Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About DataDemon

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

372 profile views
  1. Good day fellows. As you can see I am a veteran, having 15k games behind my back, I have 65% Winrate, and on top I was leading HAMI in the Hurricane League for 2 Seasons. You can say I did put a lot of effort into the game and the 2 years I spent with it were worthwhile. Still I was inactive for a few months, and when I came back the game still did interest me less and less. I lost all interest in WOWs, and although I noticed that the numbers are doing good, I still saw a lot of veterans, high skilled players, do the same. I have an idea that might fix a lot of issues in the game and the community and I wish to share it with you. In it I would also refer to the issues I see to bring them up at least. Suggestion to improve WOWs altogether: 1.Change ranked Seasons to a ranked ladder Like in chess, or Dota2, give each player a Rating. Every single player, beginner or not, gets the same initial rating. By playing ranked (which still might switch tiers from season to season) you gain rating depending on success. That is, players of similar rating pool gets to play on each team. Depending on the team average rating 'Elo' you get an expectation of your winning chance. If your opponents are stronger than you, then you will gain more XP for winning and you lose less for losing. Like in CWs. Initially there will be chaos, but after few runs you will have a fair calibration for the players. That is, each active player playing ranked will get a rating representing his actual skill. There will be no other awards, no 'best loser', nor anything else. Though you can still inofficially tag along the secondary stats (e.g. tanking, average damage, kills,...) This ladder will be permanent. You don't need to restart it every season. Your rating will represent your skill. There is ofc the issue about a player getting a certain rating, and never playing again, so that his rating will depict a wrong rating. Or how to deal with inactive players etc. These issues can be fixed by various ways, my suggestion would be just to say 'each new season you lose a bit of rating', so if you want to get your old real rating back you need to prove it in battles. And inactive players don't lose everything by not playing. So by this you want to guarantee that every active ranked/ambitioned player get an approximation of his skills as a comparable number. 2.Make fair random MM! Every player has a rating now depicting his skills at the moment of his play. Every non rated player up to this point will get a basic initial rating; we simply assume him to be a beginner until he proves otherwise. We use this rating to make fair teams. Just switch the players so the rating gap between the teams becomes the smallest possible. There are still no guarantee to be completely 'fair' teams, but it is almost certain that in this case there won't be any stompruns and the game will be close and interesting all the time. Also you have to regard that (Noob in Montana + Pro in Bismark) < (Pro in Montana + Noob in Bismark), so you have to calibrate some numbers. Like Carriers are twice as important, so the gap weight counts twice, T8 in a T10 match has less impact, or even Cruisers are less influential,... But im sure you don't need anything else to make it work Yes, I am aware that I set the win probability of each player to 50%, independent of his skills. I simply throw the category 'Winrate' out and replace it with 'Rating'. By allowing this I try to bring something into the game, which seems to be forgotten: FUN!! Goals: *The first goal is to have fun. Right now you see unhappy players in both teams. In case of a stomprun the losing team is punished for beeing weak. The winning team is punished by having no gameplay. The top players are often not even trying to win in the first place, but win with certain amount of damage,... For super unicum players, in randoms, the win itself is too common ["I win because I am that good, or I lose sicne my team is utter crap and I cannot do anything about it; but it any case I focus only on my gameplay and my stats"]. But as you all remember, the most exiting games are the close matches. The ones where it did pay off to cooperate with a teammate. The adrenaline of fighting to the last second. I want to get that. And that you get if you have fair teams. Let the super unicums fight for their win. Every mistake counts, and every small achievement pays off. It does not matter how good you are as a player, your achievement will help your team to get ahead. EVERY EFFORT COUNTS. And even the worst player in the team plays his part. He is a part of the team (compared to right now where you can play 11v12 aswell most of the times, where the big noob does not matter and is ignored) *The second goal is to reduce toxicity. The toxicity I see is discontent between players who do understand the game and the the ones who do not care. Where it is as often the case that the guy complaining is the one who thinks he understands, while in fact he is the one who does not care... By the same logic above, since everyone is integrated in the success, the weaker players, seeing as their mistakes do cost the game (if there are a lot more close ones) will tend more to improve. Which means more cooperation and understanding rather than ignoring (advices, orders,...). And the better players will have a harder fight, where you have to give your best each and every game to win. In close games you often stay to the end, watch them, feel with your team (instead of hating it). That you will get only with fair teams. It won't solve it completely, but I am sure it will cut it down. Having fun and not beeing toxic goes hand in hand ;) *Improvement of the playerbase Right now you will hear a lot of comments (ranked or randoms) like 'who are you to tell me', 'WR does not matter (by 48% guys)', 'You are such a noob NOT to lemmingtrain with us',... Ignorant players I would like to call them. Winning is random, for them either you win without their impact, or you lose anyway. So they don't enjoy and don't care right now. And as everyone can get to Rank 1 it is also random. Yeah well, with a permanent ladder, without any 'best loser' bonus you play only good if you play good. Recent example from ranked (T9). Sniping Lion, living with full HP at the end of the game, letting me in Donskoi tank for ages for him; Jutland sitting with his ships, smoking and shooting, farming fire damage while his teammates get torped. Sadly, logically there is no mistake. If their team wins, it is not because of them anyway. And if the team loses, they have high chances to keep their star. Which annoys the skilled players, up to the point that they do the same. With a real rating you will get skilled ranked top battles. Players might watch the best of the best battle it out and learn from them (since in that case ranked ladder is representing skill). They know who to listen to, from whom to learn. You won't be able to say Rating is not skill. And as for the Lion camper, imagine he gets the same team of campers. Noone spots, noone tanks, noone contests buff caps. Then he might get the idea that it is indeed useful to get to the front. And if he learns that he gets up in rating. Until he learns something new etc. *Value of skill Finally your skill, your progress itself will be valueable, for you, for your team, for your success. And it is much harder to ignore the top ranked player advice, not to go 10 line as BB, since not everyone will get as high to the ladder. Only your skill will get rewarded, not your effort or time. Issues/Changes: -There might be players who intentionally will lose ranked to be undervalued. E.g. I lose every ranked on purpose, beeing a unicum player otherwise. In that case my team will be always advantageous to the enemy one. So though my hypothetical Winrate should be around 50% I will still have 60%+. But that is not the issue for WOWs altogether. If there are a few of them, then it does not matter. If there are many, then the chances both teams to have them are equal, which sorts each other out. In fact, only your own winrate will be 60%+, you will neither break the logic nor do WOWs harm. And in the end, winrate does not matter, so if you enjoy winning yourself a bit more you can do that. It does not change anything other than that. Also how many players would enjoy to lose on purpose, have a (displayed?) rating of 0 to feel a bit better that way? -WG can still decide how to reward players for ranked. They can say you ahve to be good (high end rewards), or you have to have certain amount of wins, or games, or XP gained in ranked. As long as everyone has a rating to begin with it is fine. -There are players that don't play for the win, or the objective. Usually they might ruin the fun for the objective players, but with this system they just get a low rating and the MM does not expect too much from them to begin with. So they don'T let you down that way. -There is only one fun fact I saw in it. E.g. I am a cruiser main, unicum in cruiser, decent in BBs, utter crap in CV. My rating represents my highest skill, in a cruiser that is. So whenever I play my very best crusier, I will get good winrate. But switching to a CV the MM still expects amazing results from my side. Even playing my average cruiser I will get slighlty worse results. Is this an issue? On one hand it sucks to lose more often. On the other hand winrate won't matter as such, and it is more than fair to see you success in your best ship more than in your worst. That holds also for your opponents. The goal was to get approximately even teams, not exactly even. And in any case, independent of the outcome of the game, you still get your contrubution (like pro and noob together win, and win is what counts, still pro did 200k damage, while noob did 40k). So in any case you will always be rewarded for your skills. -2nd fun fact. You are noob have 50% WR, improve yourself, play ranked, and you still have 50%WR... Lol right :) Nevertheless before you did 40k average damge, now you do 80k. So you still see your results, while your best each and every game is still valuable Motivation: My motivation for bringing it up is that I do enjoy chess (as a semi-pro player) far more than WOWs and I wondered why. The answer was pretty simple. Whenever I play chess I have a rating with my name. I don't get idiots telling me they know it better if their skill is not comparable to mine. (here you get stats don't matter and if I argue with stats than im a sore loser; so in the end they neitehr listen to reason nor to statistics...). Also everyone himself put a lot of effort into chess, everyone is proud of his own rating, and therefore they do respect everyone who did the same or is even better. Your respect better players rather than to hate on them. You listen and learn from them. I wished WOWs, and the people altogether would be more like that. I am not sure if I will reply to comments due to my inactive state, I just wanted to share my opinion and hope someone can make use of it. See you and have a nice day
  2. DataDemon

    How to nerf Worcester (?)

    That attitude really does disgust me. Sure you can have it, but the few people met here to exchange opinions, to get closer to the truth. You just spit into our face, claming ot know it better and that we (or maybe just me) were completely wrong, then I go and answer your arguments to se if you have a point and... guess what- you don't care about it any more. You never did, you just stated your feeling and f*cked off, You don't defend your opinion, you don't want test it, you don'T prove anything, you just really agressivly place it inot this topic as if you know it better than ALL of us. And then you are gone because if we disagree we are obviously wrong. I did my best to argue with you, trying to prove you wrong, even admitting that I may be wrong, just to realize you just feel that way and you still feel it. No further arguments do it for you. By far this is the most retarded argumentation I have seen on the forums. I stated my points, I proved my points as good and detailed as I could, and I did all I could to disprove yours. One of my last ones was, since you did not catch up, in ranked worcester will be the only best cruiser you can pick. And this tells you that it breaks the competitive balance. Your point was it is not stronger than others. You can surely don't care or have time for it, but claming I am completely wrong, beeing rude at the same time and then just disappear is a [edited] move. And everyone would appreciate you not doing such BS anywhere
  3. DataDemon

    How to nerf Worcester (?)

    I just wonder where are the deniers of this topic, the ones claimed to know it better, the ship needing BUFFS!!!, ... Do you admit beeing wrong on that subject in the end? Right now you just stated your opinions, very offensive amongst them and then just run off. @tsounts @ShinGetsu @Affeks @El2aZeR about catching up potatoes. You had actually good points there. Yeah, the impact often lacks in some stomprun scenarios, so when Zao will always get its damage and stats on every situation, Worcester sucks in games where you win OR lose e.g. 9-0 which does happen occasionally. It does need a balanced fight. Also I agree on the CV issue, Worcester, aswell as DM, hates planes. BUT having said that, in terms of impact I have seen games where I was not playing a Worcester myself (due to exact this situational performance there against potatoes), whenever you saw a decent Worcester on the enemy team you knew it would be hard. Chances are high your DDs will ocasionally run into its radar. It has so much potential. And I could not make it work outside of competitive (like I got 'only' same damage as in my Zao on average) I have 3 Clanmates who have 130k &140k average damage in it. These are the ones I asked to play Worcester for Clanbattles with me, and they all love this ship now like I do. They can just make it work in randoms aswell (whereas I stick to my competitive mind of less famring damage and having more impact where I die in the end bcs protecting my teammates who suicide thereafter anyway...). Well my point is, they have 140k average damage WHILE having bad games like stompruns. Each 3rd-4th game they get to 200k damage with ease. This ship is a huge asset in randoms, and (compared to a DM) you do not rely on noobs giving you full broadside. It works in every situation and does not depend on enemy skill (your surviving depends on it only). You can compare the stats now https://wows-numbers.com/ship/4074682352,Worcester/, for benefit of doubt take the best 5% of other ships with 10% of Worcesters due to the fact not enough potatoes are there to drag it down. It is only outbeaten (with this handicap) by Henry and (old) Hindenburg. And we all know Henry is main BB farmer, while Worcester prefers always to shoot Cruisers and DDs whenever possible. To showcase this point, the XP for the very same damage (Worcester vs Henry/old Hindenburg) is 300+ for Worcester. Just to showcase, that while doing the same damage he is still more useful by targeting smaller things, beeing in game, and having impact. If we call that OP or not is up to you, but you habe to be mad not to call the ship the strongest Cruiser T10. And I expect, if no changes are incoming, worcester to be the ONLY (with Salem maybe) Cruiser viable for ranked, simply bcs others are lacking compared to it. And if that is the case (since Worcester is even better competitive due to it's freelance radar and the ability to kite to some extent with few ships around) it will be a sad picture wouldn't be it?
  4. DataDemon

    Do the French cruisers need a concealment buff?

    Henry is a high skill based ship, you need to know and have played a lot to get it's role to full effectivness. It is hard to tell whether it does need a buff or not, but in any case, concealment is not the issue. I hated Henry 3 months ago (for the lack of teamplaying abilities), and prefered Zao all the way, since on paper Zao has better conecalment, better torps, better DMP and better arcs. Not to mention it has better armor and it is smaller so in all traditional Cruiser gameplay mechanics Henry is a bad ship to begin with. But Henry is as unique of a crusier as Khaba for a DD. It should and HAS to be played differently. All of you who got the ship first noticed how fast you die to BBs once you are closer than 14km and beeing focussed. I did that too, but that is not how the ship works. Like it or not you do not want to get closer than 14km unless you know what lies ahead (lategame). Therefore I can understand players not using concealment in the first place. I myself adore the legendary which leaves me with 15.5km concealment, but buffs my DPM to the extent of a... Zao :P I cannot answer you whether the ship needs a Buff or not, or what kind of Buff it needs, but I can tell you how you might play it to be succesfull in it. And be beneficial for your team on top! Leaderboard Henry to begin with: Misconceptions about Henry. A)You snipe at ranges you are selfish damagefarmer. If played wrong this is true. E.g. if most of your team lemmings one side (e.g. Okinawa C), and you just play a 'Zao' with your ship, sticking with your team, farming some damage from back lines while the other flank is getting crushed, and in the end you have 30k damage dealt without taking any in return (since your team was tanking), then yes, you are as bad as 1-line Yamato snipers with Survavibility expert. What you should do instead is to flank. Go 1-line, 10-line. Get them from the side. Use your arcs to get stationary ships out of cover (perky DMs, Worcesters). Also important detail, they cannot shoot back at you, even if you are spotted. You are just annoying and be proud on it. Due to your speed you can be at any flank, and you can support every flank from the middle (with mine 20.6km range, but 19.1 do it aswell). You are the furthest ship behind often, but it does not mean you are useless in terms of gameplay. One of the best examples I can give is on Mountain range, spawning north right, I just try go full speed 10-line to J1. If I get there we won the flank, since from there I shoot the positions where usually a moskva or a DM sit and tank. I got Broadside BB positions from the south C cap, this move, isolating myself from the team, just wins you the flank. And with the speed (and range) you are still back in the game really fast. B)Live to fight another day. That might be a bit selfish indeed, but the main job of a cruiser is to be able to assist/damage without taking any. You are used on other cruisers to trade often (Zao get close, gets 2 volleys of on a dd, kites away and does it's best surviving; Hindenburg going in to brawl as last breath to change game,...). Henry does not have any circumstances where he trades. Your only job is to farm damage. It is a boring gameplay, but that does not make it a bad one. If you die in Henry before the endgame starts you missplayed. I had to leard that surviving is the main key, and with that I often managed to overcome overconfident random players in a losing situation. That is btw the main reason for the high damage numbers. Because you live to the end, that is not a selfish gameplay, that is your job in the ship. Your best way to assist your team is by ignoring them and playing for yourself most of the time. And certain features for the Henry. It kites like a god. With the speed (and some spaced armor) you can survive a lot of shells. Every 3rd of my games I tank 2.5-3 Mill Potential damage. That does not tell much, but it is the amount of half of their team trying to get me, since I am on a position they dont want to have me in. A lure the attention away from my team that way. How to get that is easy, I got 15.5km concealment and I am fine beeing spotted all the time (that is why I do not think concealment Buff will improve anything), they spot me and start shooting usually. Then the kiting begins, while I farm them. Seldom teams have patience not to shoot a Henry and reveal their positions. Next feature is you have to think ahead, you are fast and you can switch flanks (unlike a Zao that is bound to the flank it is right now). You can multitask. Switch positions, shoot different stationary targets on different end of the map. Almost like Arty from WOT. And final thing is, you need to be aware of the whole map. E.g. I noticed an enemy Zao not beeing spotted for 2 mins when I pushed a flank (pushing 3 of their BBs away^^). Conclusion, turn out and run. At 13km the Zao then shot me but I was facing away already and moved to another position while Zao was out of the game. If I would not have noticed such details the Zao would have melted me together with their BBs. With this I wanted to show some insight into Henry gameplay (for randoms, I don't consider this ship to be viable for ranked), it needs a lot of skills, knowing where the enemies go, where the dds are (whether you are safe from torps on your solo tour). So you can 'ignore' the team and do your stuff without hurting it (by losing your ship). This ship is very specific and if we talk about potential I do not even know whether it does need a buff. I consider the legendary upgrade to be one, also the Reload Booster is very welcome. It is just a gimmick ship which you have to master on it's own. As said, I hated it 3 months ago
  5. DataDemon

    How to nerf Worcester (?)

    I was talking about 1v1. Pure 1v1. Like last 2 ships alive 1v1. Worcester will not lose against mino. Also Mino with radar was the best pick last season for ranked. So it had it's use. It is just on the very first week all good radar minos did grind out, simply bcs it was so effective. My point holds, 1v1, unlimited time, as long as you don't force me to face into you, you will not win. But same you can say, so it is a Stalemate. Against others you win with the right strategy. And why it is important since in ranked you play only 7v7, which results often in a situation where you will play solo in the end. Like Mountain range you go 1-4 line. Then you will have 1v2,2v2 or 2v3 where the same rules apply like 1v1. E.g. even if Zao+Hindenburg are pushing, usually Hindenburg behind due to concealment and speed, I will still open fire on the Zao and melt it in 30-40 sec like I would do. Chances are high that I can still survive and get unspotted thereafter. And for the main point, kiting in a Worcester, as long as it is only againt cruisers, is great. The whole thread is about Worcester beeing too OP. And we all know it's teamplaying capabilities (Radar, island HE spam). But even going solo it is still good. Too good. And yes, it was meant for a true 1v1 since that still happens often in competitive (ranked, clanbattles). In randoms you are 12v12 and therefore, at the start, you have to hug islands only. Unless you can find a flank with only a few ships and no crossfire (e.g. Sleeping Giant A cap). And if you would read my 'wall of text' on the last page the only reason why it is not OP in randoms is due to the game beeing decided just before your main impact comes in. Worcester strenghts don't shine with an incompetent team So in short, Worcester DOES beat every cruiser in ranked AND it is one of the most useful for competitive on top of that. The only reason I brought up '1v1' is because some smartasses thought they will kill a Worcester easy just because in randoms it cannot hide as easy (12 players)
  6. DataDemon

    GO NAVY! Event

    Can somebody tell whether we will have enough time to farm both x75 loyality? aka 2x15 days of playing? I joined the eagles and I do not care getting no containers for the win, since I just want the prem cammo for worcester only. I did not calculate the days, but knowing if we have enough day to farm both I would have switched on the 2nd day (1.day Egales, 2.-16. Sharks, then eagles again). But since there was no communication about the lenght of the tournament I assumed that you will have to decide for one team only and show loyality to get the ultimate prize (cammo). It will be my fault ofc, but I would be very pissed if basicly all can get both loyalities maxed and my dedication to my losing team from the start would mean jack sh't Also about Sharks losing from day 16+. Not sure about that one. not all players play every single day, some might finish it only on day 25 or so. Sure Eagles will get a boost from the tryhards from Sharks, but so will the Sharks get the boost from tryharding eagles. So I predict the gap to close, but still Sharks beeing far ahead and winning at least 20 first days before it switches for the first time
  7. DataDemon

    How to nerf Worcester (?)

    We are talking about you pushing a Worcester. I would kite a way so i can shoot all my guns, not just the rear 2. I can tell you with an encounter on Hotspot in clanbattles. We played against a top clan (not telling the name of players on purpose). They were moving 1-2 line with minotaur and zao 2km behind. I was defending with a Worcester only. I was facing away since I expected them incoming. The minotaur did the mistake of 'pushing' in full speed. I got spotted, poped radar to spot him. Result of the encounter: I took 5k heal included damage from both of them, Minotaur 'survived' on 30k after 1 full of his heals. This minotaur did play bad, admitted; but so did your worcester. Also mino can ofc repeat the procedure more times and his mistakes cost less due to the heal, but nevertheless by pushing into a worcester that is facing away you always lose. You can use all of your guns i Worcester without getting pen'd by Minotaur. The only way is to be moving full speed so you can wiggle, and that is the reason why you need to be moving away (since doing this facing towards a mino will get you into torping range). My point still holds. If you push a Wocester as mino with same amount of HP you die with equal skillset. Same happens if a Worcester pushes into a mino. Stalemate. And finally you did not get my main point. For randoms you are stationary most of teh game, where you can rush a Worcester. Worcester is garbage close range against every cruiser with torps. In clabattles, and ranked there won't be camping worcesters. There will be moving radars like minotaurs. Except this imrpoved minotaur (to the last season) can solo kill dds (mino struggles in killing them as long as they dont have to turn broadside to disengage, that is they were not rushing you to begin with), and he shits on cruisers aswell. Like if a zao rushes into a Worcester it is dead in 30 sec. Whereas if that is the minotaur (in a ranked scenario) it can stop and back off, while you need to disengage aswell sicne you can be blabbed by BBs. A Worcester just kills it himself and can doge, even tank (30mm deck armor) some BB shells. In a 1v1 it is equal with minotaur, but against everyone else, including BBs it is just better. Worcester is just a better Minotaur in terms of ranked. Or if you recite my initial post, it is a Zao, Des Moines and Minotaur combined, and therefore I consider it to be OP competitive wise
  8. DataDemon

    How to nerf Worcester (?)

    If you would have read the thread to this point, here is the ez explanation (like Tyrendian explained). We are talking about a pure 1v1 scenario. Not Okinawa C cap where the enemy Zao can doge better than you in worcester the incomming fire of 11 other ships. A pure 1v1. E.g. ranked scenario. Both ships are full HP. -Bonus: Worcester vs Khaba. I had that 3 times. Khaba loses. No AP needed. Just fight as you would fight a Zao below. Khaba deals 2-3k, you deal 5k. -Worcester vs Henry. EZ. You go into middle. How you lose the fight is only if you and Henry are constantly spotted and he is shooting you from max range. Possible in randoms where there are dds around, impossible in ranked. So Worcester gains space, get into objectives, caps. What does Henry do? He has to contest. Worcester can anticipate Henry, he knows where he is coming from, open fire and melt him down with twice the DPM at 10 km. -Worcester vs Hindenburg. Esentially the same. Situation I had in randoms. You sail full speed forward. YOu spot enemy Hindenburg at 12.3km, you turn out immediatly. At 10.5 you are facing away already. Spam HE. If he shoots HE aswell it is GG. If he shoots AP angle yourself for a brief moment so only your back guns shoot, then get back to shoot all 6. Even less damage that he deals then. -Worcester vs Moskva. 2 ways. You can rush and citadel him from close range. Or you stay at range and HE spam. Even if you dont deal too much damage, you deal still good enouh to kill him. E.g. in Clanbattles we always smoke a Worcester to shoot a Moskva. In the time of a gearing smoke the moskva burns down to 20k (heals included). So I assume I would need 3 min of straight shooting to kill a moskva. I am sure a moskva will not be able to kill a Worcester in 3 min at 12-13km. If he shoots AP angle, if he shoots he don't care. And we are not even talking about going stealth and let the fires do the work. -Worcester vs Zao. There is only 1 chance of Zao beeing equal. If Zao is reversing until Worcester is spotted. THey are spotted at the same time and Zao starts running. If Zao is pushing into a Worcester, again CB experience, Zao is dead in 30-40 sec. HE only! If Zao is reversing into a Worcester, so it can kite away at 9-10km range, then the fight is... equal! CB experience. So that is the ONLY way a Zao does not lose. And that situation is most certainly not to happen in usual circumstances. -Worcester vs DM. Tough one. But Worcester wins. If you are 'trapped' facing a DM at 10km AND he is reversing (highly unlikely situation) then you are really fucked. But if lets say you push into each other, so you close the distance DM loses. You can tank his HE while you shoot just your front 2 guns. Then you get really close, at 2km you go past his side and citadel him to death bcs turret traverse. If you can kite away (or beeing on the move while not closign teh distance) you still win. If he shoots AP you turn yourself out. Otherwise spam HE. If he is stationary you hit, if he is moving/kiting you win bcs DMs turret traverse is garbage. -Worcester vs Mino. Tbh, I am not sure. If both are permaspotted Worcester wins, but sicne Mino has better concealment (and heals) it could change things. Basically if a Worcester pushes into a Mino you lose, if you can stay at distance without having to turn broadside once you are in advantage. You can mitigate the chance by not pushing straight line, but sideways into the cap. Or in short it is a stalemate. If worcester pushes into a mino worcester is dead, Mino pushes into a Worcester mino is dead. Fine enough for me since e.g. in ranked where it is not only 1v1 a Worcester is still the bigger threat to enemies than the mino to my team. I can prove everything of the above, but only if we bet money on it, since otherwise it is just wasted time. You can trust me on this or not, but if you did not play Worcester in Clanbattles, or you have super unicum stats in the Worcester don't even try to convince anyone of something else. If you are so full of yourself bet some money and try it. Worcester beats EVERY Cruiser 1v1. Even Des Moines. The reason why it is not straight up the best is because a DM e.g. can punish other crusiers better and faster, and it is a teamplay. Worcester cannot push, it sucks against BBs (yes, BBs are the weakness of Worcester), ... Still there are too many factors that makes it too OP for ranked imo. But it is out of question that Worcester DOES DESTROY every Cruiser on almost all occasions as long as beeing played properly. And finally for the doubters. YOU DO NOT SHOOT IN WORCESTER AT RANGES PAST 12km. Unless it is a stationary target. You just get unspotted and close the distance and go for objective. Sooner or later they have to come to you. You need to be as close as 9.5 to spot it. This is already brawling distance. Even noobs will be able to hit at 9.5km in a Worcester. And in case you turn and run and will not chase you. I go dark and go for objective again. until you return and I can finish you. This holds for every 1v1 scenario. Still want to prove you point in the khaba at 9km distance Morten???
  9. DataDemon

    How to nerf Worcester (?)

    For addition, since a lot of guys don't get how 'kiting Worcester' works. First of all you position yourself pointing outside of the enemies. Step 1: DakaDaka. Step2: If they push you, you just run. If it is a cruiser, you kill it. Does not matter which distance, if it is not a DM you can shoot all your guns while NOT showing enough broadside for AP citadels. HE you just laugh at. Especially if you bait him to switch to AP and turn back straight. Difference between Zao and Worcester kiting. Zao can kite means you are at a flank, 4 ships are pushing, spotted since usually they shoot at you or others (and if they don't it is 11v8 for your team which is good aswell). You can stay at 14+km, you turn once, shoot your guns, turn out and you are still moving fast away. If you get focussed you get stealth, get more distance and shoot from 16+km. And finally you can take your time, since whereever you end up, you are still usefull, from any ranges. This you cannot do as Worcester. First, you don't hit moving targets at 14+km. So you stay at <14km. Which makes all the pushing ships focus you. Also you don't move away exactly if you shoot all of your guns like you do in a Zao...Finally you end up in the middle of nowhere and you are not even close to beeing useful like a zao since you need to be going back to close ranges again. How you should play 'kiting Worcester' instead. You don't shoot until you get closer than 14km. Preferably 12km. You get yourself a target. Preferably someone you can damage heavily. e.g. Cruisers, French BBs, Conqueror. Get in position and shoot. Kite away doing that. Hitting at 12km is easy, you chunk of 4-5k damage of a Hindenburg every 4 sec. They start focussing you (aiming guns)- go dark. Even if they start aiming you as a team, you still get ~20k damage in, in less than 20 sec. Then you need to doge shells for 20 more sec. He damage is not that bad, AP from BBs (who are not Republique or Yamato) you can mitigate by sailing like a needle- hardly any damage. Reposition yourself then to the next island, or go back and repeat. If you think about that 20k damage on a Hindenburg is 30% of his HP you should be fine with not shooting for 2 mins to get that. If you are not focussed to heavily you farm on obviously. At least you made Hindenburg turn out and the others panic now. You do NOT have to be permafiring like a Zao would do from 16+km.
  10. DataDemon

    How to nerf Worcester (?)

    Sad to hear that from a former clanmate... But assuming you have a brain the answer is easy. Do you care about that? If not, what is the difference? If you do, would you rather read 10x 'I play a Des Moines an I killed a Worcester' and build your opinion on this experience, like we have for 2 pages (you don't blame them for not contributing anything, do you? -Though maybe that represents more the level of understanding you can get). Or would you like a truth, someting you can back up. Which I did. You can read my first sentence to get the point. If you need proof, you read in detail. It does not matter how many people claim Worcester beeing crap if the Worcester is not playing correctly. So I am providing an example of a Worcester beeing correctly. Only 1 question remains, who am I to think of myself to know how a Worcester is played- oh yeah, right now I am amongst the best players there, so maybe my wall of text has a point. If you are interested in the point ofc, if you are here just to state your opinion and ignore other, I get that you will be intimidated by so many connected words. You don't need to read it, but for the guys who are interested I consider it to be easier to read this than to browse pages 3-4 without any aditional, or even false knowledge. I hope you can get that without becoming offensive again
  11. DataDemon

    How to nerf Worcester (?)

    Thanks to all people writing in the thread. Also both Kudos to supporters of my opinion, aswell as the other minded participants at least most of them). Having played 1 month Worcester I can give a detailed opinion with explanations. For starters, we use Worcester in Clanbattles as a clan. That was my suggestion and everyone in the clan agrees of it's impact. We have different setups, with 0 dds, 1 dd, but we still are using 2 Worcesters anyway. And right now we did manage to get into Hurricane, just to prove it's viability. For the next presentation I would like to present you this chart These are my recent games in WOWs, I will be comparing Worcester with the others to explain some features. FYI I play both the Zao and Henry with Legendary upgrade (so it is completely different playstyle), I played my Worcester mostly without a pocket smoke, often even pure solo. Also I play Worcester for my team in CBs aswell as I am #17 in PR in Worcester on WOWs-numbers. This should tell you that I really do have the expertise to claim some facts about it. On Top I did try everything on Worcester since it was my idea to use it in CBs and I need to know what you can get away with in the end... My conclusion at the start. Worcester for KOTS (though I did never play it tbh) should replace DM. It will not break balance, it is just sad for DM to be thrown out. But at the same time Henry is bad pick aswell, so that is how it is. Worcester for KOTS (competitive with CV) has better stealth, bigger AA range, and same radar. For Clanwars/ranked T10 it is OP. For the same reasons I discussed it, but I will repeat the essence below. For randoms the ship is fine. It is not OP. It is situational. And you do not have that much impact like I thought it would have sadly. I start with randoms. First of all I need to bring up the Henry stats top to explain some details. My Henry has 15.5km concealment and 20.6km range. By all means I did expect it to be a useless ship backranks grinding damage and not supporting your team in any other way. I still think it to be that way, but I did exploit the foolishness of random players by going off flank, using the concealment as a shield (not to come to close), equipped it with RPF(!) and started to draw attention off flank. Each single game I farmed 2.5-3 Mill Potential Damage of random players shooting me. I have no impact with my guns, I cannot support dds like I do in my Zao, I jsut simply get shoot at and get some damage in. That strangly wins you the game. Henry excels in surviving, and everyone is dumb enough to shoot it once it is spotted. Also in 12v12 it is much safer to shoot from 20km range (than as a Zao from 12-16km). The more ships the better for Henry Worcester on the other hand is the exact opposite. The fewer ships survive the more powerful you get. You can stay in more spots undetected to shoot above islands and helping your team. You can move more freely on the map, surprise Cruisers/dds and so on. With 12v12 ships you really need to hide and take care. With your gun arcs you need to be front lines, but so can you die fast. So at the start you need to take a lot of risks, or you need to wait. In the first case you just die, in the later you have no XP gain in case of a Stomproll, like it happens sometimes in randoms. It does not matter if you win or lose, in a Stomproll your impact is 0!! In detail, if they push you, you are dead. If you push them, you hit crap. Next thing is CVs. You would think Worcester has no troubles with CVs do you? In my experience, CVs are your worst enemy (if you want any other role than plane deterrence). A smart CV will just avoid you. You could help your team, but you should hug islands, while BBs should not. Also with CVs the enemies push slower, stay at larger distance, you need to take safer spots, get larger distance aswell. In the very late game your impact is even greater (since you can defend yourself in a CV+3 vs CV+3 scenario), but only if you get equal teams. And equal CVs on top! You are useful for the team, don'T get me wrong, but you cannot have any other impact if CV is present. Another point that I learned. This is not a DM. You cannot take the same spots. Nor can you get as close as a DM. The DM (again a ship I have 700+ games in and ranked out lately) can bow-hug islands. Bow hug in the sence you get really close (e.g. on Sleeping giant just almost INTO the cap on east). You can pull your ship so your front guns can shoot while you remain unspotted! Your radar is close to the cap, you have a low profile, and if they really do hard push you (even a BB) you will die, but with your AP you still can punish them heavily. Well Worcester can shoot only 'broadside'. So you have to be further away completely hidden behind islands. Or in short, it is a complete different ship (for randoms). What you can do instead is to manouver out, use different islands, and especially lategame get many, many crossfire positions on enemies. But in terms of impact, you still shoot only HE so getting ~300k+ games is barely possible. You cannot punish idiots, nor carry games like you could do in a montana. Even a Zao has the potential to push a BB, kill something reliably 1v1, whereas Worcester will need to rely on luck purely if the team fails. Therefore I don't see it as a threat for randoms. It is hard to play there actually tbh... But in ranked/clanbattles the ship is OP. First we start with no CVs and only 7v7. Just imagine you play a Worcester and you know you are safe from a BB. Or let's think it as a lategame scenario in randoms where you actually got equal teams. The potential of a Worcester, from my experience of 300 games in it. Worcester vs Zao. Often you have the scenario of a Zao having to push a flank like a ninja. Suddenly you see a Worcester at 10km. If you go bow in into him, you are toast. Each well placed salvo of a Worcester is 5k, each 4 sec. The best fight I had was agaisnt WGP2W who did not try to run but openly used all his guns and aimed different parts. I ended up on 15, while he was dead. At the same time I had 2 games where the Zao was backtailing me, I pushed into him, he accelerated (that is kiting at 9km) and it was still equal!!! A Worcester can push a Zao (CB experience, not some random dude). Worcester vs Hindenburg. More of random experience. You spot a Hindenburg pushing. You turn first, once you are facing out of it, you start shooting. If he shoots AP turn straight, otherwise use all 12 guns. I had some nasty experience, like I came out 6km in front of a Hindenburg and was facing out, and he still got a good AP shoot into my [edited], when I thought it would be autobounce, so the angling is pretty 'specific', but other that this 1 incident you always win 1v1. Heavily. On average (against random players) I lose 10k HP while killing a full HP Hindenburg 1v1. If Hindenburg is sailing away I see no reason to fight him. Luckily for a Worcester you don't get these situations oftenr that you activly need to hunt Cruisers. Worcester vs Moskva. It is a long fight, but Worcester wins. I just will not be stationary but moving obviously. In randoms you rarely get these situations since neitehr I nor moskva focus each other in that case. Worcester vs Mino. In randoms it uses smoke, I got radar, suprsie [edited]. In CBs I often have the situation of Mino+Zao pushing a flank (or Mino+DM). A Worcester holds off both of them. I agree that you cannot 'win' straight up 1v1 fight, as you dont push into him, nor does he push into you. But for now it is just a stalemate, and I can reposition my Worcester later, whereas your push with Mino did not work out. Other than this, my own experience, Mino+Zao pushing on Hotspot 1-2 line. 1 Worcester holds them off every time. The first time WGP2W pushed it to far (at 8km distance), so I almost killed it in 30 sec as Worcester, taking only 10k damage in return from the Zao. That is it. Worcester vs Henry. Gain space, let him come close, he is dead. As for the tankyness, if Kurfürst or Montana are shooting you, stay like a needle. I learned that you can eat citadels, though you happen to eat them from long distance when shells are falling, but you ahve a slim profile. If they even hit you slightly angled, most of the times it is a citadel. You really need to be the needle when their shells hit you, and then (if they did not hit the aft part) it is only overpen! You need to have map awareness in randoms and experience, expect, bait shoots, but you can tank them. As for Rep, you are fucked, so go stealth. But so is he usually so it is fair. against Yamatos again you dont go needle, but broadside, so it can overpen you. But dont be spotted if he has his guns pointed towards you at 15- km. In general, if you kite away you can always use all of your guns, and you can turn out to be the needle, letting Zao/whoever miss you, turn in, shoot 12 guns, and turn needle liek to shoot only 4 of them when he is shooting again. For randoms it is situationaly since you need to have equal stationary fights. But in ranked it will dominate the game.
  12. DataDemon

    How to nerf Worcester (?)

    Mino can brawl with crusiers in certain situations. Worcester kills any cruiser 1v1 in every situation. Except maybe a DM bow on rushing, but then I managed to get past it and citadel him from the side at 2km range. Mino requires skill and is situationary. It can survive against cruisers (not talking about moskva at below 5 km ranges). Worcester instead kills them. You can trop them as a last instance. Worcester has no this kind of burst damage, but for that it makes up with pure DPM. As a mino you played ranked, you were only dd spotting. Other than this hardly nothing (still had impact because crusiers with HE were quite ineffective). Well Worcester can do both, it can surprise a dd AND play as a regular DM thereafter. If you don't remember, I started the topic talking about Worcester beein exactly the oposite of a stationary cruiser. As such, palying against a moskva is easy. He pushes back, you get closer. Stay in the open. You beat moskva 1v1 in any position (at any range). You can be shot by BBs of course, but so can you if you play Zao. With almost identical armor. So to return to my posint, it is almost as good as Zao in kiting (having twice it's DMP), while beeing a better DM only without AP, -AND- beeing able to do the job minotaur was solely taken for in ranked; all at the same time. And about brawling, I agree that against BBs it does crap. But the same holds for DM and it is still considered to be fine. As for Hindenburg- you see him in time, turn your ship (guns do keep up) and you kite away. It beats every Cruisers as in terms of effectivness as in terms If you disagree with that, pls explain it really well. Ofc I am not the smartest here, but I have played Worcester in Clanbattles against the very best, I am a warlead of my clan (evaluation of ships/positions/...), I am a cruiser main player, having 2000+ games in T10 Cruisers, and I got 65% average winrate (70% recent). You can have your opinion, and it might have a point, but please consider that if you are talking about your feeling and your experience, that I have also some experience and skill. And finally I am not talking about random scrubs, but competitive, capable players. I doubt you can get a kraken against them. Actually in your case, as harsh as it sounds like, your opinion does not even have a value. If you cannot seize the potential of the ships, you cannot compare them. After all we are talking about how good you can be with best play, and not how they should be balanced so the average player performs equally good in all of them
  13. DataDemon

    How to nerf Worcester (?)

    Just imagine ranked season T10 for a second to show you an example. Many of you, like myself, played a Des Moines. I have 70% WR (including 65% Solo WR), 700 games and it was my favourite ship before Worcester. While in randoms you can punish DDs and Potatoes, in ranked/clanwars your job is to radar, hug islands and survive the assault. In 'competitive' the Impact of a DM is pure of only a support ship. And you have all seen it, without radar you are in a disadvantage, but playing a DM itself was the hardest way to proceed, because it had really not that big impact (in case others do mistakes before it even counts that you are the better DM this game, since you took only 10k damage, and the enemy one 40k...) In the same ranked season, Khabarovsk was a bad pick for a dd (unless there were too many dds), Henry was a bad pick for the same reason. Zao surprisingly was performing not so well (talking about the first 2 weeks, where mainly only great players were online), Hindenburg was the way to go (it was also before the buff). Hindenburg was the best ship for DMP, DM for support. Radar minotaur was doing really well due to BB overpopulation (BBs>CAs, so you focus only on dds then). You all remember these times. It was only objective gaming, and how hard YOU can carry the game. The ships were reduced really hard on their strenghts and weaknesses... Now imagine in this 'balance' as we all see it a Worcester. That is, in a competitive scenario, 7v7, no premade communication. Can any cruiser now contest the spot with a Worcester? So ranked cruiser comparisson -Worcester vs DM. Worcester has better concealment, same radar. More DMP, more range. Arcs are 'worse', but so can you hide also better and beeing able to shoot. You cannot be 'outspotted' by a DD like the painful 9.9-10.6km mark on DM, making your life hard on mountain range. You lack AP power, but in a 'perfect' game, or at least against competent players, like in ranked, how often do you use AP in the end? As for Worcester, as said, even if it does it worse than zao, it still can reposition itself, and it is not a floating citadel. Guns turn fast, dds are scared. And you have def AA for free. There is 0 reason to take a DM with you. As for 1v1, as long as worcester is not facing a DM but kites away, it even wins 1v1 against Salem... -Worcester vs Zao. In ranked Zao was good only for flanking. Sneking up from the side, off cap etc. Solo Play. Beeing sneaky until you get spotted and then kite away (otherwise you would take Hindenburg). Sad thing, at 10km range Worcester wins for free. So this 'approach' at least is countered. So zao is reduced to a worse Hindenburg if there is a Worcester is there. -Worcester vs Minotaur. Smoke Mino is countered. Radar Mino. Well Worcester can do the same stuff a radar mino does. I do it in Clanbattles, agaisnt organized teams and get away with it. So in 'random' compatitive teams I can do the same a Minotaur was good at. -> These things the Worcester does all at the same time! When beeing just another DM was basicly already enough to call it 'balanced'
  14. DataDemon

    New Season of Clan Battles!

    Good day ladies and gentleman. I just discovered a small flaw in regards of all the guys aiming to get the Steel this Season. I am not blaming WG, but I bet they did not think about some of the consequences using the new MM system for the clanbattles. In short, while earlier they put a lot of teams against each other, this season they put only ones in close rating. (and Beta team so some extent). All this is backed up by my experience in Clanbattles so far. So first, as a mathematician (it will become relevant) my claim is that it will be much harder to get your Steel this season. Simply by the fact, that during the time of the clanbattles not enough teams will get to Typhoon league. With not enough I mean not the same amount of clans like last season(s), and if they do it will be to a later stage during the season leaving them less time to farm steel. Maybe up to the point that not everyone get the 30 wins together. Also for the same reason I claim that the Taifun League this season (in the time we are playing CBs) will be harder, aka you need to be more skillfull than last season to get your steel. If this is the case it would mean quite a lot of implication of Feedback you can think about, but first let me prove my point There are only 2 differences to last season. First is a small one, you can have a Bravo rating. Second is a big one, the fact that teams play only equal rated teams (whereas last season there have been larger rating differences aswell). In the last season the spread was high. One implication was that a good team without many games could jump pretty fast up (or fall down if it was bad). Admittedly it was not 'fair' or fun to play monsters and noobs in the same evening, which the current system evades, but it made you reach your deserved rating relativly quick. With that I mean if you are a Tayphoon strenght team, you will get to Typhoon. Maybe you will be placed a bit wrong, like T3 or T1 instead of T2 due to getting you randomly too many Hurricane or Storm teams, but you will be fast in the area where you belong. And by fast it might mean still 4-5 nights of playing, but the current system is even slower! My point is, yes, the system is fair. It ranks the teams accordingly. Also it is a decent MM, I like to fight equal clans, I am all for it. And if we let it run forever you will get the same results in terms of ranking as with the MM from last season. But we don't have time forever. We have only 10(?) weeks of time. And the goal for most of the participants is to get the Steel, that is winning 30 games in Typhoon. To which you have to get first. -The Spread between best and worst clan will shrink compared to last season By putting only equal rated teams against each other good teams will progress slower and bad teams will fall slower. While e.g. #1 Team played against #2-50 last season, and when it could be equal against #2-10 and won against #11-50 it could progress. And by progressing, the balance was taken with it (let's put HAMI as a team which gets 40% agaisnt TTT. To keep our rating we need to be 100 rating points below TTT. Then there are clans that have 40% expected winrate agaisnt HAMI, so they need to be 100point below us to keep their rating,... So by TTT having 500 points in Hurricane makes space for weaker clans to fill up). But by the system right now, TTT will have only oponents #2-20. Which means it will constantly be playing on it's strenght, making clans who don't have the strenght to face them (or the 10 further close clans), never get close to them. It would be no issue if TTT would have Hurricane 400 rating points, but this will not happen in the limited time we have (mathematically it will, but in more than 10 weeks clanbattle time!). Also looking from the back, there are 0 point-limit in gale league. A position you cannot lose any points. If 2 clans with 0 points play each other, you 'produce' rating. In the last season you could spread this produced rating, since it was possible for a gale 1/storm 3 team to play a team which had produced these points. And so there was an option to spread these below generated rating to all clans (making the average rating bigger making thus more clans get to typhoon). This season chances the points generated way down below stay simply there. E.g. a team gale 0 points wins - >25 points -> plays against equal team, loses them; but the team gaining them is still Gale ~100 points and these 25 aditionally generated rating points stay in this league. The Rating influece will decrease (experience by chess Elo system if you need further proof) -Typhoon- strenght this season is not the same as last season, but stronger For the same reason, the reduced spread, typhoon will have stronger teams. The positioning between the clans will remain the same. The only difference will be the threshold will be higher. It would be like Typhoon threshold this season skaled down to the last season would be not Typhoon, but e.g. Typhoon 200 points. -It will take longer for Typhoon-strenght clans to get to Typhoon. Hereby is another big point. Even if we consider a Clan, 'QWE' be just on the verge of beeing able to compete in Typhoon this season. So if we consider that looking in the rating of the clans given in 8 weeks, QWE would be the weakest, but still Typhoon clan. It will take him still ages to get there! Now I would like to mention sorting algorithms. The one presented this season is like a 'Bubble Sort'. This one compares neighbours and switches positions depending on the result. It does not represent it completely, but you will see what my point will be (since you need still to compare teams more than 1 time etc... ). While the last one we had was comparing also distant relatives/ratings (which was not fair or fun). The advantage of the first sorting is that you get the right order in your parts you compare them. E.g. the Top 10 clans are positioned the right way atm. They played a lot of games against each other and this is right. What is not right is their position compared to other groups they were not compared to. The Typhoon clans right now might be Hurriane clans. Also they are indeed the best, but Bubble sort cannot tell you how much stronger. What is the chance of a Storm 2 clan to beat us? 10%? 0%? 40%? We have no idea, because we are not getting compared like last season. The order itself is right, just the rating is completely random. (IRL: chess engines and Elo rating- problem). If you would eventually compare every single one to every single one you would get the best and right order. But it will take more than 10 weeks. Likewise, the last season, it was more chaotic, but the system put the teams fast to a certain spot. It was not correct as it was still working more with chance, but for us as a playerbase it would make no difference if we would be in T1 or T3, as long we get our stalingrad and steel/flags. Right now we know who are the best, but we don't know which kind of guys/group are 2nd best /3rd best/ ... and we also don't know how far behind these groups will be due to the lack of playing against them. Again, given unlimited time the problem will solve itself, but it is a ranked season, not a ranked forever rating. -Bonus issue: skill influece bcs Beta rating Last season there was only 1 rating to play for. Meaning even the best clans had to let 'weaker' players play. Most of the middle field clans do not even have a 2nd team. So you cannot just argue about the following holding true for all clans. Clans with capacity for 2 teams, 1 of which is hurricane strenght, will play 'stronger' for their alpha rating. Also, they will have less games. Which you can see by e.g. WGP2W, HAMI, ... using only 1 team for alpha rating, while having up to 2-3 playing. So not only the roof of the rating each season is harder to play against (for regular teams going for 30 wins in Typhoon), also we progress slower towards it. Resulting in the roof beeing really close to the threshhold itself today. ~10-15 clans in Typhoon, most of them deserving to be in Hurricane, will take even longer to get to their respective position. Making it even harder for Typhoon strenght teams to progress and getting their share of wins in time...
  15. DataDemon

    STALINGRAD "FINALIZED VERSION" (just a 2nd Kronshtadt)

    *edited* As for the thread, first of all if you need exact stats about Kronstadt-Stalingrad here is your link. http://proships.ru/stat/ships/1164,1133/ It's in russian, but you will see the relevant numbers. Including AP pen at distance. Since we were talking about Stalingrad (as a good point given by OP) and the thread should stay in this area, instead of a baboon putting himself into the middle of discussion, if I may add my opinion (yeah, the baboon is not interested in it, but so are we not interested in his): Old Stalingrad was completely OP. But it was unique. Something new. Something interesting to play. Instead what we get now, in case this is the finalized version, is a WORSE moskva. There is again the face-face comparisson in detail if you like http://proships.ru/stat/ships/1164,723/ Some important details are: -Fire per minutes are same -HE DPM is 120k for Stalingrad, 160k fpr Moskva. So although you could be using HE, with that reload and pitiful damage you should stick with AP. Even if He does pen 50mm armor -AP DPM is 250k for St. , 300k for moskva. The AP penetration is better on Stalingrad, but at the same time moskva is not bad aswell. I don't think the 20% less damage does offset it. Also you can only overmatch minotaurs, so your caliber does not give you that much. -Bonus: DCP is 45 sec. Dispersion is worse than of a moskva. And I do consider the faster reaload to be more flexible (so you can spam HE and have ap ready when needed in 10 sec. -Armor is even better for Moskva. At least bow/stern (50mm some parts for moskva, while 25mm still for stalingrad 2). The broadside of a Stalingrad is better protected. -HP pool: 72 vs 65k, so not that big of difference I can list more details, but essentailly I consider it to be just a different Moskva. In terms of competitive/clanwars I would prefer a moskva anyday. And as for myself, I would take the Salem instead aswell. Stalingrad 1 was OP and wrong for the game. But Stalingrad 2 (the current version) is just as bad as a reward. It is simply not unique enough. You can get the same by playing moskva. I completely agree with OP that you cannot accept this ship as the reward for clanbattles. It is semi-balanced (I think it is even underpowered), but gives you no additional possibilities. E.g. Salem, though it is only the heal as difference gives you a lot more potential, like not to camp only. Whereas Stalingrad is just a bulkier moskva, which is a ship not that famous anyway. I hope they change something about it, right now it is sadly pure disapointment