Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

2 Neutral




    Dido just got slapped

    Dido gets 2 second nerf and Canarias gets giga buff to range, 10 sec reload, speed boost, and double pen with 4,500 ap dmg. these guns on paper are more nasty than the 15 sec reload, 4,600 dmg pensicola, but pensi does not have 16 km range. Canarias should be a good ship that has been hyped up
  2. you are worsening the case for AA being bad when saying that is it not worth building into. also does not help the cpt rework has made getting builds for bbs that are "comparable" more expensive especially for newer players. why would a new player take aa skills when concealment, fp, bb si are so much better for the survivability of a bb that is dealing with cvs and surface ships. "As I believe you are primarily a Battleship player, I can agree that Battleship AA skills are often not a choice you would make. Battleship AA is often sufficient to matter enough for its purpose outside of Battleships that have a specific AA weakness."
  3. except it is not manual, it is "guided". choosing to change ammo is ships with dual purpose guns to choose to shoot planes and not ships would make cvs have to pick ships in combat. it would be far more balanced than the current system EX: imagine if yamato had beehive rounds, 8km away and wacked an entire squad of planes, the cv has fast enough planes to doge but if makes a mistake pays dearly, while yamato has to 1. change rounds 2. aim at aircraft 3. choose to load more aa rounds or change to HE or AP
  4. that is the only choice we have. in order to avoid CVs we do have to move and good CV players know how to heard ships for their team. You should know this
  5. That is beside that fact that AI controlled defense can be exploited, compared to a manual control and having a consistent defense against and enemy that is exposing a unit of attack and scouting to deal damage to a target without exposing your ship. Manual control would limit that ablity that a cv strike can dodge flack as an example of exploiting current AA
  6. how can you disagree with a fact? The interaction between aircraft and surface ships is player controlled v. player damage mitigation. that is not PvP. pvp would be manual control over aa

    PTS 0.10.7

    Hopefully subs will be limited to 2 per team and that is still too many. Subs are as useful as BBs, but BBs can tank and deal damage to all ships types, subs, while stealthy, are slow, have low HP and can hit slower targets most effectively, with the exception of CVs. Subs are more of an inconveniences to other classes, especially cruisers who don't have access to AWS or airstrikes. Much like CVs there are a select few classes that "counter" subs and far fewer that can "mitigate" the small amount of influence that subs have in a game. As ranked is a smaller randoms game mode, adding more ships that provide little impact to winning the game is foolish. Knowing that this feedback message will not stop WG from adding them into the game after an entire year of prepping for their implementation, subs don't fit in the game. There is not nerf or buff that will change the fact that some ships in the game can defend against subs, and others are helpless against them much like CVs, but subs have to expose their ship to deal damage compared to CVs. Why not give all ships the ablity to defend against subs, like: wooster, zao, DM/Salem, RU bbs, German bbs, Goliath, IT bbs, and other cruisers and battleships that are not fitted with some kind of defense against subs like all ships have AA(with varying efficiency against cvs)? but then again what do I know?

    Worst Defeat Ever

    is this good

    WoWS x Warhammer 40,000: Imperium vs Chaos

    when is the 40k event happening. the captain logbook has other flags and patches that are 40k related.