Beta Testers
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


Community Reputation

1,933 Superb


About Big_Spud

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Interests
    Tonks, Botes and other machines of war.
  • Portal profile Big_Spud
  1. I hope they manage to come up with a functional solution, rather than not changing smoke mechanics at all.
  2. Most people simply have no clue how to play the game, and will insult you for saying so. It's the same everywhere. It's honestly disgusting how inept most people are at this game.
  3. Maybe the best at jamming their own mountings because of the stupid number of flash protection systems?
  4. Don't worry, by literally no metric was it the best heavy gun employed during the war.
  5. What are you actually trying to argue here? Also, your immunity zones are off. 15,700 meters was the inner edge versus 14" guns, and 18,000 meters versus 16" guns firing average weight (2200 lb) shells.
  6. Seal clubbing in general as a term is confined to tiers 1-3, where an experienced player would usually not gain anything by playing at that level. People who play excessive numbers of games at those tiers are by all rights seal clubbers. Tier 4 is questionable from either side, mostly due to the presence of tier 4 premiums that more experienced players may have spent money on and legitimately just want to play. Tier 5 is the absolute cutoff for what could be considered sealclubbing. Most players by that point at least have a basic understanding of the games mechanics, and most lines are rather well developed to the point where an expertly handled ship will probably not be utterly shut-out dominating more average players in the same ship.
  7. Guilty-as-charged for seal-clubbing in Arkansas Beta I guess...
  8. 100% investment. MFCS, AFT, Secondary Battery Mod. and the flag. Conversely, we did try at one point to convince them to make fifteen 28,000 ton ships so we could make twelve 35,000 toners. Naturally, the British were not amused.
  9. I think the US managed to skate by simply because we had such a large industrial base that it never really suffered from treaty atrophy like the British system of private shipbuilders did. Not that there weren't failings, torpedoes being the major one.
  10. I've honestly played enough games with both the NC and Alabama secondary builds versus the Tirpitz and Bismarck secondary builds that I need to disagree. Once you actually get into that 7km range bracket, you can keep angled towards your target in NC/Alabama while still bringing the entire secondary battery to bear. This reduces your profile to gunfire and potential torpedo hits while still bringing the maximum number of guns on target, all of which can deal damage to an enemy destroyer, cruiser hull or battleship superstructure if they hit, and they are much more likely to hit. There's also the psychological aspect of people simply not expecting a secondary spec USN battleship, and assuming they can close on you in relative safety for torpedo attacks. That alone has killed plenty of destroyers and cruisers in my experience. With 15 RPM I would rate them as completely superior to Bismarck in the close range role. Even as is, I still prefer them when it starts getting claustrophobic versus the 8-10 km howitzer attacks Bismarck does better at.
  11. At first glance that's what a lot of people think, but honestly I prefer it over the alternatives (and Monty uses the 5"/54, which works great out to its max range of 9.1). Yamatos 5"/40 guns are useless beyond 7km because they have even more potato arcs than the 5"/38's. There's only two reasons why I say I still like the 5"/38's as secondaries. First is because of the fact that they turrets are all mounted so close together that they generate terrific spreads out to their max range. I did a test a while back of secondary specced tier 8's (NC/Amagi/Bisko) and the result was that the NC has the shortest time to kill versus same tier destroyers compared to the others (this now also applies to Alabama). This was simply because it hit more shells per salvo on the target. Second is the firing angles for the turrets themselves. Because of the echelon layout they use, you can basically get all guns firing forward while staying at autobounce (all five mounts can target 20 degrees off either side of the bow, or 30 degrees for Iowa because of its inset center mount). To get the best effect out of Bismarck or Amagi's secondaries, you need to go almost completely broadside. Compounding that is the fact that half of Bismarcks guns are too small to actually deal damage to a lot of ships superstructures or tier 8+ destroyers. With un-nerfed rate of fire at the same 7.6 max range (or 9.1 for Iowa), I think they would be second to none for harassing fire.
  12. Or they'll just nerf its output by 40% like the 5"/38, so that it has the same 7.5s reload as all the other 6" secondaries.
  13. I would prefer HE secondaries at tier 10 TBH. AP secondaries are questionable by tier 7 and utterly useless by tier 8 versus most targets. Most tier 8-10 cruisers would be immune at any reasonable range or angle. It would also hurt them when fighting other battleships at close/medium range because of the loss of fires.
  14. 15C calls for 108,000 SHP developing 28.5 knots, with a 13" belt over the machinery and 14" over the magazines covered by 5"-6" decks respectively.
  15. Whats happening with Nelson. Where is the carrier rework? Its almost August.