DFens_666

Probably a bit luckier with the Bismarck and a bit of bad luck with the Tirpitz. 50 games is still kinda low to get a good picture for a specific ship. Every win/loss makes a big difference, you have 30 wins with Tirpitz and 40 with Bismarck. Imagine you play 10 more games each, and you win 8-9 with Tirpitz but only a couple in Bismarck... they would be much closer together fast. Could be, that his teams are worse so he has more opportunities to get more damage.

Yeah... it feels like an underwhelming ship to play in divisions. Its not so good in supporting the others (fighting DDs f.e.), and the torps work better if you have the enemies pushing you. In a division, you usually do the pushing.

Is of nice color https://wows-numbers.com/de/user/snapshot/ships.ajax?accountId=540423429&date=2019-08-04&type=pvp On another note, havent played today, but still looked nice

From my recent experience in 3x division, it certainly seems like it and would make sense. Basicly, the better our division was (WR), the worse our teammates were. If we played with 3 players, who have >63% WR, we had to fight for every win, and even got more losses than if i played with 2 other guys who had lower WR. Doesnt make sense really, why should 3 very good player struggle harder? Unless we get worse teammates to "balance" it out. Best games i had, if i joined a division with 50-58% WR players. Was hard, but in the end we won. Compared to the other games, were it was extremely hard but couldnt get the win as our teammates made everything possible to throw it away. At the same time, every time ive been divisioning with people who have lower WR than I, they start to complain about the MM Which again would mean, they make it easier for me, but i make it harder for them. *tinfoilhat off*

Couldnt agree more. I had to decide: Stalin or Bourgogne. A lot of people said, how much fun Bourgogne is, but i dont really like those small caliber guns, already on JB, and Bourgogne is even a tier higher. So in the end, i went with Stalingrad. Not a bad ship, but because of its reputation, not that much fun to play it. Everyone gets busy shooting you, because "Stalingrad OP, must die !!!11" The issue i see with Bourgogne, its bad at tanking. Low HP and covered in thin armor (free HE farm). I can do well in GK, because i can tank a lot if needed. Maybe Bourg could make it up for it by deleting stuff, but i also see issues with Cruisers which can bounce your shells. If i get the steel, i might take it still as the next ship. Not really interested in Flint/Black/Neustra and probably neither in Somers. Cant really vote, as stalin is good, but not that much fun

I still prefer Epicenter to Standard battle But i agree, islands of ice is absolute horseshit. TotD is... okish. Also i like epicenter in that lowtier map, whats it called, Big race? or something like that.

1. You dont have Azuma. Azuma is leading on many stats if you care to look them up (damage, survivability by FAR) even WR is 3rd best. 2 Again, you dont even have Ibuki... 3. I agree, we need more Female and LGTBQ Captains aswell What you say? There were no during WW1+2? Who cares!!111 (on a seious note, PA does have 2 captains...) 4. African ships? Also id like to add, Musashi is pretty OP for its tier.

Eh, are you sure? Im pretty sure, they dropped from normal containers, because we only got like 5 Great 8 Containers back then. Quick google also seems to confirm, that they did/do drop from normal Containers once you have atleast 1 item.

Should be obtainable through normal containers, once you get 1 piece to start the collection. Same like Azur Lane or In the service of the Motherland.

Some T5 Sealclubbing... grinding with @Saltface and @ForlornSailor Got called having scrub protection for double citadelling an almost full broadside Graf Spee

Ovechkin has also colored tracers

Imo you should drop SI for CE when you get your next captain point (if you play CBs, you can still reset for free) Cleveland has no heal, so i think you can drop it. You lose 1 Radar/Hydro, but if you use premium consumables you should be fine. You could drop DE instead, if you want to transfer that captain on the Seattle at some point, since Seattle has Heal so you get more out of it. As @Tyrendian89 said, post a couple of replays, its mostly a problem of the playstyle.

First try in Exeter, wasnt too bad actually

Nah, i meant adjustmens like lowering the fuse delay. You cant do anything youself right now

Nope, thats actually how it works in Wows too. Its quite easy to test, take a CA and go close to an Omaha. Has a large citadel as you know. If you are too close, you will overpenetrate the citadel, because the shell leaves the ship before it can detonate.

This is not correct. Fuse time will only be taken into account, if the armor fuses the shell in the first place. F.e. i hit 25mm armor with Yamato shells, the armor is too thin to fuse the shell, so nothing will ever happen. If you hit 200mm of armor, then the fuse delay will start with 0.033 seconds. AP shells need to fuse first, then they will detonate after the delay.

But for that, you dont need a lower arming threshold. You need faster fuse delay. As CLs do have enough armor to arm the shell (usually 70mm+), but are too thin so shell just goes through without detonating. I dont disagree that its stupid (even in a BB vs Cruiser fight, not only CA vs CL btw), but you need to make the correct adjustements to get the result you want

If you have, try Kronshtadt on a BB aiming for upper belt (32mm). You will get mostly overpens, as it needs 51mm of armor to arm the shell. When you are at an angle, where you start to get ricochets, you should also start seeing pens. Armor thickness needs to be taken into account if it fuses the shell or not. If the armor thickness is not enough in the first place, shell wont detonate. If shell arms, then it depends on the fuse delay if it detonates inside the ship or not. To your Wooster / repu example. Ofc, but thats because wooster has insane RoF. Give Hindenburg same reload, it would hurt more

Not if you look at it from the standpoint, that its already rigged It just feels weird, that a better division wins less and needs more carrying than a worse division. Shouldnt be happening really. Could be bad luck, i know, but at some point you start to wonder...

Angling makes armor thicker, also you still have impact angle aswell, so a BB with 32mm armor will pretty much guaranteed penetrations as the threshold is so close to the armor needed to arm the shell (34mm). Its a bit difference against CLs, as they tend to have 25mm armor. But as i said, if you have a CL flat broadside, you go for the Citadel. A CL cant withstand CA AP while broadside, unless you are a Omaha/Atlanta and you are 4km away... then your threshold doesnt do anynthing, as the shell doesnt arm in time. You need a lower fuse timer (f.e. 0,022 like Stalingrad) to make it work.

I can only speak about 3x division, as i basicly dont play anything else anymore. But you would think, that 3 people with 63% WR dealing 300-500k damage a game should get some easy wins aswell... doesnt happen anymore really. I mean, yes, we still get 70% WR or more, but it feels like a HUGE wall to overcome. Compared to playing with not Unicum WR players, I can get even 80% WR, while it feels less of a struggle. It just feels like, that both teams gets more potatoes, while playing with 3 good players, our team has more potatoes who just die in 3-5 minutes and it almost gets impossible to recover from that (at times atleast)

Already feels like they are put in my/our teams deliberately From my latest experience playing 3x division: - 3 people with >63% WR absolute horror, we only have the biggest suckers on our side. - Me and 2 guys with <58% WR, much more manageable, i have very good games which are tough, but mostly end in victories. Also quite often ive been told by *closer to average* players, that they have worse MM when they are divisioning with me and another 63% WR player. Coincidence? Everyone can say *tinfoilhat and whatever* but somehow i feel that something like that is in place. Also if i see what other people with >65% WR say, who are using MMM.

This, i even came across people who accnowledged this ( @GarrusBrutus remembers ) I made my own math, and it seems to be favourable for them to actually play like this. They wont invest 15 mins into a game only to get a mediocre win or loss. Die fast, get your 300-400 XP regardless. However, once they reach T10, i dont see a reason for this anymore as they arent grinding anything... well some modules and ofc LMs, but this cant be the reason there. Guess they just like to keep on playing like that

Fire make BB go ouchy? Not really The HIV annoyed me for quite some time. At some point it was like, well either you kill me, or i kill you. I got him I think i still had like ~15k HP left to go.

Hmm, i dont see a viable reason for that. T8+ Cruisers have atleast 25mm armor, or even 30mm. So even a slight angle is enough to arm the shell. And if a CL is flat broadside, you want Citadels - not pens. Citadel armor is always thick enough to arm CA shells. The only thing, which can let you overpen the citadel is, that the shell doesnt detonate in time (Kronshtadt says hello) Overpenetrating a BB in a CA is most likely due to hitting the superstructure (i dont think they need to get pens there all the time) or you shoot the bow and most likely shell detonates outside of the ship. Now if we go below T8, do CAs really need it there? Imo no. While BBs are also thinly armored (T6/7), i dont see a reason to punish CLs even more. CAs have the power to overmatch some of them anyway. AP on broadside BB works, but so does HE because you dont get much shatters.