Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

[Verdius]

2-1-2 not unique enough, WG said after announcing an entire line of reskinned 'Pan-Asian' DDs, including such unique ships as Fletcher #4 and Gnevny #4.

[GrossadmiralThrawn]

23 minutes ago, Darth_Glorious said:

R.I.P. tier 7 :

 

21 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

 

There are battleships with better angles, this can't be right/final...

https://sea-group.org/?p=3409&lang=en

 

1 minute ago, Verdius said:

2-1-2 not unique enough, WG said after announcing an entire line of reskinned 'Pan-Asian' DDs.

you see, tovarish, there a glorious Soviet DDs in this line so it's much unique)))))))))

[WolfGewehr]

Tbh, I just can't understand why they had to put the dev blog into facebook. From all the possible platforms they choose facebook...

[Hades_warrior]

1 hour ago, Capra76 said:

 

Educated guess: they'll find they're way into the tech tree marked as "soon" with patch 0.6.9 then maybe get unlocked with a micro-patch to co-incide with gamescom.

That make sense.

Its 2 weeks left until GamesCom. I hope they will show us something more then just talk about Pan Asia DDs.

[Xevious_Red]

Well there's three weekly missions running for the next 3 weeks. Since part of that has "blueprints" as a reward which lets you skip ahead to the tier 3/4/5 then i doubt they'll release them before those missions finish.

[Bellegar]

9 minutes ago, Xevious_Red said:

Well there's three weekly missions running for the next 3 weeks. Since part of that has "blueprints" as a reward which lets you skip ahead to the tier 3/4/5 then i doubt they'll release them before those missions finish.

All this common sense...... get rid of it

Seriously though, I know it makes sense to add them after those missions. But I don't know, some how a little voice in my head keeps yelling "they'll come at Gamescom". Maybe it my weird logic, but to me a Gamescom release would make the most sense.

 

But now with those missions.......

[Spellfire40]

3 hours ago, BillydSquid said:

 

Pfffffffffffffffffffft. That's crap and you know it, getting hits against a DD at 15+km has an extremely low chance of happening, especially with a reload of 30 secs so cut the crap. 

 

Now if you take pot shots at DDs at about 10km or less, that's absolutely possible, no argument here, BB AP can cause a lot of damage to DDs. 

Given that most DDs have weapons that have less than 12 km range and at 10 to 12 the more acurate BBs CAN hit BBs a spoted DD can easyly get wasted at that range the Problem is much like 12 km BB stealth. Your are forced outside your safe Zone if you want to engage a stealth BB that is not firing of at Targets at 23km range and waste his 4 skillpoint skill.

[Hades_warrior]

27 minutes ago, Bellegar said:

All this common sense...... get rid of it

Seriously though, I know it makes sense to add them after those missions. But I don't know, some how a little voice in my head keeps yelling "they'll come at Gamescom". Maybe it my weird logic, but to me a Gamescom release would make the most sense.

 

But now with those missions.......

Tell that little voice in your head to go away.

Inner voices are unhealthy [psycho] 

[txtspeak]

2 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

Tell that little voice in your head to go away.

Inner voices are unhealthy [psycho] 

DON'T TELL ME HOW TO LIVE MY LIFE!

[Bellegar]

Just now, txtspeak said:

DON'T TELL ME HOW TO LIVE MY LIFE!

Yeah that's what the voice is for

[mtm78]

6 minutes ago, Bellegar said:

Yeah that's what the voice is for

 

Voice? Don't you mean voices? 

[Dampfboot]

20 hours ago, mtm78 said:

I will fly over with my sauser and EMP their hydro.....

 

 

Interesting, I have an idea for a special German DD consumable: sonar decoys! So you would see 20 torpedoes incoming but just 10 of them are real and you don't know which ones...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bold_(decoy)

[mtm78]

Why not a Sieglinde, deployed so the destroyer can go silent running and escape while only the decoy is lit up?

 

 

[Gojuadorai]

Just now, Gojuadorai said:

compiled "deep water" torps stats

 

source from SEA group data mine

 

aditional info supposedly from sub_octavian : deep diving torps hit everything but DD's

 

4 things i dont like currently about the DW-Torps:

 

- cruisers are already screwed  by 1x torp hit now they are threatened by stealthier more damging torps

- only one line can use them

- you need to choose pre battle

- the deep water torps are stalthier and do the same dmg with same speed and same range this IMHO violates WG's internal logic of determining range speed and dmg, 

they always justify it with a trade of for warhead size etc because of the limited torp space. now they get a larger warhead for free?

imho the better stealth is already enough or do you want  even more insta-gib in this game?

 

[Hades_warrior]

1 hour ago, mtm78 said:

 

Voice? Don't you mean voices? 

When he skip daily therapy, then are voiceS. 

[mtm78]

4 minutes ago, Gojuadorai said:

 

4 things i dont like currently about the DW-Torps:

 

- cruisers are already screwed  by 1x torp hit now they are threatened by stealthier more damging torps

- only one line can use them

- you need to choose pre battle

- the deep water torps are stalthier and do the same dmg with same speed and same range this IMHO violates WG's internal logic of determining range speed and dmg, 

they always justify it with a trade of for warhead size etc because of the limited torp space. now they get a larger warhead for free?

imho the better stealth is already enough or do you want  even more insta-gib in this game?

 

 

S_O already said they are being tested on them and that they are not neceserelly restricted to that line when testing is done. 

 

But having to choose pre battle makes it useless.

 

23 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

Well if they implemented it like I think it should: selectable in battle, and effective, it might actually work as they always said they want and battleship players will sooner pick other classes as their inherit survivability is impacted. More so, if the deep draught are slower, it punishes bow on and static gameplay more than it would impact battleships which are played more dynamically. 

 

If it's a choice people need to make BEFORE a game it's absolutely useless to even test it, since MM doesn't differentiate between anything but classes atm you can end up with only destroyers capable of hurting one type of ship. This is incredibly harmful for gameplay and shouldn't even be considered. 

 

Destroyers need their flexibility in order to be playable, why artificially limit them when no other class has the same limitations? Even AP bombs make more sense as you at least have a chance to do SOMETHING ( they do have overpen damage right? ). Why would I contest a cap in my IJN DD when I'm set up for BBs and can't even torpedo an enemy smoke cloud? Why should I be harmless to battleships because I'm an USN DD and I'm set up to contest cap zone's? 

 

This concept is not a way to fix the meta, it will make it worse. 

 

[Boris_MNE]

I suggest to wait how it will look like , at least in testing. No point arguing over that now.

[Bellegar]

2 hours ago, mtm78 said:

 

Voice? Don't you mean voices? 

 

26 minutes ago, Hades_warrior said:

When he skip daily therapy, then are voiceS. 

Stahp mocking me! According to my voice I'm very sane!

 

Edit: at this point I wonder how many people will become feared of flying if I say my avatar's an aircraft because I'm an aircraft maintenance engineer

 

Spoiler

 

Spoiler

It's true actually, I'm not trolling

 

 

[Gojuadorai]

9 minutes ago, Boris_MNE said:

I suggest to wait how it will look like , at least in testing. No point arguing over that now.

 

why do i need to wait for testing when i can see design flaws already?

if they get rid of them before testing great but why wait to do so?

they things i voiced critique about are all things that do not depend on testing because it not about "does it work" but about does it make sense to go this way...

 

[Boris_MNE]

20 minutes ago, Gojuadorai said:

 

why do i need to wait for testing when i can see design flaws already?

if they get rid of them before testing great but why wait to do so?

they things i voiced critique about are all things that do not depend on testing because it not about "does it work" but about does it make sense to go this way...

 

 

 

 

Ok I will answer you:

 

- cruisers are already screwed  by 1x torp hit now they are threatened by stealthier more damging torps

To change this it is needed literary 2 seconds developer to edit number for depth and they will no longer be able to hit cruisers.

- only one line can use them

Sub_Octavian said they will consider add it on another dds, but of course for start it is the best 1 line to have them, if they are bad, they can be removed quickly.

- you need to choose pre battle

If they really put it on that way yes, they will be crap but we will see (again depends on first bold sentence)

- the deep water torps are stalthier and do the same dmg with same speed and same range this IMHO violates WG's internal logic of determining range speed and dmg, 

they always justify it with a trade of for warhead size etc because of the limited torp space. now they get a larger warhead for free?

imho the better stealth is already enough or do you want  even more insta-gib in this game?

If they can hit only one class, and bypass other 2 i would say they are highly situational. And bbs will be forced to MOVE.

 

 

Therefore, I am not judging anything untill I see their design... lot of important stats can be changed within 2 seconds of editing code so .. lets wait :)

[Spellfire40]

1 hour ago, Gojuadorai said:

 

4 things i dont like currently about the DW-Torps:

 

- cruisers are already screwed  by 1x torp hit now they are threatened by stealthier more damging torps

- only one line can use them

- you need to choose pre battle

- the deep water torps are stalthier and do the same dmg with same speed and same range this IMHO violates WG's internal logic of determining range speed and dmg, 

they always justify it with a trade of for warhead size etc because of the limited torp space. now they get a larger warhead for free?

imho the better stealth is already enough or do you want  even more insta-gib in this game?

 

Again under the asumtion that the ships use a variant of their original Navys weapons: whats the Point of making some of the more coompetitiv Torps in the game even more stealhier and uping thir damage on top? If this were IJN torps by all means it makes sense since stealth IS their bigest drawback but especally for the top 3 i dont see the Point others than the aded damage since US Torps (if they are the base dekivery vehicle of teh warheads) ARE stealthy enogh to get hits in. Range is a factor steath isnt...then again neither of the 3 is a totally Torpedo dependen ship in the 1st place they would just suck at nuking smoke Screens,

[Affeks]

1 minute ago, Spellfire40 said:

Again under the asumtion that the ships use a variant of their original Navys weapons: whats the Point of making some of the more coompetitiv Torps in the game even more stealhier and uping thir damage on top? If this were IJN torps by all means it makes sense since stealth IS their bigest drawback but especally for the top 3 i dont see the Point others than the aded damage since US Torps (if they are the base dekivery vehicle of teh warheads) ARE stealthy enogh to get hits in. Range is a factor steath isnt...then again neither of the 3 is a Torpedo dependen ship in the 1st place they would just suck at nuking smoke Screens,

Yep, a DD that cant Torp DDs in knife fights or smokes, cant torp CLs camping in smoke or cant kill radar cruiser safely with torps is pretty much terrible (unless youre russian). I barely play DD, but when I do I always prioritize torping targets I can one shot like DDs and weak Cruisers. I usually dont care about BBs till all DD and cruiser threats are dead.

[KaLeuWillenbrock]

5 hours ago, creamgravy said:

 

The tier 7 is crazy OP. 6.13km surface detection, 6 flamethrower guns and 10 Mark IX** torpedoes.

 

How is that not completely broken? 

and now compare this ship to the lieberecht maass

 

why did i start playing a unique and new line of DDs with new models again?

 

forgot. They are german and therefore toxic or radioactive.

 

[Culiacan_Mexico]

1 hour ago, Gojuadorai said:

- cruisers are already screwed  by 1x torp hit now they are threatened by stealthier more damging torps

 

If the new torpedoes are effective against CA/CLs, it will make their survival more difficult; but if the new torpedoes are ineffective against CA/CL it will leave DDs no effective weapons system against them.

 

Either a DD or a CA/CL nerf.

[Spellfire40]

11 minutes ago, Affeks said:

Yep, a DD that cant Torp DDs in knife fights or smokes, cant torp CLs camping in smoke or cant kill radar cruiser safely with torps is pretty much terrible (unless youre russian). I barely play DD, but when I do I always prioritize torping targets I can one shot like DDs and weak Cruisers. I usually dont care about BBs till all DD and cruiser threats are dead.

They said that they dont work vs DDs they will work on CL late Tir CLs have roghly the same displacement as heavy cruisers just rapid fire lower caliber guns.....and you have troble dodging Torps in all but Point blank fights in a benson Fletcher or gering when your torps are on cooldown?

 

Your right on the Money thogh when it Comes to meta. If your in a 3 to 4 cap game nobody will care if you have anti BB torps if you dont cap you will get a lots of flak from your own Team..