Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Buff'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section

Calendars

  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 54 results

  1. Im sure that many of you old players like me remember about 3 years ago how WG was reducing citadels on US BB's (Iowa, Missouri and Montana) to be more tanky and not glass cannons on high tier battles. I believe that this same rework is needed for Yamato as well. Especially since Yamato have only good guns and nothing else (not to mention he is also slow ship). This buff is needed considering that other TX BB's are now in a great positions. Montana got few buffs, Kurfurst got better secondarys, Republique was great as it have all good, but Yamato feels like he stuck far behind. We should have more reason and motivations to play Yamato, especially when there is also and Kremlin in the game which is more or less better Yamato (because of much better armor and similar guns). Considering all those TX BB's that we have now in the game, there is really not much joy to play Yamato anymore. He need some love. Anyone else agree?
  2. Just got the khaba recently and i'm a bit sad about how it plays, especially coming from the Tashkent, which was a lot of fun to play. Khaba's problems are, in order of importance: Range, 13.5km is way too less torpedoes, 6km is way too short for a large, kiting DD. Rudder shift is too sluggish by default. why does it have the rudder shift of kronshtadt, moskva and the scharnhorst sisters? Smolensk has better rudder shift! The problem is, all of khaba's properties interact with each other to make it more difficult to play. If it must have 50mm plating that arms BB AP, then it has to be at medium-long range to avoid getting blapped really hard. This is especially true with the current proliferation of radar, smolensk, large caliber accurate BBs (kremlin, thunderer), 220mm and 305mm cruisers, stalingrad, italian cruisers and their SAP, and everybody's favourite, carriers. 13.5km is not viable. On top of this, it gets outspotted by every other DD in the game, and in some cases can be outspotted by cruisers too. Solution - give it Tashkent's range It's a large boat with large detection range and has gameplay that encourages kiting. So 6km torps are all but useless. You can't get too close because you will arm AP. You can't stealth torp because concealment is not going to ever be less than torp range. So you will mostly use it for kiting. Slower torpedoes are good for kiting because they will take time to reach max range, allowing the target to enter this radius. However, 6km is far too limited for this. 8km torpedoes like the kiev has, is a must. Ideally i'd like tashkent's torps on it, but i can settle for kiev. In fact, maybe it should get its 10km torps again? Solution - give it Kiev or Tashkent's 8km torps Finally, the rudder shift is way too slow for a DD. Using steering gears alone should bring it to 5s or less. that opens up the option to use the torpedo detection upgrade or concealment. Right now it has cruiser concealment and rudder shift, without the advantages of a cruiser. Solution - bring the rudder shift closer to Tashkent than Smolensk/Moskva/Donskoi Khabarovsk is the top ship of its line, it should by all accounts be the best ship in the line, and at par with other T10 ships. Currently, the Tashkent is simply better and more enjoyable to play, with easier matchmaking. Khaba has not only been power crept by French DDs, it also operates in a much more dangerous environment than a year ago. The russian DD line is fun and challenging to play, but khaba seems to be a step back there at the moment. Similar discussion on NA forums: https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/211160-cant-believe-im-agreeing-khabarovsk-needs-its-range-back/
  3. GM_DaVinci

    Situazione Hindemburg

    Ultimamente ho notato in gioco la presenza di poche Hindemburg. Nelle Classificate e nelle Clan Wars si vede sempre meno, soppiantato letterlamente dall'Henry IV (gran bella nave) Cara WG, non sarebbe il caso di effettuare un buff all'Incrociatore tedesco, per riportarlo competitivo come ai suoi tempi??? Grazie
  4. Maty83_Cz

    Gascogne buff: Case and point

    First of all, I will mention that I am a BB main. I absolutely love playing the steel behemoths and I find them really satisfying. As such I have played through all the BB lines at T8 except for one: Soviets. I don't have the entire premium BB collection, but from playing against them, I can guess as to how good they are. Thus through my experience with T8 battleships I believe I am able to evaluate her. So, why do I think Gascogne needs a buff? First, let me use WoWs numbers to demonstrate why. Gascogne as she is sits is one of the worst T8 premiums in terms of winrate (Tirpitz B is a more accurate representation as to where Tirpitz stands now, and even that ship has better stats than Gascogne). As I own her, I will endeavour to explain why. From the get-go, we can see advantages and disadvantages to her. She is very maneuverable, boasting the same speed and engine boost consumable as her tech tree counterpart, the Richelieu. The similarities don't end there. The armour is practically the same as well, both ships have 32mm plating practically everywhere, even including the black hole of a torpedo bulge near the waterline. this doesn't help against cruiser shells unless you are at close range where they may fall on the bulge, but can be beneficial against BBs. Unlike Richelieu though, she boasts a unique feature to help her. The repair party has a very quick cooldown, helping against HE spam. This can potentially make the ship live longer than her counterparts and helps in tight brawls. So far so good. So, from just those numbers you may think "She seems quite good. What is not to like?" Well, here is the category the ship loses on all fronts. Firepower. Yes, she is by far the worts battleship in terms of effective firepower you can bring on target, being surpassed by even some T6 ships in those terms (Warspite, W. V. '41) First, let us look at the secondaries. Her secondaries seem decent on the surface level. Both 3.9" and 6" in plentiful numbers, right? Not really. the 6" guns have a horrible reload of 12s and the 3.9" don't fare well when compared to other secondaries of the same caliber. At the same time, none of these guns get improved HE penetration. So they are not going to be dealing almost any direct damage. Additionally, their spread looks more like that of a shotgun firing than accurate naval rifles, even with flags and skills to boost their effect...... Plus the second and third 3.9" gun do no superfire over the first and fourth respectively, which reduced the angle of use for them. But the main point of the ship, the primary armament is even worse... Not ONLY does she lack the numbers of guns, but she has THE worst accuracy for her tier when grouping of turrets is taken into account. Worse than EVEN Bismarck and Tirpitz. Ships with 3s FASTER reload and the same number of guns. And add to that the absolutely terrible back turret arc. 35 degrees to each side. To put it in better perspective, this means you have to expose your entire side with every salvo to bring them on target, opening you up to devastating salvos frm enemy battleships. And even if you do decide to do so, the guns are inaccurate enough to miss all but the closest-range shots. Richelieu has 1.8 sigma as compared to Gascogne's 1.9, but since she can minimize her target profile and use the close proximity of her turrets, she has a better time hitting the enemy than Gascogne. This is without mentioning the worst aspect of the main guns: Low survival. Practically every other game, one of your turrets gets damaged, or destroyed. This is an issue plagueging every French BB with quads, but it is particularlybad here. One shot can rid your entire ship of the entirety of your forward firepower. 50% of your guns. Gone. Worst part? In real life the French navy designed these turrets to AVOID this happening. Only half of the turret would be knocked out by a single hit. But in WOWs you can lose your entire forward firepower in a single hit. Even damage is severe as for the next 30s you only have half of your turrets available. So, in conclusion, Gascogne is ripe for a buff. As the stat-wise weakest of all the T8 battleships, she deserves, if not out-right needs one. What would I suggest? >Accuracy buff (Priority): Reduce maximum dispersion of the guns by 10-13% (Down to 260-270m). This would give her disadvantageous turret setup the benefit of accuracy on par with other same-tier BBs and help her accomplish the role of a flanking battleship by being able to effectively strike at the enemy from an unexpected angle >Reduce reload times by 1-2s. This means Gascogne's DPM is brought on par with at least the far more survivable German BBs. The slightly faster reload would benefit the ship as she could potentially fight on equal terms with same-tier battleships without relying on their mistakes. >Faster rudder shift :Faster rudder shift would allow Gascogne to quickly expose the back turret for firing before returning to her original angle. As the turret arc cannot be improved without remodelling the ship, this would be a good alternative. >Improvement to 6" secondary guns: Reducing their reload to 10s and slightly buffing accuracy should allow Gascogne to stand her ground in CQC matches better than currently. As they have only 24mm base HE penetration, the change would not affect DPM significantly unless specced into IFHE. >Turret HP buff. Due the the turret and superstructure positions, both of Gascogne's main gun turrets stand a high chance of being damaged in battle. Either buffing the HP, or developing a mechanic for French quad BB guns where only a half of the turret gets damaged/destroyed upon the first critical hit would alleviate this issue In my opinion, if at least the accuracy buff and two of the other ones mentioned here get implemented, Gascogne will become far more effective at her role, finally taking her rightful place as a T8 premium worth purchasing.
  5. Please WG, now it would be the perfect time to buff the Puerto Rico . Some suggestion would be: give it Balansgrad dispersion and Alaska reload ( the latter truly doesn't make sense why there is a difference for the same gun), and maybe a little buff to the rudder. I want to see what kind of sstorm can come out from this idea. You can't make matters worse right?
  6. KapteinSabeltann

    Buff the ZAO

    Yeah just like that out of nowhere; I'm calling for a buff of a ship I don't have. Well actually I'm suggesting it gets un-nerfed. Long time ago, when invisifiring was a thing, the ZAO was deemed OP and got it's health-pool nerfed by about 10k. Since then invisi-firing was removed and the ZAO is by far superseeded by other ships as firestarter. CC's like Flamu disagreed about the nerf because he felt that it didn't really deal with the issue: invisifiring. Reducing the health of an invisible target doesn't really do much it just further incentivices invisifiring, which is unfortunate cause ZAO AP is good and ZAO torps are very good... If you compare it with the Hindenburg, it's less armoured, it's got less DPM, it has more HE alpha but less HE pen, it's AA don't even compare yet the health nerf is still in place. Why compare it to the hindy? Cause they are both long range high velocity heavy cruisers. And the Hindenburg definately doesn't need a nerf. There is no reason left why the ZAO should sit at 10k health penalty compared to other heavy cruisers. The only reason it was nerfed was it's ability to invisifire which is LONG gone so why does it still have this artificially low health-pool. It should be a clear and simple thing to just give it back it's health. It's pretty straight forward in terms of coding and I seriously doubt it would lead to ZAO op plz nerf issues. The other IJN heavy cruisers were recently buffed with ZAO-like gun characteristics, at least now the IBUKI CAN long range kite now - kinda. So why not finish buffing the line with the ZAO. I know there are other lines that suffer more. German BB's, partially German Cruisers, Partially German DDs, is there a German CV in game? (*cough*), IJN gunboats prior to the akizuki aren't gunboats at all. WG confirmed they knew about this and we needen't worry cause they are "on it". That was a few years ago. Not only is the power creep real but some lines like early IJN gunboat makes no sense. However just because other lines suffer is no argument to keep a unneccesary nerf of the ZAO in game. Just reset it's health pool. There is no reason why it should have T8 health. None! Just bring it up to par with it's peers.
  7. Thejagdpanther

    Type F3

    ... buff to 9,5 km? Pretty please?
  8. SamuraiShakaViking

    IJN power creep? .. again

    The IJN is so power creep.. forgotten, ignored again: To make a balanced game, you need balanced nations, as well as ships. Especially as the game evolves dynamically, and 'metas' change. (This neglect ruined wot). We all want future sustainability and survivability for this game. Which entails that it needs to grow and expand, retain it's fun factor, maintain balancing, while also consolidating from regions to globalized worldwide option like other mmo on steam and attracting new playerbase and increasing profitability for r&d and design. The CV rework, the new premiums, especially at tier 9, and recent ranked and clan battles show how veteran ships of the game are neglected, and certain nations given token minor buffs , if any, just to keep up with balanced development and meta memes. Eg the very weak flak on most IJN ships in the now CV dominated games is very evident.. I. Azuma, weakest of all the recent tier 9 battle cruisers.. ijn cruiser flavour is torps. Azuma gets no torps. All other battle cruisers got their nation flavour gimmicks (radar, secondaries, anti air, speed boost, reload boost, etc. Azuma gets no torps, paper armour, and no gimmicks. Why? If azuma was built she would have had torps and radar and 18 inch guns. Ywt, Eg. Georgia even gets a speed boost. Now even Benham, a USA destroyer gets better torps than the ijn... so then Why would anyone buy the azuma as well as or instead of an Alaska or stalingrad or j b??? (a bundle of tier 9s is now in the shop for $300). II. Ibuki is example , it has been so power crept by new tier 9s, it's a joke. Even premiums such as mutsu, kii, kaga (lower tier planes against tier x?) and even icon mikasa are so out of balance with present game. Kii the most expensive tier viii premium , at least gets torps and some flak, .. but still struggles against newer premiums or even tirpitz. III. There are no "brother special captains" for ijn and pan Asia. Why??? Only white males. IV (Is this racial bias, similar to ignoring / sidelining an entire continent, Africa, from this product.). Segregation? V There have been no special ijn arcs or events , even as there is now a second French event arc.. even though the French navy is hardly famous at all... Japan could be the biggest lucrative market for this game, together with pan Asian countries, Korea, Taiwan, india. But if their ships are essentially continuously nerfed and under powered, wg lose the profits and playerbase. Also collaborate more with manga and anime , but include guys anime too. Constructive suggestion: keep all nations balanced, enrich their flavors equally. If u do buff a ship to bring it up to date, with new ships, buff it properly. Since wg claim the game isn't historical simulator, they seem to try make some ships historical, and others op, early 1940s ships against 1945 to 1960 ships. Start a global world wide server, which players can access from different regions including africa to be able to play 24/7/365 (as in some clan wars,) so you have a proper global mmo like any other international mmo on steam. End regional separation when you could have a shared global playerbase. It works well on steam.. Also for collectors and naval players, bring back some legend ships (which may have been op b4, but are now no longer, such as kamikaze variants,) on special offers. Offer the collectors flags, special camps, or event badges etc in the armory.or to absorb "free xp". Why not use already developed operations and campaigns permanently, so that new players , or veterans who missed them, can benefit from hunt for Bismarck, or dunkirk op. Dynamo for example. Why not re use such well developed and designed campaigns, (eg instead of regrinding lines in the NtC?) Space battles and arms race is an awesome game mode. Why not make it available permanently.? Re events, instead of endless new currencies and tokens , make a single currency or token, which players can carry over to future events, if there's nothing they can get, or nothing they want in a particular event. There's so much you wg already have to build on, so much wg has already developed and designed, which can be expanded, that things such as the NYC are so unnecessary and superfluous. Stop the gambling loot crates, especially to skip a new tech tree. It's entirely unfair and discriminatory. Fix matchmaking, especially at tier viii. This also ruined wot. Include your global playerbase in queue ,on a global server option, instead of segregating regions, like any steam mmo. But please give the IJN some TLC and update and modernize the balance of Asia with the dynamics and meta memes of the game. And try remember and embrace the forgotten continent. Africa. They actually do have PCs and consoles, fiber, and 5g is rolling out soon. Several fiber connectivity to the EU including via Cyprus.. same time zone as EU. Why ignore this potential? Make a global worldwide server soon. And grow.
  9. A small step for Wargaming, but a big step for the Aigle...? It's been a while since I played the Aigle, and with good reason - she's one of the comparatively few ships that I've never felt comfortable playing. The reason is simple: The horrible firing arcs of her gun turrets, which force her to give almost total broadside in order to bring all her guns to bear, turn the one thing she could otherwise do well - namely, kiting - into an exercise in self-abuse. A nice fellow on this forum recently gave me the tip to try out the Aigle in Operations, so I promoted her captain to a comfortable rank and set out to try to rescue the Raptor. It went rather well. Somewhat to my surprise, I had quite a lot of fun in this little Occitanian pseudo-cruiser, which was a new experience for me. Used as an opportunistic kiter , and backed up by a good team, the Aigle can actually perform. But even so, almost every time I went on an attack run, the same familiar thing happened - one or more of my gun turrets lost bearing on the target, and went silent. Wargaming is cautious when it comes to buffing premium ships, and this is a policy I support whole-heartedly. But I would still suggest that they take another look at the turret firing arcs of the Aigle. Being able to angle a bit more while still keeping all the guns firing, would make a huge difference to the "feel" of this ship, without - or so I believe - making her in any way overpowered. She's such a beautiful ship, and with this new French destroyer line coming, it would be nice to get her out of port a bit more! Cheers!
  10. TheDesertFox_96

    Gneisenau

    Sono nuovo nel forum di questo gioco, ma spero non sia off. Comunque volevo chiedere a tutta la community cose ne pensiate della Gneisenau, BB tedesca tier 7. Trovo folle che la WG abbai tenuto la dispersione standard (tremenda) tedesca per una nave con soli 6 cannoni e che ricaricano in un tempo assurdo. (La dispersione mi trolla continuamente anche contro navi fatte di carta ((pensacola e ibuki tanto per fare un esempio )) non colpendole a 5 km di distanza) Al momento la sto giocando con una secondary built (a 13 punti purtoppo di capitano) (in vista della bismarck a breve) invece che di una tank. Ho notato che giocandola molto aggressiva e possibile fare buone partite, ma difficilmente si sopravvive. Sbaglio io qualcosa? Grazie a tutti in anticipo bella gg a tutti.
  11. LemonadeWarrior

    High tier German destroyers

    At this moment in World of Warships the balance is pretty on point at the higher tiers, but in my opinion destroyers are in a weird spot, especially the German DDs. See the table below: High tier destroyers Nation Tier Ship name Purpose Conc Gimmicks IJN 9 Yugumo Torpedo 5.5 TBRB IJN 10 Shimakaze Torpedo 5.6 Wall of skill RN 9 Jutland Cap cont/gunship 5.7 Hydro 3km & repair party PAN 9 Chung Mu Cap cont 5.7 Radar USN 9 Fletcher Hybrid 5.8 DF PAN 10 YueYang Cap cont 5.8 Radar USN 10 Gearing Hybrid 5.9 DF IJN 9 Kitakaze Gunship 5.9 TBRB KM 9 Z46 Cap cont 5.9 Hydro 5km RN 10 Daring Cap cont/gunship 6.0 Hydro 3km & repair party SN 10 Grozovoi Hybrid 6.0 DF and repair party KM 10 Z52 Hybrid 6.1 Hydro 6km IJN 10 Harugumo Gunship 6.2 TBRB SN 9 Udaloi Gunship 6.8 DF SN 9 Tashkent Gunship 7.4 Repair party SN 10 Khabarovsk Gunship 7.9 Repair party I am probably a bit off with the purposes I have given to some DDs. The difference between a gunship and cap contester is that a cap contester functions really well against other DDs, where a gunship doesn't. EG: It is impossible for a Harugumo to hunt down a Shimakaze. Z46 Z46 feels a bit forgotten imo. With her current concealment she will encounter ships such as the Kitakaze, Jutland and Daring. Z46 has some really nice reload torpedoes, but her shell damage output is pretty darn low. Jutland can dish out 220,32k HE damage and Kitakaze 242,88k HE damage, where the Z46 can only do 170,1k HE damage per minute. This leaves me wondering, where does the Z46 belong? They used to be darn good cap contesters, but the game has passed that stage. Okay, well they are still really good torpedo boats. Fast reloading torpedoes, which could inflict some sweet flooding damage. Wait, what, flooding damage got nerfed... Now what? EDIT: She never had a 5.6km hydro range, it was 4.7km. My bad. Z52 The hydro of the Z52 stayed pretty steady, it was around 5.94 before, or something like that and it is now 6km. While having superior hydro she also got nerfed by the flooding nerf that was brought into the game lately. Just as the Z46 she used to be a pretty good torpedo boat that could set many floodings. It used to be a reward for the low damage torpedoes. Still really good at lighting up an entire cap when you can hit the rock in the middle of the cap. Doubts I am not really sure about the German DD line. The lack of gun power used to make up for their strong hydro, but with the addition of RN DDs and the IJN gun boat line, and the flooding damage nerf, they feel really weak, especially the Z46. I think the Z46 deserves a 6km hydro as well, and that both ships should receive a buff to their torpedo reload time. Improved torpedo dispersion? In my opinion the Kitakaze, Jutland and Daring should all receive a concealment nerf. Especially the British DDs were really strong before they fixed the concealment mechanic. They definitely need to be looked at when they introduce it as a feature. Your thoughts?
  12. aN00Bis_6VI6

    Jean Bart: Armour Buff

    Granted, I have not had many (no more than 10) games in the Jean Bart, but after recommendation going for it instead of Bourgogne, I have found her to be a pleasant ship but with a few glaring issues, but the most damning is not the dispersion of her guns though the inconsistency can be very frustrating from time to time. It his her Armour. In the current meta of HE "usage", her 32mm plating leaves her extremely vulnerable to HE spam which is becoming even more rife then ever, but the vulnerability goes so far as to even having battleships at any angle firing HE, sometimes irrespective of being broadside, this means her survivability, tied with her low HP means she struggles to last for very long. I will grant as stated above that I am still learning her nuances that make her an apparently great ship, and her money making potential is also a very delicious aspect. So if any one objects to my claim, I am more than happy to receive feedback and advice on how to play her better. And I do see her potential, but she is dependent on good circumstances which are very few and far between. I believe (currently) that to mitigate this issue she needs a minor armour buff to reduce the HE problem, enough to prevent full penetrations but not enough to block IFHE (her bow armour is good enough for tanking AP I find so thats not an issue). But then again she might need it buffed to block IFHE, I do not know how commonly used it is as I am not a true cruiser player and the cruisers I do have do not have IFHE, I find there is no need but that is me. What is the consensus on this? I have heard in the past of her good performance but that was in relation with her guns which were nerfed? I most likely am wrong, but she just cannot survive very well (or consistently) as it currently stands, and on top she gets pulled into T10 battles which has the almighty HE spammer: Conqueror (guilty pleasure with the 17.9inchers, admittedly). I feel she needs this buff bad, or in time she might not be a favorable ship at all.
  13. Will you keep playing World of Warships after update v.8.0. goes live? Vote and share your opinions :) !
  14. Why the USS Montana is perfectly fine as she is and does not need a buff ​I am bound to stir quite an argument with this, I am sure, but let me first present my arguments as to why I believe this. One thing is certain, the Montana is certainly not noob friendly, a welcome thing, in my eyes, in a game that is becoming increasingly noob friendly and bland. In continuation of this, the Montana caters to a different playstyle than her famed competitor - a playstyle which is far more dynamic than the dull bow-tanking playstyle of the top tiers. When taking apart the arguments most often thrown around on why she needs to be buffed, it becomes apparent that she is in no way inferior to Yamato. Neither does she seem to be to her german counterpart, though it should be said that I have no experience playing said ship. ​Like many battleship players, the first line I completed in the game was the Japanese battleship line, culminating in the Yamato. This was partly because the Yamato is undoubtedly one of the most famous battleships ever built, but also partly because more or less every forum post concerning the T10 battleships agree that the Yamato is a beast, albeit with weaknesses, as with all ships, and vastly superior to the dreadful Montana which is in dire need of a buff. (This was quite a while before the release of German battleships.) Thus I never bothered purchasing the Montana until recently, after having researched and played most ships in the game, and though I've had her researched for quite some time. The following arguments all assume that you're playing with a concealment build, which is in my opinion, playing to her strengths. Many of the points also tie in with each other. "I receive citadel hits too easily in my Montana" There is a reason for this. You are not playing her right. You should at no point show your broadside to the enemy when detected. Montana plays quite similar to the Amagi, a ship that I remember thoroughly enjoying. You have a menacing broadside, but it comes with a weakness. If you've reached Tier 10, there is no excuse whatsoever for not knowing this information already, as well as being more than competent at angling your ship. When angled, the Montana is surprisingly sturdy, taking minimal damage, even from a Yamato. Counter-arguments to this are of course that you're not able to fire your rear turrets when angling. Again, you've made it all the way to Tier 10, you should be familiar with wiggling your ship at this point. This is why the concealment build is so potent on the Montana: while undetected, you are able to show enough side to release your devastating broadside and being able to angle back before the enemy has a chance to return fire. Playing with the concealment build, get the rudder shift upgrade to aid in this - you don't need reduced repair on fire and flooding. If there are enemy battleships that have the opportunity to return fire instantly, let them fire off their salvos before you reveal your location with a deadly barrage of shells not even the Yamato can match. "The Yamatos guns are more accurate than mine" Yes, the Yamato has the most accurate battleship guns in the game, but the Yamato never really goes for a stealth build and often spends large portions of the game bow-tanking. Thus, the Yamato can only fire six shells at the time. That means that even with laser accuracy (which no battleships have), the Yamato is completely reliant on a substantial part of those six shells to hit. The stealth Montana on the other hand, doesn't have to depend on only six shells. Yes, she has worse dispersion, but the sheer volume of shells she puts out counters that. If you are bow-tanking in a Montana and only using your two forward turrets, or three turrets in case you're slightly angled, for the majority of the game, you're not playing her right. "Yamato is more manoeuvrable" Montana is actually quite comparable in terms of rudder shift and turning radius. This is assuming you're using the rudder shift mod as mentioned earlier. What mitigates the difference in favour of Montana is her detectability as well as speed. She has a much easier time disengaging and can trust her concealment to the point where she can turn undetected if not in the middle of the action (where you shouldn't strictly be as this leaves you vulnerable to flanking as well). The Yamato, for reasons unknown, is often more frequently targeted by enemy ships, including DDs, and suffers from worse concealment and might find turning and showing the side towards the enemy significantly more punishing. Not even the Yamato is immune from devastating blows to its sides. The Montana is 3 knots faster than the Yamato. This may not sound like much, and this might be slightly subjective on my part, but I find that I have a much greater ability to support my team in the Montana, owing to the superior speed, and I am less likely to be left behind by my cruisers (who often have an inclination towards advancing in the opposite direction the moment an enemy ship is detected on the horizon). This speed also lets you choose between more targets and as a Montana, nearly always on the move, you have a far greater selection of targets than the stationary bow-tanking Yamato, to which a torpedo attack or rain of fire is often inevitable. Fun-factor Finally, perhaps the most important point, the Montana is, in my opinion, infinitely more fun to play. She is a throwback to the fun of lower tier battleships while packing a significantly bigger punch. She offers an alternative to the boring and frustrating gameplay you often get with the Yamato, her vulnerable sides only offering more excitement, punishing the lousy players who shouldn't be sailing battleships in the first place. (It is also very satisfying to watch her shred enemy planes, though how she compares to the Yamato in terms of surviving aircraft carriers is debatable.) As you've probably noticed, none of the points above deal with one on one duels with Montana's counterparts. The thing to understand is that in many ways, the Montana plays similar to a Japanese cruiser or a stealth Missouri/Iowa. You are very vulnerable from the sides and you don't want to be caught brawling. Montana plays much more as a supporting ship and can play a much more significant role in aiding your team (by taking out cruisers and lower tier battleships more effectively than the Yamato). Your sea legs and concealment allow you to traverse the maps without too much difficulty helping your team secure capture points and strategic positions. However, and any tips are welcome to add to this, if you do find yourself in a one on one duel with the Yamato, your best bet is to close the distance and do a drive-by. This will negate the Yamato's superior armor and her turrets will be unable to keep up. As soon as you get close, lock your turrets to one side, pointing out from the middle of the ship, and as you pass the Yamato's citadel, let Montana's twelve guns tear her apart. This usually, if not always, results in a one-shot. I cannot give any advice against the Grosser Kürfurst as I have yet to end up in a pure one on one with one, but your best bet is probably to keep your distance and let your superior dispersion tip the battle in your favour. I have on numerous occasions completely wrecked enemy Grosser Kürfursts (including citadels at around 16 km range) by staying at range and angling between volleys, taking almost no damage in return. Again, any tips are welcome! Disclaimers: There are without doubt players out there far more capable than I am. I only play ranked to earn the commemorative flag every season. Playing intelligently and aiding my team are things I find more important than anything else. I have a 58% win rate in my Yamato and a 67% win rate in my Montana (along with a 2.5 destruction ratio and 1996 average XP). I have completed both the Japanese and U.S. battleship lines and I have the Bismarck from the German line without much interest in getting the Grosser Kürfurst for now. (I have also completed the US DD line, the IJN cruiser line and I am tier 8-9 in all other lines with the exception of the Russian and RN cruiser lines.) This post was not meant to say that the Montana is superior to the Yamato, but I would argue that she is not inferior either and can hold her own quite well when in the hands of a capable player (which I think everyone sailing a tier 10 should be). Also, a point often overlooked is that different ships suit different people and playing styles. If you are unable to make a ship work, you either stick at it or find another ship to play. It would be a shame if they buffed the Montana and that the fun of playing her somehow got lost in order to satisfy those who have no business sailing battleships at all.
  15. n1T_GnoRT

    About SALEM !!!

    My question is about premium ship: Salem Do you have any plans to give salem a legend module and maybe "buff" her a little bit ? After i had seen the winrates of all 3 sever: Asia,Na and Eu... and she is not very good at this time. Despite the super heal, salem is still getting punished pretty hard. Her radar is only 8.5km while the conceal is 10.65km, which mean she can be detected, focused by enemy destroyer all days and that heal won't help her too much. The Des moines gets the normal heal but the radar range is much larger, which keep enemy destroyer stay away. She can't be seen and that will help her invicible and ambush enemies more easily. so live longer When i bought salem, i thought she will become a second playstyle of des moines....but no! much more like a nerfed des moines and still need islands for survival. It's just not worth the grind. Just imagine, i saved 240.000 coals (180.000 coals when you have coupon) and get a ship which isn't having any economy bonues, the playtyle is the same like Tech tree sister ship even more worst cau des moines is better in that role :( Even Jean Bart is much more fun than Richilieu and having economy bonues too! So this is my point: I really want to make Salem like a second gameplay different to the des moines, more fun too play. Des moines is stronger because the radar is used for Offensive; Salem strengh is about the heal and the radar used for defensive. So then why not make salem like a open-water cruiser? You can give the salem A SPOTTER PLANE and LEGEND MODULE like the Des moines. Buff the HEAL which can heal up to 50% citadel damaged like Royal Navy cruiser. This will make salem more aggressive and more hype to play. An ECONOMY BONUES like T8 premium, or T9 premium (Not print credits like Missouri, but still have an economy bonues) , so that she can be a fully worthy premium ship ! The legend module more like des moines but remove the penaty (cause salem radar is sort-range and little duration) : –50% to time taken to reach full power when accelerating (improved acceleration) –20% to rudder shift time +8% to main battery maximum firing range. P/s: this is not my main account :p
  16. Pikkozoikum

    Kii needs a buff - petition?

    Hey guys, I play Kii since a while and generally I love this ship. In random battles I was always fine with that, but since ranked battles started I just noticed how bad this ship is. All the advantages, that this ship has are only secondary properties and the weakness lay in the primary properties. So I was wondering, is a petition for a buff possible, or at least a change/balancing, we don't have to call it buff. Would you change it? People argue with the "secondary properties", that this ship is fine. But: What are one of the main properties of a battleship? Fire power and sustain. Firepower means good main guns, sustain is mainly armor and HP. I think that this ship needs a buff of the main guns, similar to the amagis guns. Most ships have sigma values between 1,8 and 2,0. Bad dispersion like the german bbs have a sigma of 1.8. Even Amagi has 1.8 sigma. So there are also ships with good dispersion like the NC with 2,0. The Kii has 1,7... just why? It's one of the worst value in game, but it's so similar to the Amagi! Just to summarize the Advantages of the Kii vs. the disadvantages +Torpedos: Torpedos are no primary weapons, you don't use it often, it's more an emergency weapon +Good Anti-air: Only good, when there is a CV. How often do you fight against CVs? In ranked maybe 10% or less of the games. -Bad armor: The bad armor makes also the advantage of Torpedos weaker -Bad guns: Primary weapons. They shouldn't be that bad. The combination of bad japanese armor and bad guns make this ship just bad. If you would have good armor like germans, you couldp lay this ship as melee brawler and torpedos would be more useful as well. It feels like you play a Tirpitz with worse dispersion than a Bismarck. Just imagine the Tirpitz would have a worse dispersion than Bismarck, would you play it? If you are for the 3rd option to change something else than guns or armor, write it down here! I'm also glad to here of your experiences with the Kii in ranked! I'm for buffing the guns, buffing armor is more difficult because of realsim
  17. Jethro_Grey

    BUFF SCHARNHORST PLS

    Took my Scharnhorst out recently to grind the 4th stage of the GamesCom mission. Accidentally played random instead of coop, did ~120k damage, dodged torps and other unpleasantness. So far so good. However, according to Yuro, the Scharnhorst comes with a quality sound system which allows for torpedo beat combos. I'm missing this sound system on my Scharnhorst however, so you better be introducing it back to the ship with the next patch WeeGee, or i'll be demanding refunds. Also, it prints only credits but no reichsmarks, you might wanna look into that. Kappa.
  18. Do the French cruisers, especially the Henri IV, need a buff in your opinion? They are the least team oriented cruisers in the game - they have very limited consumable utility (i.e. no radar), they have low dpm, and terrible concealment (especially at tier X). With a full concealment build the Henri IV sits at 12.7 km detwxtion range. I feel that if it were buffed to 10.8 km, or even 11.-something, the ship can start to shine by allowing us to contest caps. It's weird that the Henri IV is supposed to fulfill a similar role to the Zao, and yet it has worse concealment, worse dpm, worse torp range, worse number of torps, and the same conaumables as a Zao. I might be a tad biased, because my french cruiser performance ia by far my worst among all the warships I've played, so I would love to hear your opinions, guys.
  19. Hello fellow japanese BB enthusiasts, So with the recent Izumo buffs (it is actually playable now and dare I say it, somehow... decent?) I think we can all agree that now, the most important buff this ship needs is a buff to its appearance. I just so happened to stumble upon this picture here: This thing actually looks not half bad. It still is unique and retains the basic WG-design but looks just way better than the ingame-version of Izumo. The layered secondaries (now they are in a straight line, which does not only look bad, but is also functionally bad), the more pronounced and curved bow area, the superstructure that doesn't look like Thaddeus's house, the Yamato-like turret design, etc... What do you think guys? I would really love to see this design in the game. Cheers
  20. Guten Tag allerseits, da die Harekaze laut teamkrado (welche ihre Infos aus dem offiziellen WoWs Development Blog beziehen) ebenfalls von der Änderung der 100mm Akizuki Geschütze betroffen ist (was sicher viele bereits vermuteten) wird das auch ein (indirekter) buff des Schiffes, speziell des 4-10 Rumpfes welcher eh schon am häufigsten auf diesem schiff gespielt wird bzw das beste Gameplay bot mit IFHE (welches nun nicht mehr zwingend benötig wird und somit eigentlich keinen vernünftigen Grund mehr gibt die beiden andren Rümpfe auszuwählen bzw zu nutzen, ergo es wird nun verstärkt bzw nur noch mit der 100mm variante gespielt (welche keine nachteile durch den 1/4 pen buff bekommt wie die Akizuki) was in meinen Augen schade wäre bzw verschwendetes potenzial für das schiff das verschiedene Spiegelstile bot. Von daher würde ich vorschlagen die beiden andren rümpfe zu buffen bzw attraktiver zu machen (ich poste übrigens nun bewusst im gamplay bereich da es im Schiffs Forum einfach untergeht da dieses nicht mehr das aufkommen hat wie vor ein paar Monaten) Daher die Vorschläge: Rumpf 1-4 Variante 1: Torpedorelaod boost auf seperaten (3 slot) setzen damit er sich nicht den selben teil wie nebel Variante 2: Kagero Top Torpedos für diesen Rumpf verfügbar machen Begründung: Die Harekaze 1-4 ist ne Stock Kagero und niemand spielt freiwillig ein stock schiff, und mit den stats wäre sie eienr Top kagero unterlegen. Von daher würde ich da die Kagero eh schon ein torpedoboot ist sie mit dem Rumpf auch eher in die Richtung schubsen bzw spezialisieren , durch den separaten reload boost kann sie ihren dmg output verstärken udn könnte gleichzeitig auch auf das für Zerstörer wichtige nebel tool zurückgreifen, damit wäre das Gameplay in der variante etwas angenehmer und würde sie etwas von der kagero abheben. Rumpf 11&12 Variante 1: heal auf 3 slot variante 2 : hydro oder T-virus auf separaten slot Begründung: Da die 1-4 ein torpedoboot un die 4-10 variante nun stark zum gunboat wird würde sich hier anbieten die 11,12 variante zu einem hybriden zu machen bzw ein suport dd da man den egringsten dpm hat und 3 rohre weniger womit man nur angeschlagene Gegner gut bearbeiten kann das wären bisher meine ideen um die beiden andren rümpfe interessanter bzw spielbarer zu machen als Konkurrenz zu dem eh schon am verbreitesten variation welche so sonst konkurenzlos wäre Hier übrigens das vidoe auf das ich mich beziehe, die harekaze wird zwar nur im nebensatz erwähnt aber trozdem sie wird ganz klar auch von der geschütz änderung profitieren:
  21. 03rutra03

    Buff dla Atlanty

    Kochana społeczności, co myślicie na temat zbuffowania Atlanty? Moim zdaniem po ostatnim nerfie (minęło trochę czasu) Atlanta z super okrętu zrobiła się nieznośna dla gracza. Wysoki tor lotu pocisku powoduje że z odległości >9km (zasięg okrętu wynosi 13km) jest bardzo ciężko w cokolwiek trafić. Z tego powodu Atlanta będąca VII tierem przegrywa z krążownikami niższego poziomu (np. Cleveland), a co dopiero gdy walczy z okrętami tieru IX, gdzie ciężko wejść w zasięg. Dodatakowo Atlanta posiada tylko jeden sprzęt (nie licząc grupy naprawczo-ratunkowej bo to ma każdy okręt), a pozostałe okręty tego poziomu mają po dwa. Moje zdanie jest takie, że powinni dodać drugi sprzęt, mianowicie zasłona dymna, a to dlatego że Atlanta w rzeczywistości używała zasłony dymnej (jak nie wierzycie to poczytajcie trochę książek i gazet) + zmieniłoby to sporo w rozgrywce + jest już jeden krążownik w grze z tym sprzętem (Michaił Kutuzow). Myślę że jeśli zbierze się grupka graczy zgadzających się ze mną to może WG coś z tym zrobi. Proszę o wyrażenie swojego zdania i unikanie niepotrzebnych hejtów. Z góry dziękuję.
  22. SaltyLord

    R A N G E R needs B U F F

    The Ranger sucks. -Fixed plane setup -The Japanese counterpart always wins with its fighters -It just sux buff -Please its a joke to play this CV We al know it
  23. Butterdoll

    Buff Nuremberg, WG.

    Yeah, yeah I know. Buff that, nerf that. But came on. the t6 German cruiser needs a overall, a revision, a minor tweak. I'm still catching the hang of it, and with this French collection thing I'm playing also my dedicated operation cruisers. Nuremberg it's one of them. It's not bad overall, pretty ok, i will keep him. But it have a flaw. it's slow, 32 knots, it takes a long time to reach whatever where. And when you are manoeuvring (to dodge incoming fire, etc) that ship bleeds speed like there was no tomorrow. It can go as low as 26 knots. That's BB territory. So, a lot of times, several times that ship drops to 26 knots. Just to put things in perspective, the Bayern t6 bb gives 25 knots max speed in straight line. Came on, WG. Put some nitro in that ship. LaGal's max speed it's 31 knots but with the speed consumable goes above 33 knots. pls, add speed boost to Nuremberg also.
  24. jerkchicken

    Moskva HE buff

    The moskva need for real a HE buff... Its just terrible compared to the other T10 CL's. Some comparisons (not all T10): Hindenburg: 4 main turrets, 202mm devided by 4: 50,5mm of penetration and excellent fire change. And great DPM! Zao: 4 main turrets, high HE damage, 203mm devided by 6: 33.8mm of penetration and the best fire change (~19%) Des Moines: 3 main turrets, heavy HE shells, 203mm devided by 6: 33.8mm of penetration and high change of fire per minute. Moskva really needs a HE buff because the way the HE is right now is just really bad. Moskva hits because his arcs alot of the belt armor which in the most case will ''recesse'' (break) = No damage. Moskva now has 220mm of main armament guns which will be devided by 6, so we will come out of 36,7mm of penetration. This can't pen the deck armor of a Yamato, Großer Kurfürst and even the Khabarovsk. While the hindenburg can do this with 4 guns and better reload! And yes why only the moskva? and not the Des moines: Des moines has better arcs that can hit the superstructure better then the moskva can do. Most of the time in the moskva you will use only 2 main guns on the front and not the rear gun. Moskva get focused alot these days, it had worst consealment among all cruisers + bad ruddershift and the worst of all bad belt armor and can get citadeld all over the time with sailing at the weirdest angles. So what does the moskva needs to make the HE useable? Just devide it by 4. So we can atleast pen more then before, because the HE right now is in bad shape real bad shape...
×