DFens_666

Yeah, the problem is ofc still that AFT has the range extension for Secondaries and small caliber main battery. So its not a pure AA skill like MAA. If you balance AFT to give equal benefits like MAA, then it would give too much benefits for ships which also profit from the range extension imo. Thats the best reason to seperate them into 2 skills imo. I dont think they will do that anymore, since AA spotting range is tied to AA range on some ships now (mostly/only Cruisers?). Guess they dont like "stealth" AA anymore, so using "P" is only viable for DDs now. With AA range upgrade, Minotaur and co could lure planes into AA by disabling it - and they didnt like that. Even if it wouldnt be a bad idea imo, WG would never go for it.

Most fun i had playing WoWs in along time! Its hilarious They should just keep that in the game.

How is the amount of nerfs relevant to anything? If WG would release a ship, which is invulnerable to anything, while having 1 sec reload with 460mm guns, and 20km secondaries and AA that kills everything instantly, and then they would start to nerf 1 thing at a time, you would argue, that after x nerfs, they are not allowed to nerf it anymore, leaving it with 1 sec reload? Now that we got that out of the way: Yes, AFT needs to be changed. I hope WG doesnt just swap BFT <-> AFT at some point That would be the most ideal option imo. Secondary specced BBs gain a lot more by those 4pts compared to, lets say Cruisers (except Atlanta/Flint). Whether DDs gain something, or are actually hurt by the longer main gun range depends ofc on the DD in question. Can be good - can be bad Just for that, they should be seperated. I think, WG put them together to have a reason making it a 4pt cptn skill, they seem to lack any ideas to make proper cptn skills anyway. Would be great to have more builds/options. That might be overkill ? Maybe they should go for something like faster AA sector switching, combined with some smaller damage buff to both Flak/DPS? Like -15% / +5% / +5%. I think that would make it an equal choice compared to Manual AA.

Id say this happens not only to NC lately... But i citadelled a NC with my JB at an Angle too, while Forlornsailor was spectating and meant, that couldnt have been a citadel. Me personaly i think it could have worked, since i targeted his Bow and think it went through there. But ive seen so much weird stuff over the years, while its getting worse and worse even. Today Flamu citadelled a fully angled Kiting Montana in his Vladivostok afaik. He didnt undertand it himself, shouldnt have been possible. And ive frontal Citadelled Zaos with Hindenburg/Minotaur/other Zaos (in space battle with Zaya). Ive received frontal Citadels with Missouri from Montana, Roon from Gneisenau... Ive seen Minotaurs/Fijis Citadel BBs like Roma, GKs, Montana, Yamato. I think the whole armor is just bugged at this point

Unlucky me, when the Alabama died he got a 23k volley on me Had to play super careful after that because it was looking bad halfway through the game.

Got 3 today - No Ironium So not every Container will have it.

During the test season with CVs, we had one russian clan fielding 4 Stalins. It was so tight till the end for it was a fun game. They had like 994 points when we entered their 2 caps at the same time and won the game CVs in CBs would definetely make Stalingrads less useful. But then everyone will be playing Henri (which is kinda happening right now anyway). I think Henri is a much more versatile pick compared to Stalin.

One problem, which you can never filter out tho, is that you dont know WHEN someone played that specific ship. Stalingrad is ofc more recently, and the first people (who have more games in it) to get it, were good players already at that time. Doesnt mean that they were as good players when they played ship X,Y or Z. I think thats a very problematic situation, and might even falsify the data to some extend. (which is why i also question WGs method to balance ships). And then there is still the problem of WG buffing/nerfing ships across the years. F.e. my Yorck and Hipper stats suck. They were my first T7 and T8 ships. Yorck has been buffed at some point, and Hipper got several buffs (better HE pen and better armor) since i played it. Any comparision to other T7/8 ships on my account would be totaly misleading. And on T10, lots of Cruisers changed too in the last couple of years. Zao got buffed, HIV got buffed, Hindenburg got buffed (HE pen) /nerfed (reload) and Buffed again (more repair party), DM got buffed. If you would want a reliable comparision, you would need to have a specific timeframe in when people played both Stalingrad and the ship you want to compare it to. On the other hand, i straight up think (without any Data) that Stalingrad have a bit too much going for it. I personaly would remove the shorter fuse time, and the lower armor threshold to arm the shell. Those are 2 things most people dont even know about. They lead to Stalingrad getting more Pens/Cits, because the shell both arms easier and detonates earlier. And I still think stalingrad is not a fun ship to play, i rather want Bourgogne

On Maplesyrup last week GZ doesnt actually look that good compared to others, 2nd last in WR and damage (kaga worst WR and Enterprise worst avg damage @El2aZeR i think you need to correct that one again ) Buffs for a ship cant be justified because someone is bad in a ship - its not how this works Can i make a new account, suck with Fiji and then come here and say "Fiji armor sucks, needs buff, i die too fast". People would say im nuts (rightfully so). Stats (aka facts) show, its not worse than the others, so demanding buffs is extremely questionable.

Blindshot full HP devstrike

I also think this "getting carried in divisions" is blown out of proportion these days. Would you really find 2 Super Unicums to play with you all the time, so that they would carry someone to 65% WR? Unless its like Famliy or a very good friend i would doubt that. Funny thing is, both me and my Division buddy (which I have the most games played with) get constantly told that we are getting division carried. I wonder how that works from both sides People should just look at overall/Solo/Div WR and it should paint a good picture which skill level the player has. Someone, who has a very high 3x Div WR is most certainly a good player. >80% WR in 3x Div is extremely rare, usually involves CVs or some weird T1 stat padding (if you look at wowsnumbers you know what i mean^^), so id say ~75% is a good WR for 3x division.

That would be the definition of what normal people think about skill gap... But skill gap for WG is one player having difference in WR between the classes So someone has 55% in DD/BB/CA, but 75% in CVs that would be skill gap for them. Now they say, that would have changed (which i think is clearly a lie)

If your samplesize is low, then you can have a good WR by just being lucky Even if you have 50 battles played in one ship, then every battle contributes 2% of WR, which is still a lot. So 100 battles starts to be a meaningful amount of games by looking at WR and the contribution the player made within those games. You should have some battles where you got lucky/unlucky, and some where you contributed - or lacked to contribute - to a win. I guess you are talking about Danae/Nagato/Dallas -> samplesize is not big enough. Everybody has those ships, my own examples Did i do well? Not really. Did i get a good WR? Yup. Deserved it? Prolly not. Could i maintain that WR over 100 battles with the same contribution? Dont think so. Did i do well? I think so. WR? bad. Deserved it? Dont think so. Would I get a better WR with similiar contribution? Most likely yes. Or this: I played them at the same time. Contribution is similar (Damage/Kills), but Kongo has better WR than Hiei. Samplesize is too low for an accurate number tho. Btw, this doesnt change, that overall WR is still an accurate number for personal skill. You can be unlucky in a specific ship for a small amount of battles, but you cant be unlucky in every ship you play over hundreds and thousands of battles. Overall WR reflects how the player is able to influence the outcome of the game. If you are good, you will have more ships with high WR even if you play only a limited amount of games, but you can have ships with bad WR. Vice versa a bad player will have more ships with bad WR, but he can be lucky and have some with good WR. Always remember the amount of games played is the indicator.

T5 vs T7 is bad, but T6 vs T8 is just worse. T5 DDs have very good concealment compared to T6/7 DDs, so thats usually no problem. T5 Cruisers are extremely squishy, but it doesnt matter so much if you fight same tier cruisers or higher ones T5 BBs are still dreadnought style, so they have better armor, usually only thin armor at Bow/aft section which other BBs can overmatch. Now if you look at T6 BBs, which have paper armor all around which gets overmatched by T8 BBs, while at the same time they cant overmatch the T8 BBs because they are covered in 32mm armor. Its like every T8 BB would be a Yamato if you would compare it to hightiers. For DDs, T8 has Concealment module. Cruisers same as always, they struggle mostly when -2 on any tier.

Saw it too, couldnt be bothered to make a thread here tho. But ill enjoy the show now

They cant fix this. It is down to what people are playing - simple math. The same math which puts T8 into T10 MM often too. Many people play T10 because they see it as "endgame" content. T9 is usually a tier with fewer players (simply because you can play T10 right away), while T8 has more players, because there are a lot of iconic ships on that tier. Also many premium CVs are around now because they just released them. T5-6 are played less, because most people only grind through those tiers. I dont see a reason to play T6 either If anything, i pick T7. But there is no way to fix this, if anything, it will get worse the less people are playing on certain tiers.

But containers will get their content by the time they are generated. So if current rules are: You can get Ironium, and you get a Twitch container today, then it should be possible for it to contain Ironium And still im under the impression, that not every container will have Ironium

I dont think that would be a good idea with how MM works these days. Since they reworked MM, you can currently use any ship as an anchor. F.e. put a T6 ship with 2x T7 ships in a division, you will most likely never see T9 ever. Only possibility would be, if MM has another T6/7 div (with the same class setup) and put both into T9 match. Now with your proposal, put a T5 ship with 2xT7 ships in a division, and T7 would basicly always be toptier. Just have to use good ships which can deal with +2 MM (kamikaze *cough*) and you are good to go (aka exploit the MM).

You wont get it in every container if i read it correctly "you will PROBABLY get a few of these" emphasis on probably -> not every container contains them id say

I just got told, that (once again) WG just seems to be retarded, and flooding/fire duration reduction does infact get multiplied one after the other, making Montana LM useless http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Flooding Why shouldnt i use Module+Flag+BoS, but switch one or more of those so i dont have concealment module retarded af...

Maybe i just think its more viable than the other crap they call Legendary Modules Funny thing is, every T10 i own has crap LMs Great, now we gonna know that Salems LM will suck [edited]aswell (if they decide to make one) prolly in slot 5 aswell Btw you sure your numbers add up? Flooding should be from 40s to 20sec without LM (15% module, 20% Signal and 15% BoS) + an additional 30% would make 8 secs flooding. Fires would "only" get reduced by 65% from 60 sec to 21 seconds. I think that qualifies as immune to DoTs

Unless we are talking going 1v1 close range in a Yamato (which is extremely questionable for a Yamato anyway) then it should just pick another target - period. If you have no other target to shoot at, then it MIGHT be ok to shoot a Bow on GK with HE. But i still rate AP higher as you can break his turrets. So a Yamato shooting HE = 99,9% just bad for his team. (For a DD its very situational too, but we are talking about BBs here) You can bait other people into shooting your broadside and either dodge completely or turn in to tank it. You basicly dont want to brawl ina T8 BB vs T10 BBs. Thats already a bad move. So id say we are talking about >15km shots here, which you can tank in a T8 BB as good as a T10 BB can. Yamato/Musashi is just an exception here, which have a unique ability because of their caliber. If you play any T8 BB, and you have a GK infront of you, ofc you can just point his bow towards him to negate/migitate his damage. Or if you are fighting him , then just wiggle around. BBs with >25 sec reload can easily wiggle in and out to use their backturrets. So you can use all your guns. Yamato has a bigger problem doing that, because they open up their weakspot. Also, a GK needs to show more broadside to use his guns compared to a Bismarck - thats what i was going for. Tanking is not on/off. Thats what i was trying to go for: Know what you can do, and know what your enemy is capable of doing. I dont go brawling with my T8 BBs unless i know i can pull it off. Also you can tank a BB constantly, while shooting another target. Why are Cruisers never broadside? Isnt your situation extremely questionable? A North Carolina cant deal any better with a pushing Hindenburg than a Montana. They have the same caliber. Monty has 1 turret more, which doesnt help you because Hindenburg bounces with angled belt. Btw, im just throwing this out here: You dont know enough of the game, thats why you think T8 BBs have it the hardest, the comment of non-overmatchable Cruiser bow shows that. Hindeburg can bowtank a Bismarck, but so can a Hipper... not a special treat for T10. And a Zao cant Bowtank any T8 BB either. Just examples. Dont want to make a complete list. You can catch Cruiser broadsides everytime, unless you present yourself on a silver platter and everyone knows you are there. Im not saying this happens all the time - but there is no reason that T10 gets those opportunites more often. Its all about positioning. You can kite away if you already are already turned away before you are being permaspotted. Im not contradicting myself anywhere. You have have to know when to do what. Then what reason do you have to play any Tier? Except maybe T7 which usually has good MM... You might aswell get a T6 game while playing T8 so Thats just an arguement to dismiss any arguement The better point would be: Why play T9 ships? They end up even more often in T10 games than T8 ships, while still not having the same effectiveness. NC = Iowa, only Monty has more guns. Even Healthpool wise the jump is higher to T10. Why you feel i targeted you with that Wasnt meant that way. But people do it all the time, forums or while playing the game... You saying the same stuff over and over in every new paragrapgh doesnt make it more true tho. Why do people play T8 premiums then? Ive played 500+ games in Takao, which didnt get me anywhere Because you are not always lowtier... Or you have to grind... or play a premium ship - not enough reasons? Then i cant help you. In your instance: Your Bismarck WR is better than your GK WR. You dont have 50% more average damage, despite having 50% more firepower with more health. So how does that work out for you? That is contradicting yourself - not the points i listed on what T8 ships should do. Ofc you cant do everything at the same time. But the better you assess the situation, the better you know what course of action to take. Feel free to answer again, but i think all has been said, we are just going in circles now. So maybe we should stop at this point

XP on ships should be transfered to T1 Orlan afaik. Captain XP you are earning is automatically converted to Elite commander XP, as all space captains are already 19 pointers. So you already earn that every time you are playing with them.

Yamato is very good. Conqueror is prolly meh at best. I dont think i would use it. Mino is crap i think. You lose 5% concealment but gain 5% more dispersion for shells coming at you, while getting extra long smoke generation but shorter duration. Wont use it, especially because i play Radar mino anyway. Khaba i dunno. Monty might be quite nice, i think you can get almost invulnerable to DoTs if you stack Flags/modules/cptn skills. Might be worth a try atleast.

A Yamato shooting HE would be a detriment to his team, as he is very useless. Damage output from Yamato HE is not good, considering he would most of the time use only his front guns. Compared to a Conqueror which has higher fire chance and double amount of guns and can show broadside without getting citadelled to death. Sure, more HP means you can tank more, if you get damage in the first place. If you bounce, you receive no damage. GK has 105k HP, but has to show tons of broadside to use all its guns and eats massive amount of damage even at longer range, 20-30k no problem. Bismarck is much smaller, so the chance of receiving that amount of damage is lower, even if it has less HP. Obvious this is not true for every nation, but just an example that its not as bad as it looks. More guns: Yeah well...ships should get better with every tier shouldnt they? And its almost never a 1v1 in this game. If your flank has inferior numbers, just kite away. No reason to push in a T8 ship if there are Cruisers sitting behind islands paired with T10 BB. T8 BB can devastate a Cruiser also, but only if its alive. Most players being lowtier simply die because they think they cant do anything. Staying alive is the most important thing tho. Both sides have T8 ships, if you are better than the enemies T8 ships, then you have a better chance to win the game. People would just need to understand, that its not up to them to make a play when being lowtier. Its possible, but you cant force it as easily. Most people probably even lack the knowledge to do it properly. I wouldnt call your points invalid, ofc they make sense and they are facts. But I dont think they matter as much. When being lowtier, you simply dont have the same task as compared to being hightier. Thats why a lot of people actually struggle on T10 imo. They cant produce what is needed of them. While on T8 it doesnt matter as often, they get carried along. Id say making a play while being lowtier makes it even more crucial when and how to do it. But if people go with the mindset "i cant do anything" into the game, ofc they will suck. Even if its subcontiously to prove themselves right. Its all about game mechanics and knowing how to profit from them. Playing a T8 BB and showing full broadside to a T10 BB you dont have to wonder why you eat tons of damage. Whining doesnt help there.