NobleRipper

See this post (it sorted out the same issue for me):

That's clearly an unusual case. Implying that an older PC will always (or often) be faster than a newer one is ludicrous when there's a simpler explanation at hand for the discrepancy (WGC vs. launcher). The possibility that the older one is faster should be taken into account, but it's hardly something to be given much weight in the circumstances (particularly when we're talking Windows 10 vs. Win. 8 and the fact that other things seem to run similarly on both). To be entirely sure it's the WGC compared to the launcher, you'd have to try using them both on the same computer so the test is fair. If you can, though, it would be interesting to compare what the launcher is installing against what the WGC is installing, in case there are any extras with the WGC download.

Can't recommend Massie enough, he's a really thorough and thoroughly readable author. Worth looking up his previous book Dreadnought as well, if you're interested in the naval arms race and its impact on the start of WWI. Be advised though, it's a pretty chunky book! As far as other books go, R. A. Burt and Norman Friedman both have (separate) books on WWI battleships (pretty sure both cover BCs), as well as other books dealing with battleships from earlier and later periods; Friedman has books on cruisers as well. If and when N. A. M. Rodger releases the third part of his history of the RN (1816-present) that will likely be well worth a look as well. Agreed with Drachinifel, by the way! There's also the question mark over the British shells, their habit of shattering on impact rather than penetrating; I think that was mainly due to wartime production though, so while they were an issue at Jutland I'm not sure if it would have been so bad at Dogger Bank given that they might not yet have run through the pre-war stocks yet. As far as the RN thinking of the time went, there was that 'But we've always had a squadron on the Broad 14s' idea; then suddenly bam: Aboukir, Hogue and Cressy sent to the bottom by a single U-boat because they hadn't expected to encounter submarines on an anti-submarine patrol...

You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar. Many thanks! Although now I have to git gud too ;)

I know it's the conventional view, but I'm not entirely persuaded by that argument: it was at the Dogger Bank where the Germans nearly lost Seydlitz to basically the same thing that did for the British BCs at Jutland; the Germans put safeguards in place, but only afterwards. Erego, the German BCs were about as vulnerable to heavy shells as the RN ones were. Added to that, Seydlitz had her after turrets put out of action so it would only have been two German BCs shooting back at three British; also the German guns were rather smaller and German fire direction techniques were generally good at the start of a battle but degraded as time went on and damage added up. Not sure the British wouldn't have had the advantage. As for the Germans' being better ships, well: battlecruisers were always intended to outshoot anything that could catch them and outrun anything that could outshoot them; the Germans' were slower and had smaller guns (not to mention the usual German disadvantages of being poky and uncomfortable for the crews and with comparatively short cruising range), so I'd have to disagree ;)

It's true, he wasn't directly involved and the battle went against his wishes; however his signals ended up being 'engage the enemy's rear' and 'course NE' which his 2IC took to mean engage the enemy whose course was NE (which could only be poor old Blücher at the time), where in fact Beatty meant it to be make your course NE and engage the enemy's rear, meaning the rest of the enemy squadron that were rapidly running away. The fault was his signals officer's (apologies, I shouldn't have said FO as a flag officer is something else), but Beatty kept the same man in the position through the war and he was responsible for quite a few similar mistakes so on balance the responsibility has to be laid at Beatty's door.

That was actually the second time Beatty and his FO cocked up: see also the Battle of the Dogger Bank in 1915 where a signal message being unclear resulted in the RN BCs pummelling an already-disabled ship to death while the German BCs made good their escape. Regarding the battlecruisers and armoured cruisers: battlecruisers were originally termed 'large armoured cruisers' (probably a better name in my opinion), and were designed to fulfil the armoured cruiser roles of a) apex predators in a guerre de course and b) scouting for the battlefleet, potentially even filling in as battle line units in a pinch. The second part was based (at least partly) on how the Japanese used their armoured cruisers as supplemental battle-line ships against the Chinese in 1894 and... Well, you know who. The problem is, that tactic was one of necessity for Japan who didn't have enough battleships, and also of convenience in an era when battleships only had four heavy guns and did most of their fighting with quick-firing secondaries at secondary-battery ranges. An armoured cruiser with slightly smaller main-battery guns and (potentially) identical secondary outfit wasn't actually a bad fit for that kind of battle. However, battlecruisers were designed and built in the Dreadnought era, when all the fighting was done with the big guns, at which point not having the armour to stand up to them was always going to be... Problematic. As far as I recall, the quote you mention was either from Churchill or possibly Jackie Fisher; the substance of it wasn't (as is sometimes represented) that Jellicoe was in any way incompetent, more that he was the only man trusted with the one part of the British war effort that could potentially suffer a catastrophic and war-losing reverse if handled improperly. Consider what might have happened if Beatty was in charge of the whole fleet at Jutland instead of just the battlecruisers, and feel free to compare/contrast.

My particular favourite (admittedly only on a brief scan-read, I'm sure there's probably more): "British doctrine in World War I emphasized smothering the enemy with rapid broadsides, even at the expense of safe ammunition handling procedures." Actually, that would be Admiral Beatty's doctrine in the battlecruiser squadron (leaving off the anti-blast baffles in the ammunition handling spaces to speed up gunfire), which the gunnery officer aboard his own flagship Lion refused point-blank to implement and was not in force anywhere else in the Grand Fleet. The three BCs that blew up were essentially ordered to remove their own magazine-detonation protection in the name of getting out quicker broadsides Nelson-style (probably at least partially because Beatty just couldn't be bothered with gunnery practice, so the Battlecruiser Squadron's gunnery was the worst in the fleet for accuracy). There was indeed something wrong with his bloody ships that day, and he was the one that ordered it so.

I'm having this same issue. Have already updated my drivers and (re)installed all the required .NET frameworks etc. @TheWarJaC Can you give us any further info on how to get the game working, or point us in the direction of someone who could? Thanks in advance!

Have just noticed that I have the Gryf (T1 Euro) in my port, apparently with its own extra port slot for free. Didn't realise that was happening (to be fair I may have missed it in the news), but it's appreciated!

Accessible by sea then? ;)

Let's just hope that the crate with Grzegorz Brzęczyszczykiewicz inside doesn't get sent to Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch by mistake...

Spot on, well said! I'm certainly looking forward to trying them with CE, it seems tailor-made for them (will mean over three and a half kilometres' stealth firing torpedoes for Vasteras...)! Personally I've not seen much real use from the heal at all; it seems to give back too little health (although maybe that's just down to the circumstances I've used it in so far), and they're so squishy anyway that the extra doesn't really last long...

Many thanks for the generous gift, WG! And I like that the missions are a complete change from the usual: much longer grind in Random than Co-op

You got enough tokens to get up to T7? Sounds like that guy in the screenie above isn't the only one with RNG in his favour Definitely agree, with the fragility and slow-turning turrets it's definitely worth playing them almost like light cruisers. Of course, RN CLs have smoke...

Just be like all the cool kids and play Ops. Leander smashes the T6 ones, and Fiji isn't too shabby in Narai...

*Ahem* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Community ' This article is about one of the three European Communities that existed from 1958 until 2009. It is not to be confused with the present-day European Union, which incorporated the European Communities in 1993. ' You seem to be unfamiliar with these terms. EU stands for European Union, it isn't just shorthand for 'European' (you might try saying 'Euro' instead if you desperately need to abbreviate, it would cause less confusion). 'European Community' is something else again. Also, I'm still not bringing any kind of political argument here, I'm not sure why you think that. As for why the term 'Swedish' is inappropriate for the tree, well: And that's without mentioning that the only battleships so far is Austro-Hungarian. You'd be perfectly at liberty to take issue with the wiki description, though: 'Ships from three navies are currently represented in World of Warships: Poland, Austria-Hungary, Sweden, and the Netherlands.'

I'm looking forward to seeing how they play with a more experienced skipper; I just have the 3pt-ers that came with them. Oh yes, I forgot the Blysk; for some reason I always seem to lump it in with the commonwealth ships mentally (must be that the flags are similar and it was the only Euro ship for a while)... What questions would they be? I pointed out that the term you used was inaccurate, I provided a correction. Also, by your logic, Britain is part of the Commonwealth so the Commonwealth line must be 'ridiculous', USA is part of the Americas so same for Pan-American and Russia/Japan are both part of Asia so it must apply to Pan-Asian as well. What, in your opinion, would be a non-ridiculous name for the European line?

Commiserations, had a game a few days ago where Raptor and Arsenal spent the last few minutes of the game hugging so Raptor was late for her date with the anchor point by about ten seconds at most. Haven't dared play again since, given that all my games before that were losses to 'unexpected' enemy torpedo strikes or ambushes... Someone mentioned recently in another thread that we need a 'that sucks but I want to show my support for you' reaction as the 'cool' one feels a little strange at times like these

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union ' "EU" redirects here.' Europe is not the EU. The EU is not Europe. What is your confusion here?

It's not an EU tree, it's a European one. You can tell because Britain is still on the flag. And if you look in the rest of the line, two of the tech tree ships and one premium aren't actually Swedish. As far as playing them goes, I didn't expect to like it; then I got Visby, and had a lot of fun (to the point where I went out of my way to actually unlock the permaflage). Due to the fun'n'engaging event mechanics I only just managed to get Vasteras from the last directive crates and there was never any possibility that I'd be enough of a masochist to grind out her camo, but she's fun to drive too; had a really great game where I just stayed out of detection range and launched torpedoes, got a surprising number of hits. Those two at least are nicely agile and the torpedo reload speed is great. The torpedoes themselves, though, are just awful (to the point where I can only imagine WG will have to buff them soon); good luck ever whittling a battleship down from full health on your own. Added to that they can't take a hit (even with the rather anaemic heal), so any enemy torpedoes are pretty much guaranteed to put you on the bottom with a single impact. The guns are ok, but the traverse speed is terrible unless you spec substantially to improve it, so I wouldn't rely on either them or the torps to win a fight on their own. Basically they're ships that rely heavily on being adequately supported by teammates or else have to go to great lengths to stay out of reach on the flanks and do long-range drivebys; they're not even particularly useful for ambushes given the terrible torp damage. I still like them though.

I did the credit bundles largely because I wanted to pick up some captains for a couple of tech tree lines I'm going to start going down. Liked the Bayard, thought the Nelski was quite poor (and confirmed the same about the DoY which I've rented before but can always use another skilled RN skipper), didn't really have any strong reactions to the rest (didn't bother playing any of the destroyers to be honest as it's not my thing). Only ones I'm not bothering with are Lazo and Molotov.

I wasn't aware of the addition until someone posted a screenie of their Captain Dasha in another thread, and it's not like I don't read the newsposts; this one came in rather under the radar, it would seem.

I have it on NV+ and my unique commander voices work with that as well. Presumably that's the difference between it and regular National...

Settings > Audio, make sure Voiceover Modification is not set to someone specific (as that makes all your ships sound the same); beyond that I don't know any further. Anyone actually know how 'National Voiceover +' differs from 'National', out of interest (there's very little information I can find elsewhere on the subject)?