fumtu

Again for a third time, by the time of Cowes action her guns were already replaced with 4inch guns. As, in the game, she is in her original configuration, DFAA will only benefit 2x2 Bofors guns and 4x2 13.2mm heavy machineguns as her 120mm guns were not DP. So basically adding DFAA on current ship is a waste of consumable. I personally think that 4x2 4inch guns at T7 would be way OP. Sure you would need to invest 4pts in IFHE to damage T8/T9 DDs, but even without IFHE, 4inch gun would be able to pen T7 and lower tier DDs, as 102mm guns can pen 16mm which is an armour of T7 DDs. Not that lower tier cruisers have much more armour either.

Did anybody try on PTS to play DDs which don't have DFAA with some captain skill that enhance AA? How good are they against new CVs? Which captain skills now are more relevant for better AA? I watched new Notser video but I would like some other opinions too.

Yes I will. What I won't play are random battles but stick with ranked and scenarios. Luckily this ranks are T9 and as I'm grinding Jutland and Kitakaze this will enable me to continue grinds but avoid randoms until 0.8.1.

Only three lines in the game are composed of ships that were actually build, USN CVs, RN DDs and IJN DDs (classic torpedo line). Majority of T10 and T9 ships were either laid down but never finished, project never started or simple concepts for future ships. T9 is especially bad with Iowa/Missouri and Jean Bart as only RL BBs. Not a single T9 cruiser ever existed, Ibuki was laid down but later converted to CV which was itself never finished. Kronshtadt, being laid down, was actually more real than all other T9 cruisers except Ibuki. DDs are somewhat better as only Z-46, Udaloi and Kitakaze being paper ships. Without paper ships lot of lines would have gaps, some of then quite significant.

Sound like every DD in game. This nothing special for Blyska. Even with PM and Propulsion Modification 1, every hit disable my engine ... or rudder ... or guns ... or torps ... Yup he was consistently up-tiered in T7 over the weekend. Majority in T9-T7 battles. My last couple of games with T7 was similar, quite often in T9 match. Not sure if this is just a bad luck or WG (failed) attempts to improve T8 MM somehow succeeded to make worse T7 instead.

Probably because JB was released long after events in which you could get that camo. Maybe sometime in the future, who knows.

Well if they include US then I don't see what is a problem to include SU. Yes their early war role is quite shameful, but in the end they were part of the Allies. Blyska is not the only ships that have pre-war/early war configuration. Aigle and Gallant both have their original AA, so the Cossack which is T8. Sims AA is early war (represent her AA by the time of her sinking) which mean not quite good as other destroyers of the class had later. So Blyska is not unique in that regard. For a premium ship. I managed to shot down 38 planes with Cossack, with her pathetic 9 AA rating and 2.5km max range on 40mm pom poms. With few exceptions, like Galland (my best is 12 planes with her), with all other you can manage 20-30 planes just by positioning you ship so that your AA could be useful without any additional skills.

So what? WG decided to include both Soviet and US ships, which by the way at that time were both neutral states. They allowed Haida too which by that time wasn't even laid down. Scenario is based on historical event but this is a game not a simulation so I don't see any problem for WG to get a somewhat "relaxed" in that matter. Also there is a difference between premium and silver ships. Premium ship don't always represent the most modern configuration of the ship. On the other side silver ships hull upgrade usually do as they represent a class generally. For example both Icarus and Jervis didn't have 20mm Oerlikon's by that time but you can use them in the scenario.

Well IRL Blykawica did't take part in providing cover for transport ships from Dunkirk, but she was still in her original configuration at that time, with some additional Lewis machine-guns added for more AA. She replaced her 120mm guns with 4inch guns during 1941.

You do understand that action at Cowes happened AFTER she had replaced all her original guns for DP 4inch guns. Her original guns, the ones we have in game, were not dual purpose which means they can't shoot at planes. So only weapons that would benefit from DFAA would be 2x2 Bofors guns and 4x2 13.2mm guns. Only place where DFAA could be useful would be Dynamo Scenario, in randoms it would be useless.

Sorry, but lets be clear here, while SG started as a reward ship for CW, by the time that ship is officially released it stopped to be that as by that time ship was actually moved to Arsenal and was available to anybody with right amount of steel. How will they get that steel is completely different matter. All those ships already received small nerfs by so called global changes. Azuma and Alaska got same fire duration as SG, Musashi and Missouri AP damage to DDs also suffered together with all other BBs, smoke firing penalty also affected Flint and Black too. WG is not targeting only SG, they are targeting all four ships they are calling as "Super Cruisers" so this is just another global change. You may not like it but don't make it to something it isn't.

Wait if you consider changes to AP - DD interaction a nerf to SG than you have to consider the same as nerf to Bourbon as her AP works the same considering their damage to DDs. Also it is not true that it can't pen DDs anymore, it can pen but now only for 10% of full damage.

Her main guns were not dual purpose so all AA comes from 2x2 Bofors guns and 4x2 13.2mm which is noting special. Adding DFAA on that wouldn't benefit her AA much.

Sorry but you can't discard those stats as irrelevant. By those stats Sims, Mahan and Akasuki are three bottom ships no matter do you take top 5% or 10% or general stats. This clearly is showing that those three ships are clearly under-performing compared with others. On the other side, stats shows that with more skilled players Blyska is performing noticeable better. And this should be taken into account when you consider does some ships needs buffs or not or what buffs it actually needs. Just as can't balance something by top 10% you can't also balance something by taking into account only general average stats or less skilled players. I didn't said that WG should buff Blyska, but that buffing her is not as simple as just buffing her DPM as that could make her quite stronger in right hands. There is other way to buff a ship then just increase DPM of it or slapping additional consumable as some suggested.

I think that problem is that when you take general stats Blyska doesn't look good but when you look top 5%, 10% or 25% of players then by average damage she is not far from the top T7 DDs, except of course GM which exceed in every range. So I can understand that WG don't think that she don't needs buffs, especially in DPM department. Maybe some buffs to rudder shift or turret rotation or even faster reload of torps would be sufficient but I think that increasing a gun DPM would be a wrong thing to do.

Guns and concealment are Cossack selling point, not the torps. Any skill point spent on improving torps is a waste point. PT (of PM), LS, AR, SE and CE are must have on Cossack, just on almost any other DD but Soviets. BFT is a next best choice for 3 pts skill. Last four point you could spend on RL or IFHE or DE + PM (or PT depending on which one you choose first). Basically anything that would improve your guns or make them more useful. Cossack exceed in fighting other DDs and that's why having RL in combination with that 5.4km concealment and 8 guns with 4.5sec reload, with BFT, is a great thing. IFHE could help you deal more damage to other cruisers, it won't help much against BBs tho. IFHE will give you 26mm pen but that is enough to pen hulls of cruisers with 25mm hull armour like Cleveland or Chapayev but not enough for Balti or Hipper. I personally think that you won't get enough for 4 points you spent on IFHE. Better choice would be DM, to increase already good fire chance and spend last point on additional 1 point skill. You don't need TR as your torps are already fast reloading and you will get only 6sec faster reload for 3 pt skill. You can go with SI but you already have enough smokes and three hydro consumables are quite enough too. Turret traverse is already good and getting 20% bigger smoke for smoke that last only 45sec is a bad option. I have one shared captain for Lighting and Cossack with PT, LS, AR, SE, BFT, CE and RL. I 'm planing to build another with same skills except switching for DE and PM instead of RL. I think that those are the best choices for Cossack captains.

Only thing that I might try in Update 0.8.0. Note sure how it will work, I kinda liked AR as a mode, only problem was uneven upgrades disposition between teams where one side could get more gun reload or concealment modules then the other. I expect that it will be heavy DD meta as they were probably the best type for this mode. Good things that there will be no CVs in ranked so ... big yaaaaaaaaay. Personally I'm not too much interested in reaching R1. Just some steel and camos would nice. If I find that I'm quite bad in this mode I'll simply stop as I don't want to be a dead weight for my team. Of course if I find a strength to play the game after all this NY mission/campaigns grind.

Imagine when they add subs too. Driving the ships will be like playing 3D Chess, or simultaneously paying Chess on three boards. Fun fun fun ...

What? What range has to do with this? Penalty is always the same, it take into account base concealment, things like CE skill, concealment module or camo don't have any impact on this.

These are just initial stats. Yes in current state Exeter does look too strong for T5. But this doesn't mean that she will keep them. I can understand that you may have some concerns regarding the ship but there is no need to overreact as, again, it is still very much WiP. IMO if WG decide to keep her at T5, Exeter would need some nerfs, hell even if they move it at T6 she might end too strong. Well I guess we can expect first round of testing after 0.8.0.

Only if Exeter concealment remain that low, unless, like many hopes, she get moved to T6 where she should be with those stats.

Penalty for firing in smoke is calculated by both gun caliber and base concealment. That's why for example Neptune has worse detection when firing from smoke then Mino or Edinburgh.

Why it seems that your solution to every problem is just improve autobounce angles. Aren't 457mm already have better sigma then 419mm. Not sure if that helped a lot.

Majority of IJN DDs only have 25mm guns as AA. So now there is no need to even bother to try to prevent plane attack.

Tone is currently a T7 premium cruiser. With 4x2 203mm and 4x3 torpedo launchers she could be a strong ship, no matter how WG implement her air component. Yes some people have unrealistic expectations, wanting that she be some sort of CA-CV hybrid which would be hard to both implement and balance. But even without planes Tone is quite strong on its own and much easier to balance than some other ships with similar capabilities.