UrPeaceKeeper

Ehhh... not technically wrong, but my original statement stands. My frustration wasn't just toxic people being toxic, it was the toxic behavior being specifically targeted at ST because their favorite CC made some comment about a ship being x, y, or z and it angered said fanboy to the point they legit harass ST trying to provide WG with accurate feedback. Not being able to respond to that behavior... at all... was frustrating. Thankfully I record 100% of my gameplay and have reported several to WG with reasonable success.

Destroyers are all about risk/reward... so a certain level of aggression is necessary for victory. Especially since destroyers are one of the key spotting classes in the game! :)

The learning curve gets real steep around T6 when you start running into radar ships more consistently. It's not impossible to do well but I'd expect it to get harder. If you like challenges, you can definitely stick with it... just... I want you to remember something... they have guns and they ARE useful... don't forget that!!!!

Of all the nations to avoid as a first time DD captain, the IJN DDs would reign supreme. They are a high skill floor, high ceiling ship line that can be frustrating to play. Why? Doing well requires extensive map knowledge, ship knowledge, gun play mechanics, torpedo leading, and general situational awareness understanding that is difficult to master. Screw up and you get hosed quickly. I would recommend either the USN or KMS (German) DD lines as being generally good all around destroyers that will teach you good destroyer tactics without being excessively punishing. If you need help with specific ships in whatever line you choose, check out my YT channel (link in my signature) for three specific ship you are playing. Some of my videos are dated (USN DD is one of my oldest video lines) but the tactics and skill trees are still applicable even after all of the changes in the game.

You might be half a decade late to this argument... people have been arguing over player stats since WG released that info to their API for stat pages to post. I used to have a spreadsheet that automated ranking of ships in certain tiers based upon Warships.today data and the results were... interesting. Also stats rarely account for how a ship is supposed to be played... IJN DD come to mind... I fought forever to change the "don't use your guns" mantra that so many still say... but conveniently when players started using their guns, a huge increase in their stats began. Had WG balanced them around the torpedo only mantra, they'd be ridiculously OP... some still are OP AF imo... Baltimore at T9 was another horribly underrated ship by stats but very strong when played to her strengths.

Hey Calibur, longtime, no chat! I'll throw my hat in under the pretense that I've never been a CC but I WAS an ST from the RNCL through to the RNDD... do 4,5 years? Without going into too many details (NDA, you understand), I feel like WG DOES listen to ST and CC feedback but they definitely have an idea of the direction for the game and are really hard to persuade otherwise. From what I've observed, they tend to lean heavily towards only taking action if the overwhelming body of feedback is pointing out problems or the data indicates a problem. The RNCL testing showed this very clearly. Smoke + HE spam + extended fragility meant an overly passive play style that didn't fit their desired goal for an entire line of ships. It probably also didn't help that certain ST were pushing things with triple divisions of range spec minos with IFHE.... mind you, this was on the Live server... The rest of that story is ancient history now... That said there are times when WG has ignored feedback entirely... it took nearly a year of adding to feedback, begging devs, screaming in the ST forum, meetings, slack, then Discord before WG finally fixed a horrific bug in the game that existed in USN BBs since their introduction in Closed Beta... Of course in referring to the issue of the Iowa's blast bags (the bags around the base of the barrel at the turret) being white instead of the black they always were. I even provided them with an updated texture file that I had made which corrected the issue. It finally was fixed... but it took a lot of fighting! RE: CC NDA changes... while this no longer impacts me, I personally find the NDA change as a welcome one. The age of CC having access to ships at the same time as ST and being able to produce content on them was ridiculous. There is nothing more frustrating than: a.) Not being able to talk about a ship in live testing that the CCs were producing content about b.) Getting into a match and being instantly barraged by whatever CC fanboy telling me that the ship I was testing was op/garbage/meh/whatever c.) Getting blamed for b.) because ST are worthless and whatever CC has to fix our crappy work d.) Being TK'd by whatever CC's fan because ship is whatever All of these instances happened to me while first round live testing was happening on a ship line... that's silly. The CC NDA change allows ST to discover these issues without having to fight public perception created by well meaning CC without actually being able to counter those points due to NDA preventing ST providing feedback to the public. To add some salt, it also annoyed me to no end that live testing of ships was covered under ST NDA while CC were releasing content on the same ship we were testing. Seemed pointless to have a gag order when people were openly discussing our test ships. At any rate, my departure from WoWs was significantly influenced by the rather toxic behaviors caused by the ST/CC NDA differences. I've been told that the ST NDA on live testing of ships has relaxed somewhat, which is good. I don't think I'll ever go back to ST though.

I'd say, if there was one thing I'd like the option to remove, it's the aim assist that artificially increases dispersion to "help" get hits when your aim isn't perfect. Make it an option to disable so I can get the best dispersion possible and learn from poor aim rather than struggling for 30 games with some ships dispersion only to realize I'm half a ship length off and the game is "helping" me... Probably the most frustrating way this shows up is with ships that are island camping and moving forwards/backwards.

Hmmm.... no actually. The Alaska fires a 12" APC Mark 18 Mod 1 shell that weighs 1140lbs. Contrast this with the Wyoming's 870lb APC Mark 15 Mod 1-6 shells... This is most certainly within the realm of "Super Heavy" for shells as it's 31% heavier. The shell penetration is also SIGNIFICANTLY higher than that of any other 12" gun the US fielded with comparable penetration rates to the 14"/50's on the New Mexico and Tennessee classes. Here are the NAVWEAPS tables for the 12"/50 on Alaska: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_12-50_mk8.php And for the 12"/45 on the Wyoming: http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_12-50_mk7.php

Sorry for the delay, not on the forums much, but ExploratorOne is absolutely right. I play all ships in a line (including T1's) in my How to Play series. I give as honest of an opinion about a ship as I can. Don't believe me? Go watch my Grozovoi video... no seriously, that ship cost me a friggen monitor and a headset that's how frustrated I was playing it...

Take it from a fellow YouTuber and STer: Pace yourself! :p If your goal is to release 4 videos a day you will probably burn yourself out very quickly! That's a lot of editing (you will do this eventually, you know you will!) to do plus a lot of content to have on hand to upload. I stuck myself to 3 videos a week! Every M/W/F except in rare cases when something comes up. If I only release videos twice in a week it's M/Th but that happens very rarely now. Not only pace yourself, but be consistent! Like with streaming, the more consistent you are, the more likely people are to check in on your channel and see what is going on. Now if you have the free time to do daily releases of that much content, that's great! You should still put a decent amount of effort into it as it will help people feel like they are listening to someone with a bit more credibility. And yes, microphone, microphone, microphone! I use a Blue Yeti on a Rode desk mounted articulating arm. I also use a pop shield. I've done Audio three ways: Unedited, Through OBS, and Recording with Audacity. Unedited: This was done with my teamspeak headset and while it worked, it was obvious I was not using the highest quality mic. I hate my own voice enough as is, even as nice as my Plantronics gaming headset is, it never records audio at quite the same depth as a more realistic microphone. The other thing is, my computer chair squeaks, my keyboard clacks (yay mechanical! :D) and my mouse is loud. All of that gets picked up easily and recorded. Through OBS: When I started becoming more serious about recording and putting out quality content I started editing audio to remove all the things about my audio I hated. To do this I used VLC Player to save a copy of the video as an .ogg file that I could open with Audacity. Once there I edited the audio and then used a video program to combine them back together. Through Audacity Directly: Finally I removed the convert step which took forever to do even on a good computer (about 10 minutes or so on a 15 minute video). By recording direct to Audacity it cut that out of my video editing. Audacity: Best free sound editing software on the market. Very easy to use. I use three of it's built in plugins on my audio: Noise Reduction (I use this to pick up the background noise, clicks and clacks), Compressor (to level out the changes in volume) and Equalizer to add a little bit of bass to my voice and to remove all high pitch sounds such as sibilance (this is that whistle sound some people make when pronouncing "s" sounds). Those three, in that order, make a WORLD of difference to the audio, even using a nice mic! :) If you need any other advice, you know how to get a hold of me! We can meet up in the ST TS and chat too! :)