AnotherDuck

It is their usual sledgehammer approach in that they introduce a very narrow solution to a wide problem. As for the ship itself, it really is a crap idea. The PA DDs work, because they can hit all ships except DDs with torpedoes, but they still have good guns to fight the other DDs. Having a gun setup worse than any other ship of that tier and torpedoes that can only ever hit capital ships means you're almost completely useless outside that narrow role.

The German battleships are really good at brawling. They're reasonably agile in all accounts, and they take the punishment better at close range compared to other ships. The good secondaries help out quite a bit (it's not that rare to get burninator achievements), and the closer ranges of brawling means the substandard gun accuracy is less of an issue. If you feel you can't run away like in other ships (which will not be an issue T7-T8), plan ahead further. Keep track on the minimap to see when your supposed allies peel off. Always, in any ship and in any situation, have an exit strategy. Know how you can extract yourself from the situation you put yourself in before you put yourself into that position. It's more fun to build for secondaries (especially Bismarck, which has tier for tier the best secondaries in the game), but it's not the most efficient (secondary guns are called "secondary" for a reason). That also requires a certain playstyle. If you want to optimise, they do really well with an overall survival build with some additional secondary enhancements. Also remember that speccing for secondaries means your AA will come up to decent to good levels. Yeah, tighter turning mostly means you can avoid islands later without slowing down, and how fast you can dodge torpedoes. The effective course change also depends on speed and rudder shift time. You can also slow down to decrease your turning circle, which is less viable in already slow ships. Tighter turning does help, but I've never found it to be a game changer in battleships. It can get annoying in some other ships, like Japanese destroyers or Russian cruisers In overall agility, Kongo is one of the best battleships in the game. You can take most fights at your convenience, and you're especially good at close cruiser support. The great range is good for temporary retreats when you need to heal up a bit (but if you stay at long range, please pick a Russian cruiser instead).

Well, Japanese HE is very good. I'd use it very sparingly with Amagi, but there are cases where it's better than AP.

So the first thing you do when making an argument is try to argue with an ad hominem. And this is from a player who, surprise surprise, doesn't play DDs. This is what I'd like to call "hypocritical".

I'm playing it more strategically, rather than as a twitch-based action game. "Safe" is really not the word I'd use for my playstyle.

Now this took a while. Time to give the spotlight to other ships once in a while, I think.

Well, it's not completely useless. I just don't think it's as good as PT, considering how that also helps you spot undetected destroyers, and you really don't need both skills. If you have hydro, it gives you a good timing on when to use it. It gives you information in time to act on it preemptively and form a strategy to counter whatever threat you encounter, rather than forcing you to passively react to the opponents' strategy.

If IFA is wasted because you shouldn't be spotted anyway, then PT is also wasted, because you shouldn't be spotted anyway. That's not quite the case for gunboats. While I still think PT is more useful here, it's not as much more useful compared to IFA as on other ships, because a DD can bail out a lot later than any other ship. "Good" rudder shift isn't universal, especially for CAs, and CLs (if you include those) don't have the armour to angle against battleships. And if you only begin to run away when five ships are shooting at you, like you also mentioned, you're already way too late at executing your exit strategy. If you're in a cruiser, you generally don't want anyone to shoot you to begin with, so avoiding the risk of being shot at is just as if not more important than dodging already incoming shots. But the main thing is that I don't need IFA to tell me what I already know with PT and the experience to use it properly.

If Missouri didn't have radar, I'd still buy her. Or rather, I'd still have bought her, and I'd still keep her even if they removed the radar and offered a refund. Chasing DDs with Bismarck isn't quite what you do. What you do is bully them out of caps. It's still fun to chase DDs. I still remember when I snuck up on a Russian DD sitting in smoke once. He was 5 km away, with 4 km torps. Hit the kill button (a.k.a. hydro), clicked the still-sitting DD, and just waited for my secondaries to just melt him down. Certainly. Yuubari really needs a nerf. Let's remove those overpowered torpedo angles. And Mikasa is just way too strong for a T2 BB. Sealclubbing has never been easier.

Interesting fact: There are serious voice actors in America as well. But film actors aren't generally trained in voice acting, so they don't do as good of a job (which is also seen in many video games and animated films that hire big names above good voice actors). Then again, Seagull doesn't do a good job of acting in films either, so I'm not sure why anyone would expect him to be even an average voice actor.

Judging by your signature, it probably has to do with you not trying to understand how others can possibly think differently from you.

Oh, just another, "You think something is unbalanced, so clearly you're unable to personally handle it yourself you noob," argument. That's not understanding. That's trying to step down on others so you can feel superior yourself, and you try to accomplish that by making crap up you can throw at someone else.

I think defensive fire should still have the panic effect, but not the massive damage increase. And a bunch of other CV fixes for less all-or-nothing gameplay. I don't have a problem dealing with it; I just think it makes the game worse. I may or may not have mentioned that in other threads.

See sig.

I already told you. PT is better. It also gives you more information. It shows you how many people are considering you a target, and it shows you if there are undetected ships aiming at you. That's huge. If you know that, you can make sure to keep track of who is aiming at you so you can more reliably avoid the incoming shells. IFA only shows you when you're being shot at, after the fact. It's going to take you a few seconds to get the rudder into gear, and by that point the shells are at best only halfway there. At that point you're not going to have avoided the aim enough to get cleanly away unless the dispersion is perfect. Anything shotgun style, and you have a huge risk of being hit anyway. It's lazy, so it breeds lazy habits. Lazy habits are not good for good gameplay. The best way to dodge incoming shells is to start before they're fired, and relying on IFA prevents that. Actually, if anything, IFA works better for DDs than other classes, thanks to their fast rudders. PT isn't as useful (compared to on CAs or BBs, not compared to IFA), since most of the time you have a fairly good idea about the ships surrounding you in the first place, or you can (or even should) assume everyone's aiming at you anyway, and even one ship is often too much to risk it. It's better for large destroyers like the Russian ones. However, there's still Preventive Maintenance, which is good for all destroyers.

The first point is what really matters. The second point means he wasn't trying to have fun at the expense of others. The third point means he's not incompetent. Definitely a cut above the average.

No, you were condescending and rude when you told them that, so it's only natural they respond in the tone you deserve. Don't whine about people being rude when you're the one who's rude to begin with. I gave my response to aid people who do look for those answers, which is a far more common concern for people in general. Assuming everything is an advice to you personally is presumptuous if anything, so be a nice pot and wash off before calling others black.

I find Priority Target a ton better than Incoming Fire Alert. PT gives you information to lay out your plan, and dodge before they actually shoot. IFA often gives you the same information too late, so you can only react to it. At that point, it's also too late to look around to see who fired. If you're using IFA, you should pay good attention to your enemies, and not let the skill do it for you. If you rely on it too much, you'll fall into bad habits and your map awareness will be worse off for it. PT, on the other hand, aids in map awareness, since it pretty much tells you when to look around and see if anything looks suspicious.

Friendly fire makes gameplay more deliberate and less random. It's better as it is. Respawns would make all games take 20 minutes. On the plus, that would probably remove most curbstomps. On the negative, it would encourage yoloing, suiciding for the sake of respawning in a different location, MM would break completely.

Most players don't act on that, in my experience, altough most of the time I don't pay attention to my torps, since I've usually got other things to do. On the other hand, if I'm torping, I tend to sail around with torpedoes active regardless. And sometimes I go back and forth just to mess with people, especially when I don't fire torpedoes, just to gauge their reaction.

WR with that sample size means nothing. It doesn't even mean much with ten times that number. Average stats in other categories aren't super indicative either. But the problem wasn't averages, but reliability. You're going to hit for a ton if you hit in Missouri. If. She shotguns more, while Izumo snipes more. It also has to do with that I'm just not used to playing Missouri yet. That will come with time, and it's not like I think it's a bad ship or anything.

I'd like to think of myself as at least a decent torpedo boat player. I can do reasonably well reasonably consistently. The pointers I follow are roughly: Always try to get as close as safely possible. What's safe depends a lot on circumstances, like enemy DDs, CV, and radar ships. If none of those are around, you don't really have an excuse to torp from longer than 500 m outside your detectability range. While there are many long-range torps, that extra range is for additional opportunities, not a suggestion for where you should torp from. Try to find a good angle. Broadsides are good, and remember that most players will avoid showing broadsides to your BBs. Most of the time your targets sail at about 30° relative to your allies. If you're to the side of your allies, and the enemies point towards (or especially away) you, you should probably relocate. If they point sideways from you, you're in a good position. If there are multiple targets, try to see if you find multiple targets you can potentially hit with one salvo. It only raises your hit chance. Learn when to use all launchers and when to use just one (or two), and when to use the TRB. This is one of the hardest lessons to learn, and there are no shortcuts to it, just experience. It's usually fewer than people mostly use, though. When in doubt, just use one launcher, as that will at least teach you when that's enough. If you have a relatively safe target, use one and wait about half a minute, then fire the rest. If both salvos hit, you probably have a flooding kill. Islands attract ships just as much as smoke does. Even if the indicator suggests otherwise, aiming just past an island often yields good results. Especially if it's a favourite camping spot like the islands around A on Trap. If you have other potential targets, don't bother with trying to hit destroyers. They rarely sail in straight lines, and they're good at dodging. There are exceptions, like in one-on-one fights, but as a rule save your torps for larger ships. Most targets you shoot at will turn the moment you fire your torpedoes. That's life. Deal with it.

Missouri is the only USN BB I own, and have played at all, test servers included. And I must say, I'm not impressed. I can't help but compare her to Izumo, which is one of the most complained-about ships in the game, but that ship is just so much more reliable. Better aim and doesn't eat quite as much damage. That's not to say I'm not having any fun in Missouri (after all, fast BBs are almost always fun), but it's more hit-or-miss in performance.

Last time I took Kongou out for a spin, I carried a T7 match. If you can't perform in that ship, that's on you, not the ship. The best ship to earn XP in is, and always has been, the ship you enjoy the most to play at high enough tier to get decent XP for your taste. Premiums may have better economy, and they're frequently overpowered compared to the silver ships (aside from, appropriately, most of the IJN ships). If you're asking for advice but then largely ignore those anyway I don't think you're in a position to complain about advice that may not be exactly what you asked for. Comparing it to ordering a pizza at McDonalds is stupid, because you're not paying for any advice. It reeks of entitlement and it's rude.

I don't play CVs, but I hear it all the time. If I hear whining, which is often, half the time it's CV-related. I only yell at helpfully instruct CVs as proportionally often as other ships, and not nearly as much as I correct idiots on these forums.