Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'accuracy'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • 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


  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL








Found 21 results

  1. "Good accuracy makes landing consistent salvos quite easy" This is blatant misleading publicity Accurate? This can only be a bad joke. Consistent? This is true. You will consistently miss salvos. Richelieu is more accurate and consistent. Alsace is more accurate and consistent. Republique is not accurate. It's not consistent. You cannot go bow on like in both previous tiers. You have to give broadside to fire more than 4 shells. flanking would work with this ship but since you can't hit anything with it, it's basically useless. Correct Tiers: Tier X Alsace Tier IX Richelieu Tier VIII Republique By saying Republique is "accurate" and "consistent" you can only be making fun of us, right? From what i'm experiencing, with every type of tactic, it just feels MUCH inferior to Alsace and Richelieu. Am i missing something or this ship is a crap Tier X? OK I've learned to play it by now but it's not better (or worst) than Alsace, just different.
  2. jerkchicken

    Big Mo, DPM or Accuracy?

    For my last modification I always used APR (Accuracy), But I was considering to switch to MBM (DPM/Reload). I used APR Because you can only use it on USN BB's (T9+), which Missouri is the only one I've got. Always loved the disersion on the Big Mo <3 DPM over Accuracy?
  3. Here I have a list that needs nerfing/reworking and my suggestions on how: British battleships - Fire chance should be greatly reduced, their overpowered heal should be set to a heal that is marginally better than their counterparts, and on higher tier ships their AA should be reduced a little Cruisers - Increase rudder shift time, increase turning circle radius, decrease RoF with high explosive loaded Belfast - Remove Radar and smoke Flint - Remove radar and smoke All Battleships - increase accuracy, reduce the chance to be set on fire HE in general - reduce fire chance and decrease RoF Large guns (above 283mm) increase RoF and increase accuracy Until these changes or something similar is implemented, the Belfast, Flint and British battleships should be BANNED from Random and ranked battles
  4. Hi all, One very important aspect of WoWs - Accuracy / Dispersion - is often neglected and not discussed much... that is very strange... Here is my feeble attempt to draw attention back to it and try to unify all the interesting posts and wisdom we have gathered about it over the time (years now)! #1 How the Dispersion looks like in WoWs AFAIK the dispersion in WoWs in different from real life (i.e. "Horizontal" vs. "Vertical") - here is picture of it from NA forum: (MORE APPROPRIATE PICTURE TO BE ADDED) Is this accurate / true? #2 What influences the Dispersion in WoWs Hidden "Sigma" value for main battery guns in ships stats Hidden "Sigma" value for secondary battery guns in ships stats (<- does this exist?) Maximum Dispersion (in meters) for main battery guns in ships stats Hidden maximum Dispersion (in meters) for secondary battery guns in ships stats Modules / Equipment can lower (in percentage %) maximum Dispersion for main battery guns Modules / Equipment can lower (in percentage %) maximum Dispersion for secondary battery guns Enemy cammo can increase (in percentage %) maximum Dispersion for both main battery guns and secondary battery guns RNG roll #3 Close Range (0 to 3-4 km) / Long Range "special" case Dispersion for BBs in WoWs With WoWs v0.4.1 we now have "special" case Dispersion for BBs at close range (0 to 3-4 km): #4 Interesting existing threads dealing with Accuracy / Dispersion from forums and Reddit and videos from YouTube: "World of Warships - Captain's Academy #38 - Dispersion, Horizontal, Vertical and Sigma" "The meaning of "sigma" (with figures)" "The meaning of "sigma": part deux (with more figures and including horizontal dispersion)" "I solved for WG's Range Scalar" "Dispersion Map @15km, Hood vs Warspite" "What do we know about dispersion (and the modules)?" "North Carolina (2.0 sigma) vs Alabama (1.9 sigma) Preliminary Accuracy Testing" https://www.reddit.c...abama_19_sigma/ "Accuracy, what is sigma? What else influences it? Comparison of all battleships." "0.5.10 LIVE BB sigma values" "BB sigma values ( live)" "Some interesting info from RU - RichardNixon on Dispersion and Sigma" http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/31444-some-interesting-info-from-ru/page__st__800__pid__862483#entry862483 "Dispersion - Deviation?" http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/50810-dispersion-deviation/ "Tier 6 vs 7 BB dispersion compared" http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/46314-tier-6-vs-7-bb-dispersion-compared/#topmost "I finally figured out some of the math behind WoWs shell dispersion model" http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/56720-i-finally-figured-out-some-of-the-math-behind-wows-shell-dispersion-model/ Please lets check / correct / enter new data & links collectively for this - IMHO it is well worth it! Leo "Apollo11" P.S. Edit: 2017-02-06: More links added to #4 2017-03-19: More links added to #4 2017-04-17: More links added to #4 2017-05-11: More links added to #4
  5. The initial concept of Giulio Cesare got me thinking about the way accuracy is portrayed in this game. We can all agree that 138m dispersion was way over the top, but this experiment showed that 1.5 sigma isn't neccessarily scary, it is the dispersion stat that matters most. Right now high sigma value is responsible for strange shell behavior, which is best seen with the Scharnhorst which has a great sigma coupled with huge dispersion. It creates those "funny" shell patterns where f.e. 5 shells go straight in the middle and then there is the one stray shell that flies completely outside the reticle. Now compare this to the Fuso, which has 12 guns, 1.5 sigma with decent dispersion. The shell pattern is much more predictable, it creates a shotgun effect that peppers the dispersion elipse evenly. I will risk a statement that a global reduction in sigma coupled with slight reduction in max dispersion would actually make the gameplay more comfortable and could be the way to go to reduce the RNG. On the other hand these changes would affect mostly battleships and one could argue if there is even a need to make the BB gameplay even more comfortable :) Anyway I hope we can have a nice discussion before this turns into BBaby bingo thread :)
  6. Now tell me guys I am drunk and that I see double, but when I play my US CVs in the new patch I swear that US dive bomber accuracy is even worse than before. Now circle is bigger in automatic and manual drop, which is exacly what I opose. I opened multiple topics on forum explaining that if IJN CVs relly on torpedo bombers, then US CVs should relly on dive bombers, therefore US dive bombers should deal MORE damage and be MORE accurate!!! US CVs already have lower win ratings than their IJN counterparts, why is WG nerfing US dive bombers even more? I tell you when I play my Hiryu I can relieble hit 4 bombs with maunual aim (IJN CVs have such a good accuracy), but with US dive bomber when I attack BB (huge vessel) and have PERFECT AIM I only hit 1 or 2 bombs WTF???? This is nuts, IJN already have torpedoes that converge, great dive bomber accuracy, while US CVs are getting worse and worse???? Here are topics where I suggested some changes to balance out CVs: http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/60093-balancing-us-cvs/ http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/62454-balancing-aircraft-carriers/
  7. Hi all, just a thought that came to mind and I did check to see if it was valid. It seems to me that the naval guns dispersion pattern (the oval target area with which guns hit or miss the target) is way off reality and actually results in rather ridiculous naval battle tactics, which in actuality would have resulted in disaster. What I mean is, that as in the Battle of Denmark straight, when Bismark demolished Hood, the result was BECAUSE Hood was heading towards Bismarck head-on thus making it easier to hit (citadel hits), had Hood been sideways towards Bismarck, the hits would have been fewer and she might have survived the combat (though perhaps badly damaged). In actuality, naval guns dispersion is narrower sideways and bigger rangewise (this is precisely why "finding the range" was such a big deal in naval battles). This makes sense, when you think of ships tossing and listing while on sea, the guns pointing sideways would not necessarily change much due to ship movement, but they would be severely affected by pitching and rolling, which would affect the range of shot mostly. This is why I find it quite ridiculous seeing BB's in a battle trying to "angle" their ships nose first in order to get shot to deflect off armor and to lessen the number of hits (and succeeding), when exactly the opposite should actually be true. Therefore the Vertical and Horizontal dispersion patterns in the game should actually be adjusted 90 degrees for them to be anywhere near correct. It also stands to reason, that since BB's width is usually somewhere in 30-50 meter range depending, their length of 160-250 should actually make for a much easier target. I included some links, which better illustrate the matter: https://defense-and-freedom.blogspot.co.uk/2015_12_01_archive.html (scroll down a bit and you'll see the chart). and http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/fm6-40-ch3.htm These are both excerpts from actual artillery studies and I just feel that doing it "the wrong way" feels awkward and absurd and somewhat deducts from the game-playing experience. It also leads to the BB players not firing full broadsides, as was the accepted and recommended BB practice at the time, instead strangely "wiggling" around trying to get ships "angled" which just ain't right... Any thoughts? Any hope of getting this "fixed"?
  8. Sticky_Icky

    Dispersion - Deviation?

    I havent found anything like that, and i was really wondering..... We all know about max dispersion and we have probably seen the graphs with the differences between IJN BB max dispersion and USN BB max dispersion, but i have an important question to make..... does Standard Deviation change from ship to ship or tier to tier? or does it stay the same? is it just placebo e.g. saying that the Amagi is more Accurate than the Nagato? because max Dispersion doesnt mean a lot without knowing about Standard Deviation... if 1000 shots land with a maximum dispersion of 240m for two battleships, but BB No.1 has a tighter spread close to the middle than No.2, then we can safely say that the No.1 is more accurate than the No.2 does this kind of mechanic exist like a hidden stat, or it is universally the same for all USN BBs and the same for all IJN BBs? if it does, can modules affect it, like a Hull upgrade, or a Gun Fire Control System upgrade?
  9. Captain_Riley

    Iowa's 6th upgrade (for Iowa veterans)

    I've only played two matches in the Iowa so far and I have noticed that her dispersion is actually pretty good and her volleys are quite consistent, I get a lot of Citadels with her so I must ask Iowa veterans, in your opinion, is it worth getting the Artillery Plotting Room Modification 2 or is it better to get the AA Gun Modification 3? Thank you for your time.
  10. WebSpawn

    HE hell in Battleships

    So lately I've started playing again, and whilst I'm nowhere near my old level I do feel like I can hold my own in any class. Get some kills, sail around and have fun. Barring ofcourse, like the name of the thread implies, the supposedly mightiest of the seas. The BB. And it just so happens they are next on the list to Tier up, I'm at Tier V currently (Kongo, New York, I also own a Warspite) I don't know what's up, but I always get raped by fire. Ofcourse one can repair, but then the odd torpedo comes along and ruins your day. And if you don't? Extra crispy! Ofcourse that wouldn't be all that bad If you could at least sink the pests. But no matter what I do, I never seem to get more than 4 hits out of all the available shells. I don't even notice a difference between full salvo's, single shot or sequential fire. They go long, they go short. Obviously it takes a while to get back into the swing of things, but I don't remember this happening the last time I was really into the game. And when I'm driving a CC and I try to burn some Battleships I get pounded into oblivion. Can you offer any advice to a frustrated player?
  11. Echelon2k

    Gun Fire Control System

    This is more of Dev question tbh. So not sure if this is the correct place to post this... What exactly does it do ? What i know : The impact area is an ellipse ( oval ) The upgrade says it reduces Horizontal dispersion ( by roughly 7% afaik ) What i don't know : does this really only affect the x-Axis ( push the impact area to become more of a circle ) or both the the x- and y-axis but with different values? does it affect both axis in the way that the relative length stays the same ( impact area becomes a smaller ellipse )? I'm asking because if it were to affect the y-axis in any way it would (for me at least) turn a mediocre upgrade into an extremely powerful one.
  12. Hello everyone, I've been playing my way up through all the US battleships and high tier cruisers, currently hovering at a freshly bought Iowa, upgraded from a fleshed out North Carolina. What I've stumbled across many times is the high error margin of long distance shots and aiming above the 18km-range, which is, of course only a problem for the extreme long gun ranges of Tier VII and upwards. Especially the fast japanese ships, but Tirpitz, Iowa etc as well, have it quite easy to evade incoming long range fire, thus forcing you into close combat - which is not the purpose of BBs (why would they carry such long range arty, then, hm?). Therefore, I have come up with some solutions to general aiming problems with BBs that might contribute positively to the gameplay. They are ridiculously expensive to maintain, and thus it is essential to keep the gameplay smooth and as far away from frustration as possible ;) My first and most important suggestion would be to introduce a "Sensory"-Upgrade-Slot. This might be made available under the other upgrades, like turret or damage party upgrades, or added as an additional upgrade slot. I. Ships behind obstacles Now this is a problem not only BBs are facing; it's quite hard to judge the waterline of the target from it's marker alone; if a spotting plane is not available, you're pretty much wild guessing, although you might, from the height of the obstacle, have a fair chance of hitting it. I'd therefore suggest three rough markers, an approximation, upon which to gauge the ship's proportions. Those markers still do not give you an exact representation of the ship silhouette and are thusl not overly compromising the balance of gameplay. Make the upgrade in a semi-expensive price category, like 500 000 credits, call it "Echo Search", and it is also going to take some effort to purchase it, as well as having to leave out another upgrade. Balance kept intact. II. Turning ships Aiming at turning ships might be another issue. Personally, I mostly get lucky, but I figure it might be tweaked a little bit. I'd suggest a "wavering silhouette" approach: you still don't get the exact impact point (now that would be too easy), but you are being guided a little bit closer to hitting "in the zone". Once your upgrade/consumable, in this case being called "Artillery Guidance System", say, at 1 000 000 credits, is activated, you get a wavering silhouette of the targeted enemy vessel. The closer you are on hitting it, the greener it gets. Balance is kept intact due to basically having no impact on the absolute accuracy of the guns. I'd make this consumable self-refreshing, like mana-based buffs in fantasy games: you activate it, a counter ticks down, you deactivate it, the counter fills up again. You can immediately re-activate it, and the counter will start to tick down from the consumable fill state it was. An elastic, smooth feature, that can be used to a player's content - if you have it turned on for a long time, you might see yourself having to wait till it's filled up again for precious seconds, but you could also only switch it on for a split second to reassure your shot. Suits many playstyles. III. Shot projection My last suggestion is thought for the reaaaaally long range shots. I have always been greedy of those beautiful, easy to gauge colour boxes for torpedo spreads, and why couldn't other ship classes have something similar? After all, aiming at long distances of 20km+ with shot traveling times of 15s+, is definitely one of the hardest bits of the game, and therefore feels a bit too hard if you think of all the credits and experience you have to spend to get your hands on those gun ranges: basically, it feels like you spend a shitton of effort for something you cannot effectively put to use, since the enemy can easily evade your fire. I'd suggest you call it "Radar Artillery Guidance", make it really expensive in the area of 5 000 000 credits to get hold of it. The basic principle would be similar to the torpedo guides: you are being projected a corridor in which your shots will impact, and you still have to gauge the exact impact points by yourself, it is just a small support to avoid the enemy ship hopping off your well aimed battery fire. Thus the player is being helped at aiming without totally screwing the balance. An attached solution would be an elastic haircross, like the artillery spotter features of strategy games: your aimpoint projects an impact point onto the water and turns the greener, the higher the probability of hitting the enemy. It's still not exact, but taking out a little bit of frustration. All my suggested solutions are canonical, meaning, it totally makes sense to give the high tier, hyper-tech battleships and cruisers the option put their high standard of technology (>> real life) to use. After all, the real world ships got state ofthe art plotting solutions, radar based counter fire, fire projection screens and various other tinky toys... and therefore offer enough space to adapt these features into gameplay features. Well, what are your thoughts? I love playing with the fatass BBs, but I think you get too little compensation gameplay-wise for the credits and XP you have to spend to reach the decent ships like NC or Iowa. Which is why I'd strongly suggest giving the players who spend so much time getting that far a little bit of balm for the nerves ;) Cheers ;)
  13. Notice how nobody says "Let's play toss-a-coin"? The tedium and irritation caused by randomness in this game detract from enjoyment. Randomness makes air superiority Brogues dull to play and battleship vs cruiser engagements irritating. Fighter RNG The fighter engagement mechanism removes skill and thus deprives the carrier player of meaningful engagement. Fighter engagement whereby fighters literally cannot move the battle in any direction is unrealistic and often ends up eg 5-1 in planes shot down. This unbalances the whole battle on a coin toss. Faster fighters in particular should be able to disengage at a penalty to their attack strength but slower fighters too should be able to move the battle towards an allied ship with AA. Whilst strafing is the more skillful approach, it is very risky and still forces your planes to engage. Solution: remove the fighter engaging mechanism. Players will still be able to focus enemy squadrons but it will be more like fighter vs bomber engagements. Fire RNG Cruiser/gunboat success vs battleships is almost entirely dependent on luck with starting fires. Even angling doesn't make much of a difference any more due to reducing overpenetration. Solution: make fire chance cumulative. Start at 0% chance per shell (for US). Each shell that hits increases the chance by 0.5%. By the time you've landed 8 HE shells, you're up to 20% chance of fire per shell. Cap it at 30% (10 shells) and have it halve every 20s. Fire extinguish could half the chance too but you'd still likely be prone to another fire if you're getting hit a lot. This makes dying to a couple of cruisers who can't shoot but are lucky with fires incredibly unlikely. If they can shoot then chances are you'll be set on fire three times at least. Fire duration could also be part of this equation. Accuracy RNG Accuracy/dispersion has been discussed a lot I'm sure. The Myogi drives me nuts but I think it's a ship-specific problem at short range. Feel free to discuss. Teammate skill RNG Lastly, players are over-rewarded for being lucky with good teammates. Winning should be reward enough without getting double the XP of the losing team. If there's any XP bonus for winning, it should be 20% at most. Boost XP overall to compensate.
  14. hello community, i just updated my client and tried to play a game with my omaha! i noticed that the shell traces are completely strange.not normal and i also seen in my gameplay that the accuracy was awful.i was hitting a ship and the shells was traveling through it without inflicting damage.Anyway after i died in the game i was observing the game and i realised that others couldnt hit a target the traces was wrong and the shells was way off target.. in conclusion there must be a problem in the aiming system.. please fix it !
  15. If you think you know all that is to know about Ishizuchi, you may be wrong. ,,Sailing in at tier IV, this battleship is often thought of as a proto-Kongo (a mean ship in its own right). The Ishizuchi is the perfect Premium ship to master the fundamentals of battleship captaining: big guns, heavy armor, and intimidation." (present description on Wargaming official page) Facts: Wargaming was lying months ago about this ship and is still lying rudely about it. Ishizuchi is NOT "a great choice" or a "perfect ship". Example: ,,the perfect Premium ship"... First lie - heavy armor. For tier IV, Ishizuchi has an extremely weak citadel (203 mm), less than any battleships on tier III-IV you can see at this moment in the game, and a pretty weak hull armor. Even tier III battleships have 305 mm citadels, like South Carolina and Kawachi. Kawachi as tier III has better armor than Ishizuchi (tier IV), both citadel and hull parts. Second lie - big guns, comparable punch. That's a shameless lie, designed to create the image of power and destruction. Power and destruction? Mmm... NO. It has 305 mm guns, which are horrible due to bad penetration, nasty accuracy and (again) horrible dispersion. Yes, this is the word that describes this ship. HORRIBLE. The penetration is so bad, that you're asking if they mistakenly put the 203 mm guns from Furutaka on Ishizuchi and called them "305mm". Along with bad armor, penetration and accuracy, comes the fact of small range, 12,9 km, one of the things that will drive a Ishizuchi owner mad, since there are ships like Myogi (6 guns, 365mm, more than 15 KM range) , Wyoming (12 guns, 305 mm, 14,1 KM range) and Phoenix (if I remember well - some 10 gunsx152 mm, 13,7 KM range that can be raised to some 16KM with one of the 4th skills of the captain), which can give a serious kick from greater distances. Wanna light the Ishizuchi on fire? NO PROBLEM. Third lie - intimidation. You cannot intimidate when you have a horrible ship. Everybody who knows "her", knows that she's the perfect target. Period. Now... what people don't know, is that Ishizuchi is getting TOO EASY on fire. I've used the ship too many times to be wrong about this. It doesn't matter if she's fast. Most of the time you'll encounter faster ships or ships that have both speed and greater range. Just imagine what's the outcome. Ship's on fire. You use the repair consumable. "Oh, no, now it's on fire again. But I just repaired it. Great, here comes a torp..." Well... that's the course of things with this ship. Beside that, there are other aspects. Anti-aircraft defense. VERY BAD, even if you have a skillful captain. The AA guns fire like the crew is drunk, sick, drugged... or something. Secondary guns have bad accuracy as well, and they have a bad range, even if you manage in the end to enable the 4th skill of range. So... defense? What defense? It's a joke. The entire ship is a joke. A bad joke. At least here (secondary guns) WG could have done something, but as far as I saw, they just take money and leave the player in possession of a ship that clearly is pretty unusable. And now comes the worst part: when players who enjoy playing low tiers enable the 4th skill of their St. Louis, Phoenix, Kuma, Tenryu (etc) and some long range guns destroyers... they have no trouble destroying Ishizuchi, spamming fire. In case of a dd that can shoot at more than 13 km away, when you sailing Ishizuchi with his 12,9 KM range, YOU DON'T EVEN SEE THE GUY WHO'S SHOOTING YOU, AND YOU CANNOT SHOOT BACK! Another thing. Like all these problems weren't enough, this is the only battleship who gets constant damages to the... rudder. Considering guns range, turret rotation speed, the deck "inclined" to catch fire, the bad armor and the bad AA guns, having a problem with the rudder is even worse. More than that, last updates seem to bring something very unpleasant. Almost full HP ships destroyed in a single salvo. That haven't happened before, and I played it many times before the updates. Imagine a battleship like Ishizuchi, 40000 and some HP... one blow (and that was angled, not a 90 degrees shot), and it's gone. Really, now. How to have fun with this ship? And Wargaming has and is doing nothing about it. Now... Some kid told me to enable the 4th skill. Where that kid failed - is that 4th skill of range works on guns up to 155 mm (in this case works just on the secondary useless guns, since the main guns have 305mm). Some accused me of asking for a "pay to win" ship. Nope. This is not the case. I just paid money to have fun. I have experience with this, and I don't have fun. Simple as that. And so on... Some people asked me why I haven't take the refund. Well, because it had a limit of 14 days, if i remember well (not nearly enough to properly test a ship), and implied some procedures that I do not agree with. More that that, I dislike very much to be lied, I dislike even more to be tricked. If someone who sells a thing (Wargaming in this case) say something about that thing, they should make sure the description FITS the product. Otherwise they must be accountable for the problem and change the product with a better one (since the buyer was lied), which in this case could be done. There's another option, one that is called "buffing". So far Wargaming has done NOTHING about it, not even when people start complaining about Ishizuchi. They did it for the ATAGO, but not for Ishizuchi, which means they don't respect their customers. So, you do something for those who paid more (Atago), but nothing for those who paid less (Ishizuchi). N.O.T.H.I.N.G. If in my first post about Ishizuchi I was using a lot of cuss words due a lot of anger, now I come with all arguments, after sailing Ishizuchi in many battles. I expect moderators to be fair, as they should always be. If you know what I am talking about, please use the poll. Let's demand the ship our money deserve. Thank you One annotation: As far as I see on their profiles, people like Phantombeast and Hellhound666 have never fought a single battle in Ishizuchi. I respectfully ask that people treat this poll in a serious manner, as we talk about WORKED money. Work, you what that is, I hope... These two negative votes don't count.
  16. Nevíte jak naštelovat děla u bitevních lodí? Že netrefim torpédoborec jsem si zvykl, Že na 10 km potřebuju 2-3 rány na zástřel - budiž. Ale když můj NY na 5 salv trefí 3x (3 zásahy) a nepřítel (taky NY) trefí 80-90% střel tak to mě prudí. Navíc když vidim jak půlka šplouchne před a druhá za jeho lodí. Na co je mi věž se třema hlavněma když se ani jeden granát netrefí? A v kamufláži to není. Od té doby co ji používám tak funguje spíš jako magnet Někdy mám pocit že se zásah počítá v době výstřelu a ne dopadu (výstřel nepřítele, můj obrat 90 kamkoliv, 2-3 délky lodě na plno vpřed a stejně mi padá olovo na hlavu)
  17. Accuracy on Montana there is no earthly reason for the same guns to have different stats. please remedy. Monty Max dispersion = 295 no mod, 276m with accuracy mod Iowa, Maximum dispersion = 272m, 253m with accuracy mod.
  18. HeliPilot_UK

    Secondary Guns - need a buff?

    Considering battleships have long reloads and a long firing range, the close quarters combat capabilities (I think) should be increased. Recently they have had Main Battery buff making them accuracy much better at close range, but they have long reloads. The secondary guns on most BB's are mostly a joke unless you acquire both commander upgrades and have the Accuracy and Range upgrade mounted on your ship. However, many BB's need the Main Battery Accuracy upgrade in order to be effective, which then prohibits the use of the alternative Secondary Upgrade, I propose that Secondary Gun Firing Accuracy should get better the longer a target stays within it's range. (this would makes sence, as if the crews were acquiring their range on the target) This is because the accuracy is stupendously inaccurate, and only is useful for incapacitating ships or setting them on fire with lucky hits. Their range I believe should stay as they are, as this can be significantly increased to up 40% (if the BB is capable of mounting the Secondary Upgrade). However, my main reason for this is because BB's have to deal with constant fire's, massive attention from carriers, and deal with pesky long range torpedoes. With my experience with BB's from tier 2 (Mikasa) to the Nagato & Tirpitz, they have to much on their plate to worry about, so this proposal should not effect game play too much, and offer BB's a second chance to surprise ships (not just DD's).
  19. Can you give me some details on this subjects: - Air Supremacy (5 point captain skill) This skill adds 1 more fighter and 1 more bomber to squadrons. Does it add one fighter to ships that carry a fighter? I see the Aoba has 1 squadron with 1 fighter and 1 launcher yet the Cleveland has 1 squadron with 1 fighter but it has 2 launchers one being empty. Soon i may have to choose a 5 point skill and it would be great to have a squadron with 2 fighters in a cruiser. - Camouflage: -4% accuracy on the enemy attacking your ship How do you calculate minus 4% accuracy? Is it only based on shell dispersion of does it affect accuracy per shell or something? Sometimes i have the feeling that i'm giving noob captains +4% accuracy... - Line drifters. There's discussion about cvs, op ships, buffs, nerfs, torpedos etc but my worst experiences in battle, the ones that bore me to death and take away all the immersion, are related with that border line mechanics. Fixing the lead is not enough. I think the problem is the amount of time (forever) you can drift the line. Can't you use a warning like "You will sink in 10 seconds if you don't turn around!" when players ride the line? In the real world the ship would sink if it could achieve such speed sideways. Why not sink it because of that? It must be great to sail at 45 degrees in an impossible straight line and always be able to shoot all your main guns. This looks like a really nice advantage to me... Give a warning and just sink the cheater ship. I mean i have upgrades to turn faster, to go faster... it all looses some meaning when you see a ship going sideways at 20 knots happily firing all his guns. You should really change that or you might as well create an upgrade to go sideways at full speed, at least it would be part of the game. This really annoys me but somehow some people love it and go straight to the border as soon as the battle starts. Anyway thanks for the game. I do spend a good amount of time (and some cash) with it and that is something i haven't really done with any other game. You must understand i must be picky to make it worth the trouble of listening to my wife calling me a kid for playing it so much. Cheers!
  20. Pete_SB

    Main battery mod 2

    Anyone got any figures as to how much it improves accuracy and what the ships base accuracy is in the first place?
  21. DasLumiman

    Too much RNG for BB?

    I have played just over 100 battles so I am by no means a pro, but i still somehow have a 59% winrate. The thing is when playing BB the RNG just becomes unbearable. The worst part is the accuracy, you aim can be perfect, but still you are lucky to hit anyting because its basicly spray and pray. And when you hit something you do anything from 120dmg to 11000 (as a Fuso). Sure its fun when you actually get lucky and 1hit a cruiser but most of the time I just curse at the screen when most of my shots go to either side of the target with 1 or 2 hitting for 500dmg. Imo it would be more enjoyable to play BB if they became more accurate but got a dmg nerf. Its just so frustrating when your aim is good but the RNG is bad. DD's are fine because torpedos are pure skill and go were you aim them, and so are Cruisers since their guns are accurate. CV's Im not sure about since ive never played them. But long unreadable stroy short: Deastroyers, Cruisers and Carriers = skill Battleships = luck. Sorry for the horrible english. I'm trying my best here