|
BIG HEADLINE posted:It *should* be included up to ~T5/6 as a training feature that can be toggled. It'd serve two purposes - it'd keep pubbies playing in T5/T6, and as a teaching tool. If you're in a T7 ship (including premiums), you should have that 'second nature' thing down by that point. I'd be fine with that. My stance on the aim indicator (though I prefer not to use it myself) is largely the same as the SPG camera hack for WoT. If they're going to approve it, they should add it as a baseline for everybody and keep the playing field level. Then everybody gets what they want.
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 03:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 00:52 |
|
|
rossmum posted:Another huge match in the Iwaki. This thing is stupid and I hope it never, ever gets nerfed. Huh. In my experience being a better japanese light citadel isn't good enough to take it up to the standards of stuff like the clemson.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 04:24
|
|
|
I am having problems getting the alt button mod working, I am pretty certain everything is in the right spot but still nothing. I have the gunsight mod installed and that works just fine though. Maybe I have an old version?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 04:36
|
|
|
That "aimbot" is awful. I have used it for research purposes and my accuracy rating in matches during said usage must've dropped to nearly zero. It does *not* give you an accurate firing indicator, partly because it doesn't seem to take into account shell velocity, plus the vertical movement factor which it does not do well. It will also dull the hell out of your sense of aim the first couple of matches you use it, making you have to get used to properly leading your targets again. I foolishly forewent a backup of whatever it replaced so I had to reinstall my entire game just to get rid of it, but I did so happily, because screw that thing. If this is meant to be WoWS's "thing" like XVM is to World of Tanks, then the randoms can have it, and I'll sleep well with the fact that I tried it and it's terrible. OSad fucked around with this message at 04:55 on Apr 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
Do people feel the Omaha or Phoenix is better? Cant remember which to rebuy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 04:58
|
|
|
Zhanism posted:Do people feel the Omaha or Phoenix is better? Cant remember which to rebuy. They're roughly tier appropriate equivalents of each other. If you really want two sets of torp launchers, Omaha. Otherwise the Omaha is the Phoenix only more in every way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Huh. In my experience being a better japanese light citadel isn't good enough to take it up to the standards of stuff like the clemson. It's fast, turny, gets smoke, and has a lot more in terms of guns than DDs of its tier. If you know how to lead to hit citadels consistently, especially at the edge of your range where most pubbies really struggle to even connect, you will butcher everything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 05:23
|
|
|
rossmum posted:It's fast, turny, gets smoke, and has a lot more in terms of guns than DDs of its tier. If you know how to lead to hit citadels consistently, especially at the edge of your range where most pubbies really struggle to even connect, you will butcher everything. Is this the ship you used to own an entire match by yourself yesterday? Saw what you wrote in the goon channel. omfg, bra-loving-vo on that one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 05:27
|
|
|
Yeah. It happened again today. Frogboat supremacy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 08:14
|
|
|
OSad posted:That "aimbot" is awful. I have used it for research purposes and my accuracy rating in matches during said usage must've dropped to nearly zero. It does *not* give you an accurate firing indicator, partly because it doesn't seem to take into account shell velocity, plus the vertical movement factor which it does not do well. It will also dull the hell out of your sense of aim the first couple of matches you use it, making you have to get used to properly leading your targets again. I found the mod useful for slamming zigzagging destroyers since you can more easily predict which way they are going in and put some shells ahead of the direction they are turning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 08:18
|
|
|
OSad posted:That "aimbot" is awful. I have used it for research purposes and my accuracy rating in matches during said usage must've dropped to nearly zero. It does *not* give you an accurate firing indicator, partly because it doesn't seem to take into account shell velocity, plus the vertical movement factor which it does not do well. It will also dull the hell out of your sense of aim the first couple of matches you use it, making you have to get used to properly leading your targets again. Make sure you got the up-to-date version. The latest version uses a different algorithm or something and is much more accurate. It does take shell velocity and vertical movement into effect.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 08:31
|
|
|
I need to learn to not be super aggressive in my Sims, the ship is amazing but drat does it get blown out of the water if you make a mistake. Everyone should get a Sims just to drive it around in circles.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 09:20
|
|
|
I don't often meet known goons in this game, but when I do I ram them. Failed to ram Ullerm just a few moments ago. Sooo close. Edit: Also, I maintain some guy on your team was using the mod. Consistent hits on a zig zagging BB at max range... E2: Does anyone know how Damage control actually works? I used it twice in a row for less than 1k HP repair despite missing over 20k HP on my ship. Other times, it heals 1/5th your HP. To me  and I wouldn't mind some schooling.
Dalael fucked around with this message at 09:59 on Apr 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 09:41
|
|
|
Replays work now, sort of, so here's some frogboat antics and my first game back in Yamato. Right click -> save as.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 11:10
|
|
|
Dalael posted:E2: Does anyone know how Damage control actually works? I used it twice in a row for less than 1k HP repair despite missing over 20k HP on my ship. Other times, it heals 1/5th your HP. To me I think it only repairs light damage. If you get hit and it says Moderate or Heavy damage, you're out of luck.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
Was there a stealth nerf of destroyer torpedoes? I was in my Minikaze this morning and put 6 torpedoes into a Miyogi and he not only survived, he went on to smash 3 other destroyers on my team. Then in another match I put 4-5 torpedoes into a Phoenix and the bastard didn't sink. I've taken 3 hits in a Phoenix and sank, so not sure what happened. Sort of taking the fun out of playing a destroyer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 14:42
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:Make sure you got the up-to-date version. The latest version uses a different algorithm or something and is much more accurate. It does take shell velocity and vertical movement into effect. Link please? Post it in PGS or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
Zhanism posted:Do people feel the Omaha or Phoenix is better? Cant remember which to rebuy. If I had to pick, the Phoenix, because it's more likely to get fair matchmaking that doesn't pitch it against the Cleveland.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 17:03
|
|
|
So, people losing lots of turrets lately actually had a reason - they snuck in the turret barbettes as part of the hitbox into the latest version. And accidentally set their armor to 0. Oops. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Daylen Drazzi posted:Was there a stealth nerf of destroyer torpedoes? I was in my Minikaze this morning and put 6 torpedoes into a Miyogi and he not only survived, he went on to smash 3 other destroyers on my team. Then in another match I put 4-5 torpedoes into a Phoenix and the bastard didn't sink. I've taken 3 hits in a Phoenix and sank, so not sure what happened. Sort of taking the fun out of playing a destroyer. Anti-torpedo armour exists, and I think if you hit the same location on the ship in quick succession you won't do much damage.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 19:12
|
|
|
Magni posted:So, people losing lots of turrets lately actually had a reason - they snuck in the turret barbettes as part of the hitbox into the latest version. Oh for chrissakes. That would explain it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
I paid the sucker tax and bought the Yubari to get in. Seems like a pretty awesome ship at Tier IV, by the way,
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
New World of Warships dev diary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_MlKKvvkhE Focus on the jap tech tree. Notes from the video: 1) Furutaka is shown as the tier 5 ijn cruiser 2) aircraft carrier tree: Hosh -> Zuiho -> Ryujo -> Hiryu -> Zuikaku -> Taiho -> Hakuryu 3) The big sell they say over the american carriers will be them operating more squadrons compared to americans. At the cost of survivability and aa armament 4) Battleship to get slightly tweaked? The Myogi is missing from the tree shown in place of the Masamune. Is this just a translation error?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
JuffoWup posted:3) The big sell they say over the american carriers will be them operating more squadrons compared to americans. At the cost of survivability and aa armament Maybe I'm remembering things wrong, but isn't this kind of backwards? I'm pretty sure american carriers could hold more aircraft, not that it really means anything for this game
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
gwrtheyrn posted:Maybe I'm remembering things wrong, but isn't this kind of backwards? I'm pretty sure american carriers could hold more aircraft, not that it really means anything for this game 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
Sidesaddle Cavalry posted:There's a specific line in the video that says the Japanese carriers will be a bit different in terms of gameplay capabilities than they were in reality in comparison to US carriers. I didn't watch said video because I'm at work  Besides if they made them similar to reality, they'd really suck by tier 10. I was just expecting fewer squadrons on japanese but stronger aircraft or more aircraft per squadron
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
JuffoWup posted:4) Battleship to get slightly tweaked? The Myogi is missing from the tree shown in place of the Masamune. Is this just a translation error? Same ship, different name. Also, the tier 9 in the IJN BB tree will apparently be the A-140-J2, a rejected Yamato design that mounts three 3*16-in turrets all forward of the superstructure Nelson/Rodney-style. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
God I love this game. Just played a couple Tier 2 Jap Destroyer rounds before work. Sank 3+ enemies through the magic of torpedoes each game. On the second game, I ended up flanking half their fleet from an island and just circling around them pumping torpedoes into the area. No risk of hitting friendlies, tore up quite a few ships and sank a handful of them (plus a friendly cruiser later in the game who was ramming an enemy ship I had fired torps at.  ). I also finally broke down and researched a carrier, so I'll dick around with that after work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
gwrtheyrn posted:Maybe I'm remembering things wrong, but isn't this kind of backwards? I'm pretty sure american carriers could hold more aircraft, not that it really means anything for this game They carried similar numbers unless the US boats were rolling a deck park.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:God I love this game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
Had the best round I've ever had in the Minekaze - hit with 11 torps, 3 crit hits, 4 ships sunk, caused flooding 8 times, and punched in someone's citadel. The highlight was that I was extremely low on health and a Miyogi at full health was coming around an iceberg to punch my clock. I blind-fired 6 torpedoes in the lane I thought he would use and raced to get around the berg before he could fire on me. Completely rocked him, and the citadel hit blew up his magazine. And the best part? It was me and a carrier left on our side, with the Miyogi and a carrier on the enemy side and the score was drat near tied and both of us were close to hitting 1000 points. Had he managed to sink me the game would have been over, but thanks to my lucky shots we pulled way ahead. I was hoping to at least get a couple shots on the carrier, but he was hidden pretty well and the game ended with a win. Final tally was 300451 credits, 4802 xp, and 239 free xp. I was still working on my first win for the day which is why the xp was so high. I also finally got my hands on the Pensacola - I think I like the Cleveland more to be honest, but it's definitely nice to have a tougher ship that can dish out more punishment - first match I shot down 6 planes, took 2 torps, and sank 3 ships on the way to an easy win.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
I don't think I'd describe the Pensacola as tougher than the Cleveland personally; that ~40% loss in armour is pretty noticeable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
Sidesaddle Cavalry posted:I really love that the Umikaze can poop out 4 torpedoes every 24 seconds after the level 2 commander skill upgrade. I don't know if this is what playing the Kitakami feels like, but my Umikaze barely cost any credits or time or real money to get! I just picked up that upgrade after my last game, so I'll get to try it out later. Even with the baseline setup, it can throw out a stupid amount of 10k range torps. They reload faster than the guns on some of the ships it will get matchmaking against. Speaking of matchmaking, we ended up with a game where we had 3 Kawachis plus a mix of cruisers and destroyers against an Independence and a couple of Tier 4 battleships on the open sea map. I would have figured they'd have ruined us on that map, but we ended up sweeping them out pretty handily. Hell, probably a third of our losses were from friendly fire torpedoes. Still not decided on whether or not I like that open sea map.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:I just picked up that upgrade after my last game, so I'll get to try it out later. Even with the baseline setup, it can throw out a stupid amount of 10k range torps. They reload faster than the guns on some of the ships it will get matchmaking against. I haven't either honestly. I don't like it against kitakamis though. That wall of torps.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Kitakami's pre 10km is like playing a very hostile game of dodgeball. Anything past 10~12km and they usually die in one volly since they cant reach you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Burt posted:https://www.facebook.com/flodbergshipmodels?fref=photo It's crazy how much effort making a model like that takes. You spend hours taping, spray painting, retaping, repainting, blending paints to just the right color, modifying parts by adding some of the special glue that "dissolves" the plastic just a bit, and then start putting everything together. Metal parts add a whole new level of complexity. You spray paint them beforehand, then try to bend them into the right shape. The problem is that bending causes the paint to chip off, so you have to try to repaint them after they're in the right position. I remember getting the catapults right on my model of the Missouri took about seven hours. The metal is so thin that even a stray breath can blow them off the table onto the floor, and if you have something that's a quarter the size of your fingernail, like a hatch, good luck finding it. Finally, after it's put together, putting the rigging and decals on is an enormous pain. Tying string to delicate pieces of plastic just tight enough that it goes taunt, but not so tight the plastic snaps is tricky as hell. Then one day your landlord comes into your apartment without giving the required prior notice, walks right into the table where your ship is being built, and there goes that project down onto the floor.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
JuffoWup posted:New World of Warships dev diary: That tech tree is bizarre as gently caress, because the tier 9 battleship is listed as Izumo, and the silhouette matches the Izumo class, only the Izumo class is an Armoured Cruiser from the Dreadnought era Edit: And then later on in the clip when they zoom in it has a completely different, modern silhouette. Typical tree shenanigans. NTRabbit fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Apr 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:50
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:That tech tree is bizarre as gently caress, because the tier 9 battleship is listed as Izumo, and the silhouette matches the Izumo class, only the Izumo class is an Armoured Cruiser from the Dreadnought era They also list it as the zuikaku when it's apparently the shokaku class? gwrtheyrn fucked around with this message at 23:59 on Apr 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
Insert name here posted:I don't think I'd describe the Pensacola as tougher than the Cleveland personally; that ~40% loss in armour is pretty noticeable. Well, I've only done the one match, so my experience may be a bit slanted. I did keep my Cleveland just in case.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 00:52 |
|
|
gwrtheyrn posted:They also list it as the zuikaku when it's apparently the shokaku class? Some of the American battleships are incorrectly named like that as well in an earlier diary
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 00:00
|
|