arttuperkunas

Allow me to parse this article, and the glorious history of pre-cold war Soviet aircraft carriers. The Soviets had plans to build the Komsomolets in the late 1920s but then they didn't. They planned to build a special aircraft for it too but they didn't do that either. Then a bit later on in 1937-1938 they meant to build some carriers but they didn't build those either. And they meant to build some aircraft for carriers at that point too, but, you guessed it, those didn't get built either. Then in 1944-1945 they started working on some carriers, but they ended up not developing the designs (editor's note - what does "working on" mean when they didn't even manage to complete designs?). They also conceptualised some more carrier based aircraft, and by "conceptualised" I mean they didn't build those either. The end.

T5: Okhotnik - good at clubbing kamikazes T6: Warspite - God tier guns T7: Hiada - amazing DD hunter / scout

No, you are in fact astonishingly bad at this game. From your stats, you have sped straight to t10 via some high level premiums without bothering to learn the game. Most of us feel that higher costs at t10 are a good thing precisely to discourage this kind of behavior.

49% at 1k games is where most of us were at that point. What you probably need is experience rather than advice, i.e. learning the thousand little things that separate an ok player from a good one. That said, as others have already mentioned, post a replay for detailed comments.

Bear is one of those madlad sub mains, you have to keep an eye on them

Latest coal ship I bought was the Kearsarge. In my opinion it's a good ship, but not a particularly fun one. You win games because you provide spotting in line ups where no one has a CV (which is very common at T9), and your guns give you the ability to zone out areas of the map. However, the ship's handling is terrible, and it is very vulnerable to damage, so you're more or less forced to stay at medium range+. Furthermore, using your spotter planes means you spend less time doing damage/shooting your guns and more helping your team win. The end result is that playing the Kearsarge feels a bit too much like work to me.

TIL that conqkek players have feelings too

I meant understanding people in the second sense, not as a cognitive process. I would say the main problem with Ashkance is lack of goodwill with the pbase on day one due to his hackneyed apologias of weegee lately, but then again they have Maredraco on staff. So goodwill with the pbase is clearly not a requirement for the job.

Ashkance has trouble understanding/interacting with ppl, either due to aspergers (according) to his own words or other reasons. Not perhaps a great trait in a CM.

Alaska for tryharding, JB for fun.

Well if those torps are spotted, they will be spotted only long enough for the hydro using Bismarck to feel an infinite sense of sadness before getting blapped.

Hola! I've noticed some CCs etc do not use accuracy mod (slot 3 mod) on gunboat DDs like Elbing, Ragnar, Akizuki, Kita etc, but rather opt for the turret traverse mod. I understand this is more or less mandatory on DDs with slow turret traverse, but what about those that have decent turret traverse? Are these DDs so accurate that the accuracy mod is wasted on, e.g., Elbing or Ragnar? What do you use in the third slot, and why?

Hi thanks for the replies... So I guess on Ragnar (which is really the DD I have in mind) it doesn't make much difference if I have turret rotation, accuracy, or nothing at all?

You forgot the wear and tear on their intellectual property rights.

To add to that: strong divisions will usually play aggressively, especially when top tier. However, the reason for that is more strategic than tactical. In other words, we're afraid that our team will throw the game before we can kill enough enemy ships, so we play faster/more aggressively than might be 100% tactically advisable. Especially on weekends :P.

Well. Usually there is a stronger flank, and a weaker flank. The team where the weak flank kites/survives and the strong flank pushes sensibly has a good chance of winning the game (slightly depending on map and team composition thought; a smolensk/kita/friesland can make pushing in open water inadvisable). So in broad terms yes, it is a good tactic, so long as enough people follow through (which is why I mentioned the division, as it provides a strong nucleus for a push).

Is that aggressively playing team often/sometimes spearheaded by a division playing together?

In my opinion, there is a progression to player skill in this game: a. n00bs/incorrigably bad: yolo/throw their ship away by making aggressive plays without map awareness or understanding of game mechanics -> this looks like aggression b. learning the ropes: having learned that yoloing is bad, these players play too conservatively, trying to preserve their ship without exerting any map control -> this looks passivity c. old hands: will play aggressively when the situation calls for it, i.e. they will kite and preserve hp if they are on the weak flank, but play aggressively if it's safe to do so/there is some advantage to be gained -> this looks like aggression Even though a. and c. above look similar, they are not. This is why I don't find words like "play aggressively" very useful, because it can mean either n00b yoloing, or actual calculated plays. Generally speaking, the former outnumber the latter by a considerable margin. You see people throwing their ships away at the wrong time, in the wrong place, to no effect in practically every single match. Whereas you see well played aggressive pushes fairly rarely.

Survival rate in Devon5hit also seems really low (below 20%). Not blowing up is pretty important for affecting the outcome of the match.

If you like cruisers, Alaska. If you like BBs, Jean Bart. I have the Alaska, never play it - I don't enjoy cruisers, and it's not quite such a battleship in cruiser's clothing as Petro/Stalin. Just bought the JB, and that thing is such great fun.

That's super lucky, nice.

Well, no one likes short battles. I don't know of a single person who thinks stomps are good for this game or even particularly fun, even when you're on the winning team. The thing is, most of us don't agree with your solution, or believe it would lead to even worse matches.

No, I actually fixed my numbers :P (see my second post)

I agree. Which is why I said that standard battles (IMO) already fulfills the purpose of not making the match about cap-contesting, but providing a fail safe if one team kites too far away.

The calculation is correct for the first 10 containers. The problem at 20+ containers is, we enter the realm of math that is too hard for a lawyer brain when you have to take into account guaranteed drops every 20 times you get nothing.