Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

29 Neutral

About Huntn

  • Rank
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

269 profile views
  1. This is very interesting about stated vs actual speeds of ships. The other interesting thing are ticks on static sights. I tend to use a lead of 15 ticks for a cruiser or a fast battleship going full speed, unless they are real close say under 9kms, then I just eyeball it. But for outside say 10km, a 15 tick lead (ahead of the bow) is a good starting point no matter how far way a cruiser is within the firing envelope, which makes me wonder how consistent the spacing of ticks represent on a static sight, because if that lead works at mid range, at long range you should be missing the ships behind them. The nice thing about this authors method is that he gives you a fairly consistent shell flight time value (6 seconds for a battleship, 4 sec cruiser, 2 seconds for a DD) which would be used to equal one full length of that ship for calibration. Then based on flight time, you would use that to make an adjustment to how many ship lengths or partial ship lengths to lead by. And I like that it works if the ship is moving away or towards you, instead of parallel. I’ll have to try it, but guess that it works best with a static sight.
  2. I’ll look at it again with “modern” selected. Somone said that if you think the ship is going 30 kts, you’d place the 30 marker (separate from the second ticks) on the ship to hit it? Thanks!
  3. It depends on how you look at it. This is a case where the game is made accessible to more players. Want to see that taken to an extreme? Destroyers with 20 torpedo salvos, to make them competitive in-game, which I have serious issues with as being over the top, unrealistic, making a destroyer equal to a battleship, but I digress. :) But talking sights, no one in a tank or ship uses Kentucky windage to sight on a target, they all have sights which aid the attacker, giving them info and calculating for them.
  4. Are those Assistant, and Detection Timer settings in the game, in the Sight itself (if so where?) or in a different mod? In Aslain's mudpack I do see "Assistant" that is located the Over Target Marker section. I'm assuming Detection Timer is not required for this particular feature? I looked got Detection Timer after firing main gun in the Aslain list, but don't see it there. Thanks! Update: I have something called "Assistant' installed and Classic Nomogram and I do see a max ship speed listed but I see no tick marks on the sight scale. Should there be one there?
  5. Just tried the "modern"nomogram in a battle and don't see any hash marks on the scale that indicates a pointer for aiming. Could be operator error? Does anyone have an image of what that looks like? Thanks!
  6. I can get to a Dynamic/Static cross hair setting while sitting in the harbor, Escape>Settings>Controls. But there is just says Static or Dynamic. Once Dynamic is selected there are no other choices. It's been a while, but I seem to remember settings you can get at while in a battle and I assume this is what you are referencing? Thanks! Update: When the battle has started I see an additional selection to pick which site you want from a list. Thanks!
  7. I guess I need to use this more and pay attention to it. I've not seen any indication on it as to where to point. Under Aslain's there are 3 listed under Nomogram Dynamic cross hairs: Classic and Modern, Turquoise with spider webv1 (by Stiv372), and Classic Top & Top Web (by Stiv372). Anyone know if they all have the same characteristics? And how do they show you were to point? Thanks!
  8. Your image is not appearing in your post.
  9. I’ll have to look for that. I have dynamic crosshairs selected in settings, do you know what the other setting is called that would allow toggling the display? Thanks!
  10. I play exclusively Random Battles, and I agree, my rules are for Random Battles and unorganized teams. I have seen rare occasions in RBs where most of the team sweeps together aggressively and overwhelming wins. And I’ve seen most of the team rush to a zone, but then stagnate, not taking the zone and subsequently losing the match. I also understand that owning the majority of zones does not guarantee a win, but in the majority of RB matches, the team that first scoops up the zones has a distinct advantage, which the other team must overcome.
  11. I’ve been using static crosshairs for years, usually I sight in (zoom in) all the way on a target to aim. Static works fairly well, I use a 10-15 tick lead for slow ships, and 15-20 tick lead for fast ships when they appear to be traveling at top speed, and I usually get hits on them. But based on a video I watched, I’m giving dynamic crosshairs a try, and I use Aslain’s mod pack which offers a variety of choices. The vanilla dynamic sight has a single number scale. I have always preferred the spider web style sights because they help with lining up angled ships, but several of the modded dynamic sights, with and without spider web markings, have two number scales, one on the top of the horizontal line and a more compressed scale on the bottom. Why? Is the top one for 30 kt ships and bottom one for 20 kt ships? If so I don’t find that having 2 number scales is helpful, unless I’m not understanding the info they are giving. The reason being is that you have to interpret anyway if ships are angled, or are simply not traveling at full speed. I’m thinking it’s easier to to work with one scale and make adjustments than additionally having to choose fast or slow scales. One more question, in Aslain’s mod pack I downloaded a dynamic crosshairs that showed 2 pictures, one of just a horizontal line, and a second picture with a spider web design. In game I’m getting the single horizontal line displayed. Is there a way to toggle between the two displays? Looking for advice, thanks!
  12. I frequently find myself or choose the weak flank due to concerns of balance and spend a lot of time stalling superior numbers. I think the worst is when the entire team heads to a flank and then they just sit there as all of the zones are snagged by the NME. There is an inherent advantage to owning a zone, and it's hard to take it back without coordination on your team. I Now it's different when there are just the 2 home zones. Then it becomes strictly kill rates, and I tend to urge my team not to rush out, but let them rush to us, stay organized and focus fire for the easy win. Thanks for your thoughts! :D
  13. Note, in my example you are a single ship fighting on the edge of multiple ship firing ranges, or you are plowing into the effective ranges of those ships and getting killed post haste. However, I have no problem with what you said. :) The issues as I've described it is Random Battles which not usually turn into clusters, where you can't depend on coordinated actions. I do use hard cover when I can. I do bow tank, but as it is, in RBs, I typically can't depend on other members of the team to coordinate (Yes, sometimes they do), but most typically I see individual ships driving into the effective range of 3 enemy ships and getting killed quickly on a regular basis. Typically it's 1v2-1v5, and I'm like wth ARE YOU DOING? I call these suicide runs. Based on one of your comments when you are alone, good luck bow tanking 5 enemy ships. :0 This happens practically every battle (lone suicide runs) and it's not even numbers when it usually happens. It should be obvious when you are on the short end of numbers, it should be assumed you are dealing with competent enemies, and realize you are working at a big disadvantage . And it's not just numbers of ships, it's level of ships, and which ship is considered the juiciest by the enemy. Focusing fire is a must and it's great when your team is the one doing it and in the best position to do it. :) If I see my group is outnumbered, typically I back up and if lucky, they come blundering into our effective range in 1s and 2s and we kill them.
  14. This sounds good to me to avoid confusion. I think there will still be folks who don't understand what flanks are, but the compass reference might help them. :)
  15. Constantly I see this in Random Battles, as a general statement, the inability of the average player to understand and recognize the importance of staying on the edge of enemy ships weapons range, to avoid plowing into the the firing range of multiple ships, and understanding that when you are the bottom tier of battle you ARE the preferred target, the easy kill. I'll throw out an exception, when you are a destroyer, it does not matter if you are bottom tier and there are times when you must operate within the firing range of multiple enemy ships using smoke to your advantage. The primary challenge of Random Battles is that for all intents and purposes you are a free agent. You don't know the competence or the motivations of your fellow team mates. Consequently you must act conservatively as if you can't count on your team mates to make competent logical decisions. It is a challenge to get the group to act coherently, and honestly there is not normally any "getting". Yes you can toss out suggestions/orders and sometimes someone pays attentions, but mostly you just observe and base your actions on those around you. The most dangerous thing you can do is act aggressively without team support. These battles besides having a good aim, is mostly a numbers battle. With all things equal 2v1 is bad if you are the 1, and 3v1 or more is terrible odds against you, yet I see it daily the lone wolf who drives straight into the firing range of 3 enemy ships and is killed in short order. What is interesting, I've said this before, that I thought Tanks was the harder game when I first started playing Warships. But after the benefit of many battles, it's clear that the challenge of Warships is developing a competent spacial awareness. Tanks is much more tactical, and there is always seems to be a rock or building to hide behind. Not so in Warships. Once you have blundered into the firing range of multiple ships, if you are alone, you are probably toast.