Jump to content

NozTheWhiteDawn

Beta Testers
  • Content count

    152
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    6401
  • Clan

    [SOV]

Community Reputation

33 Neutral

About NozTheWhiteDawn

Recent Profile Visitors

247 profile views
  1. The Stalingrad

    Yeah, a "few" things. Only every DD in the game (+British cruisers). And enough accuracy and shell speed to hit them fairly reliably - with very quick arming AP to ensure you probably get pens on them. And the long range radar to find them instead of relying on another ship. As for poor HE, ha. Sure, the alpha damage isn't insanely high, but 33% fire chance means it barely matters - especially given how tanky the ship is when played well. This isn't even getting into the whole 12 v. 12 aspect, which means they can't normally angle perfectly against you, which matters given they get improved autobounce angles as well.
  2. The Stalingrad

    Nowhere there did I say it should have been removed as the reward. Feel free to have it be a CB exclusive. The issue was never that it was a reward ship, the issue was the the numbers. And please, "oh, this other ship can do it too." The HIV both lacks the ability to do so period against DDs, lacks the radar to actually find either itself, and lacks the ludicrous 950m/s velocity on its shells.
  3. The Stalingrad

    Honestly, I don't particularly care that the Stalingrad was going to be a CB exclusive (or close enough) reward. I DO care that WG idiotically made it extremely OP. Enormous HP pool larger than a fair number of T9 battleships, fairly accurate (and extremely fast) AP with favorable angles and short fuses - which also large enough caliber to completely overmatch DDs and British cruisers from any angle - good HE for those rare occasions where it doesn't want to use the AP, extremely tanky against anything from the front, long-range radar to ensure it has a good chance to catch those DDs to blap them with AP... oh, and DFAA (that lasts half again as long as any other cruiser DFAA) added at literally the last minute after the ship was already being called out as OP by literally every single CC that put out a review on it even before that addition. As for all of you are "oh, we earned it..." do you know why the most successful PvP games tend to do cosmetic, or at the very least fairly on the level with everything else, rewards for their exclusive content? Because by introducing hilariously stupid crap like this, they've made it incredibly difficult for anyone who didn't get it at this very first chance to do well in top tier CB. Didn't get this ship in at the first chance, for whatever reason (weren't part of a clan, your clan was still new, YOU HADN'T JOINED THE GAME YET)? Congrats, you now have a massive uphill battle to earn it in the future. Artificial stratification introduced at the top tiers of competition is THE best way to utterly strangle a game - and the corresponding profits.
  4. Hahaha, no, they aren't. British battleships get 1/4 pen on their HE as well.
  5. You don't need the 457mm guns for Conq to citadel either Minotaur or Neptune - they only have 101/102mm belt armor respectively which is very much penetrated by the base 419s. Somewhat amusingly, you actually do need the larger 457s to citadel Edinburgh (or Fiji, if someone drags that up via division) due to their thicker 114mm citadel belt armor. None of the other T10 cruisers should be vulnerable to HE citadels of either caliber without IFHE added on, at least in theory, and only the US ones get added on with IFHE. In theory, Hindenburg, Zao, and Henri IV all do not have citadels as part of their outer armor, and thus should be immune to HE citadels - Moskva simply has 155mm armor, which is beyond the penetration of even 457mm with IFHE. With that said, both instances I've had it happen have been in Zao... which is why I suspect something's screwy in regards to HE penetration. Because in both cases it was both definitely HE shells and not all that many of them - certainly not the roughly 8-9 shell hits it SHOULD take to strip half the ship off. If you look at Zao's armor scheme, it should be immune to HE citadels of any stripe since its citadel armor does not make up part of the hull, but at the same time said citadel is right behind the main hull and if said HE damage hit box is "splashing" through the armor at all - whether unilaterally or from certain angles - that would neatly explain the damage taken in both instances. It's also not something it is supposed to be doing.
  6. To add on to everything else, British battleships also nonsensically get 1/4 HE penetration on their HE shells. Which means that, even aside from what everyone's talking about against battleships, they also devastate cruisers - to the point that they can actually citadel several cruisers they can see with HE. And, given the ludicrous alpha on their HE, who cares about shooting AP at cruisers - where you have to worry about angles and overpens - when you can just fire HE and consistently remove huge chunks of them - or flat out delete them from any angle in certain cases. I have literally lost half of a full health cruiser - one supposedly immune to being citadelled by its HE - to a single goddamn Conq HE volley at longish ranges, which is utterly ridiculous. And also completely circumvents that whole "oh, you can just repair that damage, it doesn't matter." This isn't even getting into the module damage, and that I've lost 2/4 torpedo launchers (on opposite sides of the ship), on a pristine cruiser, to a single bloody Conq shell. Because that's certainly fair and balanced, right?
  7. karma and winning

    If you really want to farm karma for some ungodly reason, being a decent or better CV driver is probably the most reliable way to do so. Repelling air attacks from teammates is both highly visible and generally highly appreciated by people, and on the flip side most people tend to save their reports regarding CVs for their own if they're bad, rather than reporting the enemy CV. That visibility thing is really bloody important, as something like a DD holding down or stalling an entire side of the map solo so often goes completely unappreciated by the lemmings screwing around on the opposite side of the map for half the game. Of course, I'm going to reemphasize decent-or-better CV player. Because if you're not good with them, they're also the fastest way to lose karma.
  8. French nerf

    As mentioned, Martel was definitely overperforming compared to all the other T8 cruisers, so honestly it should have eaten a nerf regardless. Whether this one is too much is debatable. I do agree the reload booster is just a dumb concept all around though, for any ship. Jean Bart magically getting a better reload than cruisers in any circumstance is just ridiculous. How exactly does your math work? Even with the nerf to a 12 second reload, CM still puts more shells downrange than a Myoko: 10 guns * 14 second reload results in 42.9 shells per minute, as opposed to 9 guns * 12 second reload... which is 45 shells per minute. And this is ignoring that CM can turn its turrets nearly twice as fast as Myoko, so it gets those guns on target far faster as well. Also that CM's actual equivalent tier IJN cruiser is the Mogami, which mounts the same type and number of guns as Myoko (if mounting the 203s)... but has a 15 second reload and thus only puts 40 shells downrange per minute.
  9. T8 French DD Le Terrible

    ...As far as I'm aware, Tashkent's best recorded speed was made with absolutely no weapon mounts on the ship, something both the Soviets and WG conveniently ignored in claiming what kind of speed it could realistically make. As in both gun turrets and torpedo mounts hadn't been installed on the ship, and it likely wasn't carrying ammunition either - I'd additionally suspect it wasn't remotely carrying a full fuel load. All of this adds up to a huge amount of weight missing from Tashkent, and it wouldn't have remotely have been able to make that speed in trials with a full combat load, let alone actual combat conditions, and thus its trials weren't conducted at anything remotely close to its actual 3400 ton displacement. If you have an actual link with something different, I'd love to see it. Shimakaze, for example, actually made its top speed of 40.9kts with a full combat load.
  10. T8 French DD Le Terrible

    Well, this is rather disgusting... in that it's yet another nerfed high speed destroyer - this time a premium whose defining characteristic was her speed - for no real reason (well, not counting infringing on the imaginary speed niche the RU destroyers have as a reason). Or, in blunter terms, the only real historically significant thing about the Le Terrible is that it was the destroyer that, during trials, set the world speed record for that class... at 45kts.
  11. Fastest AA Defense Expert Ever

    More than useless, they were in fact actively detrimental to Hood because the wires drifted back and got tangled in her superstructure with any unexpected wind - not too terrible with practice rounds, but can you imagine if it was live ammunition? Hood being selected as the super special battleship with DFAA really was hilariously absurd.
  12. For someone weighing in on the historical aspect, it's almost impressive how uniformed you are. 1. IJN Type 93 torpedoes, in addition to being some of the hardest to spot torpedoes in the world due to the compressed oxygen which meant they left no bubble trail, were also carrying the largest warheads in the world. Yes Torpex is more excitable than the explosives the other nations were using, but when your warhead has to be mounted on a 21" diameter torpedo, as opposed to the 24" ones the IJN were basically unique in using, you are also using far less explosive in the first place. Depending on the exact mixes the US torpedoes might do slightly more damage, but it's not going to be hugely noticeable due to the warhead size difference (Mk 15 uses an 825 lb warhead, Type 93 uses a 1080 lb one). 2. Sure, the reloading process was slow, but it was also unique that IJN ships could reload during a battle AT ALL. Torpedo reloads being kept on the surface ship itself was a feature basically only the IJN did in the first place, everyone else had to either retire to a port or a torpedo tender ship. This was definitely an advantage for destroyers, but ultimately probably a bad decision for their heavy cruisers. 3. Yes, the actual IRL speed of the Long Lance is significantly slower than its in-game speed... but this applies to all other torpedoes as well. Torpedoes in general had selectable range settings that affected their speed, and comparing the Type 93 to the Mk 15, or even the Mk 17, at the same overall range settings is never favorable to the US torpedoes... and the word overall is used because the lowest range setting for the Type 93 is 20km... while the Mk 15's short range settting is 5.5km. The Mk. 17 is actually accurate in-game in it having a range of 16.5km (no range settings I can find for it, just that one range)... which still puts it as slower than Long Lances on 20km settings. 4. Part of the speculated reason why IJN cruisers have such exposed citadels in the first place is due to the torpedoes, so that little issue is likely already in the game. And I love when people decide to strawman legitimate complaints. There are actual game balancing reasons why the state of IJN torpedoes is such crap, without even getting into historical reasons, and it starts with the line(s) giving up so much for torpedoes that are roughly equivalent or even arguably WORSE than those that certain gunboat lines get. Because honestly? I'd rather hit with two 19k torps, or even two 16k torps, than a single 21-23k torp... especially since they come with a superior ship overall in other aspects (including torpedo reload and number of tubes). People mock it on the historical aspect due to garbage like the RU destroyer line being based on an aspect of them that was completely unrealistic (Kiev's stated speed was done in trials with absolutely no armament on the ship - not only ammo, but the actual entire turrets and the like which would add tens to hundreds of tons to the ship) while the IJN not only gets those huge issues on their torpedoes, but nonsensical garbage like Shimakaze getting nerfed 2kts below its actual trial speed with full combat load. Let's not even get into the gargantuan physics violation that is the Khabarovsk. If they wanted to base a DD line on gunboating speed, they should have just used the French ships, which actually has the incredibly fast destroyers like the La Fantastique.
  13. This is completely wrong, because in WG's armor penetration model exact numbers do not cut it. You need at least a fractional amount over the target number in order to penetrate a specific armor value.
  14. You know, if you're going to hammer someone for accidentally spreading misinformation, you should probably not do it yourself. Cruisers have 27 or 32mm hull/extremities since when, exactly? Last time I checked, it's 27mm for US/German, 25mm for IJN/French/Russian(bar Moskva's new 50mm lower bow plate) and 16mm for British. Not a single cruiser in the game has 32mm bow armor, not even the "totally not battlecruiser/large cruiser" Kronshtadt/Stalingrad/Alaska. And superstructure is only 16mm, even at T10, for all cruisers (bar the Brits at 13mm). 19mm is what BATTLESHIPS have as default superstructure numbers at T8-10.
  15. Pen for zero damage?

    Haha, no. This issue has been around for a while, and it's not just module damage causing it. However the hell WG models ribbons, there's definitely things wrong with it - from 0 damage AP "penetrations" in spots (even those without modules - and spaced armor is not supposed to completely stop AP shell damage, though it occasionally does cause a shell to magically vanish of course), to listed AP penetrations only doing overpen damage, to the ever fun "overpen" that did 6k and is really a double dipping shell that only recorded for you as the initial overpen.
×