AnotherDuck

Well, all classes also counter each other, and cruisers still have high DPM that can be turned towards battleships. But yeah, if it was properly balanced, you'd expect DDs to at least do more damage than they do now, especially the torpedo boats.

That's the best character from that series.

I didn't encounter any of those maps last session I played. Then again, I didn't play Fuso, so no Neighbours.

Just shows that tier isn't all that matters in WoWs. I just had a game in Myoko where I came first (or second; forgot) in a T9 match. And personally, I find Fuso to handle higher tiers better than most other battleships.

That shot in particular is worse than what I usually get with Fuso at ~15km. But what you're saying is that one bad roll proves that it always is like that. That's all that example shows. Most of the shots seemed okay. Hard to tell without zoom. Also, for the shots to have the same dispersion at all ranges, it means the shells have to first spread out, and then go parallel with each other. To my knowledge, the salvos don't look like that.

But someone is wrong on teh intrawebs!!!two!

You could add that BBs have always been the biggest contributors to the stale camping gameplay of high tier games. DDs just take the blame for that, despite not contributing nearly as much to the actual risk of high tier gameplay (which has been shown by what ships are damaged by).

"It's not the DDs that have been nerfed; it's just that 80% of all DD players are crap." The only crap here is that argument. Ships are not supposed to be balanced only for the top 20%. They're supposed to be balanced for everyone. If a ship is seriously underperforming over a large number of players, you don't blame the vast majority of players.

Considering you say one team is decided to win from the start, I know whose logic I'll believe in. RNG is most noticeable in single salvos or a few of them. It's far less noticeable over a whole game, and pretty much not at all over many games.

I only really fire single cannons if I'm shooting blind, at a low-health target, or sometimes in the USN gunboats when I lock onto target and focus on other things.

Last time I got detonated was so completely unfair. I had run out of detonation flags for my Fletcher, and I had a full 230 HP left. I totally would've survived at least half a shot longer. Who knows how much I could've carried my team with that? (We won anyway, though.) Seriously though, I while still find detonations comparatively rare I wouldn't cry if they were removed.

Dispersion at long range is mostly RNG. You'll sometimes get those narrow dispersion salvos, and if you're good at aiming, you'll have them on target. I'm not sure how it actually works, but to me it seems like if you are right on target, there's a certain degree of auto-aim correction on the length of the salvo. I've also noticed that be completely messed up if there are two ships very close to each other and you don't shoot at the one your reticle at.

The short answer is that battleships aren't meant to counter destroyers. Destroyers are meant to counter battleships. That's reflected in a lot of the Boot Camp missions, where you have to kill a select number of the ships WG thinks you should kill. That's cruisers for battleships, destroyers for cruisers, and battleships for destroyers. Carriers can just go kill whatever. Don't sail in straight lines, try to keep friendly destroyers between yourself and the enemy, and shoot the offending HE-spamming cruisers. You've got the guns to do so. That's your job. If you complain about unlimited torpedoes, remember that the destroyer player paid roughly as much money for his little destroyer as you did for your huge battleship. They have to get something out of that ridiculous overcharging. But generally, don't bring realism into arguments about game balance. It's like arguing about what colour the paint has in relation to game balance.

That's about Manual Fire Control for Secondary Armament, just for clarification. But what I meant wasn't strictly a buff or nerf, but a more consistent progression. As it is, it's 15% to T1-T6, and 60% above that. That's a ridiculous change for just a one-tier difference. Just to throw something out, it could start at 6% at T1 (theoretically), and ends at 60% at T10. That would be a nerf to T2, T7-T9, same at T10, and a buff to T3-T6. Or some other balanced progression.

You'd be better off asking me to write a pronunciation guide for Japanese than ask me to pronounce anything in French.

As a switch for the heal, it would be acceptable. As a switch for the plane, it would be too much. This is a change I'd like to see as well. Doesn't affect me at the moment, but one tier shouldn't make a massive difference. Survivability Expert (+400 HP per tier) is better balanced in that regard. (T4 skills are well-balanced against each other for DDs).

Or any high tier USN BB/CA against planes.

If you use compound words, you can create some rather ridiculous "single words", as shown above. Even the one I used is compound word (meaning "night shift"). I like it as an example, since it's relatively short while still having all three "ch"/"sch" sounds (whatever the technical name is) in the German language. I haven't the faintest, since English speakers tend to not mispronounce things the way I expect them to mispronounce it. I'm Swedish, so I have it relatively easy pronouncing German (although I still need to be familiar enough with the words to read them faster than I can say them). Yeah, that Scottish sound is rather close. From what I heard when I visited Scotland many years ago, it's a little closer to 'k', though. Might depend on specific accent. On the actual topic, I mispronounce the names somewhat, which is probably looks even worse here since I have to spell out how I pronounce it in English, and I have to think twice about how an English letter in that situation would be pronounced. I'm struggling to not just write out the actual names with dashes between the syllables. Nassau: nass-aow or nass-ow Kaiser: kay-serr (not "kay" as in "okay", which is more like "okey", but like "kahy" with a short 'a' sound and a silent 'h')König: keanig or kunik ("ea" as in "learn" or "u" as in further, and a hard g, almost k) König Albert: ^ + all-bert ("e" is like in "berry" rather than the English pronunciation of the name "Albert"). As Swede, I pronounce the "rt" as a single sound, although I don't think it's actually done in German. Bayern: bay-ehrn (same as "kay" above, with a 'b'). Like above "rn" in Swedish is pronounced as a single sound, so I tend to pronounce it like that in German as well by habit. Gneisenau: gnay-senn-aow (same hard g as before) Bismarck: biss-mahrk Tirpitz: Teer-pits Friedrich der Große: free-drish dehr groh-seh Großer Kurfürst: groh-sehr koor-fuurst (u and ü are really hard to explain for me. The latter I'd describe as 'y', but the vowel sound for it in English is intechangeable with 'i', whereas in Swedish it's much closer to the consonant 'y' sound. It's like a very low-pitched 'i'.)

Having a player play a capital ship in the same game other players control planes is like having one player control the entire airfield. Which would literally be the case if the capital ship in question is a carrier.

I would like to try that. In WoWs with WoWs infinite reloads.

Sure, if we make the same change to radar. If ships in smoke can't see out of the smoke, no ships without an active radar can see ships lit up by radar. Same really goes for the OP suggestion. If smoke is changed to reduce detectability, radar should be changed to increase detectability, rather than having a flat range regardless of the ship's detectability.

I've won with that strategy several times. It's a numerical superiority push stragety, which means you need to kill the enemy ships at the first cap, and use your full fleet there to gain a total advantage in numbers. Then you need to use that advantage to push into the B cap within a reasonable amount of time. If you don't do that, you lose. It's helped greatly by a ship distracting the enemy ships at the farthest cap to spread the enemies thinner across the map. I can remember two occasions specifically. On on Warrior's Path (or one of the new maps; horisontal cluster of tall islands with the two largest in a ">" shape between B and C) where almost all of us pushed A and only losing the ships not going there (who naturally whined in chat), and then just mowing down everything in B. The other was on Okinawa where everyone except me in Kagero went around to the A cap, killed the ships there while I harassed the main fleet at B+C, and then we managed to attack simultaneously from north and west once our main fleet was done at A. Does it count as an achievement to win with a lemming tactic?

If you want a hard Geman word non-speakers, try "Nachtschicht".

Whether you pick Gearing or Khaba probably mostly depends on if you can handle the USN DD shell arcs.

Khabarovsk, the clearly best performing DD (and lower xp than DM, which is at the top), isn't affected by radar that much. She's more of an agile CL than a DD, and does best outside radar range, where it's hard to hit her, but she can still hit most targets reasonably well (because Russian guns). If you want to go by xp, nerf Des Moines first of all. Shimakaze is the best performing Japanese DD. She's dead last of the tier 10 ships, and below 8 lower tier ships. If any ship needs a buff, she'd be one to pick.