|
Chillyrabbit posted:does changing speed change your turning radius, As in going slower you can make tighter turns? You don't turn much at all if you're too slow.
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 07:36 |
|
|
The only good use I've found against capital ships is using dive bombers to light fires so they burn their repair kits and can't fix floods.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Prav posted:I'm not sure that I'd describe the Atlanta as a ship that dispenses with ineffective popguns though! I don't see ineffective popguns on it. I see brutal DPM murder.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
JuffoWup posted:I dunno, they are only 140s. The jap cruiser move away from 140s by tier 3 or 4. And this is a tier 8 cruiser. I would imagine that you would be using he most of the time in it because ap wouldn't pen very well against its peers. You'd think that but you'd be wrong. Close in to 6 or so KM from a cruiser and if they keep their side flat to you you'll chunk them for 10-20k a salvo every few seconds. Against battleships it's HE, but it's a nice nuisance load. Prav posted:How does that work now? I lost mine in the wipe and it absolutely was hilarious before. Get in close and multiply 7 turrets by 2 barrels by shooting every few seconds.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
Getting a bit sick of teams sailing away from the entire enemy team after it's been spotted. It's not bloody tanks you don't push a lane.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
Somebody on my team decided to cover my platoonmate's destroyer by, well, covering him in torps. Halfway later in the game most of the destroyers collapsed on a St. Louis and I accidentally hit that guy with a spread I fired. I fired right after the St. Louis died and hit a 4 km shot on him with no lead. I'm actually really proud of that salvo.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2015 02:37
|
|
|
I want my US battleships already. US cruisers are very fun rides and Japanese battleships are all good and well but I want the real deal.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2015 05:56
|
|
|
Torp bombers also can get freaking shredded if they get too close against real (fuso or bigger for japanese and american when they get added) battleships. And if there's a cruiser hanging out by the BB, the planes are in real trouble.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
BadLlama posted:I'm actually liking US destroyers a lot, I go where the enemy destroys probably are going and just blow them up with my guns then go on close range suicide torpedo missions on battleships. Being able to reliably win destroyer duels is a pretty sweet ability, and if you're doing well having the other side torps for ghetto reloads is amazing. I've had some great games running a mixed squad, my US destroyer usually wins duels and the Japanese destroyers are a lot of nice extra torpedo punch.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
Keksen posted:Can one of you naval spergs help me out here? I've seen these things on several ships but I can't tell what they actually are. This one's from the Ibuki, next to the front batteries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paravane_%28weapon%29 (I spent forever wondering about it until it came up in a book I was reading. Anybody knows if Y or K guns are visible on some of the US destroyers?) xthetenth fucked around with this message at 01:47 on Mar 16, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
Citadel hitting cruisers with BBs: never not funny but probably a bad thing for gameplay. Pubbies shooting torpedoes at my battleship is kind of endearing, they're really not good at it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 04:13
|
|
|
plehsistential posted:So aside from the Kongo, what are some other ships people think are worth keeping? I'm pretty ambivalent about the St. Louis, and six slots with no piasters is pretty limiting. I'm assuming that for CVs, just keep on going up, and for CLs, the cleveland is worth keeping around. Fuso was pretty sweet last I played it, but honestly play what you want.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 13:17
|
|
|
demonR6 posted:I enjoy the Cleveland and Kongo but the Cleveland steamer wins out since I can pound out more fire which is the main goal anyways. It's not good at long ranges but has noteworthy AA and is responsive. I generally fired one at where the enemy was and one at how I thought he'd dodge in alpha. Now I just stagger them slightly.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 14:02
|
|
|
hopterque posted:Any time any planes fly over my cleveland it's just "enemy plane shot down" over and over again, it's great. I can't even imagine what the really high tier AA is like. Cleveland has amazing aa for its tier, especially if you can get right on the planes' path and let the oerlikons shred on them. Baltimore and Senjo have huge firepower and Des Moines has a ridiculous bubble of coverage, but they're going up against much tougher planes. I'm not really convinced that going for point blank attacks against high tier planes is the way to go. Maybe to try to alpha a battleship out, but it might be best to try to mess up battleships' angling and herd them so friendly battleships can gut them and you can still have big air wings for the endgame. That would take some tight coordination though. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Mar 16, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Time compression. That's the reason.TCD posted:Well, when you have a BB with no AA on it and you're only defense against torp runs is maneuvering... It is a pretty good defense but that is a problem with concepts predating WWI. Looking forward to the US ships.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
AAchat time I guess: AA is a dot applied around your ship. There's clearly some number magic in how it gets split between planes and so on, but the most important thing is that it passively deals damage to planes in its radius. When you look at ships in the harbor, the dpm numbers are for all weapons of that type, so you can just look at all those numbers and calculate. Unfortunately I have neither the ships nor the training room access to properly check whether range scaling exists, but I remember hearing that a Baltimore has more dpm at close range than a Des Moines which would likely indicate no. Anyway, there's a suppressive effect to it, especially the bigger guns iirc that does fun things like make torp bombers spray torpedoes like buckshot, which means you have to close to point blank to get still bad accuracy. The cruiser ability amps that up, and they're putting that stuff up from 5km. Don't go near cruisers unnecessarily with planes and definitely don't go right over them. Always pick the target without a cruiser buddy. On the other hand, in cruisers do try to interpose yourself on prime attack positions. If your AA is where half of a hammer and anvil is going to come from, the battleship can steer right into the torpedo squadron and comb wakes for one or none, and maybe change speed a bit to avoid the one or two torps from the other side.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
BadLlama posted:There is something very satisfying when you can unload all your torpedoes in a tight spread and have them all slam into one target. Just murder the poo poo out of them. It's pretty easy to hit a bad bb with a bunch of torpedoes with even a mediocre pattern. It's pretty hard to hit a good bb with more than one or two with a carrier load of torp bombers.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
The first battleships are to tier three and are the US and Japanese counterparts of the dreadnought, which is kinda like the katori, in that it doesn't have superfiring turrets like the South Carolina. I'm not sure if she's going to be able to get all three frontish turrets firing off the bow, that could be super neat, and she'll at least be able to fire with three while waggling her stern at destroyers. I think she's another design where turning away from the enemy is best like in the myogi, and being able to turn with about 3/4ths of your firepower available is nice and cheap compared to most battleships (I evaluate the cost of turns in how many salvoes from how many turrets I'll miss. I dislike evenly split turret layouts because turning masks half your guns as they slowly turn around) If you're going in on alpha striking enemy carriers, go all in with all you've got and get one out. Then you can leverage numbers to mob their planes. In carriers, grouping up and pooling your AA is great at hurting attempts to alpha strike you out, but be extra careful of destroyers slipping through. The best defense is swarming them with dive bombers and then a ton of torpedoes from every angle. A better defense is not having all eggs in one basket. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Mar 16, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Whenever the French gets in there's gonna be some sweet forward gun action on the Dunkerque (Slam Dunk from the Dunk). And if I remember my NF right, the British Nelson had a similar thing going on. Just be careful not to get any enemies on your rear end. The Japanese and Soviets also had similar design draft layouts to the nelson. It was kind of a thing during the treaty era. Even the us sketched out a similar design, but they got all three turrets superfiring and offset the rear two so they had better stern coverage  . (I'll edit in a pic when I get home).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
demonR6 posted:You have to keep an eye on the sign up page and keep spamming it until you get in. From there just pray they get to you in a timely fashion. There is no preference over who gets in at this point. poo poo even for alpha when they supposedly were screening people I think it was all bullshit. If one squad's coming in or you want to beat up on one squad and comb the other, holding ctrl and clicking a squad improves damage against it but reduces it against the rest. And generally ship classes get named after the first of type but wg's been imprecise with that before.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 23:05
|
|
|
Adventure Pigeon posted:They seem to prefer class names rather than the names of individual ships. They go with the class names and usually get it right.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
Potentially good torpedo bombers dropping right on you, so they don't exist before that.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
What I needed from a boats game was more variation in the effects of a given action. (Shell damage is purely deterministic, it varies based on what it hits, and if anything the hitboxes are too small for getting non-random results). Compared to oh hey look that one missed blowing that ship sky high by a foot.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
Fart Car '97 posted:Why do people complain about the Phoenix? It seems great. Lots of guns with decent range, torps to slap any DDs who get through the 5x murder guns, good AAA that rewards protecting your team. Driving it has been nothing but fun Probably has to do with its stock config. The fully upgraded one is all kinds of rad.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 01:13
|
|
|
cheese posted:I wouldn't hold your breath, given that both tanks and planes are simple numbers games with damage reducing HPs and only the occasional ammo rack or knocked out gunner to spice things up. The point is that War Thunder is probably gonna be more random in shell effects, not less.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 01:37
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:The higher-tier IJN DDs have 10km-plus range torpedoes. That plus smokescreens give them a lot of utility in large-scale encounters. Don't try to close the range except against distracted targets, or you will explode. Murder japanese DDs and spend the late game capping zones and sharting torps.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
Vengarr posted:The problem with the torpedo lead indicator is that it assumes consistent speed and heading. Which hey, sometimes guys are just cruising along unsuspecting and its great. You'll hit them with all your torps and sink them. But if they're taking evasive action, the indicator won't help you. The best position in a gun duel is either heading as close to directly away from the enemy or directly at the enemy as you can get, and using the range control this offers to keep in the region where your belt armor is what's in danger of getting penetrated. First, angling like that makes it really hard to penetrate you, and second, enemies that are quartering are tricky targets that can get much more reliable dodging results when weaving. If your side is flat to the enemy, a miss short or long means they'll hit you regardless. Quartering makes it way harder to get lucky hits. Especially in heavy cruisers, which are basically tissue paper to heavy cruiser guns, you want to be doing everything you can to deny citadel hits. Use your nose or stern to shield your vitals unless actively firing. The torp lead indicator is a good basis for guessing torp shots, but any evasive action makes it a guessing game. Considering ships can just sail the hell away and fire over their shoulders, destroyers are mainly threatening to bad players and people caught by surprise.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
Clemsons are very solid and with a Japanese destroyer backing them up are phenomenal. They win destroyer duels pretty much guaranteed, because they can launch one set off torps early to herd the enemy or score one kill, and then they've got guns and torpedoes that kill in short order while the other destroyer is on the back foot from having to dodge and getting hammered by shellfire. Going up against bigger ships, one smoking and the other hidden behind is great, because the one spotted can throw down a huge cone, and then the hidden one can drop to hit once the enemy's locked into the turn, and Japanese fast torps can catch up nicely with US ones to make dodging impossible.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
Funnily I really liked my fully upgraded Pensacola. Ten 8 inch guns on a reasonably laid out ship is all kinds of nice. 8 inch guns are so handy to have if you need to chunk a battleship that it's worth being less good at destroyer killing in my opinion. The New Orleans has some real advantages, like having six guns front and better AA, but the firepower isn't improved, and the same goes for the Baltimore, at which point it looks a bit anemic next to tens. I still hope the Cleveland get a turret speed and maybe an HP buff to make it a more agile bastard of a ship, and gets put a tier higher in a light cruiser tree, potentially with an rof buff if it needs one. Battleships are hellish powerful and good to learn in because you get to take 25 second breaks to read the battle in between salvoes. Do so and learn to read which way a game's going. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Mar 17, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 17:16
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:I very much prefer less good torps than more poo poo torps Are you familiar with the meanings of words? Like holy hell dude, it's a semantics battle with somebody who doesn't actually care what he says as long as it's vaguely similar to what he means.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:I prefer smaller numbers of good torps as found on Japanese ships to larger numbers of poo poo torps as found on American ships. Do you want me to switch to proper English for the whole sentence fragment now as well? Less good and useless poo poo are not actually interchangeable concepts, I'm afraid. NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:I'm kind of sad that the Kita's a premium, but given the size of the maps in this game, I'm also happy I won't have to dodge 4 Kitas on both teams every game. Hypothetically, were I to have seen a tier ten version of it with 20 km torps, I'm unnaturally confident saying it would have sucked massively and promoted unfun degenerate gameplay. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 18:25 on Mar 17, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
It's not, you can't, what you see away from ships is probably the results of a launched plane and sunk ship.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
BadLlama posted:So a lot of silly alpha testers are apparently mad that the game isn't WW2 boats simulator with combat ranges of 30Km+ how the hell would that be any fun. There's a decent contingent of moronic simhard spergs (unlike the friendly well socialized spergs like me) who should really go back to masturbating into Friedman's illustrated design histories because they aren't capable of having fun in a balanced game. Also destroyers have a huge implicit relative speed buff because everything actually moves many times faster than if says on the tin. And empressnero is literally not a human and is the worst simhard idiot. But right now battleships can murder what they want unless driven terribly, and their only real weakness is in map control around tight areas, and people still want things that would directly or indirectly buff them because they have confused reading books with meaningfully engaging with the game mechanics.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
BadLlama posted:Oh yeah that is true, but everyone is traveling at that magic super speed not just DDs. That still does scale up the relative speed difference. Adventure Pigeon posted:They were supposed to on paper. The problem is, if destroyers don't counter battleships, then what does? Battleships are the counter to battleships, much as they are the counter to cruisers, and destroyers and carriers require a skill mismatch to win at reasonable cost.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
Nordick posted:Also, in a BB, you really want to be planning your routes ahead, so that you can keep your battery pointed towards targets as constantly as possible, instead of having to keep turning the glacially slow turrets back and forth. This is very important. You want to be at least thirty seconds if not a minute ahead planning turns. Having to mask half your battery for usually two salvoes hurts.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
Kongo is the first battleship that doesn't have a glaring weakness. Kawachi is a slow pig with short range (the worst combo), and the Miyagi has too few and too inaccurate guns to land decent hits with any consistency. Kongo is fast, somewhat protected with a bit of AA, has enough guns to fire decent salvoes and overall isn't outright bad at anything. Fuso is slower but gives a dense 12 gun salute that fills the area you shoot. Nagato's a bit disappointing but only in comparison, Amagi's back to fast and a ton of gun, and Yamato's a ton of armor and a good gun layout.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 01:07
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:You play cruisers because you think they're fun. The tradeoffs made by battleships leave them at a substantial advantage against every other class. Anyone choosing ships based entirely on which are the best is playing Fusos, Amagis and Yamatos, as is apparent from looking at certain alpha testers. According to someone who's got one right now and whose opinion on ship balance I roughly trust, the Yamato's way squishy right now compared to what it should be and that's messing with it being that great. I wouldn't be surprised if their guess that they're tuning armor models is right. Fart Car '97 posted:Uh the Miyagi owns and is comically maneuverable for a battleship. The Kawachi has a short range but can't be flanked. They're definitely workable but they definitely have weaknesses. The miyagi is amazing for speed and maneuverability but that shot spread just isn't reliable like on higher tiers. The Kawachi's main advantage is being able to prevent something that doesn't happen to other battleships very often because of exactly the characteristics it lacks. demonR6 posted:You can certainly hold your own versus a Fuso in a Kongo. I am pretty sure the Fuso's guns are less accurate although the pack a better punch. If you are modded and the captain is trained correctly you'll shred a less skilled Fuso for sure. Kongo can hold its own, in large part it wants good angling and range/position control though.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:Premium low-tier US battleships would be my guess if they ever appear. Like the TOG, but infinitely worse. High tier. The tog is slow and not that well armed. The maximums could at least move, and have a wall of guns.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 13:23
|
|
|
Delorence Fickle posted:I could see these ships being a tier 8 premium or even set up as its own "experimental battleship" line on the US tech tree. Yeah, some of the earlier ones might actually work. I kind of expect the best spot for them on the tech tree to go to the 1920s south Dakota design though, so premium is semi-likely.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 07:36 |
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:Am I reading that correctly ? Tillman IV was designed with a main battery of 24(!) sixteen inch guns? IV-2 had 15 18 inch guns, which considering the ratio of 5 18s to 12 16s I remember from Montana design studies is similarly nuts.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 19:28
|
|