Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Anvilfolk]

Huh, I see. That makes sense. Does anything carry over, and what is the best way to get that using 1000 monies? Well, 700 now That port looked really attractive

[Flying Dice]

Yeah, I'm wondering if the credit gain is going to stay this high. It's redonkulous by WG standards, I haven't had to wait to buy any ships at all.

Oh, and the Omaha is kinda good, too, I guess.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

As long as HE is way more effective then it has any right to be, all high RoF ships will be vastly overpowered.

HE is fine. AP needs a buff that doesn't undo the armor fix. The problem is with the cruisers with high RoF and many guns being able to keep things permanently on fire. It wouldn't be historically accurate (but since when has WG cared about that, eh?), but what would be good would be to drastically drop the chance to cause fire for cruisers. That leaves HE alone as the tool for DDs and as a carrier-killer, but forces cruisers to actually load AP once in a while.

See above pics for a perfect example. 217 hits. 25% were AP, 75% were HE. HE and fire damage was 7.6 times higher than AP damage despite only being from three times more shells. Pretty much all of those AP hits were plunging shots into the Kongos, too, so they should have been doing full damage. For cruisers, especially American ones, it just isn't worthwhile to fire AP -- and unlike other ships which fire mainly HE, the cruisers should be using AP a lot of the time. But yeah, fire cause % chance + many shells = OP.

[Chosrau]

It's absolute right, the armor fix should not be undone. An under that premise, nerfing HE is the only remaining option. Your screen even shows it needs to be done. Not counting damage from fire, your HE shells did 400 dmg each on average, your AP just 280.

AP needs so much more skill to use correctly then HE does, it should provide a substantially damage output advantage.

[Flying Dice]

See, I disagree that the best solution is to reduce HE numbers, primarily because it should be doing more to soft-skinned ships than AP. AP numbers need to be increased, but there also needs to be a change in the relationship between HE shells and armor. Hell, they've already got a good example of how to do it in WoT: have HE damage reduce in an inverse relationship with armor thickness. You wouldn't even need to mess with fire cause chance that way; firing HE against hard targets would do negligible damage (barring lucky plunging fire and hits to the superstructure), but would force repairs and start the DoT.

Basically, the problem is that HE needs to be doing a lot of damage to DDs and CVs, but shouldn't be doing much direct damage to BBs and well-armored CAs. I was probably a bit sleepy last night to not notice it, but the easy way to solve that problem is what I outlined above: have armor thickness reduce HE direct damage.

[Chosrau]

Basically, the problem is that HE needs to be doing a lot of damage to DDs and CVs, but shouldn't be doing much direct damage to BBs and well-armored CAs. I was probably a bit sleepy last night to not notice it, but the easy way to solve that problem is what I outlined above: have armor thickness reduce HE direct damage.

Armor reducing HE damage is already the case, as far as I know. But even BB superstructure isn't armored very good, atleast not compared to belt armour.
I think that may be one of the reasons why HE damage done to DDs is so inconsistent. They're such small targets that you hitting superstructure or side armor is more down to RNG then actually aiming. Also explains why I seem to do way more damage to CVs then DDs when hitting them with HE.

One thing I can't agree on is CA's having to take massive damage from HE, atleast not from any HE below 203mm. American DDs can already melt anything they meet. Even in the Fubuki (tier 8 japanese DD) I can consistently hit a New Orleans for 3-4k damage per salvo, while easily doding all return fire (american guns have such bad shell velocity).
And if a japanese DD, known for having the shittiest gun stats of all the lines, comes out on top against a same tier cruiser, somewhere the balancing went wrong. The only cruisers I'm afraid of in my japanese DDs are Cleveland and Atlanta, since they actually have the reload and amount of shells per salvo to make dodging hard.

Another way to get HE in check would maybe be an approach where Fire doesn't do damage, but instead only lowers compat capability of the ship while burning (longer reloads, less effective AA, less spotting range, decreased concealment, etc. ...)

[Flying Dice]

Basically, the problem is that HE needs to be doing a lot of damage to DDs and CVs, but shouldn't be doing much direct damage to BBs and well-armored CAs. I was probably a bit sleepy last night to not notice it, but the easy way to solve that problem is what I outlined above: have armor thickness reduce HE direct damage.

Armor reducing HE damage is already the case, as far as I know. But even BB superstructure isn't armored very good, atleast not compared to belt armour.
I think that may be one of the reasons why HE damage done to DDs is so inconsistent. They're such small targets that you hitting superstructure or side armor is more down to RNG then actually aiming. Also explains why I seem to do way more damage to CVs then DDs when hitting them with HE.

One thing I can't agree on is CA's having to take massive damage from HE, atleast not from any HE below 203mm. American DDs can already melt anything they meet. Even in the Fubuki (tier 8 japanese DD) I can consistently hit a New Orleans for 3-4k damage per salvo, while easily doding all return fire (american guns have such bad shell velocity).
And if a japanese DD, known for having the shittiest gun stats of all the lines, comes out on top against a same tier cruiser, somewhere the balancing went wrong. The only cruisers I'm afraid of in my japanese DDs are Cleveland and Atlanta, since they actually have the reload and amount of shells per salvo to make dodging hard.

Another way to get HE in check would maybe be an approach where Fire doesn't do damage, but instead only lowers compat capability of the ship while burning (longer reloads, less effective AA, less spotting range, decreased concealment, etc. ...)

I... didn't say that.

HE needs to be doing a lot of damage to DDs and CVs

No direct damage from fire isn't viable. American DDs are entirely built around being annoying bastards that set you on fire; they do no meaningful damage with AP and their torps are fucking terrible just about everywhere except the rare parts of certain maps that favor them (looking at you, Islands of Ice).

I honestly can't say that I've noticed armor reducing HE damage in any meaningful way. I seem to get roughly similar damage rolls with any given set of guns regardless of whether I'm hitting a BB's armor belt or a CV's flight deck, barring the occasional citadel penetration on lighter ships. If it does, it doesn't go far enough. Meanwhile AP is half low damage and half "lolspallinglolspallinglol", with rare powder magazine hits here and there.

[Aklyon]

All I really know about AP shells is that they takes awhile to switch to and the bots seem to like shelling me cruiser with it.

[Chosrau]

One thing I can't agree on is CA's having to take massive damage from HE, atleast not from any HE below 203mm. American DDs can already melt anything they meet. Even in the Fubuki (tier 8 japanese DD) I can consistently hit a New Orleans for 3-4k damage per salvo, while easily doding all return fire (american guns have such bad shell velocity).
And if a japanese DD, known for having the shittiest gun stats of all the lines, comes out on top against a same tier cruiser, somewhere the balancing went wrong. The only cruisers I'm afraid of in my japanese DDs are Cleveland and Atlanta, since they actually have the reload and amount of shells per salvo to make dodging hard.

Another way to get HE in check would maybe be an approach where Fire doesn't do damage, but instead only lowers compat capability of the ship while burning (longer reloads, less effective AA, less spotting range, decreased concealment, etc. ...)

I... didn't say that.

Basically, the problem is that HE needs to be doing a lot of damage to DDs and CVs, but shouldn't be doing much direct damage to BBs and well-armored CAs.

Since you didn't mention non-well armoured CAs I did assume you put them into "lots of damage from HE" camp. Sorry for that.

No direct damage from fire isn't viable. American DDs are entirely built around being annoying bastards that set you on fire; they do no meaningful damage with AP and their torps are fucking terrible just about everywhere except the rare parts of certain maps that favor them (looking at you, Islands of Ice).

High tier american DDs actually get torpedoes that work comparable or even better then same tier japanese ones. And yet they are still vastly superior when it comes to gunhandling. Japanese DD line is just plain broken. Strongest ship of the line sits at tier 5 (and not tier for tier, but in direct comparison), while 6 and 7 are inferior to it in every meaningful way. Meanwhile at tier 8 and upwards you will regularly see american DDs (Fletcher and Gearing) who have better (or atleast comparable) torpedoes then you and vastly superior guns.

Even if they went with increasing the effectiveness of armor against HE damage, or introduced it in the first place, since our observations on the subject seem to differ. Even then, HE damage against lightly armored targets would be enough to be a serious threat to them, and against heavily armed targets one still has torps. Removing fire damage would take nothing away from those capabilites, except the one to easily rack up huge damage counts against heavily armored BBs without them having any way to defend themself.

[Flying Dice]

Hey, people! World of Warships is now entering the final run before the Open Beta! The update today wipes all of your progress, restores all of your purchased tokens as gold, and transfers your Premium ships over to your account proper. This is the last time progress will be wiped, so if you want to have your advantage before the OBT now's the time.

There's also the CBT rewards.

If you played 49+ matches, you get a T4 US Premium BB, the USS Arkansas. You start with Account Levels above 1 based on how many matches you played, and with a number of flags and starting commander skill points based on your activity relative to other players.

[Ozyton]

I heard Wargaming did Bad Thing.

I can't find any actual info on it with a quick google search, but according to some guy people who bought the humble bundle thingy to get into beta aren't actually going to keep the 1000 gold, port slots, free ship, or anything really after the wipe. I didn't even know the wipe happened yet.

Confirmation? I can't check myself because it has to download an update.

[Flying Dice]

#Murmanskgate 2015

Yeah. They promised on the 16th that everything from the bonus code would carry over, then later changed their minds and said it wouldn't after all. They tried to pull a bait & switch, but left shit lying all around. It's pretty damn hilarious as a whole, but the best part is the FOG people fellating WG. Also, a position for Senior Community Manager for WGNA just opened up.

Also the servers are shitting themselves.

[Ozyton]

A lot of people seem to forget that they were buying the humble e3 bundle thingy and not World of Warships and that Wargaming didn't see a nickel of that money as far as I know. It still sucks that they mentioned keeping all the stuff past the wipe, which is a pretty big mistake (obviously).

Personally I don't miss my money since I got a Total War game I've been thinking of getting plus a bunch of other stuff for just 5 bucks. I just hope this doesn't set a precedence for Wargaming (or other companies) to do a similar 'bait & switch' in the future.

http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/34324-breathe-in-and-breath-out-the-murmansk-fiasco/

[Flying Dice]

Yeah, all the rage is over the lying, not the money.

That said, at the end of the day it's $1, I got stuff for other games I play as well, the Murmansk was mediocre, and they didn't give us the port slots at all.

[tryrar]

Yeah, all the rage is over the lying, not the money.

That said, at the end of the day it's $1, I got stuff for other games I play as well, the Murmansk was mediocre, and they didn't give us the port slots at all.

Yeah, I went with the Yubari myself for my preorder buy-in. Liked it when I watched Jingles reviewing the preorder packages-only has 4 guns in two turrets, but they're fairly quick turning and fire decently fast, and of course the Yubari has torps being a jap cruiser. What defines it the most though is the rather ridiculous amount of AA this thing gets, especially for a tier 4 cruiser

[Flying Dice]

Heh, I went for the Sims. Couldn't resist the annoying bastard for very long at all.

Also the Beta Arizona is surprisingly not terrible.