Jump to content


Beta Testers
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

249 Valued poster

About axyarthur

  • Rank
    Warrant Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Physics, Math, Music, History

Recent Profile Visitors

1,408 profile views
  1. axyarthur

    Poll: How would you fix Aircraft Carriers?

    several things: - Allow ships to manually control DP batteries / secondaries in AA role. Allow CV players full control of planes in 3D space, ie, change altitude as well as speed / course. So AA now is skilled base, and it rewards either surface ships who can shoot better or CV players who can dodge flak better. - separate CV planes into attack / fighter squadrons. Attack planes do more damage than planes now, but only has 1 km spotting distance, meaning CV must rely on other ships to spot if they want to attack. Fighter squadrons, in addition to ability to engage in AA combat, can spot ships at 2x the distance as planes do now. So, CV players must choose when they fly a squadron, do attack or spot / anti-air - instead of dropping fighters now, allow manually controlled fighters to do AA combat. A simple mechanic could be that fighters do continuous damage to enemy squadrons in front of them at 30 deg cone say up to 0.5 miles. similarly, bombers can also do damage (at much lesser rate) to enemy planes at 60 deg cone at rear. Since planes can move in 3D now, players must "out-fly" each other to continuous shoot down enemy planes. The point of these changes is to give CV more strategic choice in deciding how to influence battle, as well as giving surface ships agency to fight back at CV by shooting down planes. Right now, the most infuriating aspect of surface -CV interaction is that the surface ships cannot actively stop CV player by shooting back, he can only "dodge". Also, lack of Cv-CV interaction makes CV play same as PvE mode. You're not actually fighting other players, you only fight against their automated AA, Flak, and dropped fighters. With the changes suggested above, it gives CV and anti-air surface ships more depth, and more ways to balance different nations with raw stats rather than gimmicky consumables.
  2. axyarthur

    display bug in UI

    so I was mousing over the smoke generator consumable in my gearing in port, and this happened (see pic): a bug?
  3. I think those might be testers testing the ship. It's not set for release yet.
  4. axyarthur

    penetration /armor question

    Is this for HE? It used to be that armor penetration value has to be greater than armor value to score penetration. But in the IFHE rework a while back they changed it so that now shells will penetration armor value less than or equal to their penetration value. So in your example, if your penetration is 25mm, it should pen all armor up to 25 mm.
  5. axyarthur

    How do I designate a Target

    can you clarify what do you mean by "designate target"? For secondaries? you control + click on target. To call focus fire for team, you simply point your mouse over the ship, make sure it is center on your screen and press F3. This sometimes fails, but it usually works if your mouse is slightly above the target.
  6. if by "sometimes" you mean "always", then yes, "sometimes" catapult fighters are useless.
  7. very good points, though I have reservations regarding point #3 (cruisers) most cruisers would not want to be where you need them to be as "zoning tools", as this puts them in focus fire of enemy BBs. they will most likely operate at edge of their range with respect to enemy BBs, so 14-15 km out. If you are 3-4 to the back of them, you are close to 20 km from enemy bbs, that is too far away. Plus, you want to tank damage more so than your cruisers. So depending on the situation, you want to at least be roughly same distance away from enemy as your own cruisers. a lot of these tips would work really well if you have good dd screen. If your dds can keep enemy dds away from that 12-14 km zone, then you will have much easier time disengaging from HE spam. If not, your best hope is kite away as best you can and try to kill the HE spam before they inevitably burn you down.
  8. axyarthur

    Because It Is Not Russian.....

    I know that. I meant give the Constellation the 16''/50 Mk 2's that it was supposed to received, which is a better version of guns than what it has in game, which is a copy of the Colorado guns.
  9. axyarthur

    Because It Is Not Russian.....

    Honestly just get rid of the radar on this ship. We don't need more BBs with radar. Then give her the historical 16''/50 guns.
  10. he works the same way as any other captain in terms of ship training: he can be used on any US Premium and special ships without retraining. He can specialize in 1 tech tree ship, if you want to transfer him to another tech tree ship, he needs to be retrain the same way as any other captain. My suggestion is to put him on a tech tree ship that would most benefit from his perks. My choice is the Des Moines. You can still use him on Premium ships like the Alaska. With the captain skill rework, you can also use him on Premium BBs like Georgia, Ohio, etc by using the BB branch of his captain tree while retaining the skills for his main specialty on cruisers. Same for premium DD or CV.
  11. Maybe do a complete new ranking system. Team-based games like some FPS or RTS games have some overall performance metric they used to determine ranking instead of basing it completely on victories, which in a random team game, is not totally in your control. So either use base xp, or some other new metric, to set how much a player should progress after a given rank game. Ranked progress could be calculated using a points system instead of binary star / no star system, which would allow more fair distribution of ranked progress based on player performance. So you could have system where x amount of based xp earns you y amount of ranked points, bonus points for victories, achievements, etc. then you ranked up based on how many points you have accumulated. You can still have different tiers based on how many points players have, and so on. But what do I know, this post probably a waste of space since WG is not listening to feedback that much, if at all these days.
  12. axyarthur


    It's not. GK is definitely much better ship, simply because 12 guns is better than 8. The only thing GK is worse on is probably manuverability, but the advantage to FDG is tiny and not enough to offset better firepower. Protection is probably equal, with FDG smaller size and better handling offset by bigger health pool of GK. GK is much better pushing ship, since both have horrible forward firing arcs for the rear guns, but with GK you can go bow in and still have 6 guns to play with while in FDG you only have 4.
  13. axyarthur

    Curse you Yugumo!

    I have seen people type "wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa" in chat, probably trying to accelerate/turn ship while in chat mode. It happens, laugh about it and move on.
  14. axyarthur

    Zao double rudder question

    I have tried this build, but I still think concealment is better. Problem is that even though your rudder is better, your turning radius becomes your limiting factor when dodging incoming shells, so benefit is not as great as you think. Also, this build basically makes you only good at long range HE spam, which Zao can already do without the rudder. And you lose the other great aspect of the ship, which is to use its great concealment to either support DDs pushing into cap or ambushing other cruisers with its underrated AP. I am not saying the double rudder build is bad, it's just you become too one dimensional, and you're sacrificing one of the Zao's greatest strength, its concealment. Of course, that is just my opinion, you can try it and see how it works for you.
  15. axyarthur

    So How is Ranked going for you?

    It's going great for me because I'm not playing