Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

About Johmie

  • Rank
    Senior Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

456 profile views
  1. Petition to remove storm

    Lion with the better engines and Conqueror both do 29.5kn.
  2. The worst bot yet

    I find the contrast between the average values and the best values interesting; average damage of 8441 compared with a best of 165 111? and Average XP of 508 compared with a best of 3486? I mean I know people can have good games, but to do 19.5 times your average damage or 6.9 times your average XP? A bit of a contrast, almost as if it wasn't always the same thing controlling the ships on the account, like... perhaps and not accusing anyone ()... there was a bot grinding away with little success most of the time and someone sometimes actually playing the ships that bot had unlocked and doing much better. And that perhaps the contrast could be something to be looked for. And a second thing that I find interesting here is how it bears out @eliastion's theory of how many games should be won. He's suggested that 3 of 10 are certain defeat, 3 of 10 are certain victory, and the other 4 are the ones you can affect with your actions. So under that theory if "you suck but still play - you'll win 1 of these 4 and secure 40% winrate." and lo and behold the bot has 39.9%
  3. Emden like gameplay at higher tiers

    The Wiki ( http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/World_of_Warships ) has recommended Captain skills for each ship and a description of what each skill does. Respeccing can be expensive, though the fewer skill points that are assigned the cheaper it is for a Captain. HE shells go "splat" on armour that is too thick, so if you are firing a small gun at thick armour then your HE shells will do no damage although they can still start fires. So IFHE can either be very powerful on a smaller ship or completely useless on a ship which has larger guns, better penetration (most ships have 1/6 penetration on the HE, some have 1/4), or larger guns and better penetration (RN Battleships). (And RN BB HE is good, but that makes it a case of the HE being a viable alternative in more situations rather than, as with other battleships, AP being better always or almost always. World of Tanks experience will have given you some idea of the basic concepts of angling and AP-bounces, though the details differ considerably, and switching ammo does give better results than sticking with HE.)
  4. Pink Bots

    Had a couple of bots manage to turn pink apparently by how determined they were to ram each other. One of them might have shot the other though as I think only one was taking reflected-damage, so something had unbalanced it. Main danger of friendly fire in a Battleship Brawl seems to be the carriers though as those bots don't care how close together the brawlers are, they are going to drop those torpedoes!
  5. Emden like gameplay at higher tiers

    And remember that Premium Time is common to all three Wargaming titles, so even if you decide that World of Warships is not for you after all you can use that Premium Time in World of Tanks.
  6. Royal Navy Arc

    Both definitions, used figuratively. Can also refer to the path of a planet or other heavenly body across the sky or can refer to an arch. So an arc is a path something follows (like an Atlanta's shells follow a high ballistic arc) or something that links two points (like an arch or an electrical arc in arc lights or arc welding); therefore it has been used to refer to the path of a story or of a character through that story and WG are using it to refer to the path players will follow through this event. Not sure what you mean by "all of a sudden" anyway, I think Chaucer used it to refer to a character's actions.
  7. Something aint right?

    If there are 6 ships around you shooting at you from every angle then the advice would be to not put yourself in that situation. Be aware of potentially angry smokescreens and of islands that ships with high ballistic-arcs can shoot over, while remaining concealed and (in the latter case) protected behind solid rock. Remember that although ships with high ballistic-arcs have the advantage of being able to shoot over islands they have the disadvantage that the high-arc causes long flight times for the shells, so their effective range drops well below their maximum range even with the sort of evasive manoeuvres a battleship can do. Be a pain in the arse for their targeting and watch your potential damage counter soar. Captain skills of Fire Prevention (reduces chance of fires and number of places you can burn in) and Basics of Survivability (reduces duration of fires and flooding, plus faster module repairs) will help with the fires from the HE Spam as will flying the flag to further reduce the burn time. If you are under sustained HE fire then it can be better to let the fires burn as you can't be set on fire in the same place as you are already on fire, depending on what you think your chance of breaking contact is. If you think you can get out of range or line of fire fairly soon then burn for that short time and then extinguish the fires rather than put out the two or three and be set on fire again just before you break contact and have those burn the full duration. And note that I am a potato, so take everything I said with due caution and enough salt that Jingles would need to hire more miners.
  8. Hood. Close second place tie between Scharnhorst and Minotaur.
  9. Wacky Ship Ideas

    Yes. Battleship size guns, hence the joke about people complaining of "BB" HE spam or still complaining about how AP-Secondaries "suck".
  10. Wacky Ship Ideas

    A nice idea, but what would the secondaries fire? If they fire HE then people will complain about it adding to "BB" HE spam and if they fire AP then people will complain as there is a consensus that AP-Secondaries "suck". Also I think you mean 24km secondaries since I expect it would be worth going for a secondary-build with that and that would include AFT. In terms of whackiness I would rather like to see how the Conqueror covered in Minotaur turrets that someone mocked up a picture of would play.
  11. Or the carrier player has to "switch ammunition" since those rockets are not designed for anti-capital ship work; that's what the torpedoes and bombs are for. Use the rocket planes for Destroyer hunting, with a secondary purpose of a small chance of fire and module damage on a larger ship. Use the bombs or torpedoes on the larger ships, with a secondary purpose that if need be you can make a run on a DD with a small chance of success. With the new system where the next squadron becomes available when all planes of the present squadron have dropped or the "F" key is pressed (like with single fire torpedo launchers, to "reload") it probably won't take that long between strike runs... if nothing else as since there's no scouting and multi-tasking and nothing else for the player to be doing in the meantime they can't have too long a delay before the player can start his next lot of attacking. And if you essentially have a dozen 5" shells hitting a destroyer then that's essentially a good salvo or two from an Atlanta, which can ruin someone's day.
  12. It is; text in highlighted box on https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/game-updates/arms-race/ says "Please note that to engage in Arms Race mode, you need to click on the current battle type near the Battle! button and change it accordingly." and that was/is the way it worked/works on the PTS.
  13. Please coordinate better between the people who write the news posts and who set up things in the game; yet again the news post says that all the missions can be completed again and yet again that is incorrect as the only one that shows up for me is the "play one battle". I wasn't expecting, on past form, that the stars earned for Operation Dynamo would have been reset to allow the "get five-stars" mission to be repeated and the clan-base and hall-of-fame aren't missions that show up in the mission list. But I had expected to be able to do the three-victories in Arms Race again at least.
  14. News post on the return of Operation Dynamo says "The new version has an updated list of the ships you can use in the operation, which includes British, Commonwealth, French, Polish, Soviet, and American Tier VI and VII destroyers. Besides these, you can also use British Tier VIII destroyer Cossack to complete the operation." (emphasis mine) so it looks like Haida might get to experience soldier swearing in French-French rather than Quebec-French.
  15. CV Rework Discussion

    I typed quite a lot yesterday, but made the mistake of clicking “view new posts”, the box went blank, and the content that was restored was the start I’d made on a response to El2aZeR about Radar on planes that I’d abandoned when I found that although one mark of Sea Hornet carried ASH Radar, and the A and S stood for Air-to-Surface, that this had been adapted into being Air-to-Air Radar rather than the sort he was concerned about. Does make me wonder how this new system would handle a Sea Hornet though as that could carry both bombs and rockets and was a capable fighter, or how it would handle a Sea Mosquito as that could carry bombs, rockets, and a torpedo and still be a capable fighter. Could be worse though, was the RAF that flew the “tsetse” variant of the Mosquito that carried a 57mm gun for use against U-Boats and which as well as being useful against smaller surface ships was used in air-to-air combat; allegedly gave a double meaning to knocking out a Junkers 88’s engine as rather than just meaning “stopped it working” it also meant “shot it right out of the housing”. New system does seem to indirectly solve one of my reasons for not playing Aircraft Carriers; I have quite enjoyed trying them out in Co-Op on a few runs of the Public Test and had no real objections to how they worked. The problem was there were no British Carriers was that playing something that felt a little like an RTS game made it even more frustrating to try to figure out what the other ships on the team were doing. Missions in RTS games where you have AI allies so not everything is under your control can be annoying, but in this case not only were these “units” not under my control but they’d get salty if I wasn’t doing what they wanted or if they got destroyed, even if it was their mistake rather than mine. So that British Carriers are on the way that the new system won’t make me wish I was playing an actual RTS where I could tell the units where to go and keep them working to the same plan does solve that problem. It does seem rather a drastic reversal though as it looks from the test-footage as if the player’s attention is going to be tightly focussed on their planes and their attack run and dodging the flak, so it’s going to be a lot of concentration on one task rather than the player’s attention being spread in the old-style multitasking. And it would be less multitasking than using a surface ship where you have to pay attention to whether you’re going to get spotted or if you’d expose your broadside or if an island might have something nasty behind it rather than just focussing on your aim. Have to see how it actually plays though and how narrow your focus could become, I am interested enough that I’d try to get into a Beta or whatever or at least be eager for the first iteration on the PTS. Thankfully it appears the only controls in common with World of Warplanes is “W” for faster/boost and “S” for slower so I haven’t gimped myself by deciding to use my old dusty joystick rather than a mouse in that, if the controls had been the same then practicing mouse-flying might have been useful. And I’m glad in one regard that the controls aren’t similar as that would allow altitude control and a video someone posted of another game did annoy me with the deliberate crashing of Swordfish into the sea. From looking at the footage I do have a couple of suggestions and a theory and a complaint. First suggestion would be to keep the squadron together rather than have the planes that have dropped their ordinance return home in dribs and drabs. It does make it clearer how many planes you have left to attack with if the ones that have performed their attack leave, but from comments it does seem to also make it confusing how many losses the squadron has suffered as it could be unclear which planes have been shot down and which have simply left. There is also my general feeling that if it makes sense for the planes still carrying ordinance to go in with the attack to split the fire then it makes even more sense for the more expendable planes that have already dropped theirs to also go in, rather than go home. Second suggestion would be to have a toggle for how many planes perform an attack. They have said they wanted to reduce the alpha strike potential of carriers so it’s unlikely they’d let you set it to all twelve, but I’ll still suggest it as one of the three options. Option 1 would be as it is, three planes with a fairly small target area so you’d have more precision but at the cost of needing to fly through the AA-fire up to four times. Option 2 would be for a higher-AA environment, six planes with a larger target area so you’re more likely to waste some of the ordinance (using torpedoes as an example even a Tier-X battleship isn’t large enough to be hit by all of a line of 6 torpedoes, if it turns even slightly) but only have to go into the attack a maximum of twice. And then the unlikely Option 3 of all twelve at once, which would be probably only be used with torpedo bombers to dump a long line of torpedoes against a group whose combined firepower would be needed to make the AA too murderous for anything more subtle. Theory is to wonder if Wargaming have considered my second suggestion from the opposite angle; I was saying that the heavier the AA the more planes you’d want to send in at once, but they might be thinking of varying this with how durable different nation’s planes are. US Navy planes are tough with their larger airframes and self-sealing fuel tanks, so they can afford to make multiple attack runs as shown. IJN planes though are more delicate and can’t afford to get hit, so more of them at a time release their ordinance so they don’t have to make as many attack runs. This would give the US greater precision and efficiency, and a better ability to make a follow up attack if someone Damage Controls a fire or flood, but give the Japanese a better alpha-strike ability and harder attacks to avoid, and thereby give them a different flavour to their gameplay. Complaint is that what has been shown feels like it should only be one part of the carrier system rather than all, or almost all, of it. I’d theorised before that they might be taking a cue from the Total War games where you could control your units in a normal RTS manner but with the artillery units you could take direct control and fire those yourself. And that last bit is what the footage reminds me of, something that should be combined with also being able to at least similarly take direct control of your carrier, rather than tactical map only, and preferably have multiple squadrons on the tactical map, even if those can’t be set to do more than go to a specific location. Or to put it another way, just as the replay function in World of Warships is really poor compared with X-Wing (released in 1993) I was wondering if Wargaming might take inspiration from an even older game called Carrier Command (released in 1988) where you could control your carrier or its remote vehicles either via setting waypoints or directly, and you have to be in direct control of them if you want them to fight. Which would still be “you can only control one squadron at a time” but make carrier gameplay more like the other classes as you would be spending a lot of time in the third-person view looking at your ship or your planes rather than on a tactical map. tl:dr Lost a lot of typing, and bit I got back wasn’t what I wanted. Present carrier system gives me horrible memories of escort missions in RTS games, and new system would avoid that. If worth planes sticking together on attack run it seems worth them continuing to stick together. Maybe vary number of planes dropping ordinance, either toggled by player depending on amount of AA or set by Wargaming depending on how durable the planes are. New system feels like it should be only one part of things, and in some ways Carrier Command from almost thirty years ago would have been a good inspiration.