|
JuffoWup posted:It is amazing isn't it? The problem with battleships is that you can make a mistake and not notice until five minutes later, when it will take another five minutes to fix. If your battleline forms up left behind you but then decides to run right because the mind of the pubbie is a fickle thing, you can find yourself all alone all of a sudden, usually right in the moment two cruisers and a battleship come out behind an island. That and there are battleship captains who seem to believe they are billed for any scratched paint on their ship and decide to stay as far away from the enemy as possible. If you're not engaging the enemy as a battleship or are currently maneuvering to engage the enemy, you are not doing your job. Sometimes that means you find yourself surrounded and go down in a blaze of glorious glory.
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2015 08:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 01:56 |
|
|
It's really quite ironic that aircraft carriers actually get weaker with higher tiers, simply because low tier ships have gently caress-all for AA guns. Most cruisers have one or two at most.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2015 10:14
|
|
|
Game 10 without a victory in the St. Louis. 120+ hits, no fires started, no criticals. gently caress everything.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2015 13:25
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:I'm worried the developing pubbie carrier meta is all fighters all the time because TBing is hard and if you go all fighters you can play pretend useful rts It's not so much TBing being hard as it is worrying that the other guy is running fighters and just swatting your planes out of the sky after destroying your single sqadron of fighters. At least, that's why I'm running dual fighters on my Langley 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2015 12:01
|
|
|
Is there any indication whatsoever telling you how long your torpedo tubes on one side are going to take to reload? Because there is absolutely nothing worse than having a battleship happily on the side you fired your torpedoes on and not knowing whether you can turn quick enough to fire the other side or if you should just keep straight on because the battery is going to be reloaded in a few seconds.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
I didn't think it was possible, but it appears the Independence is actually a downgrade from the Langley. It's fast and it has nice AA, but the planes aren't able to do anything in the tier 5 AA environment and the modules are one  after the other. First airgroup update leaves you with divebombers instead of torpedo bomber, which means you are completely useless in a fight, the fighter upgrade actually reduces the damage you do
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
Infidelicious posted:Not digging the Phoenix. 2 torpedos doesn't make up for losing like 10 guns. Upgraded it has like one gun less broadside than the St. Louis. Or maybe that was the Omaha, those two always blend together for me.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
Part of it is just the lack of content, really. Two tech trees worth of ships on three different maps simply isn't very interesting. If they add new nations and give them a unique feel, I can see that add a lot to the game (also the nationalism factor). But yeah, CVs are some of the least fun you can have while technically consuming an entertainment product. Even if you hit all your strikes (i.e. the other team has the idiots who sit their battleships perfectly still for a change) you spend a lot of time twiddling your thumbs. God help you if the enemy is moderately capable and dodges your strike. I've had games on the Independence where my total contribution to the battle was two scout planes shot down. First strike had just dropped torpedoes when the target got obliterated by a salvo, second strike was disrupted by AA fire and missed all torpedoes. Didn't have time or planes for a third.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2015 11:21
|
|
|
Asehujiko posted:What is a good 4th skill for the Cleveland? I have accelerated repair, turret traverse speed and sixth sense. I've narrowed it down to fire shot, AA range and torp spotting since I won't be taking this captain into a carrier. The AA on the Cleveland is pretty good and you should improve it further. Torp spotting, at this stage of the game, would probably violate causality by allowing you to spot torpedoes before they were fired.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2015 15:03
|
|
|
Oh hey, a lonely scout plane, nice, I need one more for that "kill 8 planes in one battle"-mission. Let's send this fighter squadron after it. A minute later: Okay, that's the last of the fighters lost to AA. Quite a sturdy scout, huh. It would also help tremendously if the torpedo indicator for bombers wasn't lying all the time. Nothing like dropping a two squadron spread on a cruiser only to find out that it was apparently inside the minimum arming distance or something. It's me, I'm the useless carrier on your team.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
Ah, the good old "All or nothing"-armor scheme, opting for "nothing". Those things are going to get citadel penned by destroyers at maximum range, it'll be hilarious.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
Hey guys, you know what these battleships with good speed, great armor and guns as well as the best AA really need to be competitive? More accuracy. There should be a weeaboo/wehraboo equivalent for people who want US ships to be heads and shoulders above their competition because of realism (no nevermind those other ships, those should be balanced around gameplay). I suggest eaglefuckers.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
orange juche posted:Well, the Enterprise is literally just an Essex class carrier, that happens to have the hull number CV-6. Beyond that it is a bone-stock Essex. Pretty sure the Enterprise was a Yorktown. Comedy Option: Premium Enterprise CVN 65 (?) with latest operational airwing. 
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2015 12:46
|
|
|
The Locator posted:The German ship that I would say I most look forward to is the Scharnhorst/Gneisenau, but it really depends on how they are put into the game. They were battlecruisers, but for some reason a lot of people now call them Battleships. "Battleship" was the official Nazi propaganda name.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
My biggest beef with the new armor scheme is that getting your T crossed is now an advantageous tactical position, while unmasking your broadside is a very dangerous and often wrong move. It is very counter-intuitive.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
A Kongo was a lot of fun last night. You have bigger guns, more range and better speed that most other battleships in your tier, and there are a lot of battleships around right now. You can really do the whole dictating the range of engagement thing, except you don't really need to because you also outgun your enemy. Can someone give me a good rule-of-thumb rundown on when to use HE vs. AP? Right now it feels like you should just HE all day every day, since it is reliable damage compared to AP.
|
|
#
¿
May 15, 2015 18:32
|
|
|
And to think that a few weeks ago people were bored with the game because leading shots was both too simple and the only real gameplay in the game.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
demonR6 posted:New York is terrible, next one isn't much of an improvement. The Kongo felt much better. The Kongo is really heads and shoulders above its competitor. Better range, same guns, better speed and maneuverability. No idea how the protection measures up but if you play it right he never gets to shoot at you anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2015 18:01
|
|
|
demonR6 posted:God but the loving grind through those USN BB's make me want to choke the poo poo out of something cute and fluffy. The New York is a miserable pile of dogshit. You'll be happy to know that the New Mexico is worse!  Okay, it's not so much worse as it is a similar ship except in a higher tier.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
turinator posted:are they still giving out beta keys or do i have to buy into this Open Beta is just around the corner, but I guess you can buy in if you want to try and get a decidedly mediocre battleship.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
Honestly, if you tried to avoid every game where pubbies are awful and/or watch anime you should just stop playing video games. I'll never understand the goons that venture into the official forums of any game and come back shocked, shocked!, that there are anime-loving manchildren in there.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2015 04:14
|
|
|
I agree, if there is one thing US Destroyers need, it's shittier torpedoes.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
Dear God, the Tenryu is such a shitheap of a ship. No guns, no armor, and good luck getting into torpedo range when one salvo takes you down to 10% HP because you are made from front to stern of citadel.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2015 12:36
|
|
|
I like how the Arkansas has absolutely no AA whatsoever but is in a tier where it might go up against Tier 5 carriers.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
cheese posted:Is the WoWs premium store just perma down or something? Don't worry, noted point defense bastions Kuma and Phoenix will support the battleships with AA fire
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
Used the XP banners to get through the Kawachii, might do the same for the Furukata. Depends on whether or not the grind is worse than my RPG-hoarder syndrome.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2015 10:00
|
|
|
Man, I had completely forgotten what an absolute dogshit ship the Phoenix is in the initial configuration, holy poo poo. Three guns in the broadside. Less than the T1 ships. Who the gently caress would look at that and decide that's a balanced T4? The guns are inaccurate as gently caress, too.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:They're adding a ship identical to the Aurora, which is already a premium. I'm totally expecting the third ship of the class to come out as a Japanese premium (was sunk by the Japanese in the Russo-Japanese war, then raised and put into service).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
300 XP on the daily 1.5x, that's a new record for me. Was a nice 20 minute battle, too, no one shot kill on the first salvo, no sir! Had the enemy under my guns for a grand total of two salvos. Hard to hit anything if everything else in the game outranges you by 3 km. God, the SC is such a trash ship.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
Hazdoc posted:Get in closer and try again. Unless you're on an awful map, like the open sea map, you should be able to at least partially cover your approach with terrain. Worst case scenario is you start taking fire, this is when you start backing off. Perhaps a BB or CA moves closer to keep shooting you, which would be a mistake, otherwise you've soaked damage for your team, and you can always just close back in and try again. Better than ending a win with 300 xp, at least. It was New Dawn, and my options were pretty much stick with team and hope something survives long enough for me to get a shot at or head away from team and die in a blaze of glory as the entire enemy team shoots me to a pulp. I choose the former.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2015 03:18
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:My problem with BBs breaks down to how absurdly inaccurate the guns are. You're already dropping a lot less DPS than the cruisers due to the long reloads, it doesn't help when 3/4 of the salvo you spent half a minute lining up decides to drop short, long, or decides to veer off to hit some random part for minimal damage. Yeah, this is why I don't put too much stock into people who claim they can accurately hit citadels with battleships at long range.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
So, did they just straight up remove the alt-drop for carriers? I seem to remember they turned it into a captain skill, but I can't find it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:Tenryu has enough camouflage for you to pull off destroyer-like torpedo attacks, and with six relatively high damage torpedoes you can do an awful lot of damage if someone lets you. You can still do well without using them. They're also the only way to get those stupid torpedo missions done if for whatever reason you don't like driving destroyers.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
Carriers that park themselves into a corner and then whine when the team abandons them will never not be hilarious. Also "I drove away from my team and ended up dying alone against 4+ enemies, you people are terrible and need to learn how the game works" Best combo I have seen so far was a SouCal trying that cute WoT reversing into cover thing, failing, and then whining to their teammates that they are dumb fucks who don't understand the game.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
grrarg posted:Pallada - Another classic example of a well-equipped armored cruiser. Called it. That's all three ships of the Aurora-class accounted for. I'm starting to think Wargaming has somewhat underestimated the amount of work that goes into each ship and is now trying desperately to milk them for all they're worth. See also Omaha/Murmansk/Marblehead.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
Kesper North posted:...Fuso? Low range? Buh? It was one of the longest-range, most accurate BBs in the game, and I was regularly citadeling stuff at 20+km. But I was playing with upgrades. They added the 1914 configuration, which does away with it's main selling feature, the hilarious pagoda tower.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2015 22:44
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:A premium ship called Bismarck would sell a lot more than an identical ship called Tirpitz. It wouldn't be completely out of character for them to give the tech tree version the wrong name just for that. Well the Tirpitz was the one that actually got extensive upgrades to her AA in particular. Bismarck's AA was rather...lacking.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
It won't have the speed of the Myogi but will have as many guns in the broadside, and it will be underarmored as well. It sucks, is what I'm saying. It honestly is more of an overgunned cruiser, and it should be balanced as such. The 11" guns will have a fairly slow reload, anyway, so I don't see how it can't be balanced against the other high-tier cruisers.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 01:56 |
|
|
Lord Koth posted:They're definitely in the game now, as I ran into one earlier as well, but going from the chat in that match it's still supertesters only. From what I understand they are available for people at gamescom.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2015 00:44
|
|