|
Good games tonight Falkenberg. Pubbies tho 
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:17 |
|
|
Hazdoc posted:First win most likely, and you capped a base which is a load of XP. Assuming the Hatsuharu kill was majority if not all damage dealt, its not terribly out of line for such a small match. The 22 plane kills made up a good chunk of XP too. IIRC, 40 plane kills grants equivalent rewards to killing that same tier CV, so you made up half of that. Anyways Baltimore isn't proving to be that bad imo. It's a major upgrade from New Orleans imo, with better AA, better gun RoF (11.54 seconds with module) and similar concealment. I've been dealing lot more damage than my other cruisers just fighting at close range shooting AP for sweet citadels.   
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
Yeah, I dont know why people hate on the US CAs so much. Sure, the ballistics could be better, and a buff to it would be huge, but the shells still pen harder than any other nation's shells when they hit (with better normalization too!). The HE is superior to Germans, the AA is unsurpassed, and the armor isn't half bad once you ignore the Pensacola's utter shitheap of a failure. They're mid range gunboat skirmishers, with a heavy emphasis on maneuvering, while the IJN CAs are better at long range where they don't have to turn guns (or themselves) as much and can benefit from their ballistics and stealth to win out. It just so happens that it seems most fights draw out to be that long range bullshit, and with CVs out of vogue the US CAs lose another tool in their toolkit. Eh. I wish CVs would be reworked to be less of a overall nuisance to play and play against, but I dont know what the fix would be. Having CVs back in force (and not be a mechanics nightmare) would make US CAs attractive again. Gonna upload an Atago game tonight, had a 4 kill High Caliber ranked match just now where I talked mad poo poo and carried hard, turning around a really bad game. Sometimes you just have to not be bad at boats.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
Hazdoc posted:Sometimes you just have to not be bad at boats. Yeah. Holy poo poo was I out of practice today. I failed to stay in my smoke cloud twice in one game and couldn't seem to hit poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6qUPb3OfD0 Ugh, I might spend more doubloons on respeccing this commander for turret traverse and fire chance, I dunno. If only I had a Mogami and not an ever increasing stockpile of NO CREDITS though I did just find out today that you're capped at 999 of a signal flag, so now I'm gonna blow the repair cost flags on every match I guess
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
Hazdoc posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6qUPb3OfD0 Take heart: having 999 of any flag means that you're an order of magnitude better at boats than I am. How "good" I am at boats seems to depend on my mood, blood sugar, phase of the moon, sunspot activity, and probably loving mind control lasers from the lizard people or something. Sometimes I'll be unstoppable, other times I'm like a bull in a slaughterhouse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 10:50
|
|
|
Testing the new server please connect to it when you can. It will still have a level of permissions like we have now but less complicated. https://discord.gg/0lSMRHzXe07cGT9V
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
Hazdoc posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6qUPb3OfD0 If you eventually get a Mogami, you'll definitely want the turret traverse skill, and demolition expert is a good choice after AFT.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
El Disco posted:If you eventually get a Mogami, you'll definitely want the turret traverse skill, and demolition expert is a good choice after AFT.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
Aesis posted:Imagine having 19 points of captain skills. AFT, DE and Concealment! That's the plan for my dedicated Mogami captain. A very long-term plan.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
IIRC you can't get the 19th point because it requires 9,999,999 xp.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Speaking of skills, AFT or Last Stand on a US DD captain (going for the Benson, currently at the Nicholas)? I'm thinking Last Stand because if the ballistics are like this on the entire line I ain't gonna hit poo poo at long range.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:IIRC you can't get the 19th point because it requires 9,999,999 xp.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:Speaking of skills, AFT or Last Stand on a US DD captain (going for the Benson, currently at the Nicholas)? I'm thinking Last Stand because if the ballistics are like this on the entire line I ain't gonna hit poo poo at long range. Demolition Expert (taking you from 5 to 8% chance of fire) or Last Stand. The ballistics are indeed too lovely when firing at the extra range that AFT gives you.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:Speaking of skills, AFT or Last Stand on a US DD captain (going for the Benson, currently at the Nicholas)? I'm thinking Last Stand because if the ballistics are like this on the entire line I ain't gonna hit poo poo at long range. last stand is always (with the exception of a few of the russian dds) the better choice. your destroyer is a giant engine/steering hitbox and you can't afford to be without your most important mobility tools
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Without Last Stand you're incredibly vulnerable against other DDs. You're very unlikely to win gun duels with other DDs if you dont have Last Stand and they do, and if they do crit your engines and note that you don't have Last Stand, even if you win the gun battle they may still choose to torp you while you're a sitting duck. Or they could just torp and smoke, and wait to see if they hit before reengaging you. Basically, Last Stand allows you to heavily dictate the terms of an engagement with another DD, or at the very least prevents you from dying instantly to a pair of engine crits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Deutsch Nozzle posted:last stand is always (with the exception of a few of the russian dds) the better choice. your destroyer is a giant engine/steering hitbox and you can't afford to be without your most important mobility tools You get hit twice in the engine without last stand, you're dead no matter how many HP you have without smoke and/or great luck. It does more to change fights more than any other skill in the game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
Testing the new server please connect to it when you can. It will still have a level of permissions like we have now but less complicated. https://discord.gg/0lSMRHzXe07cGT9V
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
I think im really going to enjoy the Fubuki. You get basically a straight +50% increase in firepower over the previous tier. First win today was a real gem. Somehow blapped the enemy Fubuki with a torpedo even though I had no idea he was there. Then landed 5 more hits on a couple BBs that doggedly kept heading towards me. One of them was really butthurt about the fact that they never spotted me. He was apparently unaware that some destroyers could stealth torp, and this guy had made it all the way to the Colorado. I swear pubs like that are usually on my team.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Right, I'll definitely take Last Stand. I've been using AFT on the Gnevny (also using that captain for the Murmansk) but yeah I see your points. In other news I think I'm starting to feel the Atago in ranked:    About 110k damage. Yikes. Shatter is probably my favorite ranked map right now. Pubbie battleships really don't do well with islands. e: and with the battle after that, I'm at rank 10. Calling it a night, good times. TheFluff fucked around with this message at 00:21 on Jan 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
Discord kinda owns Mogami also feels pretty heavily nerfed???? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
Pacra posted:Mogami also feels pretty heavily nerfed???? I'm pretty sure all they did was reduce the traverse speed on the 155mm turrets. Easily countered with the captain skill (Aiming Expert?). It still is a really good ship.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
El Disco posted:I'm pretty sure all they did was reduce the traverse speed on the 155mm turrets. Easily countered with the captain skill (Aiming Expert?). It still is a really good ship. They reduced the turret armor basically to tinfoil as well. While it's not every game, I'm not particularly surprised when I end up losing a turret or two, even to other cruisers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
   Sims that could. I'm finding US ships to be generally good close-mid range. They suck at mid-long range though 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 05:46
|
|
|
Project R is up for NA. Only 1000 people get the Kamikaze and it's a random drawing. gently caress WG. http://worldofwarships.com/en/news/common/project-r-announcement/
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
Fuuuuuuuuccckkk.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
So it's an ugly minekaze?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:So it's an ugly minekaze? Should be very similar, if not the same, as the Fujin. 1k winners is a bit... sad, I guess. I dont really care. More missions and free stuff is nice though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
The pearl-clutching has already begun, I see 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
clutch my pearls
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
I dont really care about the Kamikaze, but at least (most) of the pearl missions encourage wins and dont require kills so hopefully we wont see some of the same horrid behavior from the Arpeggio missions. I'm still farming fires in my Cleveland. Now it says you need 150 pearls, but does that mean on hand or just total earned overall?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
currently seal clubbing in t3 for that one mission
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSndzC1HXjk And here I was wondering why USA's 16 inch guns can't penetrate Yamato/Izumo/Amagi from front while Yamato can penetrate everything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
i dont understand why they let the yamato be so blatantly better than the montana. the montana never even existed so they could really take some creative license with it and maybe just make it an iowa with 3x 460mm guns to balance with the yamato but :wargaming:
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
The 16" superheavy was historically really good so they either need to make it work or resign themselves to having no postwar tier tens. On the other hand the 18"/47 Mark A is a loving ludicrous gun I'd love to see in a game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
Deutsch Nozzle posted:i dont understand why they let the yamato be so blatantly better than the montana. the montana never even existed so they could really take some creative license with it and maybe just make it an iowa with 3x 460mm guns to balance with the yamato but :wargaming: Even if they didnt go with 18" guns there is so much potential to make the two ships competitive - you could go with imaginary longer barreled 16" guns, improved post-war ammunition, magically faster loading equipment, better repair party that allows citadel heals or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Lakedaimon posted:Even if they didnt go with 18" guns there is so much potential to make the two ships competitive - you could go with imaginary longer barreled 16" guns, improved post-war ammunition, magically faster loading equipment, better repair party that allows citadel heals or whatever. The US 16" shell was already closer to 18" shells than it was to the rest of the world's 16" shells. It'd be nice if US superheavy shells actually had the benefit of better penetration they gave up velocity for. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Jan 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
Lakedaimon posted:Even if they didnt go with 18" guns there is so much potential to make the two ships competitive - you could go with imaginary longer barreled 16" guns, improved post-war ammunition, magically faster loading equipment, better repair party that allows citadel heals or whatever. quote:These designations were all assigned to a single gun used for testing purposes between 1927 and 1945. In the early 1920s, the USN was in the process of developing the 18"/48 (45.7 cm) Mark 1 naval gun. The prototype for this weapon was about halfway completed when the Washington Naval Limitation Treaty of 1922 outlawed guns larger than 16" (40.6 cm). As a result of the treaty, the USN decided to complete the prototype as an extra-long 16" (40.6 cm) weapon. This conversion was performed by grinding down the muzzle end, re-threading the barrel to hold an extension ring and inserting a thicker, 16" (40.6 cm) diameter liner. The prototype was then designated as the 16"/56 (40.6 cm) Mark 4 high-velocity test gun. Proofing began at the Dahlgren proving ground in July 1927 and the gun was fired throughout the 1930s in various tests. Not imaginary NTRabbit fucked around with this message at 23:07 on Jan 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:Not imaginary That makes it even worse that Wargaming didnt use them. Even if they weighed a ton more or otherwise wouldnt have fit into a Montana turret, they could have (and should have) just fudged it then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 23:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:17 |
|
|
Considering the players who've gotten to the Yamato either have to suffer through the Izumo or buy their way past it, not feeling too much sympathy. And unlike the Montana, which at least had reached the design phase, the Izumo was a completely paper ship, so they could have made a bunch of interpretations that wouldn't have made it the pile of poo poo it is. Montana isn't particularly good compared to the Yamato. Izumo isn't good compared to anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2016 23:40
|
|