|
So I've seen a few posts about the Edinburgh being awesome. What changes from the early British line to that ship make such a difference? Personally, I love AP cruisers, but the early ships don't make me confident in later performance in the line. Is it just smoke plus radar? Or are penetration, rof, etc sufficiently good to make them competitive with the Atago, Kutuzov, etc as good tier 8 ships?
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 00:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 00:23 |
|
|
Velius posted:So I've seen a few posts about the Edinburgh being awesome. What changes from the early British line to that ship make such a difference? Personally, I love AP cruisers, but the early ships don't make me confident in later performance in the line. Is it just smoke plus radar? Or are penetration, rof, etc sufficiently good to make them competitive with the Atago, Kutuzov, etc as good tier 8 ships? Battleships start having hittable superstructure, RN cruisers start getting smoke AND decent AP ammunition, and the Leander, Fiji, and Edinburgh (ESPECIALLY the latter two) have very low citadels - waterline or very slightly above - which means their biggest weakness is significantly harder to hit. Everything else on the line (with special mention to the absolutely gargantuan abovewater citadels Neptune and Minotaur possess) have their citadels sticking quite far out of the water. I think Edinburgh might also be the tier where the RN cruisers start getting their ludicrously bullshit heal too, as opposed to one generally in line with other ships. edit: FINALLY!!! Took me 20 drat games, but finally got my fifth win to max out the loving bonus exp mission for the day. gently caress weekend MM on bonus weekends, that was absolutely idiotic how many games it took. Lord Koth fucked around with this message at 00:30 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:I haven't played the Myogi in over a year I think but mentioning it gives me flashbacks. It was absolute garbage. The Kongo is great though, unlike US battleships it can actually reposition and disengage. If you aren't hitting things, get closer (with the Myogi this does not actually help). Don't be that BB guy who sits in the back and snipes. No you don't have much armor but don't show broadside and you're gonna be fine. I'm still quite terrible at this, although the fact that I'm comfortably above 50 (56% now) tells me that pubbies are bad everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
Should I just stick the Concealment modification on my Bismarck? I know that Hydro basically does everything the Target Acquisition mod does but is not always up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
Kalion posted:Should I just stick the Concealment modification on my Bismarck? I know that Hydro basically does everything the Target Acquisition mod does but is not always up. Yes. The bismark plays better in the mid to close range battles thanks to addition of high weight of secondaries. So being able to go gun quiet when needed to catch someone out elsewhere is important. It is an odd thing to say of a battleship, but really, concealment is good on any of them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 01:50
|
|
|
Cippalippus posted:I'm still quite terrible at this, although the fact that I'm comfortably above 50 (56% now) tells me that pubbies are bad everywhere. I have better stats in this than I do in tanks, in tanks I'm just blue, here I've actually managed to break unicum level if this WTR rating and win rate are to be believed. I think the pubbies are actually worse than in tanks in general. Hitting things is hard and positioning is less obvious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 02:04
|
|
|
It's more the gameplay and mechanical differences, I believe. In tanks, you typically reload between 6~12s and your shells simply do not have the same "distance" to travel and you do not have to lead as much in tanks. One shell can be crippling in tanks, but outside of citadel explosions there are only torpedoes to inflict a comparable amount of damage. As well, it's much easier to get out of danger or find cover and remain immobile behind said cover for the entirety of the match in tanks, leading to turtles very common on the Asia and NA servers (I've no idea about EU tanks). The attritional nature of the game also lessens snarky armour play that you can see with hull/turret down tanks. Even in smoke or behind a mountain you are hypothetically fully vulnerable to being chipped to death. The most important features of boats with regards to tanks is the fact that you tend to not be able to luck your way into bouncing heavily damaging attacks against you and that you must plan your moves upwards to a few minutes in advance as it is much slower moving and deliberate, relatively speaking. Boatplay caters much more heavily to those with map and positional awareness than tanks as flexing takes a very long time in comparison. tl;dr Players don't plan ahead very often.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
Yeah, I can see that. I played a terrible lovely game years ago (Navy Field) and initially I thought that hitting stuff would be easy, and it is actually, but less than expected. I'm more annoyed by the insane spread of battleships. I think I'm more a cruiser kind of guy, after all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
Ranked is such loving horseshit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 03:24
|
|
|
Cippalippus posted:Yeah, I can see that. I played a terrible lovely game years ago (Navy Field) and initially I thought that hitting stuff would be easy, and it is actually, but less than expected. Come on, Navyfield was awesome. Especially grinding NPC missions hundreds of times to improve crew. Unsurprisingly, a lot of people who played that now play warships. Edit: didn't you used to have primus in your name too? Or am I just confused. Velius fucked around with this message at 03:34 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
Another supercontainer, another 20 mil. Well now I can afford all the tier 9's I've researched but not bought yet...
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 04:03
|
|
|
Wargaming is getting you ready for the next ranked season, which will incidentally be that tier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 04:35
|
|
|
Heartcatch posted:Wargaming is getting you ready for the next ranked season, which will incidentally be that tier. If next season is going to be 9, it's going to be pure poo poo too. There's not a lot of ships at 9 that are worthy of a "standout" call, barring two. The Iowa... and the Fletcher. Yeah, 4 Fletchers on each team will be a lot worse than 4 Bensons on each team. A LOT worse. At least the T9 CAs aren't going to be as terrified of doing things as they'll all have a heal and the Izumo is kind of bad still, so that's 1/3 T9 BBs they don't have to worry about. But Fletchers infini-smoking their team and Iowas blapping anything that shows its head won't be fun. Perhaps a tiny bit better than getting sprayed by Bismarck cancerous secondaries but who knows? At least you can't get pubbies who bought their way into Ranked, as T8 is the highest tier WG will make salable premiums for.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 06:49
|
|
|
Hazdoc posted:If next season is going to be 9, it's going to be pure poo poo too. There's not a lot of ships at 9 that are worthy of a "standout" call, barring two. I'm not necessarily sure I agree about the Iowa. AA is not generally terribly relevant in Ranked, though I suppose at T9 with Taihos(or strike Essexes) that could change, and Iowa has a larger citadel above water than North Carolina, with effectively no additional protection. Meanwhile the Friedrich carries the same monstrous secondary arrangement as Bismarck, with better firing arcs too, along with packing 16" guns that fire faster than Iowa's - or it switches out for the 16.5" ones. Additionally, relatively speaking the Iowa's maneuverability in everything except speed is worse relative to its German counterpart than the North Carolina comparison(still has the longer rudder shift, but instead of having a turning radius 90m better than its counterpart, Iowa has one only 20m better). Friedrich also still has the invaluable Hydro. As for cruisers, you'll just see even more stealth fire than at T8. Ibuki would just play similarly to an Atago, except with better protection and far more range, and the Donskoi and Roon are at least decently regarded for doing more up close tasks. I'm not really seeing Ranked actually going for T9 though, for any number of reasons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 07:35
|
|
|
As WG isn't selling any T9 premium, chances of T9 ranked are pretty low. It would be pretty cool for cruisers though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 08:54
|
|
|
I was joking. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 09:12
|
|
|
I for one would like to see a T9 Ranked for variety. Actually with their current MM implementation I wonder if its feasible to have ranked for every Tier from 6 onwards. Just let people queue with whatever they like and the MM will balance teams with equal tiers and classes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 12:22
|
|
|
Does anyone have any idea when british battleships are going to be added? Thats the only line of ships I really care about.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 12:42
|
|
|
deratomicdog posted:Does anyone have any idea when british battleships are going to be added? Thats the only line of ships I really care about. it'll be a few months i guess. New lines spike interest and i guess they want to space them out maximally. New IJN DD line to come first
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 12:47
|
|
|
Have they said what they're doing with the British lines exactly? Like when will see inoic ships like the Admiral Class Battlecruiser. Will that just be in the Battleship line?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:Have they said what they're doing with the British lines exactly? Like when will see inoic ships like the Admiral Class Battlecruiser. Will that just be in the Battleship line? They haven't said yet, the only thing we know for certain is that Dreadnought will be the tier 3, because tier 3 battleships are categorically the first Dreadnought of that Navy. You could possibly also infer the Queen Elizabeth class at tier 6, but they could just as easily make it Revenge and leave Warspite as a special snowflake. You could possibly also infer that KGV will be a premium, because Wargaming's answer to the solving the problem with low calibre treaty battleships has been to make them premiums - Dunkerque, Scharnhorst. Another inference is Nelson at tier 7, because it, Colorado, and Nagato were the "Big 7" historically, and it makes a nice circle. deratomicdog posted:Does anyone have any idea when british battleships are going to be added? Thats the only line of ships I really care about. Original plan was 201, don't know if that's changed or not because that was from before the RN cruisers were moved up to now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 13:01
|
|
|
I'm personally hoping the Hood shows up because I could always use more detonation flags
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 13:04
|
|
|
Im willing to bet Hood will show up as a premium ship.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 13:44
|
|
|
With Warspite already at tier 6, they've given themselves a bit of a squeeze with Hood and PoW as premiums, as PoW can't go higher than 7; probably end up with PoW early to support the launch of the battleship branch, and then Hood much further down the track to support the launch of a battlecruiser tree using Admiral and the alphabet ships
NTRabbit fucked around with this message at 14:05 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 14:02
|
|
|
Insert name here posted:I'm personally hoping the Hood shows up because I could always use more detonation flags Maybe they'll make it you can't mount a denotation flag to an Admiral Class Battlecruiser unless you've bought the upgraded hull.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 14:03
|
|
|
Tier 10 permanent camouflagequote:Standard battle bonuses (-3% to detectability from ships, +4% to enemy fire spread)  Pretty much pay to play
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:With Warspite already at tier 6, they've given themselves a bit of a squeeze with Hood and PoW as premiums, as PoW can't go higher than 7; probably end up with PoW early to support the launch of the battleship branch, and then Hood much further down the track to support the launch of a battlecruiser tree using Admiral and the alphabet ships I hope that's more what they do so have the Battleship line go with the Dreadnought and Super Dreadnoughts so something like Dreadnought (Tier III potentially) Bellerophon St Vincent Neptune Colossus Orion KGV (1911) Iron Duke Queen Elizabeth (Warspite so Tier VI) Revenge Nelson King George V (1939) Vanguard (But maybe not as it was a Fast Battleship) And a separate Battlecruiser line of Invincible Indefatigable Lion Queen Mary Tiger Renown Courageous Admiral Maybe Vanguard in here. The Battlecruiser line might only have 3 or 4 viable ships in it though I guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 14:22
|
|
|
Gwaihir posted:"It's great" -a thing that literally should never be said about the Myogi by anyone, ever. It's miles better than the bloody Kaiser, and I've never found it to be particularly wanting in combat, the guns are a bit inaccurate but all BB guns are, otherwise it has great range, good turret arcs, good speed, and really powerful shells. I don't really get what's to dislike about it, other than possibly it's a bit fragile compared to the kaiser, it still bounces cruiser shells easily enough and can kite BBs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 14:29
|
|
|
Top end of the battleship line is 99% likely to go Nelson -> Vanguard -> Lion (1942) -> Frankenlion (1944) from the shipyards of Wargaming & Wargaming With only 14" guns on a late treaty hull, KGV has trouble fitting in anywhere without giving the some weird kind of gun stats. NTRabbit fucked around with this message at 14:41 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
Aesis posted:Tier 10 permanent camouflage Well it really only makes tier X less expensive to play, and that's already less of a problem since they made the service costs fixed. You can get the same result from using those doubloons on a premium ship for credits. Or by not being a bad. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:Top end of the battleship line is 99% likely to go Nelson -> Vanguard -> Lion (1942) -> Frankenlion (1944) from the shipyards of Wargaming & Wargaming The KGV fits in with the Colorado at Tier VII I think, 10x14" guns vs 8x16" guns with the KGV being faster better secondaries and more belt armour than the Colorado. The 14" shells used were very powerful as well, easily penning 14" armour. The Duke of York was considered a reasonable matchup to the Scharnhorst in battle as well as it had excellent fire control. So maybe Tier 7 - KGV Tier 8 - Nelson Tier 9 - Vangaurd Tier 10 - Mystery Ship (Lion) ?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 14:55
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:.... from the shipyards of Wargaming & Wargaming  I'm waiting for Belfast on the NA server.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
deratomicdog posted:Does anyone have any idea when british battleships are going to be added? Thats the only line of ships I really care about. It depends on how much work is already done on them. British Battleships are a bit tricky to balance, because of a pretty uniform gun caliber through the ages, and newer "higher tier" candidate ships actually having smaller guns (KGV). What if designs probably help, as larger guns were considered for some ships, but held back because of treaty issues in a similar way to Scharnhorst.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:And a separate Battlecruiser line of :cryingfisher: Also HMS Furious' original configuration with the two 18 inchers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:The KGV fits in with the Colorado at Tier VII I think, 10x14" guns vs 8x16" guns with the KGV being faster better secondaries and more belt armour than the Colorado. The 14" shells used were very powerful as well, easily penning 14" armour. I don't see why. KGV had 14inch guns, but was designed to carry 15 inch guns. In addition a 16 inch variant design was also drawn up. Given this, I see no reason why Wargaming can't have the KGV at a tier higher than 7 with a number but of gun module upgrades. Plus, just looking at how Wargaming did the RN cruisers, it seems not to difficult to balance the smaller caliber main battery in such a way that still makes the ship competitive in higher tiers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:I don't see why. KGV had 14inch guns, but was designed to carry 15 inch guns. In addition a 16 inch variant design was also drawn up. Given this, I see no reason why Wargaming can't have the KGV at a tier higher than 7 with a number but of gun module upgrades. KGV was designed to have 14" guns from start to finish, the British stuck to the treaty and didn't consider escalating because they would have been delayed too long, which is the opposite of what happened with North Carolina. NTRabbit fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Oct 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
KGV could go like the Scharnhorst/Gneisenau. Normal one with triple 15" as originally designed would be comparable to Bismarck so T8, potentially with a 16" upgrade available. PoW as a premium with the historical 14". Vanguard was basically a KGV with a QE gun layout, which would be a pretty disappointing T9. Seems more likely to have 16" Lion at T9 and 18" Lion at T10. And Nelson matches far better with Colorado. 21 knots speed, good armour and 16" guns that weren't as good as North Carolina's.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
Forums Terrorist posted::cryingfisher: HMS Incomparable could be a hilarious high tier Battlecruiser, 35 knots with 6x20" guns. But the Vanguard is a batter ship really, with the distinct advantage of being real as well. I'd like the HMS Furious in as a premium version of the Courageous with that configuration, that would be fun. In terms of Battleship balance the KGV were better than their caliber would suggest, the BL 14 Mk VII being the most successful naval gun of the war. The KGV's guns could fire faster and further than the 16" guns used by the Americans and it could still pen 11" of armour at 18km which is not too shabby really.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:KGV was designed to have 14" guns from start to finish, the British stuck to the treaty and didn't consider escalating because they would have been delayed too long, which is the opposite of what happened with North Carolina. Yeah, it was supposed to have quad 14" guns sticking to the treaty and they did consider increasing the calibre but they simply didn't have the time to do the redesign. Unfortunately the quad arrangement didn't work out. I could see them putting the Nelson class at 7 and the KGV at 8 assuming they take into account the large charge in the 14" shells which is what made them good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 00:23 |
|
|
If the current battlecruisers in game are an indication, the battlecruiser line for the british is going to be a collection of steaming turds
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2016 17:32
|
|