Verence196

Only solid thing from Wargaming is that another Russian DD branch is coming. Three new ships. https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/common/whatsinthebox/

You don't agree with someone else, and therefore there is no point in continuing the discussion? By all means, don't participate - but what other reason than disagreeing with someone would you have for discussing something in the first place? I may be wrong here, but aren't the 6"/47 guns of the Worcester roughly similar to the 6" Mk XXVI guns on the Minotaur? Shouldn't that alone warrant the Worcester being at tier X, rather than at tier IX?

Pensacola really wouldn't be "disgustingly OP" for tier VI. She might have to take a slight nerf from where she is now, but only a slight one, in order to fit in nicely. I agree that the Brooklyn will have to be looked at carefully before going into tier VI, and might be a better fit at VII though. The extra guns gives it an edge over the Cleve, but it's not an impossible fit. Cleveland sits quite comfortably at tier VI (in every sense but AA, where she really is OP) at the moment. Brooklyn has one turret extra, but still - I'm just not a fan of using paper ships when there are real ones available. In any case, my point wasn't to argue how a completed US cruiser branch should look. It was merely to show that squeezing an Atlanta/San Diego into the main tree really doesn't make sense. And as superdeluxe has already pointed out - nothing of this is likely to happen any time soon. Wargaming probably has - and should have - other priorities. =)

At a rough guesstimate, the rumored upcoming cruiser line split would look something like this if split after tier V: I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X Erie Chester St. Louis Phoenix Omaha Pensacola Northampton or Portland New Orleans Baltimore Des Moines Brooklyn St. Louis (1938/Helena) Cleveland Fargo Worcester Or something like this if split after tier VI: I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X Erie Chester St. Louis Phoenix Omaha Brooklyn Pensacola New Orleans Baltimore Des Moines St. Louis (1938/Helena) Cleveland Fargo Worcester It is difficult to see how Wargaming can avoid putting the 1938 St. Louis-class into the tree at tier VII. There's not much else that could bridge the gap between the Brooklyn at tier VI and the Cleveland at tier VIII (which is where most people seem to think she fits best). That still leaves a number of interwar/wartime US cruiser designs as possible premiums. The Northampton (personally I'd love to see a USS Augusta team up with an HMS Prince of Wales =p), Juneau, Wichita and Oregon City classes. Whether any of those could be made unique enough to warrant their own premium versions is another matter entirely. In any scenario I struggle to see how the San Diego would fit in. She's an Atlanta, and it probably isn't attractive to Wargaming to put in the time and effort to produce yet another premium version of the same ship (although the Omaha-Marblehead-Murmansk and Gnevny-Gremy-Anshan are examples of how it could be done). Nor is she likely to go into the tree at tier VII. Wargaming looks like they are reserving the 5-inch spamboat concept for premiums, and in any case it would be a significant departure from splitting the US cruisers into pure 8-inch CA and 6-inch CL branches.

So - going by superficial stats alone - we should expect a slightly more compact, slightly slower and slightly better armored NC? Could be a very nice captain trainer indeed. =) Nonsense! Had breakfast on the beach at Scapa a couple of years ago. A really serene and beautiful view. =)

The campaigns appear to be designed so that you need to use all the various ship classes - even including carriers - in order to complete all tasks. That's done on purpose. It's supposed to provide players with a learning curve - taking them through various ships, mechanics and skills in order to reap the rewards. The campaigns are also not time sensitive - they won't go away, like missions do. You have all the time in the world to grind different lines. Similarly, the "Honourable service" campaign is designed for high tier. The "Science of victory" campaign is there for people who don't have access to high tier ships yet. Good luck!

Correct!Or was it the commander of the US Navy during WWI? I can never remember. =p

Good job. The Mahan is probably one of the best ships to take into the top tier meta. She can seriously overperform, if you know how to play her. It also helps that the Nicholas and Farragut plays fairly similarly, giving you lots of practice before you get there. =) But yeah, love the Mahan. Ironic though that it is named after Alfred Thayer Mahan - perhaps the greatest, and certainly one of the most outspoken, battleship fan of the era. =p

I'm assuming you're sailing in a battleship yourself here?A favorite tactic would be not getting that close to a torpedo armed adversary in the first place. If you cannot avoid that, I can only suggest that you time your turns to avoid being broadsided. Most battleships average 30s reload times for their main battery. If you are prepared, and begin your turn immediately upon the enemy having fired, you should be able to successfully turn your stern towards him without being broadsided.

Xp for damage dealt is afaik calculated on the basis of what percentage of a ship's hp pool you took off. In short, you get the same amount of xp for shooting away 50% of the hitpoints of a destroyer (around 4k hp) as you for shooting away 50% of the hitpoints of a battleship (around 20k hp). So knowing your damage total is not alone a perfect indicator of how well you have done. Xp for assisting in capping is calculating somewhat similarly. The more you helped capping, the more xp you'll get. Sailing into the cap just before your allies complete capping won't net you much. If I remember correctly, the detailed xp screen shows a breakdown of how much you participated in capping. In short, 30k in a t4 game is ok, but not fantastic. You shouldn't expect to be in the 1000 xp range for that alone. There is also a lot you're not showing us. Study the "detailed report" and "credits and xp" screens in your after action reports to get a better idea of what nets you points and not. =)

Thanks to all of you. Fantastically generous. =)

I smell a case of Zeno's turrets.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes#Achilles_and_the_tortoise

Happened to me once tonight as well. Last time it happened WG said it was server trouble at their end, if I remember correctly. Guessing its something similar this time. Hopefully it will be gone when the patch update hits.

Fair enough. I think we have different reference points. To me, WoWS is the most fun when I'm invested in a battle, trying to push a ship to deliver at the edge of its performance envelope. Sometimes it works, other times it doesn't. Winning is nice, but it's not the end all/be all. You are right to point out that other ships can influence the course of a battle way more than the Emerald. I wouldn't consider picking the Emerald for ranked/competitive play, either. For the purposes of this thread, I'm just concerned with whether it's possible to have fun in the Emerald or not. To me, that is quite possible. Those players that feel fun is impossible in WoWS unless you have a chance to get the Kraken in every game (and I'm not saying you're one of them), are not going to have a very good time in the Emerald, however. =)

But surely that is the definition of "best way to play". =) This is a game. The chief reason to spend time on it is for entertainment.

But her guns really aren't that low damage. Not if you pick your targets. The improved short-fuse AP means they can do some serious hurt to DDs, not to mention imperfectly angled cruisers. Even angled cruisers can take 1-2k dmg per salvo from the Emerald, if you can place your shots. With the decent RoF, those numbers can add up quickly. That said, I'll be the first to admit that she's very weak against BBs in the open sea, or well angled cruisers with high RoF (like a well played Konigsberg). The lack of HE is hurting there. The official Wargaming advise line that starts "If you have to fight battleships..." is pretty painful to read - especially in the current BB heavy meta. There again, that is why I said it's important in the Emerald to pick your targets correctly and to have good situational awareness. There are fights you really have to avoid. =)

I'm not arguing otherwise. A more skillful captain will always be an advantage to his or her team. I'm just suggesting that the impact of a skillful captain will be lower in most weekend battles. Or, to put it another way, when the average player skill levels are low, results of battles will tend more towards chance (i.e. 50% W/L). That holds true, even if one of the players has more skill than the others. That's just my impression, though. I may well be wrong. =)

Fair enough. GL&HF =)

Now you're just making my point again. Not saying people who aren't doing well in the Emerald don't have any skill in WoWS. They can be fantastically skillful. I'm just saying that skills acquired from sailing other ships are not necessarily automatically transferable to the Emerald. What makes you good in other cruiser lines is not what makes you good in the Emerald.Nor am I saying that the Emerald is a fantastic ship. I'm saying that you can have some fantastically fun games in her if you know her strengths and weaknesses. The Emerald is a ship that needs to be min/maxed, more so than most other ships in WoWS. =) And, yeah, distance is relative. In the Emerald, "stay at a distance" means don't be afraid to stay at 12-13km. At that range you can still do serious damage to cruisers and DDs. The reason I put it in at all, is that I see many Emerald captains sailing their ships even to within battlefield secondary range. Presumably in order to use their torps, although they rarely get the chance to before they are deleted. And, finally, I didn't say it was a particularly good Blyska captain I hunted down. That said, if I see you in a battle, I'm game for some brawling. =p

Why do you have to bring metal into this?

Now you're deliberately misunderstanding me. =)I did indeed say that most players will have a WR around 50% ("most" as in "the large majority" - including both good and bad players). Anyone with a WR over 50% (from 50,1%), has a decent WR in my book. And the very best players do cross the 70% threshold (and by very best I'm talking about the absolute top percentiles). Just check any one of the many WoWS stat sites. I suspect the reason Flamu may be at 63% (which is still a very good WR), is that he is - as a content creator - playing many different ships and types, rather than honing his skill on a select few vessels.

That would be true if winning or losing battles was purely down to your own skills, but in a team game like this it isn't. The overall skill level of the team has a major impact. Random team allocation and MM serves to negate the overall impact of your skill on the end result of the battle. So the WR of weak players will be boosted, and the WR of good players will be hampered. This is why most players hover around the 50% WR mark, and why even the very best players will just about reach 70%. It is also one of the main reasons why teams with divisions tend to do better. Because players in divisions tend to have invested more time in the game, and therefore are more skillful, divisions tend to increase the average skill level of the team. When the skill level of both teams drop, the end results of battles therefore comes more down to chance. As a result - good players will not see their skills reflected in the WR. And - more to the point - because the randomness factor of games increases, good players will tend to feel more frustrated, because their actions appear to have less impact than what they're used to. I also suspect that the level of impact is dependent on the type of ship you are sailing. Some ships are much more dependent on cooperation, than others. A stealth torp DD, or a fast and well armored BB may have less of an issue than, say, a cruiser or slow BB. This is also one of the reasons why it is so difficult to measure actual player skill by stats alone. =)

Just for some balance to this thread - I don't find the Emerald too bad at all. I'm having some decent games in the ship. In playstyle it's really most like Russian DDs, in that it is an incredibly squishy gun platform. It performs best when brawling with enemy DDs, or as a long range gun platform. In both cases you need to use your WASD-keys for all they're worth, and to have substantial situational awareness. You can never sail in straight lines for more than a few seconds at a time, and you can never - ever - overextend. Always be aware of where enemy ships are (or where they can potentially turn up), and always have an escape plan ready. The Emerald has decent speed, and with the upgraded hull it's rudder shift also becomes acceptable. You need both. In short, to play the Emerald successfully you need to: Fire at targets of opportunity Don't rely on pushing to get those kills. You have decent turret traverse and RoF - use them to shift your fire to better targets. Prioritise destroyers and cruisers showing their broadsides. Your damage total will add up as long as you survive. Don't risk dying just to get that final kill. Your torps are secondary weapons. They are decent if you find yourself in a position where you can ambush, but don't rely on them. Getting close enough to use them on anything bigger than a DD will too often put you at unacceptable risk. Be an unpleasant target Weave, duck, turn. Stay at a distance. Never sail in straight lines. Never be the best possible target for the enemy. Try to make sure that you stay in a position where the enemy will prefer firing on someone else. Adapt to the situation Don't be afraid to retreat, or spend time working around a flank to get to a more advantageous position. Read the minimap often. Try to predict where the enemy is, and where he will be heading. Playing the Emerald is not for everyone. You need to hone skills which are not much in demand among most other classes of ships in the game. That said, once you get them, you can have some fantastic games in this ship. I had a particularly memorable one on saturday on Shards where I hunted down a Blyska-Mutsu combo inside one of the archipelagoes. Epic fun! =)

Weekend players (i.e. players who play mostly on weekends, and rarely build up much skill) makes battles completely unpredictable. Win or lose often becomes largely a matter of luck, rather than of your skill level, on Saturdays and Sundays. =)

I've seen an enemy DD sunk by the secondaries of a friendly Bogue. To be fair, the DD was close to death when he came into range, but still - that's the ultimate way to be defeated. =p