• Content count

    219
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1066

Community Reputation

35 Neutral

About Murotsu

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Birthday
  • Portal profile Murotsu

Recent Profile Visitors

144 profile views
  1. I agree with those who say the 2 out of 3 strategy is reasonably smart. "He who defends everything, loses." You can't be strong everywhere and concentrating on one flank to overwhelm part of the other side's fleet is a good move. It's attacking in mass to defeat the enemy in detail. I've never seen a team take just one objective and then camp on it. What bothers me is the tendency of players to charge off on their own rather than form up at least something resembling a formation and fight as a group. The rush forward is another mistake many players make. If you have a battleship or an all-gun cruiser long range is your friend. It keeps the torpedoes away while you use the strength of your ship to take out opponents. Let the DD's and small cruisers with torpedoes get in close. There are exceptions like say, the Mikasa, but on the whole gun ships should use range as their friend, not charge in.
  2. I I'd of thought that was obvious...
  3. Because you have a slow computer...? The latest update on mine was today and it took like a minute or two to get done. It's best to do them when WoW reminds you they are doing one rather than waiting until you want to play. Then, two minutes seems like two hours... That has something to do with Einstein's Theory of Relativity or like that...
  4. Maybe this one instead?
  5. You could be right there. The references I looked at are vague about that. But, I'd also say that the Japanese conversion looks far more practical than the German one.
  6. This is the ex-liner Scharnhorst as actually converted by the Japanese in 1943. Here sister ship Gneisenau was going to get converted in Germany at one point using the Japanese plans tweaked by the Germans.
  7. I think the worst case is having a team that charges off in four directions to individually engage multiple opposing ships, except for the AFK top tier battleship that sits doing nothing and is later sunk, all the while nobody else is trying to capture any of the objectives or stop the other team from doing that. To top things off, a fool playing a destroyer on my team manages to torpedo me, crippling my ship which up to then was doing great and it was shaping up to be a good outcome at least for me. That's when somebody else on the team broadsides my ship in a collision that allows the guy I was successfully engaging to turn the tables and finish me off. By the end of the match, I was the only guy to sink an opposing ship... the one that got sunk... while the rest of the team went to the bottom and the one DD is now pink. I can accept unbalanced sides in terms of ships, but being stuck on a team of nothing but vegetables is the worst. No matter how well you play individually, you can't possibly make up for the rest of the team's gross incompetence.
  8. Actually, on a ship for ship basis, the USN was greatly superior to the IJN. I don't think the IJN had a clear superiority in any category of vessel, and in almost all cases didn't even have parity. As for Japan's surrender, it was a combination of factors. The USN was mining the snot out of Japanese ports and had gotten subs into the Sea of Japan. That brought on true economic collapse. Russia invaded Manchuria. The US was fire bombing and nuking Japanese cities. Trying to say it was simply one of these, or some other issue is wrong. Japan surrendered because the choice they faced was destruction and starvation with no means to stop it. Russia wasn't going to invade Japan proper without massive help from the US providing the necessary naval and amphibious forces to do it. But, the loss of the China coast and Korea ensured that no more imports were going to arrive, just as the mining of ports and sinking of ships in the Sea of Japan ensured that the means to deliver imports was as good as gone too.
  9. This is a game. There has to be a degree of balance between the various ships or it wouldn't be interesting to play different ones. Everybody would simply take the obvious "best" ship for some tier by type and use that one. So, maybe the US ships are degraded a bit. I think the Japanese ones are made a bit better than they historically were to compensate the other direction. Russian, British, French, ships all get tweaked the same way for the sake of playability. I doubt it'd be much fun if one particular ship in a tier dominated all the rest of that type in that tier.
  10. That, and maybe a more diverse set of lines than the same old thing every time... I personally would love the occasional smug or snide comment thrown in, just for humor's sake. Maybe make it like getting a super container... Imagine... Instead of just "The battle starts..." the voice is female and says "The battle is starting. Good luck, you're going to need it!"
  11. A good battleship player shouldn't be putting themselves in a position to allow destroyers to close to under about 5 or 6 km from their position. That puts the battleship at the extreme of the destroyer's torpedo range most of the time and gives room and time to maneuver to avoid them. It also usually is still close enough that well aimed salvo or the secondaries will chew up the destroyer. They should also hope that their teammates playing cruisers will position themselves to give some support since it should be the cruisers dealing with a pesky destroyer, not the battleship.
  12. I'm surprised no one mentioned PT 109 as it came out in the 60's as Kennedy was running for President. It wasn't a bad movie either.
  13. You left off that the maximum range of the Mikasa's main battery is relatively short. That means the other BB can pound one before the Mikasa can get into range to even shoot. But, in those low tier games I see lots of people charging forward too...
  14. Slow is a problem, but as WoW already uses some degree of compression that wouldn't be an issue. Also, you could simply have MM start the two sides closer together. As for what would be fired... That would be both AP and HE. AP rounds were available starting with the Palliser shell of 1864, and improving from there. HE rounds were also available. The biggest difference is the damage per hit with either would be less due to the poorer penetration and use of less effective explosives like black powder or wet guncotton. Later in this period you get more effective ones like picric acid that continued to be used well into WW 2. There is also the introduction of the "Quick Firing Gun" by 1890. Many of the guns from about that time forward already exist in the game, particularly on ships on the lower tiers. These would make the secondary armament on larger ships very useful compared to the main battery, often the reverse of what is now in the game. Personally, I find the ships racing around spraying shells to be tediously repetitive. There's little real tactics involved in that. Having to carefully aim your fire and planning your course ahead of time would require more effort and creativity on the player's part. If WoW is to just be a spray and pray (prey?) game with everyone running around as fast as they can, it's just another FPS only with ships...
  15. I was thinking... yes, that can be dangerous... Anyway, I think it might be considerable fun and interesting if WoW were to add older warships to the game, rather than focusing on late WW 2 "super ships." This could take the form a "B" tech tree. That is, like actors, you have the "A" list and the less known ones are on the B list. Here, you add ships between say, 1870 and 1905 to their own tech trees, by nation, to compete against each other. You have battleships that have to get close to each other and pound their opponent with painfully slow firing main batteries, torpedo boats that are slivers with two torpedoes with short ranges. You have lots of broadside cruisers and other assorted oddities to compete with. Who could pass a chance to play one of those Russian round battleships, or an Italian Dulio class turret ship with 17.7" guns that fire so slow you think you're reloading torpedoes...? There'd be a whole big selection of armored cruisers that could bash on each other, even some like the US "Big Ten" that could take on a battleship. It would certainly make it almost a whole new game to experience...