Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

1,568 Superb

About mofton

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

2,005 profile views

    Saddening post - indicates there are still CV players around
  2. At T8-T9 it's not a tremendous problem. Take Aigle for instance, she should be limited by her shell hoists to 10 RPM sustained, or even worse, yet in game she's pretty at 12.5 RPM. Similarly the Leningrad's historic 6-10 becomes 12, and there are more extreme outliers than that. 10'/s in game will probably be adequate enough as a long-range gunboat, it's the same as the British, and the Russians are getting buffed to. If it's not enough well WG have just decided to upgrade Tashkent with Khabarovsk's 20'/s turrets. If you wanted a T10 Mogador you could look at doing the same. No destroyer in game has a rudder shift anything like as bad as that, and I'd be amazed if WG tried to go down that route here. Likewise there seems to be some kind of formula for handling plus balance factors. Khabarovsk is similarly long, thin and fast but gets 760m radius and 11s of shift more as a balance factor, Haragumo's similar. She might not handle well in-game, but I doubt we'll see 1,600m/30s.
  3. Duke of York vs Lyon

    Lyon's one of the few ships I've ever kept. I kept her for the Hermes op, and because I went with a silly full-secondaries build which is occasionally amusing elsewhere. Duke of York does a job I'm not that interested in having done - poor HE spamming T7 battleship.
  4. They could, though that would suggest preternatural knowledge of the British minefields by the Germans. The track record of battleships in the Channel is pretty significant for mine strikes. During the Channel Dash the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau stayed as close to the French coast as possible, but Scharnhorst was mined off the Scheldt Estuary and both she and Gneisenau were mined off Terschelling. Nelson was mined twice in the Channel on 18 June following D-Day. Warspite was mined off Harwich in the southern North Sea shortly after, being the first British battleship to pass through the Channel since 1939. The fact that in 4 years only 2 battleships passed through the Channel, and those that did went straight through as close to their side as they could is pretty telling. While yes, a battleship could maneuver for sure in the Channel, U-turn, do a doughnut whatever, it's still narrow and congested waters. Especially for deep draft battleships which are more restricted in water depth and more vulnerable to mines.
  5. Will you keep Akizuki?

    No way. If I keep her and keep her skipper I'll be at square zero for the Kitakaze. If I keep the ship but bump the skipper up I'll have a T8 which needs a 14pt minimum skipper with nothing. Even without that, T8 matchmaking is not what WG wants you to play, get to T10, get permacamo, get insignia, get top-tiered, get more birthday crates, get another CB ship, get a uniquely legendary upgrade for it. Akizuki's been one of my most unsuccessful T8's, she holds little attraction.
  6. USS Alaska - Dev Blog!

    T10 MM will still include a lot of the T8's, but definitely a lower proportion you're right. WIthout warships.today's nice 2 week stats it's hard to say much, but WOWS numbers has about 7 million lifetime games for Bismarck and Tirpitz combined for instance, while Montana has about 1.6m. In a T10 battle you're still pretty likely to have 1 or 2 of the usual 5 battleships be 15in armed ships, if it's 2 and 40% that's a useful edge. if you can bow tank even one battleship it gives you a nice advantage, especially late game. It's hard to quantify how useful, but having enjoyed myself immensely slaughtering the occasional Bismarck up close in DM when it works, it's a lot of fun.
  7. USS Alaska - Dev Blog!

    The list of premiums is a bit meaningless without weighting them. Ashitaka is incredibly rare for instance, while Missouri is one of the most played T9's. Bismarck and Tirpitz are #1 and #3 most played ships at T8, not just most played battleships. Not all of these occur equally frequently.
  8. Average player WR playing the Seattle right now is probably >55%, it might well be that corrected for playerbase Seattle is underperforming Myself I played a small sample of games with good WR (mostly due to the vagaries of matchmaking) and I still think it's trash. Even if it's not trash, the combination of firing angles, poor traverse and poor range made my 17 games overall unenjoyable and I'm glad I dropped the 100k FXP for Worcester. Seattle's about as ergonomic as a bed of nails.
  9. Very nice, I think they look great. I would love to see more flotilla markings on the funnels with the camouflage and I think they're well rounded out by having hull pennant numbers too, but only named premiums get that. There are a few oddities. In the images Jervis and Icarus lack ASDIC domes on the hull, which they were fitted with, while Gallant and Gadjah Mada (their classmates) do have them. Especially ironic given the consumables... Jean Bart is shown without her premium camo.
  10. I see that point. Fundamentally WG have gone a bit mad with resources. ECXP was a great addition to FXP. Oil has been grossly under-utilized and so far the best I've had from it is to generate coal, it's just sitting there, we've been lucky enough to have all the Clan base buildings since S1 yet it's still 30 oil/player for a CB win... Why both steel and coal have been introduced when one could do is a bit beyond me too. I think if they only appear on the account levels that would make sense, especially as a new player is likely to not have any ECXP or oil until they join a clan etc. Good suggestion.
  11. Would this be so hard? I forget about the new 'Arsenal' a lot of the time, and if I'm curious about how much coal I've gotten recently it means diving into it. Oil currently needs a separate visit to the clan tab and then usually a search. This is not super efficient and the UI isn't precisely a rocket. The other 3 Resources all live happily on the top bar, maybe Elite Captain XP could go there too rather than having to pretend to want to re-spec a captain to trick the UI into showing you. Just a thought.
  12. It's made out to be worse than I think it really should be. The AA DPS is 8.1 per mount, half that of the USN's 5in/38 twin. Given the US mount's advantages in rate of fire that seems potentially fair. What seems unfair is that somehow Shimakaze's 4.7in/50's which were hand cranked, low ROF etc. generate 10 DPS, which is significantly more, while the RN ships have faster traversing turrets (20'/s on Conquerors), fired bigger shells to greater distances, were equipped with VT radar fuses late war and in general should be superior, instead they get 81% of the firepower per turret. I also have no idea how Conq which is rocking Vanguard's upgraded turrets with RP and Mk. 37 FCS gets longer range but identical DPS than the others. The AA range at 4.5km on the KGV-Lion is also unfair in my view. Their fire-control system wasn't the best, but neither was it on a number of ships in WOWS. The 5.25in ends up getting less range than the USN 5in/38 despite having an AA ceiling about 25% higher - not that you'd ever use it, and having a nominal range of 21km vs. 16km at 45' firing angles. The way WG arbitrarily sets the firing range for anti-ship also disadvantages it. The RN gun as a secondary gets the same plane Jane 5km range as most, but should outrange the US 5in/38 gun and should definitely outrange the German 105mm (17km historic range, effective far less) which through the power of 'National Flavor' gets 7km range - ditto the French 100mm. The way WG sets shell damage, putting the 80lb 5.25in gun at 1,900 while the 5in guns of the world get 1,800 firing 50-55lb shells is also not great for it, especially as anti-ship the gun would fire SAP which in combat was very effective against destroyers. The rate of fire is fair, they shouldn't be shredding waves of planes, they shouldn't be burning Bismarck to the waterline, but the way they're in-game seems to use formulas which ignore all their strengths, and magnify the shortcomings.
  13. RN Cruiser Premium?

    It would be nice, but I've somewhat given up. Although it's great that British Destroyers will be coming out sometime this fall, giving the RN a 3rd line merely 18 months after the Germans had theirs released in December 2016, the lack of a British premium cruiser what with Belfast removed from the shop is galling. The UK's not had a premium since the garbage copy-paste DoY given out at Christmas. Since then we've had Makarov, Roma, Musashi, Aigle, Gascogne, Asashio, Kronshtadt, Varyag, Abruzzi, Z-39, Monaghan, Salem, Massachusetts and Haida. The next 2 premiums look like 9dJ and Boise with Stalingrad after this season of CB. Germany has PEF in the pipeline, the US Alaska, and France the Jean Bart. T-61 is apparently read and in limbo. The UK gets Cossack, maybe/eventually after she was first revealed in December 2017. There are currently 11 premium Russian cruisers released or in development, strikethroughs removed from sale: Aurora, Diana, Varyag, Oleg, Krasny Krym, Makarov, Murmansk, Molotov, Kutuzov, Kronshtadt, Stalingrad UK: Belfast France De Grasse Italy D'Aosta, D'Abruzzi Oh well...