Aotearas

Was just posted on the news around the world thread, guess it's relevant for @PresnostiX Source The question now would be if Presno had gotten warning emails as WG said they sent out prior to bans and possibly ignored them, or if he got insta-banhammered.

Naw mate, that'd just be the new premium aviation battleships.

Gameplay quality has largely equalized across most tiers which means that yes, you'll still see tier X players acting like headless chickens without any idea of what they're doing.

No. This message is sponsored by No: "Because sometimes, it's just No." For more informations, dial 0800-123-No or visit www.no-you-dont.gov.no/why-would-you

The HSF suffered roughly half the losses the RN did.

It decreases maximum dispersion. That in turn scales along the dispersion formula at all ranges so yes, you get slightly more accurate at every range.

Not a double kraken? Plebs ...

Okay, this is satire right? You can't be that ignorant to seriously think reducing the battle of Jutland to broadside exchanges is in any way representative of the combat action, nor can you POSSIBLY think that "just stopping engines and shooting exposed citadels" makes even an iota of sense.

Ah, so that's why you've been absent. I thought you were on a break from WoWs the whole time.

Okay, this is just horribly uninformed nonsense. Crossing the T is a tactic from the bygone age of wooden sailing ships exchanging broadsides and I can tell you exactly why: What should be obvious if one just looked at such an ship-of-the-line of the sailing age is that basically all its firepower is concentrated on its broadside, with little to none cannons firing directly for- or rearward. Hence sailing broadside to the enemy meant you could project maximum firepower, whilst a ship sailing either directly at or away from another ship had little to no offensive capabilities. Secondly in those old days, armour wasn't a thing and a solid iron shot had increasingly devastating effects the more of a ship it had to fly through. Hence sailing broadside didn't only maximize one's own firepower, it also minimized the potential damage as a solid shot punching through the width of the ship had a lot less ship (and seamen) to pass through on the way than if the shot went through lengthwise when a ship was hit sailing directly towards or away from the one shooting at it. See "raking fire" Crossing the T ceased to be a legitimate tactic with the advance in naval, protective and offensive engineering: With the emergence of ironclads, ship protection advanced to such a point that the thickness of protection was the deciding factor in survivability, far less so where they got hit. Look up the Battle of Hampton Roads where USS Monitor and CSS Virginia spent days ineffectually bouncing shots off one another. In stark contrast, the CSS Virgina was in full progress of utterly demolishing sailing warships that had little effective protection, until the USS Monitor showed up to interdict and save what remained of the USS Minnesota. Speaking of the USS Monitor, with the developement and deployment of rotating turrets, naval architects suddenly had a way of mounting their weaponry in less static positions, allowing warships in turn to keep tracking targets with the maximum amount of guns without necessitating a broadside course. Last but not least, with weapon capabilities and gunnery evolving into more and more effective range, not getting hit eventually became the prime defensive methodology in naval warfare, with ships engaging in defensive manouvering (whilst keeping their own guns firing via the means of rotating turrets of course). Expanding on the weapon capability and firing/combat range increase, plunging hits became a much more serious concern for naval architects than presenting any kind of broadside. Armour protection was redefined into a save zone, which describes a range interval to the enemy in which a ship is, by virtue of armour protection and impact angles protected against a predefined offender (say 16'' guns). Even the much quoted Battle of the Surigao Street is falsely credited with spreading the nonsense of crossing the T still being a relevant tactic in modern baval warfare. What actually won that battle decisively was the employment of destroyers in a devastating torpedo crossfire as the IJN line advanced up the strait, well prior to any capital ship engagement. By the time the US battleship line, the infamous T, actually sprung into action what was left of the IJN taskforce was one battleship, one heavy cruiser and one destroyer, up against the combined USN battleship fleet. They could've been arranged in literally any other formation than a crossing firing line and would've crushed what little remained of the japanese. You mean the one that despite getting crossed (twice, iirc) suffered no worse damage than the supposedly superiour positioned RN fleet? Hmm, why would that be. Surely it has nothing to do with modern armour, evasive manouvering doctrines or some such black magic.

Right then, looks like we got a classic case of "everyone's who's better than me is cheating".

Shooting Minotaurs in smoke is relatively easy with a spotter plane when you know what you're doing. Even if you haven't been shooting, as long as the player has a rough idea of where you are it's possible to get consistent hits (the addition of the range indicator on your firing line on the minimap, a small circle indicating the spot on the minimap you're aiming at, can be viciously exploited together with last known positions in that regard). Add a bit of RNG blessings and violá: multi-cit salvo. There's no cheat that would allow players to see you in smoke unless you're already spotted, due to how the server only sends the spotting information to the client when the spotting criteria (which are handled serverside) are fulfilled. The client simply doesn't have the data, hence no way a cheat (which can only access informations the client has) could show him.

You're working real hard on getting banned from the forum, aren't you? You should really check your attitude and do something about that nervous insult trigger finger.

Still blowing off snowflakes ... The Kongou hard carry. Technically it's the ARP Haruna but I really don't like the aesthetics for those ARP ships and in contrast, I do very much like the way a plain Kongou looks. reminds me of my early days with WoWs where I didn't have enough camouflages and credits lying around to paint everything and its dog. And yes, hard carry. Both DDs were of the questionable sort, though in case of the T-22 he's at least a bona fide newbie fresh to it all (and though it was an ill-advised attempt, he DID squirt his smoke basically out of spawn for his teammates to use it, so at least he's got the right mindset for a teambased game!). Nevertheless, T-22 died very early and the Mutsuki ... let's say he must've had some serious allergies to doing anything remotely intelligent, so he was basically useless the entire game until he somehow managed to kill himself on a lone and completely isolated Bayern he'd been hunting for several minutes. Don't ask me how that happened, I was busy trying to turn the match around. At least I could count on the BB division (yes, you read that right, miracles still exist!) to move with purpose, or perhaps just move along with me, but either way us three went where it was needed and it worked out. Even had the joy of proving the superiourity of glorious Nippon steelfolded a thousand times over British imperialist dog wet paper towboat HMS Hood with what was essentially a double tap execution, first volley between the islands did something 20k damage and then finished with a secondary spewing CQC drive-by (he really should've tried to ram me instead). I even got an airplane from the Ranger as a war trophy Sadly I got denied the Double Strike as after nuking the Shchors with the front guns, the Dallas survived my rear turrets' salvo with a meager 960 HP, less than one overpen worth of damage

Let me guess, it was the dude at F10?

Jingles is hardly a credible source for indepth gameplay analysis. And besides, I'm certain you are to understand his point literally in the form of CVs not being able to be everywhere on the map by way of only controlling a single squadron at any given moment of time. Let's also not forget that the explicit purpose behind the rework is to get more people to play CVs and that WG wants to have 2 CVs per team (softcap!), so they can cover at least 2 caps. Given that most maps have 3 caps and only a handful others have at most 4 caps (out of which one is already precapped for each team, so only 2 caps left for contesting) it still means that CVs can dominate the meaningful majority of the map at any given moment of time.

Met @Atankean on the same team today.

This isn't about OP waiting time, it's about MM deciding that any player waited long enough in queue and simply grabs whatever is available to make a game. You could get into queue and get matched literally a second later and could still have this MM if another player had been waiting in queue long enough beforehand, mostly hightier CVs due to the necessity for mirroring tiers and the relative miniscule playerbase that will result into 1+ minute waiting time in queue even at peak activity hours because so few people play them.

Hindenburg as a complete package is not as good as the HIV in a competitive setting: The HIV is considerably faster which makes it capable of pushing or relocating fast when necessary, the lack of speed makes the Hindenburg also bad at kiting since it won't be able to speed away and go dark if it has to because it can be run down by faster ships. With the Main Battery Reload Booster the HIV also has a much better burst damage capacity it could use at a moments notice, say when a ship is showing broadside. Hindenburg has superiour theoretic AP dpm, but the much better penetration on the HIV makes its AP much more consistent. In randoms it's not much of an issue because teams won't be remotely as organized for such differences to be a deciding factor, but nevertheless the HIV is a very potent ship.

If we're getting a 2 CV softcap, how about a 3 BB softcap? Or 4 BB softcap? Just anything less than 5 BBs per team really ...

That ... would be retarded. So straight in WG's ballpark. Which just makes WG's refusal to limit divisions to the same tier even more unbelievable when they actively tweaked their MM to be even more exploitable. Guess in Soviet Russia, exploit programs you.

Yes it is worth it. Consistent, heavy damage with every salvo and more than sufficient fire chance due to a high base chance. Plus that 50mm plating isn't just on two specific BBs, there's also the Moskva and Stalingrad with their 50mm deck and the reason why HIVs became the prime anti-Stalingrad selection in current CBs.

The only way of tricking MM halfway consistently I can think of is CV anchoring at tier VII due to the semi-mirror MM for CVs and the fact no double CV games exist above tier VII, but even that is only really in benefit of the other two non-CV ships that are division with you as they can play tier VIII ships and more or less always be at worst middle tier (and if the CV is a Saipan it won't hit it too hard either cuz tier IX planes) as regular MM will never match that division with another solo tier VII in a tier X match for obvious reasons. Only exception is when MM finds another division that wants to try the same trick at roughly the same time that it can match both against each other at tier X (maximum MM tiering for the involved tier VIII ships). Just another reason why division should always be an uniform ship tier, remove the possibility of unwitting faildivisions completely and remove the niche exploit of CV anchoring. Without said tier VII being a CV, divisioning with any other tier VII ship in a tier VIII one yourself still treats your division as a maximum tier X MM bracket and you should be matched into tier X games as often as you would in a pure tier VIII division. It's only the necessity for MM to mirror CV tiers that enables CV division anchoring. Unless WG changed the MM algorithm to literally reward faildivisioning by reducing the chance of getting bottom tiered ...

Welp, internet had been behaving the last two days so I hoped whatever was the problem might've solved itself and I could participate in CBs again, but just now it crapped out again. Unless the technician coming wednesday is a miracle worker, I guess CB season #3 is officially over for me, without getting to finish the Typhoon mission for the steel. Ffffffffffffffffffuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu~

0.7.12 is the latest WoWs version, but what I'm seeing in your screenshot is 0.7.11.1 ... have you perhaps tried to load an older replay? Those sadly don't work, replay version has to match game version otherwise it won't work or flat-out crash.