Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

86 Good

About LAnybody

  • Rank
    Master Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

361 profile views
  1. LAnybody

    Halsey In Georgia?

    EL is not a waste on the French BBs (at least, Richeliu, Jean Bart, or Republic). Having the right ammo is really important given their small number of guns. But yeah, on every other BB, it's not really useful.
  2. LAnybody

    This is not OK...

    I'm perfectly OK with nerfing AA on BBs and CA/CLs a bit. They should be a bit softer targets for torpedo bombers and dive bombers. But two things really do have to change: Rocket planes need to SERIOUSLY have their damage and accuracy nerfed. it's just far too easy to nuke a DD, and they are extraordinary overpowered at end-game, where having a near-automatic 5k+ damage on anything is really not OK. AP bombers just need to go. They're toxic for gameplay and the implementation is broken. Seriously, I regularly see them score citadels on CLs, and the whole point of AP bombs is that they're for HEAVY armor. Not to mention that they encourage camping and clumping. Just get rid of the things.
  3. LAnybody

    Harugumo — Japanese Tier X destroyer.

    It would be fine with a /5 rather than a /4 pen on its HE. That would radically cut down on the speed with which it can melt BBs and CAs. Same goes for the Akizuki and Kitikaze. Having them be able to pen 32mm of armor is just way too much. 25mm (with IFHE) of pen is more reasonable. Would make people actually learn how to use AP.
  4. LAnybody

    Torpedo rationing

    There is an issue here, though. Single torp spreads take time to shoot. And you can be very prone to either shooting too many (you only meant to shoot one launcher, but ended up into the next launcher) or not enough (you leave one in the launcher), which REALLY hurts your reload times. There's a lot of times where using the fan is the far better choice. One-by-one works really well when you've got the time to set it up, and watch what you're doing. it's really not a good idea if you're trying to react or really in a jam.
  5. LAnybody

    HMS Rodney free XP ship

    Torpedoes on all British battleships would be practically useless to play with. They were all fixed position, submerged tubes. Not trainable deck tubes. You'd have to line the entire ship up to use them, which even in a close combat is highly unlikely to be worth it. Not to mention crappy balance.
  6. LAnybody

    Yoshino Torps

    Zao is just fine - it's got nice armor, great concealment, great guns, and now, very good torps. The Yoshino is a terrible thing, and does nothing but contribute to the no-skill torp spam. The Shima need a lot of help, as the torps are still substandard in all versions. It's concealment is no longer able to make up for this, and the gun buffs were pretty cosmetic.
  7. For anything relying on torpedoes or which expects to use torpedoes regularly, PM is infinitely preferrable to PT. it seriously cuts down on the incidents of getting your torps knocked out mid-reload, which causes a FULL RESET in your torp load time. That's incredibly painful, and ludicrous that WG does this. It's horridly unbalanced. Frankly, PT is really only useful for the French DDs, IMHO. And they're pieces of junk.
  8. LAnybody

    British Skipper - IFHE Vs.RDF

    This is one of the big flaws in the pen system being used, as well as the bounce/overmatch mechanics. Both put in arbitrary cliffs, instead of smooth curves, which cause a LOT of problems in balance and play. If instead of the pen and overmatch mechanics, WoWS just had smooth probability curves based on angle and armor thickness, we'd have no need for IFHE or worrying about armor thickness vs caliber. It's one of several fundamental flaws in WoWS that unfortunately will never be fixed.
  9. LAnybody

    Shimakaze Build

    The two big problems with the Shima right now aren't really intrinsic to it, per se. There's been a LOT of power creep, and that's impacted the Shima's dominance in stealth very badly. There are several other DDs that now have stealth close enough to the Shima's to make virtually no difference, and all of them outgun the Shima. In addition, while Radar can be worked around, but it forces a playstyle that exposes the prime weakness of IJN DDs these days: AWFUL dispersion for a FAR TOO WIDE torp spread. Due to the lack of concealment, you're forced to take significantly further away torp shots. That is, for most people, under 10km is pretty difficult to pull off. The issue is that at 10km, it's far more difficult to hit anything than even other DDs, as the torps are far, far, far too spread apart, leaving massive gaps that even a GKF can turn inside.
  10. LAnybody

    DD candidates for Tier 7 Ranked Sprint

    Because premiums tend to be - by far - the most likely to be severely unbalanced. You get a major "pay to win" problem. Moreover, even if premiums were perfectly balanced, the very fact that WG allows them to be bought anytime, with no preconditions, means there are a LOT of people driving premiums that don't know how to play the game. It's the old Wallet Warrior problem: you're able to buy a T7 (or T8 or whatnot) and play Ranked, even if you still haven't gotten over (say) Tier 4 in anything, and don't have a clue about how the game works at T7, or even many basic concepts of the game mechanics. So, allowing premiums into Ranked (and Clan Battles, and such) means the quality of play suffers very measurably. There's a lot of mediocre people using overpowered ships with an unfair advantage, and you get (franky incompetent) potatoes spending money to play where they don't belong. Moreover, in case you didn't know, many premiums have hidden XP bonuses. Not cammo, but BASE XP bonuses. Which matters in Ranked due to how promotions and demotions are handled. It's quite possible for me to outplay someone, but, due to that hidden BaseXP bonus, they get a higher BaseXP than I do - and, if we lose, that means they, the less deserving person, doesn't get punished while I do. These problems are also present in Randoms and CoOp, but their impact is far less, for a number of reasons. Profit is important, but ultimately, if the game suffers in quality, you lose players, and revenue goes down. So pursuing profit at the expense of player enjoyment is short-sighted. Not to mention that it discourages people from buying your product if you screw them over just because you haven't bought *everything* from them.
  11. LAnybody

    How bad is it?

    I am primarily a cruiser and DD player in NA, but all classes in EU and Russia. I play for the team, not just myself. 5 second spotting works fabulous for team play, and I simply don't just bore right in to attack heavily defended targets. Spot for 5 seconds to figure out where everyone is, retreat, then come back for another 5 seconds, rinse, repeat. Your team gets the hint fast, and they shoot when I spot. I don't need continuous spotting to have them be murderously effective. I get well over 100k or so spotting damage each game without too much problems. And 5 seconds is more than enough to locate an isolated DD for murder. If you're playing naive, sure, you get shredded. But that's the equivalent of saying that DDs suck because if you charge the enemy, you die, or that CAs have it bad because you can't stand still out in the open to just blast away. Flying straight into clouds of flack gets you murdered, as does trying to penetrate 3 or 4 ship clusters. But again, that's naive play. AA is manageable, and is generally ineffective after about a third of the game. CVs are one of the few classes that get MORE effective the longer the game lasts. CVs spot (which includes figuring out how the enemy team is deploying, so YOUR team can counter), and harrass DDs the first third of the game - works very well, and you don't lose much in the way of planes doing it. It's murder on the DDs, because unless they huddle near their cruisers (in which case, they're effectively a mission-kill), and rocket planes are their bane. Most of the EU players have figured out how to nuke DDs easily, down to 50% health using just the attacks from a single rocket plane squad. 3k by 3, and that's 9k off a DD, who can't do anything about it. Once you get to the 7 minute mark, it's easy to pick off any lone ship with bombers or torps. And there's very little that ships can do to stop that. In Randoms, virtually no team has the ability (i.e. teamwork) to stay in AA clusters beyond the first 5 minutes or so. And the cruisers on your side simply decimate enemy AA effectiveness by HE spam. By the 8 minute mark, 75% of your opponents are helpless against you - only the untouched ships and the few pairs of supporting ships are remotely dangerous to a CV. A typical BB has lost well over half it's AA potential by that time, cruisers are down a third or more, easily. And everyone is spread out enough that they can't mutually support each other. Due to plane speed, it's quite simple to fly around the dangerous AA bumbles that still exist, and whack the vulnerable ships. So yeah, you have lots of problems if you're blundering around like a bull in a china shop, thinking you can just blat whatever comes your way. That's the way it was in 0.8.0, but isn't anymore. But the rest of the problems that CVs cause are still there, and their attacks are very effective when played with thought, not bravado. T8 CVs certainly have major problems in T10 games (as do T6 CVs in T8 games). But they're completely dominant otherwise. I can even play really dumb against T7 opponents in a T8 CV and completely [edited] them using naive tactics. Just sank a T7 Gneisenau from 95% health (and full AA) using a single squad of dive bombers, and that's pretty common. CVs are not damage monsters, but they dominate the game nonetheless, and in exactly the ways and reasons I outlined above, which you still haven't managed to explain why I'm wrong. All I hear is whining about how planes can't attack due to super-bad-AA, which is provably wrong. I am nowhere near a unicum CV player - about middle of the pack in EU, yet all that I've said is practiced by the average EU player, not just the top 1%. And did you read what I said in prior posts. I don't play CVs on the NA server, because the quality of CV play on NA is atrocious compared to EU (both was and still is). I play them on EU and Russian. Which won't show up looking at this ID. Moreover, I don't know where you got those percentages, since they're wildly wrong - I'm about 58/29/13 CA/DD/BB in NA Try something other than an ad hominem attack.
  12. LAnybody

    A-150 "Super Yamato" Name Suggestions

    With only a little tongue-in-cheek, I'd have named them: "Great Floating Target" and "Divine Sacrifice to Davey Jones" Given what is known about them, and the constraints enforced, they would have been hideously useless, massively vulnerable, and ineffective as a combatant. They had virtually no useful AA, would have been shorter in length and much deeper in draft (and thus, slow and unmaneuverable, even by Yamato standards), with a very slow ROF on a ship that had a lack of guns and mediocre fire control, and (amazingly) with sub-par protection. Big caliber guns makes up for none of that.
  13. LAnybody

    How to burn a ton of coal...

    Nope. JB has 32mm of bow armor, which can only be overmatched by the Yammi/Musashi 18.1" guns, nothing else. The major issue with the JB is that it does not have much more than 32mm armor over pretty much all of the ship, which means it's hugely vulnerable to virtually all HE spammers you see. Well, the other issue being that it's main guns lack real punch, so you have to be satisfied with mostly pens, and not citadels, on Heavy Cruisers and BBs.
  14. LAnybody

    How bad is it?

    Who cares? This is my 5th account, and I don't play CV on the NA server. I play CV on the EU one, mostly, sometimes on the Russian. I've got an aggregate of 15,000 Random battles across 3+ years of play, about 2000 of that in CVs. Moreover, I'm talking about the META, which affects all ships by how the CVs work. You don't need to specifically play CVs to comment on the meta changes. Moveover, I was presuming the OP had played CVs prior to the rework, so was familiar with how they HAD worked (and what the meta was like then). CV vs CV isn't about attacking the other CV. It was priorly about the PLANES attacking each other. I presumed people understood that from the comment about fighters. Obviously, I gave everyone too much credit for thinking. Prior to the rework, CV players battled each other in the air, and it was a BIG part of the play. Now, you just ignore the other CV's planes, from a practical matter. Even the "fighter drops" aren't really of anything other than a minor consequence, and certainly don't have even a 10th of the effect the prior system had. Spotting briefly is a HUGE deal, because it lets you get an excellent view of the entire team's movement, and mostly nullifies maneuvers. If you're losing planes doing brief spotting, you're doing it wrong. This is a function of the 3x or more speed increase in plane speed, as well as the far more rapid ability to redeploy squads. CVs now have the ability to spot stuff on the entire map, with very little delay, so sneaking around is an order of magnitude harder. You no longer can just hover over a ship, keeping them continuously spotted, as before the rework. But that's not really a big loss - you briefly spot a ship for 5 seconds, every 10-15 seconds or so. Your team still can lay down VERY effective fire, as they just hold their fire until you spot, they fire, then you circle around while they reload. Rinse, repeat. Only if you're incompetent, and blunder around straight into AA clouds or attack 3+ ships in a cluster. It's quite simple to avoid losing planes in both cases. Even still you obviously will lose planes. But again, the gap in effectiveness between the "OK", "Good" and "Very Good" is huge. CV do NOT have a finite number of planes. You can always launch a squad. This is slightly offset due to having only one squad active at a time. While te rearm time is up somewhat, that's mostly irrelevant, because you can always quickly launch a squadron of some other type of plane. But you can still blunder about the entire game, take massive plane losses, and have effective attacks in the late game. There's no danger of being coming combat ineffective like there was before. Especially since they removed fighters from being any real factor in the game. DDs are still quite easy to spot. Sure, the distance is low, but it's not 2km. It's closer to 3km or more. And who cares about reality. This is a video game, and everything doesn't mimic reality. At the speeds that planes move, it's easy to cover large amounts of ocean, making spotting sweeps simple. DDs are not really any harder to spot now than they were prior to the rework. And CV attacks against DDs are ludicrously more effective than before, not to mention that spotting them is both easier, and far longer duration than before, because even now, DD AA is pretty much completely ineffective (VERY few DDs have even mediocre AA). DDs suffer more in the current meta because it's far easier to spot them with fast sweeps, they have virtually no AA defense, and CV rocket and bomber planes are HIGHLY effective against the low-HP ships. That makes it easy to remove the DD's main defense: stealth. And just being able to spot them removes any chance that they can be effective, since DDs live and die by not being spotted. If you can easily determine where a DD is, your team can counter them easily. Oh, and effective blind shooting of rocket planes and bombers into smoke is now an order of magnitude simpler than before. Nope. The skill gap between "beginner" and "very good" in other ships is noticeable, but not anywhere near as consequential as it is for CVs. That was one of the problems before the the rework, and was SUPPOSED to be something they were trying to address. They failed miserably. The #1 indicator of which team wins is the skill of that side's CVs. That is, for the most part, one player. No other ship type comes even close to that kind of impact. Really, what are you doing? Flying straight into AA clouds? Unless they're in a superAA cruiser, full squads have no problem putting through 3 attacks. DDs are especially vulnerable to 3 attacks, but BBs are as well. You run out of the AA bubble of most ships quite fast, and, as long as you're not doing something dumb like actually trying to turn around right after you pass over, losses are low. Not to mention that CVs now can retain full squads late into the game now (provided, again, you're not a naive, blundering about), and AA effectiveness drops off a cliff after about the 6 minute mark, as HE spam removes AA in droves. I have no problem triple-striking things like an Atlanta in a T8 CV, I just don't do it until about the 7 minute mark. Seriously, even after repeated AA buffs, it's quite easy to do 3 strikes per squad on anything but the toughest AA ship or cluster of ships. If you're having problems, that's not indicative of the state of the game at all, but rather refusal to make basic adjustments to your playing style, which appears very naive. Are you even playing CVs? Seriously? Prior to the rework, a CV got one attack after it's ship had died, and you had to line up the attack BEFORE you died. While planes remained until they ran out of gas, they just circled, and you couldn't command them. Now, you get to fly the squadron around until it runs out of gas. You get 2+ minutes of effective play after your ship dies. Sure, you only get a max of 3 attacks, but you can do a LOT of highly effective stuff in that 2+ minutes, especially since everything is such low HP that often single attacks are sufficient to kill. How many DDs at end-game have more HP left than the 3k damage that a good rocket plane attack can do IN ONE PASS, let alone 3? It's not one last tag. Its 120 seconds of spotting, plus 2 or 3 HIGHLY effective attacks possible. Being able to scout the entire map after you've died is of insane usefulness, and you retain the ability to drastically alter the game outcome long after you died. The amount of game effect a dead CV has is ludicrously zombie-like. Obviously, not very much, if you're still having that much problems, and not using the planes to their potential, as indicated by your comments. As I pointed out above, even after repeated AA buffs, AA is NOT very nasty - it's merely potent at the very beginning of the game, when stuff is still heavily clumped together and everyone hasn't lost their AA to HE spam. That situation changes VERY rapidly, to the point that AA is quite ineffective for most ships past the 7 minute mark. Even in the beginning, CVs are hugely effective against DDs. Remember, this isn't just about direct attacks, this is about the change in meta. Having a huge impact is more than just causing direct damage. Torp damage has been nerf'd, certainly. However, rocket attacks are ludicrously powerful (given how easy it is to hit with them), and bombers remain VERY potent across all opponent types. CVs don't generally have 1-strike-kill capability. But that doesn't mean they're not highly effective at causing large amounts of damage, FAR more than they did before the rework. That's because it's both damage-over-time, and because the success rate of individual attacks is VASTLY higher than it was before. Rocket attacks hit upwards of 80% of the time. Bomber attacks are well over 60% hits. While you do less damage per attack than before the rework, you now get 3 attacks in short timeframes, each with a relatively good chance of causing damage. Take a look at the stats: CV damage per game is up significantly. Not to mention that the way the meta has been altered by CV performance causes far more camping, lemming trains, less aggressive play, and heavily crippled an entire class's ability to do it's primary job. That's long been known, and doesn't address the reasons why the CV rework made DDs far easier to spot and kill. For the most part, it's really annoying to hear players talk about how the CV rework hasn't really changed anything, that people who haven't bothered to actually learn how to play their CV spout off stuff that is easily disproved. CVs have been nerfed from the 0.8.0 release, where they were god-like in power. They're still by far the most impactful thing in a game, and the meta has been altered drastically in ways that DON'T improve the gameplay at all, as I pointed out. The fundamental problem with the rework is that it solved NONE of the problems the old CVs had, and instead both introduced a bunch of new problems, and altered the meta game in a direction that severely negatively impacted the enjoyment of everyone.
  15. LAnybody

    My god the Kongsberg is squishy.

    For the German 150mm guns, adding IFHE changes their pen from 37mm to 48mm. I'm not aware of anything that has 38mm to 48mm of armor on it in T4 through T7 - everything is either less than 37mm or more than 49mm. Which makes IFHE worse than useless (as it enforces a loss of Fire Chance). The Konigsberg's 150mm without IFHE will pen bow and stern armor of ANY ship it sees. It will pen the deck armor of any ship it sees (I think). It will pen the upper deck hull armor of any cruiser it sees, but not of any BB. It should pen armors of secondaries for anything it sees. It won't pen turret armor of most cruisers or BBs it sees. It won't pen the main belt armor of any cruiser or BB. It will pen every part of any DD. IFHE won't change any of that. DON'T use IFHE on any of the ships that have the /4. It's only useful in very limited situations for those ships, and then really only for memes, not practical play.