Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

Community Reputation

37 Neutral

About b101uk

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

394 profile views
  1. Operation Hermes still has the likes of tier VIII Bismarck and Tirpitz etc that fall within the 8.8km manual secondary range and other tier VII ones too. and as I said, how do you reconcile that the IFHE spac commander was doing less damage via fire because there were fewer instances of fire and the gain in direct secondary damage was at best negligible most of the time, so all told was on-average doing less cumulative damage, given in both cases secondary's were the only methods of fire starting given the mains fired exclusively AP thus were NOT contributing to fire starting etc. i.e. if IFHE speced commander was doing at best ~10k more direct secondary damage BUT was doing on average ~15k less fire damage, then damage wise there is a deficit ~5k damage to the commander without IFHE, who may be doing less direct damage but is doing more fire damage, or using your image to illustrate if the commander had IFHE and for the 326 secondary hits if he did 17754 direct damage and 20000 fire damage is that better or worse than 7754 direct damage and 33389 fire damage, or is there a deficit of damage? after all tier IX and X are not indicative of all the rest of the tiers in the main, and lots of players who have reached tier IX or X in 1 or more lines still spend a lot of time playing tier V, VI and VII, so for a bulk of the player base who don't exclusively spend their time at tier IX or X should they follow like sheep and kowtow to all opinion that IFHE is best because paper maths at high tiers and because XYZ et al said so, given also the propensity for spamming HE from their BB's mains, which obfuscates simple reading and comparison of secondary battery HE direct damage and fire damage.
  2. I did an experiment in operation Hermes using two commanders in the same ship (Gascogne), the 19 point commander had IFHE, the other commander had 15 points and didn't have IFHE but otherwise all the skills were the same. the result was, on average the commander without IFHE was doing more cumulative damage, given for the test I used exclusively AP in the main guns so fire damage could only come from secondary's and the damage caused by the main guns was omitted and only secondary and fire damage were used then divided by number of secondary hits. I put it down to the fact that when you have a low e.g. 5% fire chance and take IFHE as a skill, that -1% to fire chance represents -20% cut to the chance of causing a fire, thus it was relatively noticeable by the lower amount of fire ribbons.
  3. Next new tech tree?

    1 yak could easily pull 2CV
  4. the RN line isn't broken per se, what is broken the notion that BB's would fire HE at other fighting ships with their main guns, when most BB's only carried limited quantity of HE for their main guns specifically for shore bombardment.
  5. using pre 1925 data, the 457mm for their given shell mass they were not that far behind Yamato's 460mm in terms of kinetic energy at the muzzle given the almost 20 years between the two. in fact using a 1506kg shell in the intervening years between 1920 and ~1943, if there was a gain of JUST 12m/s in muzzle velocity, the 457mm would exceed that of Yamato's 460mm in terms of kinetic energy at the muzzle. and given most of the existing 457mm components had either been scrapped or converted to other calibres for testing purposes before the 1930's, had Conqueror got beyond being a paper ship is 457mm would have been made using the then's latest forging and manufacturing practices and NOT pre 1925 practices and would also have been using 40's era propellant charges, which granted many RN BB's from the WW1 era far more muzzle velocity increase than just 12m/s.
  6. Next new tech tree?

    being Mongolia, Yaks are used for heavy pulling........
  7. keeping the chat open post game seams like a method to increase toxicity and apportion blame etc etc more so than continuing meaningful conversation, given the masses rather than the minority who may find it useful.
  8. WG: Possible FPS/lag fix

    much like Edna Mode and capes
  9. What's going to happen Indi?

    I don't really see they can do much, though giving her a repair party with 1 charge (2 with premium repair party or superintended, or 3 with superintended AND premium repair party) or having it replace radar so you can only have one or the other could push her firmly into tier VII and would probably see her played more.
  10. I guess less than the majority, but by no means an edge-case in respect of BB's, PvE/operations or premium ships at lest.
  11. None of my three 19pt commanders (USN/RN/MN) have Concealment Expert and they are primarily BB commanders first and foremost, on the other hand nearly all my cruiser and DD commanders that are between 10pt and 15pt have Concealment Expert, but as I have quite a lot of premium ships some of the cruiser commanders will serve as alternative BB commanders too. Now granted my 19pt commanders are mainly orientated to PvE/operations, but I don't really feel there is very much disadvantage in normal random PvP when I play them either, given I have traded Concealment Expert for Manual Secondary's and given the prevalence of HE spam have taken Fire Prevention, while Advanced Fire Training pushes out the AA for CV games and secondary bubbles for the inevitable closer-in exchanges, while on tier VII ships and above (with the exception of Belfast) I take the Target Acquisition System Modification 1 for the extra +20% torpedo spotting range and 3km minimum spotting range to make closing in on smoke easer. After all Concealment Expert is only good for so much, after which it becomes a useless ornament, given if the rest of the team is working well its not needed, while in the latter half of the game skills relating to closer-in fighting come to the fore as you push for a CAP or towards smoked up positions or have that inevitable secondary range contact or torpedoes appearing out of nowhere.
  12. my FXP and EXP are most of the time relatively low (>1 <100k) as I am actively still spending it, e.g. at this moment in time I have ~7500FXP and ~60000EXP, but in an hour of so my EXP will be back down to ~0EXP. on the other hand I have millions of potential FXP, if only for the money to convert it.
  13. yet the RN have some of the longest confirmed hits during real battles in real weather and sea conditions at many different calibres, so "never came close" is rather subjective outside of "on-paper" arguments.
  14. with 12,928 posts, probability says you have written "then" when you meant "than" etc, not because you don't know the difference, but because the "E" and the "A" on your keyboard are quite close and the rest of the letters in the words are the same, which makes it easy to miss. perhaps you should review your 12,928 posts and correct your own mistakes of then vs than?
  15. it seams to be something of a problem with the "War to the Knife!" & "The Heat of the Fight" etc missions in that despite being available until Mar. 16, 04:20 PT (07:20 ET) for VII-VIII French battleships or cruisers in Scenario ONLY, they are no longer possible because the Scenario has switched to a tier VI limit ship limit one. https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/common/march-of-nations/