|
Aesis posted:This makes some USN ships difficult to use at range as they have slow projectile speed with high arc of fire compared to IJN ships. That's how they sort of balanced the Cleveland.
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 13:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:59 |
|
|
Hazdoc posted:Does the Russian navy have any sort of prefix we can use for their boats? I don't think they had one officially, but I see people using RFS like IJN is used even though Japan didn't have an official prefix.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 13:21
|
|
|
Krogort posted:That's how they sort of balanced the Cleveland.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 13:43
|
|
|
Does the game have a problem with aiming at people scraping across the map boarder? I had a game earlier where I had a cruiser run head on against the map border and my guns seem to were trying to correct for his movement, always hitting behind him while he was actually not moving forward and I was aiming straight centre for him. I have not that many battles yet, so that is the first time I ran into something like that and I'm wondering if this was a problem with latency (which would be weird with a ping of 30 to 40) or some kind of known issue.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
Aesis posted:I think they also nerfed RoF on Cleveland but I can't remember. Slow projectile speed + high arc makes me sad when playing NC though. Cruisers laugh at me. Until you get inside that magic 10km mark and every volley is a kill  Had a really great game with with Warspite last night. 5 or 6 kills, each of them being multi citadel 1 hit KOs. It really rallied the team.What sucks is when a good cruiser player sits at the 14-15km mark doing donuts and making you eat HE death while you plink 3-5k hp every 30 seconds 
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 13:49
|
|
|
Aesis posted:I think they also nerfed RoF on Cleveland but I can't remember. Slow projectile speed + high arc makes me sad when playing NC though. Cruisers laugh at me. Does it get better with the Iowa ? I stopped playing the NC when the stupid Tirpitz got released, it's suposed to be inferior but its armor is impregnable and its small canons have no trouble citadeling the hell out of the NC. Oh and it has torpedoes. gently caress this ship.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 13:50
|
|
|
Feindfeuer posted:Does the game have a problem with aiming at people scraping across the map boarder? I had a game earlier where I had a cruiser run head on against the map border and my guns seem to were trying to correct for his movement, always hitting behind him while he was actually not moving forward and I was aiming straight centre for him. I have not that many battles yet, so that is the first time I ran into something like that and I'm wondering if this was a problem with latency (which would be weird with a ping of 30 to 40) or some kind of known issue. It's a visual trick. They are actually moving a bit downwards when scraping the edge. It's a cheap trick that gets people who don't realize how they are moving. So if you're facing them and they are side scraping to the right into the edge, aim a bit down and right of their centre mass. Fire a bracketing shot to see how things align, make adjustments, fire full volley, laugh at citadels.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 13:52
|
|
|
Krogort posted:Does it get better with the Iowa ? It's not that crazy of a ship. I routinely face them in my Warspite and Colorado and they are pretty easy kills for the most part. Call out to your CV players and let them know that Tripz == Free Kill. If you're in a BB, never, ever, close the distance. Stay at/around 10km.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 13:54
|
|
|
Stanley Pain posted:It's a visual trick. They are actually moving a bit downwards when scraping the edge. It's a cheap trick that gets people who don't realize how they are moving. Ah tanks, I guess that makes sense though I would've probably prefered they went to route of World of Warplanes (even if that game is terrible) and ships would lock to autopilot and return to the battlefield if they run across the border. That would easily fix weird stuff like that. But now I know how to kill those guys, so I guess not that much of an issue. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 13:57
|
|
|
Feindfeuer posted:Ah tanks, I guess that makes sense though I would've probably prefered they went to route of World of Warplanes (even if that game is terrible) and ships would lock to autopilot and return to the battlefield if they run across the border. That would easily fix weird stuff like that. But now I know how to kill those guys, so I guess not that much of an issue. Thanks. They can also be moving slightly upwards depending on their angle to the edge. Once you figure it out it's actually easier to hit them because they usually aren't moving very fast.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
Stanley Pain posted:It's a visual trick. They are actually moving a bit downwards when scraping the edge. It's a cheap trick that gets people who don't realize how they are moving. The real issue with border scraping is jackasses who are fully aware of how it affects their turning rates. You can alter your positioning extremely quickly when you're on the border, which can both easily hide your broadside along with allowing one to dodge salvos that really should hit. It's incredibly bullshit and probably the biggest thing WG needs to fix due to how dickish the exploit is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 17:09
|
|
|
Going into the border should cause damage, the longer they stay in it the more damage gets done. Alternatively, give them a penalty similar to hitting friendlies and TKing.
Vadoc fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Sep 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
They just should make the maps bigger. Extending all borders out by 4-8km. And then just treat the border as land. Run into it: come to a complete stop and then have to reverse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
Tank Boy Ken posted:They just should make the maps bigger. Extending all borders out by 4-8km. And then just treat the border as land. Run into it: come to a complete stop and then have to reverse. Or make it part of the gameplay. If you leave the map, you withdraw from combat. Credit is somehow given to the ships that hit you or chased you off. Make penalties for it harsher than getting sunk. It could be like a safety in football. You push them right off the field... you get points and the ball back.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Tank Boy Ken posted:They just should make the maps bigger. Extending all borders out by 4-8km. And then just treat the border as land. Run into it: come to a complete stop and then have to reverse. I don't think that would be a good idea. Some of the maps are too big already, with the usual pubbie suspects (BBs in particular) heading too far away from cap points in order to snipe from 20km. Those battles either end in an unsatisfying cap win/loss or drag out forever. Small maps are more fun imo. Short but sweet battles are where it's at 
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
There are a ton of really elegant and simple ways to fix edge exploiting it's surprising (no not really) that nothing has been done. Treat the edge as land, done.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 18:26
|
|
|
Krogort posted:Does it get better with the Iowa ? Also just brawl with NC, it sucks at range. I just go to area with more islands and don't even fire until I'm detected or can remain concealed. Open sea ranged engagement is very bad for NC.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Tirpitz should be relatively easy to citadel at range (its deck armor is dog poo poo), but the ranges in game are just capped instead of compressed so angles might not get high enough for that to matter. Otherwise I think the idea is that it takes few citadel hits but lots of semi-penetrations.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
I've had a lot of good luck ruining Tripz with the Pepsi. 5-6k HE volleys onto the deck never get old.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:Tirpitz should be relatively easy to citadel at range (its deck armor is dog poo poo), but the ranges in game are just capped instead of compressed so angles might not get high enough for that to matter. Otherwise I think the idea is that it takes few citadel hits but lots of semi-penetrations. The Bismarck class is yet another example of Germans designing their gear not to fight WWII but to be really good in videogames. IRL its underwater protection was severely suspect as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Most of the BB players I've run into who are going up against me in my Tirpitz at brawling range just blast me with HE, because of the magical mystery secondary inner belt armor that makes getting citadels against one frustrating as gently caress. They just blast me with HE on the deck/superstructure and set 2-3 fires in 1 volley, and do it again 30s later.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:The Bismarck class is yet another example of Germans designing their gear not to fight WWII but to be really good in videogames. IRL its underwater protection was severely suspect as well. Eh, it was torpedoed several times during the sinking and examination of the wreckage showed the bulkheads were still intact. So as far as belt armor goes it didn't do too badly. That wouldn't have meant a lot if late war magnetic torps detonated under the ship, but then none of the battleships were protected against that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:The Bismarck class is yet another example of Germans designing their gear not to fight WWII but to be really good in videogames. IRL its underwater protection was severely suspect as well. So that's why Wehraboos exist. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
So I'm currently on the Phoenix right now and trying to figure out how US CAs play. Should I just be keeping at range and plinking CAs and under with HE and closing in on BBs to torp them when it's safe (ie their broadside is facing the wrong way)? Also I'm assuming never go full broadside.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
Eej posted:So I'm currently on the Phoenix right now and trying to figure out how US CAs play. Should I just be keeping at range and plinking CAs and under with HE and closing in on BBs to torp them when it's safe (ie their broadside is facing the wrong way)? Also I'm assuming never go full broadside. Pretty much. Remember to switch to AP if you're within 10km range and a cruiser shows you its side. You have the firepower and maneuverability to be an excellent DD hunter as well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
I've done it, I have seen peak pubbie terribleness. If only we had the technology to punch brain donors like these through their monitor. 
Chucullinn fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Sep 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
PirateBob posted:Pretty much. Remember to switch to AP if you're within 10km range and a cruiser shows you its side. You have the firepower and maneuverability to be an excellent DD hunter as well. Does this pretty much apply to the rest of the US CA line? The Phoenix seems... unreasonably long for a cruiser and I imagine the later ones don't have so many problems presenting a huge target when seen from the side.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Regarding the Tirpitz, if you properly angle yourself you will almost never get citadeld, but for some reason the Tirpitz eats 5-10k hits on a regular basis, even when at a good angle. I haven't played the NC since my supertester days, but back then I found it to be a good long range ship.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
Hammerstein posted:Regarding the Tirpitz, if you properly angle yourself you will almost never get citadeld, but for some reason the Tirpitz eats 5-10k hits on a regular basis, even when at a good angle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:Eh, it was torpedoed several times during the sinking and examination of the wreckage showed the bulkheads were still intact. So as far as belt armor goes it didn't do too badly. That wouldn't have meant a lot if late war magnetic torps detonated under the ship, but then none of the battleships were protected against that. To be fair there was only one hit on the protected part itself, with the second being the one that hit the stern, and they were really small ones even by the standards of aerial launched torpedoes. I'm not certain, but I THINK they were either 18 Inch Mark 12s or 13s, which weighed respectively 1548 lbs and 1630 lbs. For comparison, the IJN Type 91 decently more at 1870 lbs and the US Mark 13 weighed in at 2216 lbs. More damningly, those British torpedoes only carried around a 380 lb warhead, whereas the Type 91 carried one weighing between 450-520 lbs, depending on specific model, and the Mark 13 used a 600 lb warhead. Ship launched torpedoes were of course far heavier, with Mark 15 weighing in at 3841 lbs and the Type 93 Long Lance weighing in at a massive 5952 lbs. Suffice to say, what was barely good enough for tiny British aerial torpedoes probably would have been wrecked by those in use by the two nations that actually fought large naval battles during WW2, no magnetic hull breaking torpedoes needed. edit: Unless you mean HMS Rodney's claim, which I don't think has ever been confirmed. Lord Koth fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Sep 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:To be fair there was only one hit on the protected part itself, with the second being the one that hit the stern, and they were really small ones even by the standards of aerial launched torpedoes. I'm not certain, but I THINK they were either 18 Inch Mark 12s or 13s, which weighed respectively 1548 lbs and 1630 lbs. For comparison, the IJN Type 91 decently more at 1870 lbs and the US Mark 13 weighed in at 2216 lbs. More damningly, those British torpedoes only carried around a 380 lb warhead, whereas the Type 91 carried one weighing between 450-520 lbs, depending on specific model, and the Mark 13 used a 600 lb warhead. It was hit by torpedoes from both destroyers and the battleship Rodney during the last few hours before the crew scuttled it. The Rodney had 622mm tubes. I know this because it's the only time a battleship actually torpedoed another battleship with those underwater tubes. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 21:45 on Sep 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
I'm a new player trying to decide what to specialise in. So far I have every tier 3 ship unlocked on the US side, and the tier 3 Jap Destroyer unlocked as well. When it comes to destroyers, is there a general consensus on which nation has the better ships? I like sailing around at high speed, pooping out torpedoes, if that matters. I noticed that the American ones have the 3 spread torpedoes, while the Japanese only have 2, which I would imagine makes the Japanese ones harder to use. What do you guys think?
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:To be fair there was only one hit on the protected part itself, with the second being the one that hit the stern, and they were really small ones even by the standards of aerial launched torpedoes. I'm not certain, but I THINK they were either 18 Inch Mark 12s or 13s, which weighed respectively 1548 lbs and 1630 lbs. For comparison, the IJN Type 91 decently more at 1870 lbs and the US Mark 13 weighed in at 2216 lbs. More damningly, those British torpedoes only carried around a 380 lb warhead, whereas the Type 91 carried one weighing between 450-520 lbs, depending on specific model, and the Mark 13 used a 600 lb warhead. There might have been a torpedo hit from Rodney or one of the heavy cruisers in the final battle. Apparently Bismarck was losing buoyancy before it was scuttled. Praising Bismarck's armor because the British didn't sink it with guns is dumb though. It failed spectacularly at keeping the ship operational, but the crew didn't strike their colors when their ship was unable to fight back.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Eej posted:Does this pretty much apply to the rest of the US CA line? The Phoenix seems... unreasonably long for a cruiser and I imagine the later ones don't have so many problems presenting a huge target when seen from the side. Unreasonably long? Not really. IJN have some that are longer, I'm pretty sure. Omaha is very vulnerable if it shows side. Cleveland has much smaller citadels and survives a lot more punishment. Pensacola is soft. Rest of the line are somewhat harder to kill than IJN counterparts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:It was hit by torpedoes from both destroyers and the battleship Rodney during the last few hours before the crew scuttled it. The Rodney had 622mm tubes. Doing some more research, I realized I got the number of hits wrong anyways. Three or four hits from the Swordfish, though again those were tiny ones and at least one hit the main armor belt as opposed to under it. Dorsetshire may have gotten between two and three hits, which would have been decently larger ones of course. Rodney's claim has never been confirmed as far as I'm aware - the Germans denied it hit and, given the damage a 622 mm torpedo should do, I'm inclined to believe them. Lord Koth fucked around with this message at 21:59 on Sep 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Gunder posted:I'm a new player trying to decide what to specialise in. So far I have every tier 3 ship unlocked on the US side, and the tier 3 Jap Destroyer unlocked as well. When it comes to destroyers, is there a general consensus on which nation has the better ships? I like sailing around at high speed, pooping out torpedoes, if that matters. I noticed that the American ones have the 3 spread torpedoes, while the Japanese only have 2, which I would imagine makes the Japanese ones harder to use. What do you guys think? IJN destroyers get longer-range torps, letting them usually engage a target without getting close enough to be seen. USN destroyers need to get closer, so they rely on using terrain, smoke, and teamwork to setup torpedo runs. USN Destroyers get faster-traversing gun, so they're better at skirmishing with other small boats or chipping away at/annoying largeboats while doing evasive moves.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
Anyone using Aslains, it's been updated again. Many of the mods that got yanked because 0.5.0.0/0.5.0.1 broke them have been updated.  E2A: I take that back, you just have to get it from the EU forums: http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/ind...e-2909/#topmost It's by a fairly popular/productive modder so it should show up in Aslains pretty soon. MREBoy fucked around with this message at 22:39 on Sep 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
I love the new mod that let's you see all the hidden ships in the tech tree, including alpha awards, etc. Also, which BB do you think I should get first, the Kongo or the New York? I'm leaning Kongo due to my experience in CBT.
|
|
#
?
Sep 29, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:It was hit by torpedoes from both destroyers and the battleship Rodney during the last few hours before the crew scuttled it. The Rodney had 622mm tubes. Though there is the claim that SMS Wiesbaden got HMS Malborough during Jutland, too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:59 |
|
|
MoraleHazard posted:I love the new mod that let's you see all the hidden ships in the tech tree, including alpha awards, etc. Kongo
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2015 00:02
|
|
