Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About BruceRKF

  • Rank
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

2,088 profile views
  1. BruceRKF

    Balance Changes – Public Test 12.5 (DB 448)

    Agree with most of what you said, but why does need Shinonome a buff if compared to Fubuki? Shinonome has better gun dpm already by quite a bit and will still have a fair bit more after the Fubuki buff.
  2. BruceRKF

    European Destroyers tech tree split

    Grom has slightly better concealment and rudder shift, but no AP, less range and only half the torpedo damage. I still love my Blyskawica despite her stark weaknesses in rudder and concealment and her being extremely power-crept. Without even having played Grom, I already know which one I prefer. Depressingly, Grom also has the same reload on her torpedoes as Stord despite having only triple launchers. I feel like they could have at least given her a quicker reload there. As it is, it's back to last place in torpedo dpm at her tier.
  3. BruceRKF

    European Destroyers tech tree split

    I have only played Muavenet and Stord so far. Both not much though, so these are only first impressions, underlined with comparisons within their tiers, as well as a high degree of experience. Muavenet for me is the worst tier 5 destroyer (and I have played all but the Kamikaze sisters) and it mostly comes down to her torpedoes. HE dpm is quite good (tied 5th of 18 t5 DDs) , health pool and concealment are bang average (both 9th of 18), smoke is standard (like Japanese or Russian DDs). Speed is towards the lower end (13th of 18), but at least you get a speed boost. Torpedo range is also average and you have about a km of stealth torpedo window. She has all the makes for a decent if unremarkable hybrid DD. However, torpedo dpm is half (!) that of Maestrale which previously held the crown for worst torpedo damage at tier 5. And having only one launcher with no option to single launch makes tactical torpedoing impossible, nevermind that hitting a torpedo is barely noticeable on anything other than a DD. To add to that, while the torpedoes are fast, the reaction time for the enemy is actually second highest at tier 5 behind only the big 610 mm Mutsuki torpedoes. Honestly, I'd rather play Acasta which is already a pretty mediocre ship, but has better smokes and torpedoes that can actually hurt. Stord is closer to being the decent if unremarkable DD that Muavenet could be. This time the health pool is on the lower end (third worst), but you get good HE dpm (5th of 21) and your torpedo dpm goes from worst by far to only third worst. Not great, but serviceable. She also has the second highest base speed at tier 6 (although technically she is only 6th in ranking since there are five ships that do 38 kn base). Concealment is slightly below average, but nothing to worry about and you have just over 1 km of stealth torpedo window which is okay at tier 6. Main poblem for her is the terrible alpha damage of her indiviudal torpedoes. Like on Muavanet, many targets will barely notice a hit and reaction time is again second worst behind the big Japanese torpedoes. This means that hitting a torpedo in itself becomes more difficult, but at least a Japanese torpedo can cripple a target with very few hits while a European one will just be shrugged of. Both Muavenet and Stord are overall underwhelming on first impression. The latter I can at least see myself playing every once in a while, the former I cannot. Generally, the lack of AP still irks me to no end. As an experienced player, you always want the option to punish cruisers at short range ot farm superstructures of BBs once you have your fire going. Example to the point: right in my second game in Muavenet I had the opportunity to sneak up on a broadside stationary Omaha. In any other DD i would have citadelled the crap out of her, but nope. I also hit three of my four torpedoes (one hit the island, duh!), but because of the abysmal damage she had enough health left to react and start shooting at me. I was able to escape via smoke before she could do much to me, but as I said, in any other DD she would have been sunk easily between torpedo damage and citadels, none of which the new European DDs can provide.
  4. BruceRKF

    Update 12.4 - Bug Reports

    Same problem as @Dark_Meta_. Payed with the two resources I have in abundance (credits and FXP) and got no tokens.
  5. BruceRKF

    New Japanese Battleships

    The reason why there are only high tier ships and not a complete tech tree is probably money, as always with WG. High tier ships generate far more revenue for WG than lower tier ships. With how early access is handled these days, it's even true for tech tree ships. On the other hand, modeling the ships takes near enough as makes no difference as much time for a tier 1 as it does for a tier 10. That beinf said, between real ships and design proposals, the Japanese had plenty of ships to fill a battlecruiser and a battleship tech tree (I guess tier 3 could be difficult for battlecruisers, but they left that out already for the Italian BBs). Kongo and Amagi could go over to the battlecruiser tree, B-62 could be the tier 7 and some Kongo evolution the tier 6 and Tosa replace Amagi in the BB tree as an improved Nagato. I reckon there are some blueprints, maybe from the UK, for ships that would suit tier 4 and 5 BBs as well. And it should definitely be 460 mm guns for the number 13 ships, even if it means 32 mm overmatch. Let BBs share the suffering of cruisers at least a little.
  6. There is no money in lower tier ships, so it's only high tier ships, I would guess. I thoroughly agree with previous posts that the Japanese had enough real ships and viable blueprints for a complete (at least from tier 4) battlecruiser tech tree. As always, I am curious about the history of the proposed ships. Luckily, for battlecruisers it's a lot easier to find some historical evidence compared to the WG-fantasy high tier light cruisers. Some initial impressions from looking at the pictures, plus a quick search on the internet: Tier 8: B-62. A bit sad that they got rid of the two funnels the original design had. Tier 9: Number 13 (which was supposed to be a battleship, not a battlecruiser I think). Is it only me, or is the X turret too far from the Y turret? Are they going for a more Kongo-like look instead of following the design plans or is it just the perspective of the picture that is throwing me off? Tier 10: Project L, supposedly enlarged Kii class (so also a battleship, not a battlecruiser). Could not find anything historical about this one. Anyone has any links to something regarding this ship? Edit: @ColonelPete You forgot Ashitaka, although she is of course the same class as Amagi. And then there is the new dockyard ship, Daisen. Edit 2: Another thing: Obviously it's not nice to have even more overmatch in the game, but in this case WG could at least have BBs suffer as well and give the t9 and t10 the proper (historical) full 460 mm, not fabricate some 457s.
  7. BruceRKF

    Vampire II or Illinois?

    Personally, I am a sucker for historical ships, so between those two, it automatically means Vampire. Especially since they could not even bother to give Illionis a proper unique superstructure, as was planned for that 3x4 203 Iowa version. Apart from that, Vampire has excellent gun dpm (even better than Daring), which is what is most important in coop. I do not doubt that Illinois can do a lot of damage as well, but since in coop bots will come at you mostly bow-in, the BB dispersion hurts Illinois' damage, while Vampire can hit them easily. Should you ever want to play Vampire in randoms, she is great there too. While only having one torpedo launcher, the torpedoes have good range, speed and damage and reload quickly (similar to Cossack, I guess). She has very decent concealment of 5.8 km and 5 km hydro. Together with the dpm, that is a real threat to enemy DDs. The crawling smoke has advantages and disadvantages and is something to get used to, but can also help with DD hunting, especially in caps, since you can just keep crawling forwards while in smoke and force the enemy DD to bail or fight something they can't see. Can't say much about Illionois, don't have her. Others will have to write and ad for her.
  8. BruceRKF

    Update 12.4: European Destroyers

    AP shells for the new destroyers when? That is really all that concerns me about this new patch. I am generally interested in the new DDs (at least up to t8, since real ships till there), but without AP, they are missing so much in utility.
  9. Hello fellow captains! My memory seems to suggest that there was once a mod that made the container ship in port invisible. Am I misremembering? If not, does anyone know where I can find such a mod? I am asking because sometimes the container ship in the background ruins the asthetics of my screenshots
  10. BruceRKF

    New ships – Closed Test 12.5 (DB 444)

    Trying to get the thread back to its actual topic, i.e. the new ships: does anyone have further information about the historical designs of those two, especially Numancia? Searching through the internet has given me a little bit about Ruggiero di Lauria (those guns are too far apart for an Italian ship btw ), but I couldn't find anything about Numancia beyond WG's description of the ship. Also: more 30 mm overmatch, hurray!
  11. BruceRKF

    New ships – Closed Test 12.5 (DB 444)

    Aren't there still some countries where Soviet symbols like the hammer and sickle are forbidden? Why are they displayed in WoWs? Talk about having it both ways...
  12. Low tier, CV, submarine and in a DD with awful concealment. What could possibly go right? Glad that they changed the spotting xp mechanics, otherwise I would probably have landed somewhere in the middle of the scoreboard and no one would have been the wiser that spotting targets actually helps.
  13. BruceRKF

    Sneak Peek: The Longest Night of Museums 2023

    I remember this event from the last two years. Some very interesting stuff to see and listen to. Only downside I can recall is that some museums had some technical difficulties with their streams (video/audio quality). Not too surprising I guess, seeing as those museums are all over the world. Nevertheless, looking forward to this one!
  14. BruceRKF

    Two hidden gems ingame

    I remember that collection. It is ancient, back when New Orleans was tier 8 (and Cleveland, Pensacola and Baltimore at 6, 7 and 9). Good old times. I guess for newer players it might indeed be worth it to spend the coal on this collection to get the economic benefits if you play those ships somewhat regularly.
  15. BruceRKF

    New ships - Closed test 12.4 (DB 437)

    The more I inform myself about the history of the Spanish cruisers, the more I am baffled about the decision to put the 1940s refit of Méndez Núñez at tier 2. The ways I see it, the Spanish did not have that many protected cruisers, but still more than enough to put one of them at tier 2 along with all the other ships of that type we have at tiers 2 and 3. Why put a refit Méndez Núñez at tier 2 when you could make money by selling her as a tier 5 premium, for example? @Seefelder mentioned two far better options for tier 2 already.