Jump to content

Vaidency

Members
  • Content count

    1,201
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    8185

Community Reputation

496 Excellent

About Vaidency

  • Rank
    Lieutenant Junior Grade
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

1,109 profile views
  1. Ok, so what you guys are getting at is that this ship, a tier 8 which is fairly powerful at tier 8, needs to be buffed so it can compete with tier 10's. That's not how the tier system is supposed to work.
  2. Shaving just 12 seconds off the nearly 2-minute reload time on the torpedoes really isn't going to make much difference. Sure, maybe sometimes you'll get them back up just in time to launch on an enemy who would have gotten behind an island in another 15 seconds, but those situations will be rare. And any time your torpedoes finish reloading and you don't launch them again within 12 seconds the module will be effectively giving you no bonus at all. On the other hand, having your torpedo tubes more easily damaged and rotating like heavy cruiser turrets will be really negative drawbacks that probably come into play a lot more often than the 12 seconds saved on reloads. I don't have the module yet on my Shimakaze but I'm not expecting to like it.
  3. American Tin?

    The guns would only have 2.5 km range but the shell travel time would be so long with a 213 m/s muzzle velocity and howitzer firing angles you'd still have to give substantial lead. I love it.
  4. Nation battles

    It's irrelevant whether or not the nations are balanced because the ships that were implemented in this game were all balanced around the assumption of international teams supporting them. Russian DD's are not good at capping. French cruisers are not good at hunting DD's. British cruisers (with the sole exception of Minotaur) do not provide decent AA support. Japanese BB's are not very good at pushing. Trying to force these ships into those roles by depriving them of the kind of mixed teammates they usually have won't tell you much except for how this very limited game mode plays out. It would probably be dominated by the USN, by the way. Their DD's can win cap fights, their cruisers can hunt DD's, their BB's can push and they'd be one of only two factions with CV's at all. The worst faction would clearly be the Russians at tier 6+ because they'd have no BB's, no CV's and DD's that aren't good at capping. There is no way that a team consisting entirely of destroyer leaders and fire support cruisers is going to be competitive against an equally skilled team with access to other ship types.
  5. First off, it was always pretty strange that the tier 10 IJN CA had the shortest range torpedoes of any of them. Even the tier 5 Furutaka has a 10 km torpedo option. Sure, the F3 has great speed and damage, but those are far less valuable than having long enough range to enable a stealth launch. And second, a modest buff to the Zao was not unreasonable. The ship has basically just been a slightly worse Hindenburg for some time. Giving it something interesting and useful that Hindenburg can't do (like stealth torpedo) is a good way to give the ship a distinctive flair and make it a bit more competitive.
  6. A question for DD captains

    It has nothing to do with a realistic assessment of what a 16" shell does to a ship. We all know that the game makes major adjustments in order to make all ship types roughly equivalent in power because a battleship would otherwise be far more powerful than a cruiser or a destroyer. This is purely an issue of game balance and design. There are three major factors: First, battleships generally have little to fear from cruisers, especially in the mid tiers, so proper balance should dictate that they fear something else. Tier 4 to 8 cruisers live in constant fear of being deleted by a battleship AP salvo. Why should destroyers too? Second, there is a risk of battleship AP being too universally useful. If you can just Devastating Strike a destroyer with AP shells the same way you do everything else, it lowers the skill ceiling for battleship play. Third, while destroyers are the most elusive ship type, they also have the most risky attack method. Torpedoes have very low hit rates when fired from more than about 8 km away, and being spotted at inside 8 km makes evasion very difficult. With low hitpoints and no armor to prevent overmatches, you're bound to take a beating if you get spotted on a torpedo run, even if they're all overpens. Taking penetrating hits at that point just feels like piling on.
  7. Possible Solution to Radar

    If there's a problem with radar being too strong, it should be scaled back a bit in power or availability, but giving destroyers a way to just neutralize their intended counter is silly. That's like giving cruisers a consumable that temporarily makes all their armor 400 mm thick so they can bounce battleship shells whenever they need to.
  8. The trouble with BBs

    This is a ridiculous statement. Battleships have, by far, the most hitpoints, best armor schemes and best repair capabilities. They are vastly more capable of weathering enemy fire than any other ship type. This does not mean you can always survive extended focus fire from multiple enemies or get away with sloppy positioning, but you absolutely can survive beatings no other ship type would even come close to enduring.
  9. I won't stand for any video games being a waste of time! I demand productivity from my gaming hours!
  10. DD XP....Seriously?

    He did about 50% damage to a pair of lower tier BB's and then did some trivial damage to two other ships. He got no caps but did have 39k spotting damage. He also didn't get sunk and his team won the game. That probably should be enough to at least not lose credits even without a premium account.
  11. Ramming mechanics are really weird. If two ships just hit each other coming from roughly opposite directions it simply deals damage equal to each ship's maximum hitpoints, but strange stuff happens if enemy ships collide at very low speed, especially if a faster ship catches up to a slower enemy and rams them from behind while they're both going in roughly the same direction. Then both ships start taking damage rapidly but I think the lighter one takes damage faster? It's a strange scenario that doesn't come up often but it's confusing.
  12. I think the most important pieces of information the game fails to give out are the penetration and overmatch ratios. These numbers are absolutely crucial in determining how good the armor is on a ship but they're not a part of the UI at all. Any experienced player can tell you that Yamato's 460 mm guns are much better than Conqueror's 457 mm guns, and it's not just because of Yamato's better dispersion and sigma. It's because of the arbitrary and hidden overmatch ratio that WG made up combined with another arbitrary decision to give many ships exactly 32 mm of extremity armor. All those 32 mm armored sections are just barely able to bounce 457 mm shells when angled, but offer no protection at all from 460 mm.
  13. Concealment expert

    Replace CE with a new 4-point skill that is more in line with the other 4-point skills.
  14. Given that a second line of USN BB's would just be several more 21-knot dreadnaughts like Florida, Nevada and Pennsylvania with some obscure design studies for higher tiers, I don't think it would generate a ton of excitement. Plus the fact we already have 7 USN standard BB's in the game as-is. No rush, WG.
  15. Concealment expert

    I agree. Concealment Expert should probably just be removed from the game. As the original post notes, it's seen as near-mandatory for almost every ship, which is a pretty obvious indicator that it's simply overpowered compared to other captain skills. It's a big barrier to entry for new players (especially new players trying DD's) because you're at a huge disadvantage if you don't have it yet. This makes it a big element in seal clubbing. Also, the way it's implemented is stupid. It should not be more effective for BB's than it is for cruisers. The fact it allows some BB's to achieve cruiser-equivalent concealment is just obnoxious. 60,000 ton battleships should not be getting their concealment down to 12 km.
×