Captain_Newman

Oh, I own her, and like the ship. Torp reload is troll too if you're forced to brawl late game, people never expect you reload and torp them again. Problem with Mutsu isn't even it's crap armor - you can angle to mitigate that issue - it's the troll guns. They're either trolling the enemy, or they're trolling you. W. Virginia is, I think, more consistent, though I should test her more. Mutsu's guns do hit extremely hard, when they hit.

Arizona isn't bad, I just think Warspite and W.Virginia are better, with the latter you overmatch everything you meet if you're top or mid tier. T6 isn't that bad for "mixing it up" anymore, actually, it's t7 that's always +2 these days, you'll be top tier a lot in t6 now. If we go outside of class, I'd say t61 is better overall in this tier - more carry potential.

I do agree with you, I'm just vary of completely dissing the mid tiers because it did take some adjustment and learning to make this line work - and it may have coincided with me grinding the Amalfi. I did go back to t7 when I grinded Gorizia and had a good time on it. I will say I have no desire to ever visit the t5's again. Say hi to mr. Flibble and the Potato King, btw.

Zara isn't terrible, she's just not quite "there" yet, for me the line started working with Amalfi. One issue with this line is that I find having Sansonetti being almost a pre-requisite to make it work - that improved EL in particular is necessary. It may not be the best 203 AP, but you get a lot of guns on Venezia and you can straight up delete broadside cruisers if you can switch fast enough.

In b4 we're having the same conversation in late 2021 about sub rework

Finally, someone who gets this ship. Personally, I can forgive a lot if the guns work - and they work exceptionally well on the Viribus, you citadel everything. Yea, she's slow, most BB's in this tier are, but she's maneuverable. Yes, she has bad AA, what ship doesn't these days? She can maneuver well enough to be difficult to hit with torp bombers, at least. Even Texas can't prevent drops from happening - it has relatively strong AA compared to it's peers, but it's very short ranged so it can make the CV pay for the drops a little, but not prevent them. I know it's not a popular opinion but Viribus isn't a bad ship. The guns are literally good enough to make up for other deficiences.

Thanks, sounds interesting, I'll definitely grab it soon. Would be nice to play an actual naval sim, particularly one not based on lootbox economy...

Pretty much. Rare ships are those you can't ever buy again - Missouri, Belfast, Kamikaze, etc.. I have a feeling the big E will join that bunch.

How is UA:D? Is it playable yet? I'm kind of interested in that one.

I don't think it's actually them being lazy, it's just that they have a set direction for the game, which, given it's f2p nature, is designed to cast as wide a net as possible. If this was a more hardcore sim that wasn't built on the f2p model, you'd have far less potatoes playing it - but the player base would be significantly smaller, as well. Personally, I'd love to see a game that focuses on surface naval warfare like wows does, but is more of a sim and less of an arcade team pvp thing... but that isn't and never will be wows.

Maybe they're trying to create some artificial scarcity so they can farm collector's money.. though probably not, a premium soviet Nurnberg is an odd ship to do it with.

This isn't a naval simulator, though. It's an arcade team shooter with ships. There's some tactics, sure, team positioning, angling, ammo selection, but this is far from being a realistic simulator, nor is it striving to be. As for what WG expects of CV players, they gave them automatic repair and defense fighter consumables, ship can only be moved (manually or by autopilot) when not controlling planes, AA has been nerfed into the ground so they don't need to be that careful about what they're dropping, planes regenerate, they're immune to detonations and nearly immune to fires, I mean.. I just don't see how adding wind direction factors into their vision of this class they've been putting every effort to simplify into absurdity. It's an interesting idea for a different kind of game, it's just not going to happen in wows.

No idea what you're talking about, none of what you just said is correct. Man, I wish I started with my current stats... I started playing about 3 years ago and they've gone up significantly since then, and had a nice spike up during the last year (having a consistently solid wr for over a year will do that, it's been nice that way). Anyway.. you're either lying on purpose or misreading something. I would suggest spending less time looking at my profile, and more time trying to improve yours. Either way, I don't care, you're not interesting, please go away. Actually, hang on, there's an ignore function. Ahh, that's better.

Just put mine fields on map borders. Problem solved.

Hard to settle for three, but let's try. 1. Daring - tons of fun, great little DD. 2. Jean Bart - still my favorite BB. Very consistent results, and I like the mobile playstyle. 3. Helena - remember when ships were simply fun without being OP, WG? Lots of guns, noticeably better balistics than Atlanta, I'd say losing radar for better guns is fair enough. But I mean, there's more good stuff like the Cossack, Gremy, Thunderer, Lenin, Belfast.. the list goes on.

Both ships are are still good. Not amazing, but good.

Yes, well, let's also give torps their historical stats (they were, in general, much slower and shorter ranged), make sure we understand the difference between hydrophones and ASDIC, make sure DD's can't actually reload torps once they've fired them, have Smolensk run out of ammo 5 min into the match (actually, I kinda like that suggestion ) Realism / complex mechanics and this game don't mix too well. I mean, most players still struggle to understand the simple mechanics in this game and complain about the "huge learning curve". At least half PA destroyers and Asashios I encounter in a DD try to torp me... introducing wind direction so you can launch planes would literally BSOD their brains.

Keep in mind that with SC's, you need to defeat two layers of RNG that is heavily stacked against you. First, you need to luck out heavily to get one. Then, you need even more luck to get anything good out of it. tl;dr - keep calm and get resource containers.

Losing 12km sea mines to get the really good 6km hydro, on a ship that packs anti-DD specialized ammo and instant disengage smoke is a really good trade in my opinion. Straight up better than Zara in terms of impact, it lets you play more aggressively early on and remove DD's if their team isn't providing them with enough support, which is often the case.

The Home of Balans comes to mind. I do like your suggestion, problem is they are highly unlikely to do it as it would effectively be quite similar to locking CV's in coop only; regardless of the "learn to counterplay, we don't like whining while we farm you" attitude of the CV apologists this is the least liked class in the game by a wide margin. If you give players an option to never see CV's, I'd wager the vast majority of the player base would do it. Most games in that special mode would be 3 human CV's on each team, the rest are bots. Ofc, WG could always try to incentivise playing this mode (offering rewards that require you to play it and are too juicy to pass up).. but then we're just back at square one. But don't worry, after souring their relation to the player base in 2019 with the glorious reeework, NTC and the PR nonsense, they're now in the process of chasing away the more stubborn of us with their homing TORPEDOES that ignore TORPEDO PROTECTION and citadel you. Everyone and their grandmother is telling them it's a terrible idea, so ofc they will shove this down our throats regardless. What they don't get is that there is a point of no return where even the relative non-existent state of the competition won't save them. They'll turn this into wowp with most teams being populated by bots if they stay on this course.

What I think would improve the situation massively would be the outright removal of rocket planes, coupled with a slight buff to dd air spotting ranges from air. Rocket planes are just too ridiculous - fast, they remove all stealth, and deal lots of damage to strategically most important targets with ease. Using bombs to hit dd's can be devastating to a dd (if HE, ofc), but does require more skill than hitting them with rockets - so at least, make them work for it. A complete potato shouldn't be able to easily damage anything - aiming skill should be rewarded, and if you don't have it, well, then you don't perform. They also over nerfed the AA. Combine that with slingshots and AA is basically decorative at this point.

Interesting (and incorrect) position, but you knock yourself out buddy. There's plenty of constructive ways to prove the original proposition wouldn't fit. Labeling the OP as a whiner so you don't have to deal with the subject matter being presented in a very polite and civil way is just a lazy way to try and shoot someone's argument down. That's in my book. But again, knock yourself out.

Another epic necro. @Excavatus, the bat signal is lit.

No need to be rude. He was being polite while making a suggestion. You might not like it - I personally think it doesn't fit the game as it's intended to be (WG regularly discards any ideas it deems too complex, and this one easily falls into that category), but the OP wasn't whining, merely brain storming about what to do to make the situation more palatable.

The lowest tier ones I found to be all right were Zara and Gorizia. Amalfi I really liked, as I did anything above it. Only played Trento once so I won't talk about it, I did hate both the premium and tech tree t5's. But, y'know, ymmv. Line's worth going through based on what you get at high tiers.