creamgravy Players 2,780 posts 17,292 battles Report post #13851 Posted February 13, 2019 USS Pringle? Pffftttt... Gimme a Admiralen class destroyer from the 30s please. Acasta/Gallant hull with 4 x Blys guns, 2x4 RN Mk IX torpedoes and a Fokker C.VIIW. Now we're talking! I'd take a premium Piet Hein (Sank by Asashio) or Kortenaer (Sank by Haguro, still waiting for a Saumarez or any S/V-class premium btw) 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[CR33D] fumtu [CR33D] Players 3,842 posts 38,978 battles Report post #13852 Posted February 14, 2019 9 hours ago, creamgravy said: Gimme a Admiralen class destroyer from the 30s please. Acasta/Gallant hull with 4 x Blys guns, 2x4 RN Mk IX torpedoes and a Fokker C.VIIW. Now we're talking! Problem is Admiralen class destroyer didn't have catapult plane but floatplane which would needs to be first put on water with crane and than take off from water. Not sure how WG would do this animation especially with a moving ship but if they do then I would like V25 destroyer with floatplane Till they make that animation I wouldn't mind getting USS Charles Ausburn, a Clemson class with catapult plane 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[NAN0] HaachamaShipping Players 8,474 posts 10,052 battles Report post #13853 Posted February 14, 2019 2 hours ago, fumtu said: Problem is Admiralen class destroyer didn't have catapult plane but floatplane which would needs to be first put on water with crane and than take off from water. Not sure how WG would do this animation especially with a moving ship but if they do then I would like V25 destroyer with floatplane Since catapult fighter launches a whole group one after the other, it should be clear that WG doesn't care whether it looks ridiculous or not... 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[WG] MrConway WG Staff, Alpha Tester 3,411 posts 4,389 battles Report post #13854 Posted February 14, 2019 17 hours ago, Verblonde said: At the risk of being presumptuous, may I pass on @fumtu's suggestion of USS Pringle as a future premium to @MrConway, please? I'm sure it must have been suggested before somewhere, but I don't recall seeing it in my time playing WOWS (so, at least a year)... Denied. All of my efforts are squarely behind USS Conway (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Conway_(DD-507)) 1 11 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[NED] piet11111 Players 2,225 posts 8,827 battles Report post #13855 Posted February 14, 2019 4 minutes ago, MrConway said: Denied. All of my efforts are squarely behind USS Conway (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Conway_(DD-507)) Its a fletcher class so why not push for it as a free-xp ship ? More DD's are always welcome. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[WG] MrConway WG Staff, Alpha Tester 3,411 posts 4,389 battles Report post #13856 Posted February 14, 2019 51 minutes ago, piet11111 said: Its a fletcher class so why not push for it as a free-xp ship ? More DD's are always welcome. I agree, unfortunately I don't have the clout to get a ship implemented because "it would be cool" :P Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[NWP] __Helmut_Kohl__ Beta Tester 4,156 posts 18,919 battles Report post #13857 Posted February 14, 2019 1 minute ago, MrConway said: I agree, unfortunately I don't have the clout to get a ship implemented because "it would be cool" :P We really need a proper TX Steel DD for CW though. Because of reasons... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[WG] MrConway WG Staff, Alpha Tester 3,411 posts 4,389 battles Report post #13858 Posted February 14, 2019 Just now, __Helmut_Kohl__ said: We really need a proper TX Steel DD for CW though. Because of reasons... I'm not saying you're wrong, but unfortunately the chances of USS Conway being that ship are... slim. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[PEZ] Yedwy Players 11,301 posts 39,586 battles Report post #13859 Posted February 14, 2019 How about those swedish Oland class dds? Might fit nicely at T6 or T7 with proper balancing for say 300-350k freexp? since pan-euro tree in making and al that... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Panocek Players 13,176 posts 13,617 battles Report post #13860 Posted February 14, 2019 4 hours ago, Yedwy said: How about those swedish Oland class dds? Might fit nicely at T6 or T7 with proper balancing for say 300-350k freexp? since pan-euro tree in making and al that... Kinda this. Not so much said Swedish DD, but there are tiers below 8 in this game after all How about Freemium T6 Saratoga (Lexington class) in her early outfit, with 8x203 being her gimmick? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[SCRUB] Aotearas Players 8,460 posts 13,076 battles Report post #13861 Posted February 15, 2019 So, XP/credit rewards for aircraft have indeed been disabled. Why did I even watch the balancing Q&A and asked questions when the devs can't even get their informations straight and then react to my question about aircraft kill economy as if I had no bloody clue and telling me to read the news? Nevermind my other question which was initially brushed aside as "the answer wouldn't give players much informations" with one streamer staff person having to paraphrase the question (kudos for effort there) to get any kind of answer from the Sir_Excel ... Got to say: real smooth. 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[DK-CP] NothingButTheRain Players 6,338 posts 14,259 battles Report post #13862 Posted February 15, 2019 On 2/12/2019 at 2:43 PM, Toivia said: Moskva is also a ship that in my opinion didn't need the buff of 50mm strips of armor (it's a monster of a cruiser anyway) on its bow. I have a theory myself that maybe people don't want to play the often imaginary paper ships (or cold war era ships) regardless of their actual capability or perhaps people attracted to soviet designs just aren't that great or interested in skillful play. I think this Moskva buff was also done in light of Stalingrads imminent release or shortly after. I don't really prefer playing a paper ship or ships that really existed (although I do have some preferences, like Yamato and Alaska and some other). On 2/12/2019 at 6:09 PM, drmajga said: Regarding the "Lynkori" (Ru-BBs) getting radar: Uaaargh, this is so stupid that i willingly forgot about it. But in the end it´s a nerf to all BBs. In storm all ships will be hidden from view, only battleships will get lighten up by the Ru-BBs. And in general, with a 33 sec reload i will rather take a safe shot at an other BB than potentially waste a salvo by missing a nimble DD - and wait for 33 seconds more. Yeah, i think the RuBBs will turn out to be a nerf on the BBs in general. I was thinking about this increased visibility of BBs due to this radar specific for BBs, but more for BBs behind islands (like Shatter). It's already risky to try out a sneaky move with a BB between these islands and with this radar this will get even more risky. But of course in storms and cyclones this would also be a nerf to BBs that are closer to the battle area. I do want to point out that I am not against putting radar on battleships. I don't mind and it doesn't really affect me. Only radar I kinda mind is the one from ships like Moskva (and of course Stalingrad). USN radar is kinda easy to evade most of the time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[TEA] Robber_Baron Players 1,322 posts 7,981 battles Report post #13863 Posted February 15, 2019 On 2/13/2019 at 11:44 PM, creamgravy said: I'd take a premium Piet Hein (Sank by Asashio) or Kortenaer (Sank by Haguro, still waiting for a Saumarez or any S/V-class premium btw) What about Witte de With? Personally I would like to see Van Nes myself, but that would be mostly because the skipper was from my hometown. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darth_Glorious Beta Tester 2,464 posts Report post #13864 Posted February 15, 2019 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[T-N-T] Toivia Players 4,019 posts 23,935 battles Report post #13865 Posted February 15, 2019 Haven't seen the whole stream yesterday but yeah, Neustrashimy is silly/stupid/absurd, basically as expected. I'm as puzzled az Flamu is about the gun inaccuracy. Maybe it has something to do with the two turrets being so far away from each other (similar issue to say the Graf Spee or maybe the Gascogne). I suppose if they could adress the accuracy somewhat and reverted to the normal heal, it'd be fine enough. I'm surprised at the Exeter though, I expected it'd be nerfed to the ground. Instead without smoke and with the long reoad it seems to work just fine at T5. (Nevertheless, I'd still prefer it moved to T6 with smoke.) Viribus Unitis: Umm, no comment. (Still want it at T4.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[CR33D] fumtu [CR33D] Players 3,842 posts 38,978 battles Report post #13866 Posted February 15, 2019 4 minutes ago, Toivia said: I'm as puzzled az Flamu is about the gun inaccuracy. Maybe it has something to do with the two turrets being so far away from each other (similar issue to say the Graf Spee or maybe the Gascogne). I suppose if they could adress the accuracy somewhat and reverted to the normal heal, it'd be fine enough. Nuestra dispersion is basically the same as Grozovi, 110m on 12.8km compared to 107m on 12.3km. It is just one less turret and the placement of the guns. 4 minutes ago, Toivia said: I'm surprised at the Exeter though, I expected it'd be nerfed to the ground. Instead without smoke and with the long reoad it seems to work just fine at T5. (Nevertheless, I'd still prefer it moved to T6 with smoke.) i don't understand why people expected that Execter will be bad without smoke. Great concealment, great maneuverability, small citadel and heal. Smoke and great RoF make her OP, now I think she is quite good for T5. Yes she could suffer in T7 matches but not more than majority of other T5 cruisers. At her own tier she looks good. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[XODUS] JaiFoh Players 799 posts 4,868 battles Report post #13867 Posted February 15, 2019 1 minute ago, fumtu said: i don't understand why people expected that Execter will be bad without smoke. Great concealment, great maneuverability, small citadel and heal. Smoke and great RoF make her OP, now I think she is quite good for T5. Yes she could suffer in T7 matches but not more than majority of other T5 cruisers. At her own tier she looks good. I Agree I still think that from a business point of view but also a personal point of view that Exeter would perform perfectly at T6 as she was. Now she is a Solid T5, and certainly better than Emerald Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[CR33D] fumtu [CR33D] Players 3,842 posts 38,978 battles Report post #13868 Posted February 15, 2019 1 minute ago, JaiFoh said: Now she is a Solid T5, and certainly better than Emerald Well better then Emerald is not something to brag about. 1 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[T-N-T] Toivia Players 4,019 posts 23,935 battles Report post #13869 Posted February 15, 2019 8 minutes ago, fumtu said: Nuestra dispersion is basically the same as Grozovi, 110m on 12.8km compared to 107m on 12.3km. It is just one less turret and the placement of the guns. i don't understand why people expected that Execter will be bad without smoke. Great concealment, great maneuverability, small citadel and heal. Smoke and great RoF make her OP, now I think she is quite good for T5. Yes she could suffer in T7 matches but not more than majority of other T5 cruisers. At her own tier she looks good. I should have formulated it differently with Exeter. Basically I'm surprised Flamu didn't just say it was crap and be done with it. Often CCs will not "endorse" non-OP low tier ships. Personally I was arguing prior to nerfs it was comparable - hell superior - to many T6 cruisers. So obviously still having access to a heal and 203mm guns on T5 is still very strong. About the Neustrashimy dispersion, it's about the really wonky results one sees in battle. Unless there is an actual bug somewhere and the listed values are not correctly applying in game or the large distance between turrets (as I noted above) is to blame. Maybe dispesion should be looked at overall on all ships with 4 or fewer shells per salvo. (I'm often disappointed even with how weirdly shells disperse on my Anshan/Fushun.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[P0RT] Admiral_H_Nelson Players 3,938 posts 23,206 battles Report post #13870 Posted February 15, 2019 35 minutes ago, Toivia said: I'm surprised at the Exeter though, I expected it'd be nerfed to the ground. Instead without smoke and with the long reoad it seems to work just fine at T5. (Nevertheless, I'd still prefer it moved to T6 with smoke.) Who knows? maybe the same team that is working on Giulio Cesare are also looking at HMS Exeter, and your wish will be granted! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[-TPF-] invicta2012 Players 6,382 posts 26,850 battles Report post #13871 Posted February 15, 2019 2 hours ago, Toivia said: Viribus Unitis: Umm, no comment. (Still want it at T4.) Gosh no. Look at what it does: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[BYOB] Aragathor Players 7,047 posts 32,314 battles Report post #13872 Posted February 15, 2019 25 minutes ago, invicta2012 said: Gosh no. Look at what it does: Where are the bottom tier battles? Playing against T4 potatoes with a 19p captain is overkill in any ship. I want to see the ship against T6 & T7 enemies, where most of T5 ships are. Where a T6 cv just takes a dump on him, where taking two torps from a DD means death, where his shells just bounce off against armored enemies. It's easy to pick two top tier games and claim "it's OP!". Viable and useful in T7? Show it. 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[COMFY] ImperialAdmiral [COMFY] Players 1,649 posts 9,828 battles Report post #13873 Posted February 15, 2019 One good game doesn't make this ship special. I think yesterday I saw Flamu playing it and it melted while being angled all the time in basically 3-4 Kaiser salvos. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Humorpalanta ∞ Players 2,025 posts 13,785 battles Report post #13874 Posted February 15, 2019 Sooo... Neutrashimy gets good concealment, good 10 km torps, spood beast, retard heal aaaaand Def AA. Why? Cos it's russian. Well fuckin balanced... When you thought it couldn't urinate on so many IJN DDs, it actually does on all of them. Beats Shima and Yogumo in torps, can pick a fight with gun IJN DDs AND heal back their damage... and of course just for fun rapes AA built DDs by having Def AA. And naturally has smoke. It should get a radar too... 2 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[COMFY] ImperialAdmiral [COMFY] Players 1,649 posts 9,828 battles Report post #13875 Posted February 15, 2019 21 minutes ago, Humorpalanta said: Sooo... Neutrashimy gets good concealment, good 10 km torps, spood beast, retard heal aaaaand Def AA. Why? Cos it's russian. Well fuckin balanced... When you thought it couldn't urinate on so many IJN DDs, it actually does on all of them. Beats Shima and Yogumo in torps, can pick a fight with gun IJN DDs AND heal back their damage... and of course just for fun rapes AA built DDs by having Def AA. And naturally has smoke. It should get a radar too... And reload booster to compensate for having only 4 guns 1 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
