• Content count

    459
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    6482

Community Reputation

108 Valued poster

About Xechran

  • Rank
    Warrant Officer
  • Birthday
  • Portal profile Xechran

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Portal profile Xechran

Recent Profile Visitors

181 profile views
  1. I derped. From memory I thought she was proofed against 8" gunfire. She was proofed against 10" gunfire - but has no underwater protection to speak of.
  2. Lets go back a bit. Alaska is too stronk against T10 cruisers. Solution: Put her against Tier 5 cruisers.
  3. Except armor. Shes not a battlship or battlecruiser. She is a cruiser with battlship caliber guns. That is an direct analogue of the Graf Spee. Her displacement, armor, and gun caliber require putting her at T10.
  4. Except it doesn't. Wargamming already put a super cruiser at the top of a cruiser line and I called it out by name - Moskva. Putting Guam opposite that is not a leap or a stretch. Next is play style - as noted the DM is a carry on. It plays like an Atlanta. The logic works just fine -- the only thing that falls apart is your ability to label the line "CA" or "CL". Wah?
  5. You seem to be somewhat newer to this field, the current Cleveland has been nerfed to hell and back to make it fit into that slot. Its a shadow of what it was released as, and it was released in a nerfed form to make it fit to start with. They planned to put her at T8 and revert those nerfs. You can't use the ships current performance to argue against that plan.
  6. Alaska doesn't have the armor to play like Scharnhorst, as you noted. She is not a BB. She is, at best, a cruiser like Graf Spee. Which they did implement as a cruiser. That gives us precedent. But she could not reasonably be put at the end of the CL line. What to do? Simple. Move Des Moines to the top of the CL line and put Alaska at the end of the CA line. Alaska/Guam versus Moskva. This keeps like playstyles together and gets the ships in game.
  7. Wargamming hates this fast and easy 3 step process to fix passive gameplay! You can earn 80,000 XP an hour, just click here! Seriously, you say gameplay is how you like it at a certain level, then go play with those pixels. Meta changes as ships develop - the horror... the horror...
  8. How to fix passive game play. Step 1: Select preferred Tier 3 ship Step 2: ??? Step 3: YOLO. I don't see an issue with passive play, I see issues with people being out played. Using game mechanics to out play the other team, spotting mechanics/autobounce angles etc., is good gameplay. If the game is any more complex than Tic Tac Toe, some folks are going to use the game mechanics to roll others. Not having the options to do so leads to stagnant gameplay.
  9. Strange, when I played GK it gave me a SC. Was a few hours ago.
  10. Was at work - pharmacy inside a Walmart. We were all in our little cube oblivious to what was going on, but a bit weirded out by how empty the place was. Its Wal Mart, the Fun™ never ends! At least, it shouldn't. When one old lady finally came in and picked up her husband's prescription we asked if there was a wreck out on the road. It had been our best guess. She said two things, "You don't know?" and "Turn on the news". We turned on the radio and they were describing a bit of what happened. Coming in the middle of it, I honestly thought it was an accident. I knew it wasn't the first time a plane flew into a New York building, I was convinced it was a smaller commuter or private plane with a pilot who was not instrument rated. Then they started talking about the damage to the other tower... wait what? Someone else went out to electronics to see what was going on, when he came back he wouldn't say anything but "You need to go see it for yourself." It took us a bit to process, we had all kinds of ideas bouncing around - we didn't name Al Qaeda specifically but we did discuss the first WTC attacks, the Cole and Lebanon barracks etc. We had a good idea who would do this. Its taboo to say it, but we know.
  11. Did it not? I was under the impression it did. Something to look into. Ya I thought so, it was an area protected by TDS, it was abreast the aft turret. The link in the OP can provide details. I was wrong on the water shipped. Was 3,000 not 5,000.
  12. Being able to take a lot of torpedoes means two things: they were wide beamed (a result of poor boiler technology), and the attacks came in fantastically fast. Rather than heralding the finishing attack, you need to account for the poor TDS performance when being hit by a single torpedo. The common comparison being made to the North Carolina, who was hit in the weakest area of her protection system abreast her forward magazine. Her narrow beam at the forward turret cut into the TDS area. When the IJN torpedoed her, she took on 970 tons of water. Again, at her weakest point. Compared to the 5,000 tons of the Yamato class. That requires examination and explanation. It should not have failed that catastrophically.
  13. I would condemn the necro thread, but it is still a relevant issue. 'Clear skies' needs fixed badly.
  14. Won't lie, I laughed.
  15. Has the same rules as other 6" gun cruisers. 1/6th HE penetration. Sounds like you were hitting high armor up tiered battleships and don't have IFHE. Aim at other sections or ships.