|
Michaellaneous posted:Stop shooting AP at superstructures. Ask me about battleship shell dispersion. Hitting the loving ship is a good result. In fact that might be my entire point. Neither shell type gives results that are at all decent over a large number of attempts.
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 18:40 |
|
|
How am I supposed to play the colorado?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
deratomicdog posted:How am I supposed to play the colorado? Shoot battleships with AP. I don't know why this works for me and not other people but I actually like 16" guns. I don't actually think it's me doing anything different, just decent luck.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Ask me about battleship shell dispersion. Hitting the loving ship is a good result. In fact that might be my entire point. Neither shell type gives results that are at all decent over a large number of attempts. Stick with your team then. If you are alone or the only guy left then rest in RIP. Best you can do then is to charge straight at the cruiser, either to minimize his firepower or gently caress him up because suddenly hitting is easy.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
They took away the ability to zoom in on guns, torpedo tubes, etc. in today's mini-patch.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
MoraleHazard posted:They took away the ability to zoom in on guns, torpedo tubes, etc. in today's mini-patch.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 02:37
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Shoot battleships with AP. I don't know why this works for me and not other people but I actually like 16" guns. I don't actually think it's me doing anything different, just decent luck.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
I've been quoting fury road while driving the nicholas around and found a pubbie who started playing along. We wound up torpedoing each other while yelling witness in chat. This game can definately have its good moments.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:Too be fair, they HAVE been useful after 1942; just as artillery platforms to support troops in coastal areas and later additionally carrying cruise missile batteries. In fact, that the Marines now lack any real way of receiving naval gunfire support has been a concern of theirs. That's probably not what said person means though when claiming battleships are useful. They are working on solutions for navel gunfire support. Initially this was by way of extended range gun munitions and the DD(X) program, but these programs haven't been doing to well which is why they've been working on getting naval rail guns operational in the 2020-25 timeframe. On top of that the National Defense Authorization Act of 2007 requires that the Wisconsin and Iowa to be unaltered, preserved, and unique equipment for the 16" guns to remain in storage in case activation is required in the future. Also they are to be loaded with nuclear and conventional weapons and rammed into giant monsters if necessary. Also I want giant rail guns in WoWS. Victor Surge fucked around with this message at 04:44 on May 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
Victor Surge posted:Also I want giant rail guns in WoWS. Then you missed out. There was a chance for that as an april 1st event.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
So when are they fixing this pyromania bug? This is the least fun it's been yet when two shells can set four fires.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 05:20
|
|
|
3 minutes and 49 seconds into a 12 minute match, my St Louis gets 1 shotted by 3 AP hits from a New York. The 14k damage (14 hits, 2 crits, 3 citadels) I did to a single Yubari was enough for me to get 1st place by XP on my team  . Enemy team lost a total of 2 ships.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 06:09
|
|
|
Michaellaneous posted:
Oh, I'm fully well aware. Though in reality they were just another ship added to a preexisting carrier task force, protected in the center along with the carrier itself, rather than having a completely separate one built around it. And the Montanas were truly not needed, as it's not like we were lacking in older battleships to use as gun platforms during WW2. It was ultimately just a dry comment about the fact that said person claiming battleships were useful even after WW2 was technically correct; just not in any sort of way he seems to think. Victor Surge posted:They are working on solutions for navel gunfire support. Initially this was by way of extended range gun munitions and the DD(X) program, but these programs haven't been doing to well which is why they've been working on getting naval rail guns operational in the 2020-25 timeframe. Nah, I'm aware of the various initiatives to find a solution to the issue, just as I'm aware that, as you mentioned, they've mostly fallen through. Hell, if I recall correctly there was supposed to be a solution already in place before they were even removed from the reserve fleet and placed into museum status. DD(X) was basically cancelled(no, I don't count a whole 3 as an effective usage of anything) and replaced with the lovely Littoral program along with a restart of Arleigh Burke construction, and the railgun stuff, while it looks cool and certainly will be effective at some point, is still very much in testing. And given that there's not even a realistic platform for it yet, I'm seriously doubtful it'll be deployed within that timeframe - especially given the current cuts going on. And yeah, the Space Battleship Yamato and friends event was cool as hell.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:And yeah, the Space Battleship Yamato and friends event was cool as hell. Are there videos of this?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:Are there videos of this? Yep.(I just grabbed the first one google gave me, there might be better ones) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZXFgHENC4Q
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 06:33
|
|
|
JuffoWup posted:Then you missed out. There was a chance for that as an april 1st event. The ideal "April Fools" event for WoWS would be to have both teams fight a Kiev-class 'carrier' - have the Yak-38s either kick rear end or just fall out of the sky on their own accord (some of the conventional planes in WoWS could carry more useful payloads than Yak-38s ever could), and make the ship just randomly skull-gently caress eight random ships with its SS-N-19s. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 06:45 on May 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 06:42
|
|
|
For April Fools just add a unique carrier with an air group of realistically modeled F-35s, you get the joke mode and you annoy the stupid ~~~ANY VETS HERE  ~~~ types all in one.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:Nah, I'm aware of the various initiatives to find a solution to the issue, just as I'm aware that, as you mentioned, they've mostly fallen through. Hell, if I recall correctly there was supposed to be a solution already in place before they were even removed from the reserve fleet and placed into museum status. DD(X) was basically cancelled(no, I don't count a whole 3 as an effective usage of anything) and replaced with the lovely Littoral program along with a restart of Arleigh Burke construction, and the railgun stuff, while it looks cool and certainly will be effective at some point, is still very much in testing. And given that there's not even a realistic platform for it yet, I'm seriously doubtful it'll be deployed within that timeframe - especially given the current cuts going on. Why would you need naval gunfire support when you have precision guided munitions dropped from high altitude? Sending a battleship close to shore in the age of supersonic anti-ship missiles is just asking for a Senate hearing on the avoidable loss of several thousand US sailors. The Marines worry about it because they seriously believe that they will have to refight WWII at some point in the future, and by god do they need some battleships in the fleet for that because that's what they had in 1942.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 07:03
|
|
|
I guess the price of regular ammo is a lot cheaper, and you can keep on shooting till the barrels melt. Am I just imagining or is New Mexico a really good ship? I like the 3x4 14" guns, earlier today took 26k off Iowa with a single volley and beat him without any hp loss in a duel. I guess the guy was terrible at aiming but anyways... Colorado's gun setup looks bad. I want more shells in the air goddamnit, because the spread is so awful on all BB guns.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 10:33
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:Why would you need naval gunfire support when you have precision guided munitions dropped from high altitude? Sending a battleship close to shore in the age of supersonic anti-ship missiles is just asking for a Senate hearing on the avoidable loss of several thousand US sailors. The Marines worry about it because they seriously believe that they will have to refight WWII at some point in the future, and by god do they need some battleships in the fleet for that because that's what they had in 1942. Or because the cost of one JDAM is much greater than I think you are aware of. And a fire base, even a floating relic, is always there ready to shoot. For close air support, you need to have an airplane near by. You don't want to be sitting there hearing that the fast movers will get there in like 10 minutes.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 10:37
|
|
|
Because you can drop tons of ordnance for cheap with a good loitering time. Some french navy frigates and destroyer shelled the coast with their tiny canon durint the recent Libya war. Tiny as in dual 76mm and single 100mm.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 10:40
|
|
|
Ihmemies posted:Am I just imagining or is New Mexico a really good ship? No, it's a good ship - you just lose .7km range off the New York in exchange for leaving behind awkward mid-gun mounts and gaining 16 more AA guns. And honestly, good riddance to the mid-gun mounts. Also, I think they've purposefully made it so those who bought the three-ship preorder package at a discount would be forced to buy the 12.5k gold package to be able to get the Atlanta at launch if they want a Murmansk as well. As I recall, the Murmansk is either 3000 or 3500g, which leaves you too short for both if you buy the 6250g package, meaning you have to buy an additional 1250g to have enough. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 11:02 on May 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 10:45
|
|
|
I had the most awkward game in my North Carolina a couple moments ago. Ended up fighting two Iowas who both placed me pretty expertly in their immunity zone, and I was just pinging all my shots off them. Even after I switched to HE I would be constantly landing shots that did 0 damage.  On the other hand though I was dodging all their shots and the ones that did hit didn't do too much and since it was Domination and my team had the point I was on tying up those two Iowas actually helped. Did like, 14k damage total that entire match spread evenly between AP and HE. 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 10:54
|
|
|
CainFortea posted:Or because the cost of one JDAM is much greater than I think you are aware of. And a fire base, even a floating relic, is always there ready to shoot. For close air support, you need to have an airplane near by. I definitely want to call down a shell with a couple hundreds of meters CEP and a 2 kilometer danger close radius, then! If you look at the Vietnam action reports of the New Jersey 16" was almost never used for close support of troops in contact- it was reserved for strategic targets like bunkers and suspected enemy positions. Troops in contact were overwhelmingly supported by the 5"/38 "Peashooters" that don't get BB advocates hard at all.  Anyway new hotness for NGFS is the subcaliber Hypervelocity Shell- it uses a sabot to fit in all kinds of guns, including the future railgun. Its also got a datalink and can be steered onto targets by other assets, which is pretty cool. (The navy thinks they can even shoot down aircraft with them by steering it via datalink and an Aegis combat system) There's also the small issue that a single BB costs as much to operate as 3.5 Burke class DDs.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 11:27
|
|
|
CainFortea posted:Or because the cost of one JDAM is much greater than I think you are aware of. And a fire base, even a floating relic, is always there ready to shoot. For close air support, you need to have an airplane near by. Yeah man think of all the money you will save on ammo with your very expensive, terribly vulnerable specialist platform with awful range and a huge costly staff of soon to be flash burn victims. Fast movers being there in 10 minutes is way better than "sorry our slow-mover is re-positioning". The age of battleships was really cool, but it is over. It was even before WW2. Don't kid yourself that; just because you think something old is cool, a really specialist use-case will make it viable in the modern world. edit: Cue a 'Mad Jack Churchill' reference. Desiderata fucked around with this message at 12:07 on May 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 11:49
|
|
|
I think World in Conflict has a neat mission where you have to hold a small town until the USS Missouri comes around. Then you can designate targets and everything blows the gently caress up. Fun times.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 12:00
|
|
|
CV Commander training, question... Am I right to assume you need at least one skill of each level to proceed further in the tree? Right now I'm left with a choice between the tier 3 BB, CA, DD skills... and it seems like situational awareness, though I don't want it is the only thing I can actually "use" on my CV in order for me to get to tier 4 skills?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 12:01
|
|
|
jownzy posted:CV Commander training, question... Yes you need at least one skill in there. Situational awareness is halfway decent on a carrier. All the other skills are useless. Maybe we get something carrier-focused soon.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 12:07
|
|
|
Michaellaneous posted:I think World in Conflict has a neat mission where you have to hold a small town until the USS Missouri comes around. Then you can designate targets and everything blows the gently caress up. That was one of the best missions. God I loved that game.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
It was a real good game with a real good story and characters, for an RTS game.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
Wait is the Navy really trying to develop rail guns to replace naval artillery?. A weapon system that is based on the on the principal of moving a small mass really really fast seem like it would not do indirect very well.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 14:52
|
|
|
Hagop posted:Wait is the Navy really trying to develop rail guns to replace naval artillery?. A weapon system that is based on the on the principal of moving a small mass really really fast seem like it would not do indirect very well. They're looking at ones that can hit targets a 100 miles away. So lasers for close range, Railguns at medium range and cruise missiles for long range strikes.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 14:57
|
|
|
It's pretty cool that there are real laser guns for ships now. 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 16:29
|
|
|
grrarg posted:I have not noticed any change. Did you mean from that eye in the sky mod? No, in the port, you could zoom in on a vessel's main battery, secondary guns, and AA guns by clicking a little camera in the dropdown menu about the ship. It was fun looking at the different mounts and the attention to detail that WG put into the ships. Smoremaster posted:It's pretty cool that there are real laser guns for ships now. Does the USA use red blasters or green blasters?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
MoraleHazard posted:Does the USA use red blasters or green blasters? Green! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlLsnlPvP64
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
Hagop posted:Wait is the Navy really trying to develop rail guns to replace naval artillery?. A weapon system that is based on the on the principal of moving a small mass really really fast seem like it would not do indirect very well. A railgun is just an accelerator. With a ferrous sabot and subcaliber projectile you can shoot pretty much anything you please out of it. 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
 Not a bad 1.5x result. Could have been worse if my team had succeeded in killing me   Took about a dozen hits from the enemy which did nothing major, but I ended the match at 30% health thanks to a friendly torpedo and battleship volley. Also this Pyromania bug is pretty funny. I think half my damage done was from ships burning down.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
Polikarpov posted:A railgun is just an accelerator. With a ferrous sabot and subcaliber projectile you can shoot pretty much anything you please out of it. The 155mm AGS is going on the Zumwalts now, the railgun is slated to replace it at some point in the future, I think
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
MoraleHazard posted:No, in the port, you could zoom in on a vessel's main battery, secondary guns, and AA guns by clicking a little camera in the dropdown menu about the ship. It was fun looking at the different mounts and the attention to detail that WG put into the ships. Dev posted something interesting in a thread about the problems carriers have facing a 2v1 or the plane disparity against higher tier carriers. quote:In nearest-nearest future will be small update with testing a small change in matchmaker, almost eliminating battles with unequal number of players.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 18:40 |
|
|
NTRabbit posted:The 155mm AGS is going on the Zumwalts now, the railgun is slated to replace it at some point in the future, I think The cool thing is that all 4 of those rounds use the same projectile, the only "gun unique" part is the sabot.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 21:48
|
|