Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

[Humorpalanta]

2 hours ago, Deckeru_Maiku said:

Probably around the time when You started doing battles in T9/10 ships.

 

At least that's usually the point where people stop making "good amounts of credits"

True but even T7 games.

[Robber_Baron]

I really can't track how credit earnings work. I currently have a premium account and use premium consumables (bought with credits), but I have games where I do decent damage and XP, somewhere on the top half of the winning team, but I still lose credits. Or the other way around: I think I play bad and then I get 400k profit.

[ColonelPete]

It is mostly damage based. And if you know that damage is rewarded on damage-percent, you know how it works...

[FishDogFoodShack]

This thread really should be stickied.

 

On topic though I am actually real excited for another big captain campaign, finally another thing to really sink my teeth into that isn't just grinding lines.

[Darth_Glorious]

After buffed to 2.25 sigma and nerfed to BB dispersion, Stalingrad has shotgun symptome back in full force again. Long range shooting becomes a no no due to the fact that shells spray everywhere, much less consistent than even Kronstadt now. 2.25 sigma only feels in close range, even in mid range, it struggles to counterweight the terrible dispersion of the ship. The only bright side is that the buffed penetration and ricochet angle give its special AP the capacity to lolcit even angled BBs in close range.

[Affeks]

12 hours ago, Darth_Glorious said:

...

Still laughing at the CCs and forumites that cried about the 2.25 sigma outweighing the BB dispersion...

 

Its like dude with that logic Zao and Yamato should be about equally accurate 

 

 

[Gojuadorai]

On 30.4.2018 at 10:20 PM, Affeks said:

Still laughing at the CCs and forumites that cried about the 2.25 sigma outweighing the BB dispersion...

 

Its like dude with that logic Zao and Yamato should be about equally accurate 

 

 

 

thats why i in my topic i made 2? weeks aggo suggested that "battlecruiser" should have cruiser dispersion with BB sigma

LINK

 

alternatively they could just tune down H-dispersion a bit which would also work  i guess.

 

but i really feel they need to be reasonably accurate at range or will be not fun to play at all

[Bellegar]

So they're changing the name of Schiffmann.

Either that, or we're getting 3 German commanders all of a sudden.

[snakecake]

16 minutes ago, Bellegar said:

So they're changing the name of Schiffmann.

Either that, or we're getting 3 German commanders all of a sudden.

His name is changed as per DevBlog  Schiffmann became Franz von Jütland

[Deckeru_Maiku]

1 hour ago, snakecake said:

His name is changed as per DevBlog  Schiffmann became Franz von Jütland

 

So instead of Mr. Peeman we get two quite useless brothers? Not cool, bro, not cool...

[Affeks]

2 hours ago, Gojuadorai said:

 

thats why i in my topic i made 2? weeks aggo suggested that "battlecruiser" should have cruiser dispersion with BB sigma

LINK

 

alternatively they could just tune down H-dispersion a bit which would also work  i guess.

 

but i really feel they need to be reasonably accurate at range or will be not fun to play at all

I get what youre on and I agree, but in Stalingrads current state it cant be accurate at all ranges.

 

WG is so set on making Stalingrad a BB, the 32mm armor on extremities makes this thing a BB way more than any cruiser. 

 

Instead I would love if they gave it 25-27mm on bow and stern and elevate the citadel so giving it accurate guns on range would be justified.

[Hades_warrior]

Lol what? At least 5-6 new Unique Commanders? That to me looks like a ''lets make more UC but we are lazzy so we will just copy-paste old commanders''.

[Verdius]

"Bert Dunkirk OC do not steal" 

[Humorpalanta]

10 hours ago, Hades_warrior said:

Lol what? At least 5-6 new Unique Commanders? That to me looks like a ''lets make more UC but we are lazzy so we will just copy-paste old commanders''.

[Aragathor]

So Monaghan receives the Torpedo Reload Booster for Hull B. Not only does this take a p!ss on the IJN DDs, who were promised to be the only DDs with the booster. It also shows that WG is trying to gimmick the ship to death.

I'm very happy to say I don't care. I've spent my Monaghan money already. And I have the Sims. Much better.

[snakecake]

Akizuki can't have DefAA because USN flavour. Gives USN ship IJN flavour.

 

Also 20 torpedo broadside, so when do we get Kitakami back ?

 

 

[HaachamaShipping]

10 minutes ago, Aragathor said:

So Monaghan receives the Torpedo Reload Booster for Hull B. Not only does this take a p!ss on the IJN DDs, who were promised to be the only DDs with the booster. It also shows that WG is trying to gimmick the ship to death.

I'm very happy to say I don't care. I've spent my Monaghan money already. And I have the Sims. Much better.

It gets TRB instead of defAA. Not instead of smoke. At T6.

[Verdius]

19 minutes ago, snakecake said:

Akizuki can't have DefAA because USN flavour.

 

Coughs in Grozovoi

[Major_Damage225]

22 minutes ago, snakecake said:

Akizuki can't have DefAA because USN flavour. Gives USN ship IJN flavour.

 

Also 20 torpedo broadside, so when do we get Kitakami back ?

 

 

Kitakami with TRB anyone (so she stays uneque) 

[Aotearas]

53 minutes ago, Major_Damage225 said:

Kitakami with TRB anyone (so she stays uneque) 

DWT with 50 km range, 95 knots speed, but can only hit CVs, because "Year of the CV".

[Affeks]

1 hour ago, snakecake said:

Akizuki can't have DefAA because USN flavour. Gives USN ship IJN flavour.

 

Also 20 torpedo broadside, so when do we get Kitakami back ?

 

 

to be fair Akizuki cant have defAA for a completely different reason. Akizuki already has the best base AA ratings in the game only beaten by Z52... and Aki is a tier 8 ship... it already beats the other tier 10s by quite the margin. Now that we know Harugumo will have an extra 10cm/65 and the bofors Chi mod it would completely leave all other AA DDs in the dust should it also get DefAA.

 

But I do agree tho that USN DDs shouldnt get torpedo reload.

[snakecake]

6 minutes ago, Affeks said:

to be fair Akizuki cant have defAA for a completely different reason. Akizuki already has the best base AA ratings in the game only beaten by Z52... and Aki is a tier 8 ship... it already beats the other tier 10s by quite the margin. Now that we know Harugumo will have an extra 10cm/65 and the bofors Chi mod it would completely leave all other AA DDs in the dust should it also get DefAA.

 

But I do agree tho that USN DDs shouldnt get torpedo reload.

Well, that was said when the DefAA multiplier was 3x, currently it is 4x for Destroyers and also before the introduction of Kidd which is T9+ AA on T8 with DefAA. If AA values were a concern for Aki + DefAA they could have adjusted the value of the consumable.

 

Its just a bit of fun pointing out how some ships cant have certain consumables for "flavour" yet how certain others can.

[HaachamaShipping]

1 hour ago, Aotearas said:

DWT with 50 km range, 95 knots speed, but can only hit CVs, because "Year of the CV".

I mean, someone has to punish those spawn-camping CVs and what else do you think the GZ has hydro for?

[Aotearas]

28 minutes ago, principat121 said:

ST. Anti-abuse system

 

Players will only receive mirror damage for hitting allied ships with torpedoes after being warned and becoming pink. Instant mirror damage from torpedoes led to situations where due to an unfortunate mistake the team lost 2 ships at once, thereby having significantly reduced chances of winning.

 

 

Translation:

The victim getting torped from second line and incurring a flooding is utterly f*cked ... but the idiot who couldn't be bothered to watch where he drop his bloody torps gets away scotfree for the game because obviously punishing the idiot with reflected damage is too hard on the team, but losing the player that isn't a teamkiller is totally okay.

 

I've never seen a player get instant mirror damage for a single hit, no matter how much damage he did, unless he was already pink. Every single instance of mirror damage after hitting someone with a torpedo (or setting an ally on fire with HE) has always, without a single exception, been the punishment for causing DoT on allies. The initial hit has never resulted in mirror damage, only in the perpetrator getting pink and THEN receiving mirror damage on subsequent hits or DoT ticks.

 

 

In short:

This is BS. The entire reasoning behind this is BS. You don't want to create unfortunate events of friendly-fire sinking two ships (i.e.: the victim and the culprit via mirror damage) ... then just bloody disable DoT on allies. Someone can't be arsed to watch where he's throwing his ordnance and hitting allies in the process deserves to get punished. Not be temporaily exempted from punishment so the only guy losing out in the process is THE VICTIM (which can and will still die to DoT from friendly-fire).

 

This is stupid.

This is just utterly, ridiculously retarded!

[Deckeru_Maiku]

1 hour ago, Aotearas said:

I've never seen a player get instant mirror damage for a single hit, no matter how much damage he did, unless he was already pink.

 

Uhm, I did.. once... when in a DD I got torped by an allied DD (in enemy cap.. he said he had "misclicked the button, as he wanted to fire at the mountain behind me with his guns" - yeah, sure... pull the other one, this one got bells on it...) and suffered only 9k damage... he turned pink immediately and - as I didn't repair - started to take my flooding damage, while I didn't take any further damage at all. I whined, begged me to repair, threatened to torp me again (!) and even tried that, before he got sunk, which made me repair, as now I started to take damage again...

 

So yeah, it probably happened. And imho the people deserved it. And I see this new change as utterly dumb, as it only helps those [edited] players who torp allies on purpose to do more damage and annoy their "teammates" more.