BarronRichthofen

TBH I'd say sell it and buy another "supercruiser" the Clausewitz is the WORST of the superships. It has a small boost in most stats over a Hindy with none of the "supercruiser" specials. This ship PROVES the anti German bais at WG. Every other super ship has some unique boost over the T10. Nope not the german.

So I've noticed that for some reason you all at WG have decided to run the silver league (T6/7) on map's that have traditionally been T9/10 maps. WHY? Some of the ca's and all of the DD's take several minutes to even get into weapons range. this really slows down the game play. Can we please have map that are appropriate for the Tier of ship?

So WG one of the many dubious decisions you've implemented over the past couple years has been the removal of friendly fire. I get that you probably did it to make the game more new user friendly/ But with the fact that your karma system is nothing but a sop we have no real way of displaying our displeasure at other players for doing stupid stuff. Example noob BB turns into the escorting CA pushing him into enemy fire and causing him to not be able to torp the enemy ship. Down voting does nothing, complaining to the given player does nothing. 4 torps from the CA he pissed off teaches a lesson. I don't care if i go pink or orange or whatever penalty you decide to give. For some people it takes a 2x4 up side the head to get them to take notice. You've made a multiplayer game, that means that you have to deal with other players. Your current system does NOTHING to deal with them. Allow us at least a little satisfaction by returning friendly fire, yeah we who intentionally fire into friendly's will have a price to pay, but if we are willing to pay that price why not let us.

It's not the ship, it's the skip bombs. They are total [edited], there was ONE instance in all of WWII when they were used with success. That one instance was against dam's in germany carried out by special fitted LAND BASED BOMBERS (B-17,B-24) (try fitting those on a carrier). This is a step too far WG the main drawback from using this technique was the HIGH ATTRITION RATE. AKA the planes were EASY to shoot down. Yes they had a good accuracy but the loss of most of the planes that tried to attack this way quickly phased this form of attacking out. You at WG have made it so there are no drawbacks to this form of attack. You've made them accurate like irl but failed to give the high attrition rate to the planes attacking this way. If it worked as well IRL as in game all the worlds Air Forces would use this form of attack today. They don't. Hint hint because it cost's too much in terms of human life for the results gained. IMO Bad Ideal, Bad implementation of a BAD Ideal and an unrealistic attrition rate. you want to double or triple the damage to planes on their attack run for this type of attack then you MIGHT have a decent new FOTM. But as it stands now it's broken beyond even plausible belief.

Dev's can you PLEASE do something about wall riding. This is a GAME EXPLOIT like Aim Bot's. You crack down on that enough why not this exploit? I see at least 1 wall rider in EVERY random usually 2 or more. I suggest you start a 2% damage tick every 2 seconds that cannot be healed when wall riding. That gives an inadvertent wall rider time to get off the wall but will stop the *^^&$* that do it intentionally.

Well IMO it comes down to the "fun" factor. Respecing over 200 captains does not = fun. Reworking modules on over 200 ships again not fun. in the end for me at least, to quote Douglas Adams So Long and thanks for all the fish!

Done

It was a DESTROYER IT HAS NO DAMN TORP PROTECTION wake up and READ!!!!! and yeah I have the replay and if WG want's to see it I'll give it to them. Then wargaming need to make a far more detailed description of the damage saturation mechanic that INCLUDES torp damage and the percentages of HP each section has. But the wiki does not give enough information to figure out what the exact HP for a section is. Torp damage from the 2 hits was 17,736 so damage saturation did affect both torp to different degrees. But with the information on the wiki it is impossible to determine how much was reduced because you are not given the precentages of each section of the ship. The torps hit so close together that even slowed down to max the replay does not show exact damage numbers. It looks like the first torp hit for around 7-8 k and the second doing a bit less. So doing some rough math (really rough) First torp hits stern (when I looked closely at the replay it hits 2 frames before the second, under 1 second between hits) It does the roughly 7-8k dmg. Figuring the 0.165 reduction that should give us around 6k HP for the stern + the remainder of the 15,100 torp dmg being reduced to give the 7-8k dmg applied. Second Torp same thing but a little less damage. The issue I really have is that for a Destroyer the damage reduction seems a bit excessive. We're not talking about a ship that is 100's of meters long and has plenty of bulkheads to reduce the damage. Your looking at a Ship under 100m , it does not have the structual strenght to reduce the damage that damn much. (98%reduction I think not) BB or CA sure there is enough distance to allow bulkhead and such to do their job and reduce the damage. But in a DD your looking at 3-4 bulkhead at best for the entie ship, not enough to give that kind of reduction So WG give us EXACT percentage numbers for each section of a ship. The "The maximum HP for these compartments are always 105% of the ship’s maximum HP. The maximum HP of the "hull" compartment is always 75% of the ship's maximum HP. " is NOT enough information to stop posts like this one. I want to know what my torps SHOULD do and their MAX damage is as well. If I have the EXACT percentages of each section of a ship I can then determine if I need to throw a few HE rounds at a DD in addition to the torps to kill it. (Yeah I can do math that fast in my head) In the match in question I had to spend another 5 min chasing that YueYang down with under 200hp left to finish him off. If I had the info needed to make the determination in advance I would have pressed him and killed quickly. I personally think the 0.165 reduction is fine for BB/CA/CV big ships plenty of open spase to diffuse explosions. A DD though it should be far less of a reduction 0.33 or so for HE/Torps. AP should still have the reduction because an AP round hitting a ship with little to no armor will punch right thru just like the current AP/DD interaction is currently working. I won't bring the IRL arguement into this because this is a game not real life but it does imitate reality and a DD taking 2 torp to bow and stern boradside should NOT survive it.

SO just in a match 3 min in, me and a YueYang face off at a cap, he eats 2 torps from me in my Grozvoi. Yueyang Base HP 18,500 with no skill on this one increasing his HP to 23,000. Grozvoi torps do 15,100 each. One hit bow 1 hit stern broadside and the Yueyang surrvived with 186hp left. Sorry WG he should have died plain an simple. He had taken no damage before the torps hit so "damage saturation" should NOT be a factor. So unless the basic laws of math have changed and 15,100 x 2 no longer equals 30,200 your game is BROKEN. I understand the damage saturation mechanic. The torps hit in 2 different locations (bow & stern) so there should have been no reduction for the first torp ( they hit less than a second apart) & with the 2nd torp hitting the stern of the ship it should not have been affected by the damage saturation mechanic eiter(a second seperate damage location). In effect I riped off his bow and stern but he lived because your game applied the damage saturation mechanic to the second torp which hit a diferent damage location. Now if you want a DD to survive a dual torp hit like this one then adjust your wiki to represent this. State that DD's only have one damage location not the multiple that is stated on the wiki. Fix the game or fix the wiki One is broken right now so get on it.

I normally stay out of the Nerf or not discussions, but a recent match has me thinking the FDR does need a nerf. Was in my worchester closing on an FDR he's sending planes after me, I DFAA and reinforce, watch my AA burst 4 times for 6800 and change each time and i shot down ONE bomber. To put that into perspective my AA did enough damage to kill a T6 cruiser from full health and I got ONE damn plane. I'm sure he hit his plane heal, but even with that he should have lost a few more.

So got the dreaded pink status, details un-important on how. Go to co-op to knock it out and all theses co-op warriors keep ramming me extending my Pink status. About done with this crap Wargaming. Even sitting at spawn I've had co-op players turn and ram me at start of match. The only reason they would do this is to extend my pink status. Not a damn thing I can do to stop them from doing this other than NOT play the game. Wargaming remove collision damage from causing or extending the pink status. I'm about to go on a Killing spree in randoms IDGAF if i go orange I'm getting sick of this.

I'll admit i've stolen a few kills intentionally. But for the most part my "kill steals" are from secondary hits with German/American BB's.

For the DD captian/CV captian in you, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRu5wxl5frk BB/CA capt in you,

Seriously OP you get 120k coal, 1500 Steel, 28 days of prem, 2k doub, and 150k FXP not to mention all the flags and camos and you call it a "rock". I only opened 19 SC's and my highlights were the 15k coal, 2k doub, 21 days prem and 50k FXP. Rest was flags and camo. 1/2 of any coal ship, decent prem time, enough doub for a T7 prem camo, and 1/3 of the way to a Nelson in FXP and you call it a rock. Be thankful they gave you anything at all.

Not a bad Ideal OP save for the option part, many of us already have the shin, another campagin with a Ship as the reward or one for each calss of ship would be good. As you said it does not have to be an Alaska type ship. Just a T6 that is unique to the campagin. (No other way to get the ship)