PzkwVIB

I honestly think a modified version of #2 would be the best, Something similar to what it used to be during the RTS days. And to throw the USN and certain RN ships a bone, I think we could take it a step further. DFAA: Decreases aiming speed, turning speed, and flight speed of all aircraft within AA range by X (let's say 10%), lasts Y time (the duration of the consumable) so long as the squadron is within AA range. Increases damage by flack bursts by 50%, increases flack bursts "accuracy" by 25% (bursts are a bit closer together and go off a bit closer to the squadron), and increases continual AA damage by 25%. Concentrated DFAA (USN and RN): Decreases aiming speed, turning speed, and flight speed by all aircraft within range by 15%. Increases damage by flack bursts by 100%, increases flack bursts "accuracy" by 25%, and increases continual AA damage by 50%. And for the lower tier "AA" ships such as Texas, C hull Omaha, and the like? Buff the US version of the Bofors 40mm. It used to be back in the RTS, where you could REALLY tell when the USN got the 40mm. Better range AND damage. Now? Barely any real difference, and since the USN invested into the Bofors because it was a better AA platform than the 28mm, there's no reason for it to be so pointless. Will this fix everything? No. It's entirely possible this will move the needle too far in the other direction, but it's something. Maybe have a better physical indicator that DFAA is active, like have your squadron leader say something.

So, let me start by saying this is merely the theory crafting of a few old WoW's vets from a few years back that I decided to put on here. The Clemson-class Destroyer USS Edsall earned its reputation in the early days of WW2 (like most ships in the game) where it went up against the Tone-class Aviation Cruiser Chikuma, along with the Kongo-class Battleships Hiei and Kirishima, and survived for a few hours, dodging 8 and 14 inch shellfire respectively. It wasn't until dive bombers from the Kaga, Hiryuu and Souryuu came in that she was immobilized and subsequently sunk by the surface force. So, what would the Edsall be in the game? Well, that's where the fun begins. We came up with this not long after the Concealment Module (tier 8 slot) was rebalanced to add in dispersion penalties for shots fired at it. Basically, it'd be a tier 5 Clemson with health and torpedo buffs fitting a tier 5 DD, but with the tier 8 module available for usage. Why that module? Simple. The Clemson-class sit very low in the water as it stands, and are in general hard to hit at range. Now imagine one of them with the increased dispersion values granted by the concealment module. Hopefully the reason to care is fairly self evident. Now we get to the big question. How the hell is this thing balanced? Well, it is. You see, the guns would retain their 4.5-5 second reload time, the shells would still be 120mm, and the AA would still be laughable, and since it's now at tier 5 meaning it can see tier 6 carriers. It would be a bit of a departure and a rival for the Nicholas, but considering the Nicholas would have better DPM, better torps (maybe), and has "better" AA along with faster turning guns? I think they'd be a pretty good match as far as balance goes. What do the rest of you think?

I see where you're coming from, and I've reached a similar conclusion. But I've never seen the supercruisers as that big of a problem, barring some tiering concerns that come about with new ship type. I see most of them as the Moskva taken to the extreme. The Moskva is capable of doing massive damage (read: citadel) to every cruiser and a fair number of battleships in its tier spread. The Stalingrad and Kronshtadt are basically improved Moskva's in that regard, and the Azuma is basically an IJN variant of that with better HE rounds. The Yoshino is, again, an overtuned Zao, designed for long range fire with both its guns and standoff torpedo armament. The Alaska is, as you said, a larger up-gunned Baltimore class cruiser with equally enhanced armor. While I do think these have their own problems, the USSR ships are too finely tuned for AP spam at cruisers and BB's, the Azuma and Yoshino have the same issues as the Zao but with better range in exchange for armor. The only one I've never had issues with is the Alaska, but that may just be me. The Siegfried, I'm only interested in this in the sense of it being the largest guns on any cruiser. All this being said, I do agree with you that a distinction needs to be drawn between Supercruiser and Battlecruiser. The question is, how and how do we tier them?

Well, they're worth ~40,000 gold (1,000,000 free exp / 25 free exp to gold). And 20,000 gold is $80 US. So closer to $160 US if my math is right.

I can't even select the captains in the first place, them or the ARP collaboration captains. I can only here them if I select the ship with them rather than as an overall voice modification.

Near as I can tell it's not in any of the patch notes, which now confuses me even more.

As some who has purchased/unlocked/earned various collaboration captains, I'm a little confused as to why I can no longer select them as an overall voice over. I hear them so long as I'm playing a ship that has one in it (Akeno Misaki in my Harugumo for example), but they're no longer in the "voice over modification" setting list. And neither is the National Option. I'm running vanilla (no mods), just did a repair, and nothing. Any fixes for this?

HMS Incomparable anyone? Blueprint only, but what a blueprint...

As a battleship main, I've always been very conflicted on the concealment rework (10% across the board). On one hand, a fully kitted out BB can have BETTER concealment than certain cruisers with the same build. That's REALLY stupid. That being said, some battleships (read: North Carolina, Alabama, Monarch) rely on their slightly better than average agility and stealth to do their jobs. Not all battleships are designed simply to absorb fire and return fire at medium to long range or get absurdly close to brawl. Their guns and or armor just can't match that. As it stands now, certain battleships like the Montana will be right at the dge of their detection range (or even close) to be within optimal firing range. While other battleships like the Kurfurst or the Yamato just won't care, seeing as they have the armor and range/brawling ability to actually get away with not relying on stealth and relocation. The Republic has the speed and RoF advantage, and the less said about the Conqueror the better. As I said at the start, I'm a battleship main who's conflicted about this rework. On one hand I think that this will help certain ships out drastically, on the other hand it's incredibly hard not to see this as a nerf to all ships that aren't destroyers. Which might be needed, but I still think there were better ways to do this, like actually nerf and or buff the problem children rather than a blanket skill rebalance.

Sims to get into the Closed Beta, and the Arkansas Beta because of it. After that, I don't remember.

Unless you've made a mistake in a battleship, got radar'ed by something like a Worcester and you're sitting still in a DD, went broadside on in a cruiser in front of a battleship that was aiming at you, or simply made the mistake of playing a tier 8 CV, that should never be the case. Unless your name is Z-23, most every tier 8 ship should be able to at least make it difficult for the opponent to sink them, if not take them with you. I've lost count of the number of Yamato's, Montana's, and Moskva's that I've rushed and then proceeded to sink them in something like my Alabama. Did I lose a good chunk of HP? Yeah. Do I sink as well, pretty often. But it was worth it. It's all a matter of knowing what your ship can do, and what it can do it to.

This. Entirely this. As a concept I don't mind the "save a star" feature as a concept considering how WG has set up their ranked mode. But as someone who's played ranked in League of Legends and a few other formats as well, WG has one of the WORST setups for ranked I've ever seen. Now, I understand the whole "It encourages team play and is meant to draw the more serious players into the game mode" viewpoint that they're going with. But that being said, it is FAR too easy for things to go drastically wrong with trolls/MM/idiots to stick with this "Wins are the only thing that matters" mentality they've given us. And I agree with you that most if not all of us simply want to rank out and be done with it, not that I have any experience in that field but that's another matter altogether. All that being said, unless WG suddenly decides to rework their entire setup for ranked, we're going to be stuck with it.

This is more or less what I've been forced to do. When I try running warships with the WGC active I need to run the game on virtually bare minimum graphics to get it even in the realm of playable. Whereas prior to this I was more or less running it on the maximum to high on all graphics with little to no issue. No idea what the issue is, according to task manager the WGC was taking virtually no memory/disk, but the results are hard to deny.

I tend to spam "Try your luck" and "extra flags and camo" as it stands anyway, I have more flags than I know what to do with right now anyway. That being said I can see an overall net loss (as of right now), but that most likely will change upon the patch hitting the live server. It stands to reason that they'll add in some other form of coal gathering aside from missions.

It depends more on the hp level (overall %) than anything else, and how likely I am to need my Damage Control in the near future. Seeing as fire does % health damage, it also depends on how likely I am to sink during the fires duration.