Jump to content


Beta Testers
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

108 Valued poster

About Iridium81

  • Rank
    Warrant Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling


  1. Oh, joy. Copper.

    I'd agree, WG appears to be splitting the game economy up as much as possible so that you have to spend more money on conversion or whatever contrivances they can come up with because they screwed up the original economy, and doubling down on this is their answer. We'll see though, maybe they'll come back from the brink of whats been proven to fail before.
  2. What's this copper currency?

    There shouldn't be niche currencies, has no one learned from Star Trek Online's multitude of nonsensical currencies?
  3. What's this copper currency?

    It might not be technically fraud, but people tend to have a poor view on products that change for the worse after purchase. It is well within WG's right to make changes after the fact, however it does have consequences in brand trust. Poor planning by WG really, which is why we're here with multiple currencies being made to push us to buy more stuff.
  4. What's this copper currency?

    Definitely starting to look like WG doesn't like the amount of silver in circulation, so they're making new currencies for the consumer to buy. Sad to see them making this mistake on top of an old one.
  5. Alaska HP question?

    Yeah, its hard not to get bogged down in it. People have to get less attached to specific numbers and understand the evolutionary process of the naval arms race in the 1900s, but eh... Talking about learning/experiencing the naval arms race, I'm really looking forward to Rule the Waves II. Looks to be shaping up good if you don't mind a game that looks like AutoCAD or Excel.
  6. Alaska HP question?

    I would go so far as to say either figure isn't part of the equation. The mass of the vessel, or length is merely the result of the demands required by the planners. The whole ship building process seems to be oversimplified dramatically by many, missing the point that ships are built with a mission or many missions in mind, and its characteristics are a result of that. The characteristics are not the defining feature, merely a consequence of it. Designing a Ship Article by Stuart Slade
  7. Alaska HP question?

    Every time I've seen these type of threads I've attempted to get people to read those two books... A lot of people have opinions on things without any context of the facts.
  8. Alaska HP question?

    Mainly because there is a hole to fill, but some people think its a square one, and others think its round.
  9. Alaska HP question?

    Whats your point? They were for all intents, cruisers and functioning as the role of a cruiser of the time. They went just as fast as contemporary cruisers of the time did. There is no list of characteristics that a ship must meet in order to be classified as a certain type.
  10. Alaska HP question?

    Armored cruisers had 254mm guns back in 1906, and then there were a few ships with 283mm guns that could be described as cruisers in the 1930s.
  11. Well, if someone believes something hard enough it may as well be true. Regardless of fact, so eh?
  12. By this logic, either every team is 'rigged', or none are. Which kind of makes the whole argument moot. By who's perspective are we calling a team 'rigged'. For that matter what definition of this term are you using. This whole thread seems like a waste of time so far.
  13. So you have no interest in actually discussing the topic in an honest manner? Interesting, why bother then?
  14. The problem is that you haven't provided any facts, just anecdotes. There is nothing to disprove.
  15. I don't know where you got this idea from, Kongo originally had an 8" belt and the rebuild she received never touched it.