SoothingWhaleSongEU

KGV with: It's "proper" armour scheme* and tier 8 hitpoints and the improved Repair Party that it already has. Duke of York's improved AP pen angles. Warspite's damage control party and dispersion. Warspite dispersion with KGV's HE spam might be the wrong kind of fun. *Likewise my my crude understanding is that relatively speaking KGV's armour scheme should be more impressive than it is in but aside from the standardised 32mm bow/stern armour for (most) tier 8 BB's not sure if this is actually true in a way that works with WoWS' mechanics and interpretation of ship's armour schemes.

This is indeed directly confirmed by an old forum post. https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/31444-some-interesting-info-around-the-world/?page=183&tab=comments#comment-1295333

So... I think I've got my head around how the separation of economic bonuses for temporary and perma camo works in my head from the examples given in the dev blog but there are a few outstanding questions. I'm going to recklessly assume that WG is going to ensure everyone who has perma camo now will keep both the economic bonus and the aesthetics. 1. Most perma camos at the same tier gives the same bonus. So having this turn into a single permanent economic bonus with purely cosmetic camo switching would be easy. BUT there are a handful of perma camos that give better bonuses; like the Kobayashi beer can for Roma gives another +20% credits and the Alder Camo for Prinz Eugen gives another +50% commander Likewise there are some perma camos you get from collections that aren't as good as the normal perma camo for that tier like the K117 for Yamato. Will this mean after the update there will be multiple different permanent economic bonuses for these ships? And if you don't already have them with the switch, will you be able to buy the Kobayashi and Alder economic bonuses? Will the camo aesthetics and the bonus be packaged together or sold separately? 2. I get the idea of turning existing consumable camos into the equivalent consumable economic bonuses And whilst many of the consumable camos are brightly-coloured fever dream nightmares; a few aren't and might actually want to be used. So do you also have limited use purely cosmetic camo paint consumables? Or do the camo patterns all become permanent and you simply switch between them? Was I accidentally playing 4D chess by choosing to keep one of every type of camo, or am I merely Boo The Fool? 3. I really don't see how replacing the fixed service cost reduction with a credit multiplier works unless it like wise is just a fixed number.

In the same boat. The idea of being able to change the cosmetics of your camo independently from the bonuses is something I have wanted. But this is a far more convoluted method than I feel is required. Simply having a second dropdown list where you select the aesthetics from available camo for that ship would have been enough.

Farewell and thank you. Best wishes for your future.

Best wishes for your future and your family.

I've tried to make a very vague effort to map the age of ships vs their in game tier in the past. Very, very roughly Tier 8 is where lots of iconic WW2 ships are but it is a far from perfect match. A few destroyers that actually sailed in WW2 also turn up in the highest tiers, with fewer cruisers and battleships. Likewise more real USS ships make it to the top tiers, but some are post war. I find that battleships tend to match quite well with a set tier but there are exceptions with a few ships like the Scharnhorst and Dunkerque classes. The IJN is curious for having a big gap in completed battleships between sister ships t6 Mutsu (1921) and T7 Nagato (1920) until Yamato and Musashi. T2 is Mikasa alone from 1902. T3 is Dreadnought (1906) and her generations and second to approx. 1912 with 12" guns T4 is mostly just before WW1 (~1912-1914), most also using 12" with some pushing towards 13.5" T5 is the solid WW1 Dreadnoughts and Battlecruisers (~1913-1916) mostly with 14" guns. This also includes Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya which is *literally* T4 Gangut that had gone under drastic modernisation in the 1930s. T6 is the top dogs of WW1 with 15" guns, the Queen Elizabeth & Bayern (~1915-1918) or around 12 14" like New Mexico, Arizona and Fuso. T7 are the post war 1920's era with the iconic Big 7 of Washington Naval Treaty: the Nagato, Nelson, and Colorado classes. All 3 had 16" guns.(Even if Mutsu and West Virginia are lower tier premiums) They're joined by ships like the Hood which slightly predate them and Scharnhorst class from later in the 1930s. The King George V (1939 rather than 1911...)* are somewhat controversially down here rather than being at tier 8 with their contemporary peers. T8 are the Pride of the navies of WW2. North Carolina, South Dakota, Bismarck, Richelieu and Littorio classes. Most had 16" or higher performing 15" guns. T9 is Iowa class and the classes that were planned but never made it like Lion, Alsace, H-39. Also Sovetsky Soyuz which was a bit older but actually being built. However CV's ruined everything so these never got built. Iowa, Missouri, Musashi and Jean Bart actually sailed (although the latter was not completed during the war despite seeing if it saw action with a duel vs USS Massachussetts). T10 is Yamato which was built and Montana which was I believe a design considered ready to be built.... and then WG has to scape the barrel a bit for concepts and vague blue prints. It's *not* perfect and a few later models with low calibre guns are perhaps a tier lower than their contemporaries (Scharnhorst and Dunkerque classes) The work by: https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/142930-detailed-list-of-real-and-paper-ships/ is excellent, if perhaps a bit outdated now with a more lines and Premiums announced. They used @Phoenix_jz excellent threads on this forum as a basis. Go have a look at both if you've not seen them.

Goodness, this is a trashfire and a half. Thank you as always to LWM and Chobittsu* for the work you've both put in. Turns out you were doing even more than we thought all along. Hope something good will come out of it eventually, even if you've decided to move on.

Farewell and all the best. Thank you for your professionalism with a difficult job.

You get it by completing the High School Fleet collaboration collection. https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:High_School_Fleet_Collection There was an event earlier this month but I believe it ended on 10th May. https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/sales-and-events/high-school-fleet-returns-to-wows/

I honestly thought I'd misremembered my douboons to £ formula with this rule of thumb with this one...

FYI the Forum Guidelines do discourage randomly commenting on very long dead threads. And this one is almost 6 years old and predates the official release of the game by a month IIRC. The actual answer to this subject and why they introduced the fixed after battle service cost was that when repair cost was variable, it encouraged players to run and hump the border to try and survive the battle if it went remotely badly... even more than players do now.

I rather like the idea of accuracy (dispersion and/or sigma) increasing with repeat salvos on the same target. Other things, less sure about.

Thanks as always for the review LWM, if nothing else it serves as a very nice comparison of the different 20 or so tier 8 battleships. Is there some sort of arcane numerology with Flandre having the most hit points and Champagne having the least amongst the tier 8 BBs? Is Gascogne the exact centre? Is Pythagoras speaking to us through triangles again? I thought the battlecruiser dispersion, squishy nose & butt with one less heal, sniper battleship template was *odd* but it at least it had an identity and niche, even if I didn't like it. I'm really not sure why "12 guns, slow reload, one less heal" is a template they seem to want to try, with Hizen and now Flandre. Is it to make Roma and Gascogne look good? Should be praising the existence of mediocre, gimickless Premiums over the overpowered ones that invariably get swiftly removed from sale?

The wiki is likely your friend. https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Consumables#Repair_Party Likewise https://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Gunnery_and_Aiming#Accuracy