example, with my idea people who doesn't get the Fire Prevention skill would have to deal with a +6% additive boost to fire from the cruisers and DDs that get that skill, but well, take my idea as some sort of "template" to what I try to say, not that literally, those two skills are quite hard to compensate and need quite the time of thought to how to do it, but anyways, Fire prevention and the module for fire chance reduction needs a serious rework, because how they are now they are just worthless. I don't know anyone who uses Fire prevention skill or notices a difference in case of doing so, and BBs use the fire and flooding module because at least the flooding reduction seems to me that it's additive (not sure though, but I think it is) and because BBs get absolutely nothing from preventing damage to their engine or rudder so that module it's pretty worthless too.

I hate that too, but yeah, the thing is that you can do pretty well in a match and still lose the match if the rest of the team don't do his part and that is what really reflects the win rate, if you AND your team did well, you need the effort of all 12 players of your team to increase the win rate, not just yours.

Good, good... Keep up the good work hiding the potential of those two, specially the Scharnhost, we must keep they thinking it's a useless toy so they are even more exposed to us. Don't let them ever know they can do more damage that the others.

I corrected that already, I was writing quick, so I made a mistake there.

Yes, win rate has nothing to do with the ship being good or bad, you're just 1 out of 12 players in each battle you get in, so win rate not only depends on you, depends on what you can do to help your team, but also depends on the work the rest of the teams you get do too.