|
PirateBob posted:What do you mean by "the version in Aslain's" ? What's the difference? Aslain's modpack has an EoS knock off that scales up when you zoom in all the way just not at the level of the real EoS. That mod uses scripts which WG keeps disabling hence the reason if you install it, it fucks up the game.
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 20:20 |
|
|
demonR6 posted:Aslain's modpack has an EoS knock off that scales up when you zoom in all the way just not at the level of the real EoS. That mod uses scripts which WG keeps disabling hence the reason if you install it, it fucks up the game. You're saying the "real EoS" fucks up the game, but so does the version in Aslain's after today's WoWS update.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
Not mine. Works like a champ. I'll screen the zoom so you can see how far in it works.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
DurosKlav posted:Are you stagger firing, or are you firing a salvo? I always salvo and my shells land pretty much in a nice pattern. Thanks. I'll keep slogging through the New Mexico, not as if I have a choice. In the meantime, I'll balance this floating disaster with my other ships. Like dunking an Iowa in my Fuso!      I'm also so happy my beloved Omaha is getting a buff, I might have a reason to start using the third hull now!
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 19:39
|
|
|
Plane stats rebalance? All air groups will contain at least one fighter? The promised "advanced fighter mechanics" they mentioned way back during the first dev blog in CBT? AA fire skill for US DDs? Man this patch is going to own. Anyone know if there are any patch notes for 0.4.0.6? The one that dropped today.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
At least carriers will be balanced toward one another and will still gently caress up everything else. A perfect time to grind them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
ATTN: SEAMN types. Too soon ? Quick n Dirty 30 secs in Photoshop with a gradient tool. Yay for WG using a bunch of different DDS files for various crap, that's why all the turrets/other bits are regular colors still.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
Perfect, taste the rainbow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
 If there is any way for you to get your hands on a Murmansk, you should absolutely get one. It's my beloved Omaha, with 8km torps and it's a goddamn premium.   Replay link. It helps that the Kumas all panicked once I started citadeling them and drove into things. Shot some torps that an Arkansas helpfully sailed into, then I got into a brawl with a Phoenix and trashed him before finally dying to fire damage. gently caress yeah.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
I've said it before in this thread but if you really think the New Mexico is inaccurate garbage and an all around poo poo ship now is the time to stop leveling the line. The Colorado is a 100 times worse grind. So unless you have the gold to free xp through the Colorado you should focus on your other ships instead. DurosKlav fucked around with this message at 23:03 on Aug 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
yeah i just bought one (murmansk), first match 65 hits, 2 fires, 1 flooding, 1 sinking. The long range on the torpedoes is real nice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
So let me get this straight, they're giving US destroyers a "choice" between two hulls, which given WG's track record will be basically nothing of the sort as barring extreme changes to the guns the AA variant will almost certainly still outgun IJN destroyers. And I don't think I've ever been in a situation where the extra ~2 kts of speed from Engine Boost was critical - nice certainly, but I could definitely do without - so replacing it with Defensive Fire is a no-brainer as well. Yeah, I'm seeing that change get rolled back, as with it they'll have primacy over 3/4 ship types. Against IJN destroyers, they'll generally win due to much better guns. They're still perfectly capable of killing battleships due to still having decent, if not exceptional, stealth combined with torpedoes and difficulty to hit due to BB gun dispersion. And now they're practically literally untouchable by carriers. The point isn't even the damage they deal to planes, it's the fact that the massive spread increase means that, assuming they're at all paying attention, it's effectively impossible to hit them with a torpedo, and dive bombers become even more lovely than they already are - especially considering WG marketed dive bombers as a way to deal with destroyers. Even currently, if you're in a destroyer and getting hit by air-dropped torpedoes on a regular basis you're doing something wrong, so they really didn't need the extra defense. Alternatively, let them keep the damage boost but don't give them the dispersal effect. That deals with the complaints of planes shadowing them, though doesn't help IJN ones of course, without making them basically untouchable. As for the Omaha, it really did not need buffs. The complaints were that the Murmansk was way more powerful than it should be, not that the Omaha was too weak. Omahas already regularly get great scores with little effort. So of course they boosted the Omaha's range, while giving the Furutaka the "buff" of faster turret rotation time - not like it matters since now it's significantly outranged by both the other T5 cruisers. So the "fix" to it was nothing of the sort. On to CV loadout changes, maybe WG should actually get to better balancing the sides rather than blanket changes like retards? I tend to run the 1/2/2 loadout in IJN carriers, as I like keeping at least some fighter coverage for various purposes, but I can certainly see why people ditch them. More than a few times I've lost complete squadrons of fully upgraded fighters to their same tier, or even lower in a few instances, US counterparts for no loss by them, which definitely leads to a feeling of thinking they're pointless. Their "research" is neglecting the fact that those high tier IJN CVs have fighters that actually do MORE damage per plane than their counterparts, while at the lower tiers they're either equivalent or, in the case of T6, actually lower. And I'd also argue that low skill players actually do better in US carriers than IJN ones, so that argument is dumb too. Or, more specifically, I'm qualifying lower skilled players as those mostly still doing auto-drops or experimenting with manual. Auto drops from IJN squadrons might, MIGHT hit a battleship, but anything other than that is a crapshoot, as it's perfectly possible to sail ships of any class through gaps between the torpedoes if given angle/time. As opposed to US ones where it's impossible, or at best it might merely require you to be pixel-perfect, to sail cruisers through a spread, let alone battleships. Dive bombers obviously have a better chance of hitting to, due to more planes in the squadron. I've honestly come to actively seeing a single US torpedo squadron more than two IJN ones, as you're actually likely to take the same number of torpedoes if they're dropped well, and the US ones not only do more damage per torpedo, but are also guaranteed to take them all to different parts of the ship, rather than the IJN ones which will hit in pairs at the same locations, leading to even more damage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
What did they mean by adding a fighter to each airgroup? do they mean adding a fighter squadron or just an additional fighter plane to each bomber squadron? The reason I ask is because if they are tacking on an additional fighter squadron to Mod2 (strike) load outs, it will just make IJN Carriers even more OP than they already are. As is, they get so many squadrons that getting a fighter squadron on top of that will be kind of ridiculous. For US Carriers, it would be more useful having an extra fighter squadron for their Mod3 (fighter) load out, maximizing air cover.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
The infodump said the Furutaka will get a faster rate of fire in addition to faster traversal plus apparently 10km torps. That might be worth being outranged by 2km or whatever. The 203mm guns are monsters at tier 5 with good velocity. It's just that they are too drat slow now for players to really take advantage of them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
Applied to SEAMN as Orangecarebear
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:What did they mean by adding a fighter to each airgroup? do they mean adding a fighter squadron or just an additional fighter plane to each bomber squadron?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:And now they're practically literally untouchable by carriers. The point isn't even the damage they deal to planes, it's the fact that the massive spread increase means that, assuming they're at all paying attention, it's effectively impossible to hit them with a torpedo, and dive bombers become even more lovely than they already are - especially considering WG marketed dive bombers as a way to deal with destroyers. Even currently, if you're in a destroyer and getting hit by air-dropped torpedoes on a regular basis you're doing something wrong, so they really didn't need the extra defense. Alternatively, let them keep the damage boost but don't give them the dispersal effect. That deals with the complaints of planes shadowing them, though doesn't help IJN ones of course, without making them basically untouchable. Hold on a second, you seem to have no idea what the situation is with high tier DDs. CVs hard counter DDs in a myriad of ways, and this only gets worse as the tiers increase and the number of squads and spare planes for CVs goes up. Firstly, air dropped torpedoes are indeed very lethal to DDs, as DDs can actually take bonus damage from a torpedo if it hits their midsection. Couple this with difficult to dodge crisscross torpedo drops and a virtually nonexistent arming distance and death to CV is my leading cause of death in the Fubuki, while it is probably 2nd or 3rd on the Mahan. On top of that, dive bombers can still hit DDs, and their HE bombs cause fire (which increases the range at which you get spotted, not a good thing for DDs) and can destroy DD guns fairly easily if they hit them. And this is all coupled with the fact that these planes can detect the DD remotely, cannot be shaken by the DD (smoke is far too small to actually break a persistent fighter's spotting), airplanes can spot torpedoes you launch, rendering them all but useless, and your AA in a DD is anemic to the point of uselessness at such high tiers. You have to burn through 6 planes vs US CVs, and 4 for IJN, before the spotting is broken, should the CV fully commit the squad to keeping you locked down, and all they have to do to avoid a plane loss is occasionally fly away and reset their damage taken (because that's how fighter HP works, unfortunately). That's assuming you live long enough in your DD, because generally speaking, getting spotted at tier 7-8 means death from laser accurate CAs at long range. And god forbid if you're within 11km of an Atlanta when that plane spots you. All premise of playing stealthily and waiting for an opportunity to strike/launch torps goes right out the window the moment the CV gets the idea to ruin your day. Not to mention that the CV has greater offensive capabilities, and when caught, they even have more HP! Past tier 7, DDs get increasingly outclassed in all of their roles by CVs and CAs, especially US DDs. At least the IJN DDs have a gimmick with their torps, albeit a hilariously inaccurate and situational one. That a US DD would ~dare~ to be capable of stopping a CV from remotely murdering them or their allies, ugh. And they're giving up a loving skill for it, along with a gun! Please, play US DDs past the Nicholas and come back to me with your win rate in the tank before you comment on "DDs being untouchable by CVs". If you can pull it off, please teach me your ways, because you've worked a miracle. Note that this change will only really affect US DDs Tier 5 and later, as they are the ones which get the 127mm dual purpose guns that constitute the Defensive Fire skill in the first place (this armament is the same kind most US CAs have that are utilizing the same Defensive Fire skill, and why the Atlanta's AA is so powerful, as they have 8x2 of it!). gently caress CVs SO MUUUUUUUUCH and thank god for defensive fire on US DDs. Now a nerf to TB squad arming distance, less plane spotting power (or a massive nerf to plane spotting of torps), and a reduction on CV HP, and maybe, just maybe, I won't be so livid about CVs all the time. Maybe. ON NOT CV RANT MATTERS, the Fuso is A Good Boat once you get past that stock hull. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zpdaH6Qz_8 Hazdoc fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Aug 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
demonR6 posted:Let the games begin.. Applied as Evolvate
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
Basically agree with all of this. I actually experienced the "enemy CV sits a fighter squad on your DD and renders you useless" in a Minekaze game last night. I couldn't touch his tier 6 fighters with my garbage AA, and could no longer stealth torp.Hazdoc posted:ON NOT CV RANT MATTERS, the Fuso is A Good Boat once you get past that stock hull.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:Even currently, if you're in a destroyer and getting hit by air-dropped torpedoes on a regular basis you're doing something wrong, so they really didn't need the extra defense. Have you played destroyers above tier 5? Aerial torpedoes are much more dangerous than dive bombers. Dive bombers are relatively easily evaded and don't do much damage even when they do hit. They're not for killing destroyers; they're for setting a ship on fire after it uses its repair on flooding. Torpedo bombers are only easy to dodge if the player using them is auto dropping, or bad at manual drop. A reasonably competent player can hit even an evading destroyer somewhat reliably with one torpedo squadron, and with two torpedo squadrons it's not difficult to drop in a pattern destroyers can't evade. Go find a youtube video of a good player in a carrier and see what planes they use against destroyers. Also adding fighters to the all bomber carrier loadouts is a good idea. Dedicated fighter loadouts will likely always be bad; they're bad for a reason that's independent of how strong fighters are (even if you completely nullify the carrier matched against you, you depend entirely on your team to win the match). At least if every carrier had to bring fighters there would always be something interfering with air strikes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
Any word on clans being fixed so new members can join?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
Hazdoc posted:Hold on a second, you seem to have no idea what the situation is with high tier DDs. CVs hard counter DDs in a myriad of ways, and this only gets worse as the tiers increase and the number of squads and spare planes for CVs goes up. Firstly, air dropped torpedoes are indeed very lethal to DDs, as DDs can actually take bonus damage from a torpedo if it hits their midsection. Couple this with difficult to dodge crisscross torpedo drops and a virtually nonexistent arming distance and death to CV is my leading cause of death in the Fubuki, while it is probably 2nd or 3rd on the Mahan. On top of that, dive bombers can still hit DDs, and their HE bombs cause fire (which increases the range at which you get spotted, not a good thing for DDs) and can destroy DD guns fairly easily if they hit them. And this is all coupled with the fact that these planes can detect the DD remotely, cannot be shaken by the DD (smoke is far too small to actually break a persistent fighter's spotting), airplanes can spot torpedoes you launch, rendering them all but useless, and your AA in a DD is anemic to the point of uselessness at such high tiers. You have to burn through 6 planes vs US CVs, and 4 for IJN, before the spotting is broken, should the CV fully commit the squad to keeping you locked down, and all they have to do to avoid a plane loss is occasionally fly away and reset their damage taken (because that's how fighter HP works, unfortunately). That's assuming you live long enough in your DD, because generally speaking, getting spotted at tier 7-8 means death from laser accurate CAs at long range. And god forbid if you're within 11km of an Atlanta when that plane spots you. All premise of playing stealthily and waiting for an opportunity to strike/launch torps goes right out the window the moment the CV gets the idea to ruin your day. On carriers spotting you, you're absolutely correct, and I referenced that. Squadrons just meandering above destroyers keeping them spotted is a real issue, and one that needs addressing. That said, in most cases for me an ambush has been ruined by floatplanes rather than a carrier. I tend to run into the carrier issue more when I'm actually moving around the map, as I generally try to stay off the common flight paths when picking an ambush spot. Carriers actually killing destroyers, on the other hand is a different matter. Or, in other words, you stated I should play mid/high tier US destroyers before commenting and I return the statement - you should probably play mid/high tier carriers before commenting regarding that. Because at least in the middle tiers, planes fly nowhere near fast enough to even remotely reliably catch a destroyer actually reacting to incoming torpedo planes before they drop, multiple squadrons or no, as generally they're small and nimble enough to dodge through even a weave if they're already reacting as the planes come in. Have I killed destroyers? Yes, quite a few, but almost all of them were sailing in a straight line right up until just before the torpedoes hit. A bunch of people playing destroyers seem to have this idea that torpedo bombers would never target them, and thus don't notice or pay attention that a squadron is making an attack run on them. US torpedo bomber squadrons are slightly different, as their spread is admittedly so tight that even for destroyers dodging through one is tough. But you seem to be conflating multiple squadrons with tight spreads being everywhere, when only the very highest tier US carriers have access to both of those. As for dive bombers, are you serious? I've made plenty of dual squadron attacks on destroyers where not a single bomb out of eight has hit, even when I've had the destroyer perfectly lined up. Can they hit? Yes but it's already an unlikely event, and this just moves it to virtually no chance at all. And again I'll remind you that one of the excuses WG gave for giving people dive bombers over torpedo bombers is that they were more effective against small targets due to there being no obvious ordinance to dodge - a claim which is STILL patently false. I accept they're RNG; I accept that even perfect attack runs by them should not necessarily be hitting all the time, due to said RNG; I DO NOT accept RNG so bad that multiple attack runs by multiple squadrons against a single target in the same game cannot get a single hit on them, despite more than a few of the runs catching him straight on at point of release. And yes, planes should not be able to spot torpedoes at all, or at least have their spotting range drastically reduced - I'm fairly sure it's the same range actual ships spot them at - and is something I've mentioned before. But that's not an issue limited to carriers, as at high tiers everything that's not a destroyer has planes flying around. And while I know arguments have been made that torpedoes were easier to spot from the air after all, at the same time an airplane also wouldn't be able to accurately communicate exactly where they were to every ship around either. Also, and this is calling back to "play more destroyers," while I definitely have more playtime on the IJN ship tree, for the actual classes I have around the same percentage of games in all four - slightly higher in cruisers, slightly lower in CVs and DDs. All are in the 20s though. Especially with CVs, actually playing them and learning how to drop also helps in figuring out how to dodge them. You and many others keep complaining about arming time, but planes are committed to their runs well before the actual drop. Whether the arming distance needs to be increased or not is irrelevant in this specific instance, because destroyers really are nimble enough to thread a even a weave if you react to the actual runs rather than the drop.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
Hazdoc posted:all they have to do to avoid a plane loss is occasionally fly away and reset their damage taken (because that's how fighter HP works, unfortunately). How does this work? Does the damage reset on landing/relaunching the squad, or do planes actually heal while flying around out of combat? Is it just fighters or all planes?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
Reztes posted:How does this work? Does the damage reset on landing/relaunching the squad, or do planes actually heal while flying around out of combat? Is it just fighters or all planes?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
Reztes posted:How does this work? Does the damage reset on landing/relaunching the squad, or do planes actually heal while flying around out of combat? Is it just fighters or all planes? The damage is only tracked in terms of planes in the squadron. It gets added as long as you keep shooting at a squadron so that eventually a St Louis crappy single machinegun will shoot a plane down if given enough time, but as soon as a ship stops firing at a squadron any stacked up damage beyond individual planes shot down is thrown away.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
demonR6 posted:Not mine. Works like a champ. I'll screen the zoom so you can see how far in it works. Well? I'm not holding my breath for a screenshot of Aslain's "EoS lite" working in 0.4.0.6. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 01:46
|
|
|
Michi88 posted:Play it mid- short range and keep your nose at the enemy, then laugh and yell I'M A JUGGERNAUT BITCH. /repeat this is how you play battleships in general really. except with the myogi, you have to do it while sailing backward
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
quote:Still, we had to do some fine-tuning. Minekaze, a too effective, elusive, and dangerous Japanese destroyer, will lose her top torpedoes and three kilometers of range with them.The traversing angles of her torpedo tubes were reduced a little, while the detection distance was increased by almost one kilometer. It's cool to be a ninja, but it's time to draw a line hahahaha GOOD. Excepting manual dropping TBs on low/mid tier battleships there's nothing with a lower skill floor than zero risk making GBS threads torpedoes outside spotting range for 20 minutes and getting rewarded for it. yaay fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Aug 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:14
|
|
|
The Mogami really is obsence. I'm averaging 73k damage as a tier 8. Its amazing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
Raged posted:Any word on clans being fixed so new members can join? I submitted a ticket three days ago and replied to it again today asking for them to either fix it or tell me wtf is the deal since none of their rules were broken. They are probably trying to find some way to make it fit into a rule but at that point the only reason is see is "because I said so." PirateBob posted:Well? I'm not holding my breath for a screenshot of Aslain's "EoS lite" working in 0.4.0.6. This is default fully zoomed in.  This is Aslain's version of EoS two steps in. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:37
|
|
|
yaay posted:hahahaha GOOD. Excepting manual dropping TBs on low/mid tier battleships there's nothing with a lower skill floor than zero risk making GBS threads torpedoes outside spotting range for 20 minutes and getting rewarded for it. There really is zero skill in torping a target that doesn't change speed or direction. You'll still eat torps because the good people use the 7km ones as is and will still be undetected with the change.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:37
|
|
|
applied as jxforema
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
cheese posted:The Mogami really is obsence. I'm averaging 73k damage as a tier 8. Its amazing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
grrarg posted:AA is essentially a series of damage over time circles around a ship. Plane hit points are not tracked outside of AA circles. A plane that flies into AA and is damaged then flies away then flies back in is treated as having full health upon re-entry. Strangely enough, I've frequently seen it work out completely contrary to this. I've had instances where a completely fresh plane squadron would enter DP gun range of my ship (even the Mutsuki with its two 120mm DP guns that have a grand DPS of 6!) and lose a plane almost instantly. Like, you hear the DP guns firing twice and a plane goes boom and you get a ribbon even before the squadron gets close enough for 40mm or 25mm AA to tune in. 
Magni fucked around with this message at 04:17 on Aug 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 03:31
|
|
|
There's a strong RNG factor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Question about ship modules. Does every module you purchase with XP reduce the amount needed to buy the next level ship, or only the ones that are in a direct line to the next ship?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Question about ship modules. Does every module you purchase with XP reduce the amount needed to buy the next level ship, or only the ones that are in a direct line to the next ship? Direct line.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
Magni posted:Strangely enough, I've frequently seen it work out completely contrary to this. I've had instances where a completely fresh plane squadron would enter DP gun range of my sfip (even the Mutsuki with its two 120mm DP guns that have a grand DPS of 6!) and lose a plane almost instantly. Like, you hear the DP guns firing twice and a plane goes boom and you get a ribbon even before the squadron gets close enough for 40mm or 25mm AA to tune in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 04:18
|
|
|
The DP guns are deceptively decent at downing planes ever since they buffed them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 04:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 20:20 |
|
|
Insert name here posted:The DP guns are deceptively decent at downing planes ever since they buffed them. Also, the activated AA ability increases your longest range aura dps by a factor of SIX, according to that mechanics breakdown guide. I think this is why US cruisers are so brutal at AA.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2015 04:23
|
|