|
xthetenth posted:Underwater torp tubes don't get added. Yeah, there's multiple ships already in WoWs that historically had underwater tubes and don't have them in game like the Kawachi or the Wyoming. That said, I do wonder whether Bismark might end up with torpedo tubes as both the Bismark and Tirpitz originally didn't have tubes and the Tirpitz had her tubes added after the Bismark sank (therefore it being a theoretical hull upgrade for the Bismark). The fact that the Gneisenau (Bismark's precursor in tier 6) also had torpedo tubes fitted later on in her service might support this. Speaking of German ships, I had my first encounter with the Konig Albert last night; I fired a full broadside at it with my Wyoming while it was sailing alongside me and caused 0 damage. I don't know if its armour thickness/angling is just that good or whether I was incredibly unlucky, but its response sure as hell didn't have any problem taking me out. If that's a prelude of what the German line will be like (thick armour, decent speed and powerful short-range guns) then I think I might prefer it to the current battleship lines. Also I feel kinda bad for people hating on the Mikasa  . The thing is that the Mikasa a pre-dreadnaught ship and therefore has a much heavier emphasis lower calibre guns than tier 3 dreadnaughts. I've seen it used to decent effect if the player keeps this in mind but it's very difficult to take advantage of a secondary boat when every other ship at tier 2 can kite you.
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Jun 2, 2024 11:25 |
|
|
NTRabbit posted:Can't find the quote, but Wargaming has specifically said that no tree battleship will ever be fitted with their historical torpedoes, only premiums will ever have them. Bismarck and Gneisenau won't get them. I was going to argue that they were probably referring to underwater tubes which aren't really workable in WoWs but I noticed that the Amagi had swivel-mounted tubes on its deck so I guess that's the decision they've made  .
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Triggerhappypilot posted:Man, what is the point of the Nürnberg? It's got exactly the same armament as the Königsberg, but it's even less maneuverable and much easier to hit. The health bonus doesn't even matter, since you'll lose it much faster. If I remember correctly, the Konigsberg has half the fire rate of the Nurnberg, also the Nurnberg has better torpedoes, AA defence and can mount the defensive AA ability (if you're so inclined, I stuck with sonar). When I first got the Nurnberg I was disappointed too, it felt like a hull upgrade for the Konigsberg at best, but by the end it was my favourite cruiser thus far in WoWs, and I was regularly reaching the top 5 in games because of its amazing AP ammo and ridiculous rate of fire.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
JuffoWup posted:Plane kill xp was never that good to start with though. I wish we could return to the ability of having two carriers in a platoon together along with fixing the aa/fighter <-> aircraft mechanic. Mainly because going for an air superiority loadout actually harms your team even if you do dry them out at some point in the match. However, if you could platoon with another carrier pilot that went for a strike loadout, you could then at least cover your strike carrier's planes. Right now, the best carrier loadout in any game is the do everything loadout. I think the problem with having two carriers in a platoon is that it would be totally game-breaking. Any team that has that platoon would almost certainly have strike and air superiority carriers working in tandem as you say, on the other hand the opposing team, if not in a platoon, would have to have either two normal fit carriers (which would be at a disadvantage against the combination) or one would have to pick strike/air superiority on the off chance that the other carrier picks the opposite and doesn't totally cripple their team. I play this game pretty much exclusively with a friend and I would love for us to be able to play carriers together and dominate any game we join, but I completely understand why they decided to go that way. Also, anyone know what would be a good Tier 4 captain skill for a German cruiser? I'm at the Yorck now and leaning towards manual AA since the end cruisers have decent air defence, but I've seen most places recommend AFT.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2016 10:37
|
|
|
pnutz posted:a brief summary of the stuff on the test server and patch by jingles [vid] I thought smoke screens always blocked LoS if they were between an enemy ship and yourself? I just unlocked the Fuso and coming off the Kongo has been really painful. I really don't think 4 additional peashooters make up for for losing the Kongo's fantastic speed and manoeuvrability, not to mention that with the stock hull you're basically a WW1 dreadnought with a 13km range going up against tier 8 battleships  .Any suggestions as to what I can do? So far in 3 games i've been at the bottom tier and get killed before get within firing range (or even before I can reach the cover of an island).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
Clarence posted:I thought the general rule was to free-xp past the first hull of low/mid tier BBs? I don't have enough free xp :-/. I knew that the A hull Fuso was bad but I didn't think it was THAT bad. quote:The Kongo and Fuso are both ships that are honestly kind of painful to grind out (IMO the Kongo less so because you're more likely to fight things with similar max ranges while stock), but get absolutely loving amazing once you get the 2nd hull, as that solves like 95% of the problem right there. Sadly, until you get that hull, it's pretty impotent outside of about 10km. I do find it a bit strange that you get killed before you can fire a shot or get into cover, as even when stock it's still fairly tough. What sort of things are killing you that fast? The stock hull is fairly tough, but it can still take only so much damage before finally collapsing. The biggest problem is that I'm facing Hull B/C fusos and/or Colorados (or better) who can easily outrange me and kite me (stock engine, yay). Even NMs which are supposed to be on par with the Fuso seem to hit harder and from further than I can reach (I vaguely remember them having crap range, but I guess it's not as bad as the Fuso's!). I'm pretty sure the battleships can see quite clearly that I'm hull A so I think they just see an xp and credit piñata and focus me down. In most games, my options are limited: stay out of range (which keeps me completely out of the fight) or charge in using the cover as best as possible (the option I'm trying) which subjects me to withering fire before I finally get into a range, maybe fire off a salvo if I feel suicidal enough to turn broadside, then die. Essentially the choice is either to die surrounded by the enemy early on when I try to close the distance or die surrounded by the enemy when my team dies because it was one battleship short the whole game. Also when you're really reliant on cover, you start to notice just how little there is an how inadequate it is for a battleship. In terms of other ships I find that cruisers all outrange me and can easily kite me, making them an annoyance I can't retaliate against, while the terrible speed and abysmal rudder shift makes me an easy target for destroyers and carriers. It seems like there is nothing I can do in a match to help my team; I'm too slow/easy to hit to cap, I can't defend anything (or I'll get bombarded beyond my range) and I can't fight any other class of ship. This really feels like you're in a WW1 dreadnought fighting WW2 ships, the Fuso is just hopelessly outclassed by everything on the field. I think I might just bite the bullet, buy some doubloons and free-xp my way out of Hull A (or the Fuso entirely if I can afford it).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Update: Holy poo poo, HOLY poo poo.   I take it back, I totally take it back, I get it now. I still slightly prefer the Kongo though.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:Could Germany have ever managed to fight the Royal Navy on an equal footing? Even if a time traveler had gone back to 1933 and handed Hitler a book called "The Importance of Carriers in the Second World War: Their Construction and Usage"? Germany didn't really need carriers; any major altercation with the Royal Navy would've been well within range of land-based bombers. If I remember correctly, after France's surrender, the Royal Navy was the main obstacle that gave Germany pause with regards to invading/defeating the UK as it had overwhelming firepower that could easily stop any crossing attempt. I believe the original plan was to use the luftwaffe to destroy or cow the Royal Navy so the army could invade the (essentially defenceless after Dunkirk) UK. The only problem is that the Royal Navy also sailed within range of RAF airbases which could cover them from any air attacks, therefore the whole reason behind the Battle of Britain was for the the Luftwaffe to destroy these RAF airbases and then sink the Royal Navy/protect any German invasion. That said, I don't think the Kriegsmarine was ever meant to take on the Royal Navy, just be a threat; you can't defend the channel with every ship you have if you leave a wide open passage between Scotland and Norway for Germany to decimate your convoys. I think Germany saw the Royal Navy as a temporary obstacle to overcome rather than an entrenched opponent to defeat. After all, think of it this way: Germany couldn't take on the French Navy, nevermind the Royal Navy, on an equal footing, but the French Navy ceased to be an issue once France surrendered. Anyway, I just saw that vid of the Scharnhorst in action and goddamn . I really want to play the German BBs now, they seem right up my alley.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:The Luftwaffe did really badly against ships for a long time. Yeah, that said though, the Pacific theatre may have proved the idea of suppressing a navy by air power. On the other hand, maybe the idea was unworkable with North Atlantic weather, or maybe the Luftwaffe didn't have the training/technology/resources to combat the Royal Navy. we'll never know, however, because that plan went out of the window once the Luftwaffe's objective shifted from destroying RAF bases to psychological warfare (which had the opposite effect). I don't think the Nazi's plans for invading the UK were realistic, and they almost certainly would have failed, but my point is that I can sort of understand the mentality behind not trying to match the Royal Navy but rather trying to neutralise it enough for an invasion to succeed. Having a small but powerful group of surface commerce raiders ready to launch the moment an opening was spotted, even as a threat alone, would play into that mentality.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
Krogort posted:Those low tier german are so undergunned that I wonder if it isn't better to fire full HE at other similar battleships. I had this same thought but HE is even more anaemic than the AP; I find that the German battleship AP won't get citadels against other battleships (or even some cruisers) but it does at least give more reliably consistent damage than HE does. Regarding firing HE at destroyers, though, I've occasionally seen some people switch to AP when firing at destroyers going head on/away and it does seem to do more damage than AP normally would against them. Am I imagining things or is there some increased damage for overpens that go through the bow/stern and further into the ship?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Overpens are when the shell goes in one end and out the other too fast. If you punch one straight through the destroyer, there should be enough room for it to give the bigger numbers because it can't get out the other side. El Disco posted:If a large AP round goes through the length of a DD, it'll be a regular penetration instead of an overpen and do more damage. Ah, got it, I saw other people doing this (so I didn't know they were coming up as penetrations) but I couldn't tell if it was pubbie idiocy or whether it was actually modelled to cause damage, thanks. I'd still consider it too situational to be worth trying but interesting nonetheless.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
This new game mode has opened up a whole new world of pubbie agony for me. There are only so many times I can yell at pubbies to not go after the rear spawning zikasas, target catapults (with AP) or just push the drat Transilvania at the end before I can take no more.  I'm also pretty sure that WoWs in general just hates me, I've chosen the random crate every time since they were introduced and I always get 5 flag rewards .
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:Is there a consensus yet on the level 2 captain skill for RN cruisers? Marksman seems like it'd be more useful more often than Torpedo expertise, right up until you get to the Minotaur and the turrets already spin faster than every American destroyer Considering how their armour is made of paper and they can have their engine/rudder disabled by a wayward HE shell, I think last stand might be the best choice for tier 2.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Jun 2, 2024 11:25 |
|
|
Just had a game with a player who got torped around an obvious blind corner and proceeded who bitch and whine about how broken destroyers are in WoWs. What's wrong with Destroyers? "They're broken because they can stealth fire".
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2017 22:58
|
|