Search the Community

Showing results for tags '0.6.0'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News and Announcements
    • Patch notes
    • Contests And In-Game Competitions
    • Support
    • The Pigeon's Nest
    • Player Gatherings and Events
    • Surveys
  • General Gameplay Discussion
    • General Discussion
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests

Calendars

There are no results to display.


Found 24 results

  1. So, Kelorn posted a very good commander skills guide yesterday, but he mentioned he didn't address DD skills due to not being as strong in DDs as he is in other ships. So I said I'd write a capt skills guide for DDs since I'm a DD main. Here it is. Intro and bona fides: I am above average in destroyer play (1117 WTR, 57% win rate over last 90 days), but certainly not unicum. I certainly advise players to look at multiple sources for advice besides this guide, as there are differing opinions as to optimal captain skills and I dislike the mentality many have of 'this is the one twue way to play DDs', but my captain builds do work well for my playstyle. I tend to play very aggressively in DDs, but I also prioritize winning over dealing damage and getting kills. For example, if I need to flex across the map to defend something or to cap when we need a cap, I do that even if it means lower personal damage, because I play for the win. On DDs that are pure damage-dealers like Khabarovsk, I may play more of a DPM-oriented style, but on boats that are good at cap control like USN DDs, I focus more on capping. And even in Khab I probably try to cap more than I should since so many DDs won't, but I digress. These builds are primarily optimized for maximizing chances to win matches while playing solo in random battles. The first build listed for each ship is intended to be a 'balanced' build that optimizes the strengths of that particular ship while providing the versatility to do other basic DD tasks (spotting, capping, cap control, and hunting/killing) as well as possible for that ship. Some ships have alternate builds listed that may work better if running in a division or in Ranked/Clan battles; these builds are usually a better build to optimize the ship's strengths if you have trusted teammates along to help in other tasks. The first build listed for each ship is what I am personally running on that ship except where I've noted that I am trying to decide between the listed builds. The two most discussed new skills and how I incorporate them: IF/HE: I use IF/HE on some boats but not others, as IF/HE is only a benefit if it allows the ship to penetrate armor it can't penetrate without the skill. Shiratsuyu, Akizuki, Clemson, Lenin, and Farragut all benefit from IF/HE as the ships they face often have armor that can be penetrated with IF/HE but not without, which makes it worth the 3% decrease in fire chance. Some DDs don't benefit, or they don't benefit enough to make it worth using 4 capt skill points and/or a 3% reduction in fire chance. See the following for more information about IF/HE, I used this information extensively in developing my captain builds and am indebted to the original posters for their work in these guides. Flametz's IF/HE guide Killjoy1941's IF/HE guide RPF/Radiolocation: I don't use this skill. Why? I have close to 5000 games in DDs. So I have very strong instincts for where DDs will go in a match, and I have very strong minimap awareness and know how long it takes for a DD to get from the point it was last spotted to other places on map. RPF has a high opportunity cost (4 points) and on every one of my ships, I'd have to give up other skills I really want to get RPF. Yes, it can be useful late-game. Yes, it can help you hunt other DDs, or know where the nearest unspotted ship is to avoid getting spotted yourself. However, not using RPF forces you to hone your instincts and gives you more available points for other skills. There are players that swear by using RPF. But I don't, and my builds reflect that. I recommend doing without. Even without having RPF, you get an icon on your screen when someone is locating your direction via RPF; I've had several kills now where I was able to use RPF against a player by determining where they were using the timing of me getting that icon. If I look at where other friendlies are when the icon pops up, I can often figure out where the ship using RPF is even if I haven't spotted them yet. RPF is a crutch, and for someone that hasn't played as much DD as I have, maybe a useful one for them, but I am a better player than I would have been otherwise because I learned how to anticipate where ships would be without using it. My DD builds. Notes: Each build's skills are listed in the order in which you should get them. If build is for less than 19 points, that means I really don't see a 'best' way to use the point left over. All builds assume that you are using the Concealment Upgrade Mod if DD is tier 8+. Shiratsuyu (this build is also good for Hatsuharu, and works well for Shinonome/Kamikaze) Primary (I use this one) - 'GunboatPOI' build : Priority Target, Last Stand, Demolition Expert, Concealment Expert, Advanced Firing Training, Inertia Fuse/High Explosive, Alternate - 'TorpedoPOI' build: PM, LS, DE, CE, AFT, Torpedo Armament Expert, Adrenaline Rush Discussion: Given that I run premium torpedo reload booster, I choose to optimize my guns instead of my torps, especially since TAE is now a 3-point skill. Shiratsuyu can comfortably invisifire even without AFT, but she has good shell arcs and can land shots consistently even out to the edge of her AFT-extended range. IF/HE allows her to do direct penetration damage to 25mm plating, which means many sections of cruisers as well as the bow and stern of same-tier and lower BBs. The alternate build forgos IF/HE, but has a better fire chance because of it. You get faster torp reloads in between uses of torp reload booster (which may mean not needing to run the premium version) and can pick up an extra 2-point skill (I recommend adrenaline rush since I play aggressively and usually take damage throughout the game.) Akizuki (as Akizuki is very different from other IJN boats, this is a specialized build) Primary (I use this one) - Wreck Face build: Priority Target, Last Stand, Demolition Expert, Concealment Expert, Inertia Fuse/High Explosive, Advanced Firing Training. Discussion: Since I already had a 19-pt capt ready for Akizuki and at least two of the three 4-pt skills are must-haves to get the most out of her, I struggled with the order in which to equip skills if you don't have a 14-point captain at least. Basically, don't even bother playing Akizuki without *at least* a 14-point captain ready to go for her, as she's almost unplayable without IF/HE and either AFT or CE. Without IF/HE, she can't pen same-tier or higher DDs with HE shells.With IF/HE she's a fearsome DD hunter. DE offsets the lost fire chance from IF/HE. She has a workable invisifire window without CE or AFT (assuming you're running concealment upgrade mod.) AFT allows you to fire at ships 12+ km out, but CE increases your concealment so you can invisifire from closer-in. CE also improves her ability to control caps and be more versatile and survivable; it also helps keep her from being surprised by other DDs spotting her first and using their speed advantage to run her down and/or keep her spotted. With how low her speed is and because cap control is so important in randoms, I think CE is marginally more important than AFT. AFT is still important, because it gives her an even larger invisifire window and allows Akizuki to stay back where she's less likely to get run down, because she is the slowest DD by far in her tier range. Alternatively, if you give up AFT, you can get BFT and have two points left over for Adrenaline Rush. While I would not use the BFT+AR in place of AFT if you play mostly solo, it could be workable if you play in divisions a lot since you can rely on your divmates to cover you if you do get rushed by a faster ship. Clemson (Clemson is unique in the USN line and so this is a specialized build, all higher-tier USN DDs have terrible shell arcs and do not need AFT): Primary (I use this one) - Seal Club Extraordinaire build: Priority Target, Last Stand, Demolition Expert, Advanced Firing Training, Inertia Fuse/High Explosive, Concealment Expert Alternate - Maximum DPM build: PM, LS, DE, AFT, IF/HE, Basic Firing Training, Adrenaline Rush. Discussion: I never ran CE on my Clemson until 0.6.0, as it precluded my ability to run DE and AFT and I play my Clemson like a Russian DD, merrily flying across the map spraying fire like a madman. However, I've tried CE now that I can do AFT+DE+CE and the extra .6km stealth does help a lot with capping early-game. I had a hard carry in Clemson this morning where the extra stealth kept me alive...we were down by 3 ships, and came back to win, but I would have been killed several times without the extra stealth window as I was able to keep from getting cornered and/or complete capping without getting seen. While Clemson is still first and foremost a gunboat and I don't worry about being spotted most of the time, it's a nice bit of versatility, and gives her a usable invisifire window. Clemson has very good shell arcs and so benefits from AFT. Starting with B-hull Nicholas, USN guns suffer from terrible ballistics and so I do not recommend AFT for other USN DDs. IF/HE allows you to penetrate the bow and stern of BBs. DE offsets the lowered fire chance of IF/HE. The alternate 'Maximum DPS' build listed boosts your gun ROF and increases both gun and torp ROF as you take damage, but you give up most of your invisifire window and lose a bit of versatility. I've tried both builds and I stay alive longer and do more damage with the primary build I listed and am able to secure caps better, which as I've mentioned is a big advantage in randoms as you often can't get capping help from other ships (especially in low tiers such as Clemson plays in) Farragut (this build is just as good for B-hull Nicholas or Mahan) Primary (I use this one) - Swiss Army Knife build: Priority Target, Last Stand, Demolition Expert, Concealment Expert, Inertia Fuse/High Explosive, AR, Survivability Expert (can alternate Basic Fire Training instead) Discussion: Farragut is the most underrated ship in the game, IMO. She is the best cap control boat relative to her tier in the game. She has an advantage in a knife fight versus almost any ship she sees; she's at least close to even against even Benson and Mahan. The only ship I really struggle to beat in a knife fight is Akizuki. Her torps are very good; you can't *quite* stealthtorp but you can come close, especially at ships that are coming toward you or angling toward you since there's only a .3km difference in torp range versus concealment range. She's fast, maneuverable, and tough. IF/HE is a big help for Farragut in penetrating BB bow and stern plating of T5-7 BBs as well as significant portions of cruisers...you still will not be able to penetrate t8 BBs except for the superstructure, but there's a lot of ships you'll penetrate more often than you did before if you use IF/HE. I use SE as the extra hp helps when knife-fighting, especially against a Mahan, Sims, or Benson. BFT is also a strong choice, they're neck and neck. Depends on your playstyle. I would definitely use SE in place of BFT with a Mahan or a Benson as the benefit from SE increases as one climbs tiers. Fletcher (also valid for Benson) Primary (I use this one) - Fletcher Gonna Fletch build: Priority Target, Last Stand, Demolition Expert, Concealment Expert, Survivability Expert, Basic Firing Training, Adrenaline Rush (alternatively, drop AR and you can get another 3-point skill like superintendent or torpedo armament expert) Discussion: Fletcher is the pinnacle of the USN line ( I prefer it even to Gearing), and the build I use is similar to my Farragut build. The main difference is IF/HE is of *very* limited benefit compared to Farragut, since they have the same guns but Fletcher sees mostly t8+ BBs, with thicker armor plating that resists penetration even with IF/HE equipped. I decided that for Fletcher, the higher fire chance without IF/HE outweighed the cruisers that Fletcher could penetrate with IF/HE but not without it. Also, Fletch has very good AA and gets more benefit from SE at tier 9, so dropping IF/HE allows one to get SE and BFT, and if you drop adrenaline rush you can even get TAE or Super. Since Fletcher is a very good stealthtorp boat, TAE is more attractive on her than most USN boats. Z-23 (150mm guns) Primary (I use this one) - Schadenfreude for Days build: Priority Target, Last Stand, Demolition Expert, Concealment Expert, Inertia Fuse/High Explosive, Adrenaline Rush, Survivability Expert. Discussion: I am not currently playing any other German DDs besides this, so can only discuss the 150mm Z-23. Not a fan of the DDs leading up to the Z-23 but the Z-23 with 150mm guns is a keeper; I've fallen in love with this boat. Once I get the tier 9 Z-46 and test some builds, I will edit this post to include a recommended build for 128mm gun-equipped German boats. While the 150mm guns have good ballistics, AFT (and BFT) have no effect on them, the only DD guns to not be affected by these skills. Then again, the 128mm guns on other German DDs don't have the shell arcs needed to make AFT an optimal choice anyway. The 150mm guns do have a much better fire chance than the 128s, so I chose to buff that fire chance with DE. IF/HE allows them to penetrate the bow and stern of enemy BBs up to t10 (except for Grosser Kurfurst bow) and large portions of most cruisers. These are gunboats and will take damage, so Adrenaline Rush helps boost the slow ROF of the 150mm guns as you take damage. Leningrad (assuming you have a dedicated captain for her) Primary - Glorious Soviet Stronk Victory build: PM, EM, Last Stand, DE, CE, AFT, Basic Firing Training Alternate (high risk) - In Soviet Russia, DD Penetrates You build: Priority Target, Expert Marksman, Demolition Expert, Concealment Expert, Advanced Firing Training, Inertia Fuse/High Explosive Alternate - Speedy Sniper Build: PT, EM, LS, DE, AFT, IF/HE, BFT Discussion: Leningrad is a bit of an odd duck amongst Russian DDs in that she is a decent stealthtorp/cap control boat with CE, so I chose to keep CE as a 'must-have' skill on her for randoms. If I was divisioning more or playing her in competitive play, I'd probably use the sniper build as it accentuates her strengths, but for solo randoms I like the flexibility CE gives me for capping. The first build is a high-risk build; Leningrad has terrible turret traverse and badly needs EM to keep guns on target as she maneuvers, so you have to give up Last Stand in order to have CE, AFT, and IF/HE. With IF/HE, she can pen much of the plating of t7 BBs, although she still can't pen t8+ BBs anywhere but the superstructure so it's a trade-off. The second build gives up IF/HE. This lowers your penetration damage as you can't pen as many ships in as many places, but that does increase your fire chance and you're able to keep Last Stand and pick up BFT. I would only recommend using the first build (without LS) if you're running premium damage control and premium smoke, as if you do lose your engines, you're going to need to either fix them quick or hide quick. I may come back and edit this; I'm going to test the high-risk build for another ten-twenty matches in Leningrad and see how badly my survivability is hampered by skipping Last Stand. I will edit this if I change my mind about the viability of the high-risk build. but so far it's working for me. Edit: The DD Penetrates You build is EXTREMELY high-risk and I have bumped it to an alternate build. When it works, it works beautifully, but even with the 40-second cooldown with premium DC, it really hurts survivability for aggressive gunboating (and Leningrad begs for aggressive gunboating.) Khabarovsk Primary (I will probably use this one for randoms) - Stronk and Versatile Build: Priority Target, Last Stand, Demolition Expert, Advanced Firing Training, Concealment Expert, Survivability Expert, Adrenaline Rush Alternate (my probable setup if/when there are t10 clan battles) - Speed-Tanking Sniper Build: PT, LS, DE, AFT, Inertia Fuse/High Explosive, SE, AR Alternate - Smoke+Shoot Flamethrower Build: PT, LS, DE, AFT, BFT, SE, Superintendent. Discussion: Ah, Khabarovsk. In a perfect world, I'd say screw CE. I didn't use CE on Khab before 0.6.0 as I couldn't run AFT+DE otherwise. But the recent range nerf to Khab, and CE becoming a 4-point skill as opposed to 5 points, makes CE a more intriguing pick for Khab. On the one hand, Khab's biggest potential contribution is as a pure DPM dealer, speeding along at 40+ knots spraying fire merrily at all comers, using its speed and maneuverability to dodge fire and laugh at everything shooting at her (except for Zao and Moskva, because their railguns can actually hit Khab from long range.) On the other hand, the t10 meta means that sometimes other DDs don't do their job, and I find myself trying to cap in my Khab even though she's way too visible to do it well. And with the range nerf a few months ago, I do take a lot more hits than I used to and I do sometimes need to stop firing and get concealment back so I can pop up elsewhere and start spreading HE love again. I think the second or third build is stronger for division play or clan battles as it allows Khab to be used to its greatest strengths. The second build gives Khab IF/HE, which allows her to pen t8 and t9 cruisers, plus Des Moines and Minotaur, anywhere but the armor belt and penetrate Moskva, Zao, and Hindenberg through their bow and stern plating. The third build forgoes IF/HE, which of course increases fire chance, and uses those points for BFT (higher ROF) and Superintendent (extra smoke and extra speed boost). The first listed build is interesting for the current super-campy, people-afraid-to-push t10 meta as it sacrifices IF/HE for CE. While Khab has terrible concealment even with CE, this gives the Khab a bit more ability to push up without getting spotted and focused, and at least a limited ability to cap, especially mid or late game. I hate to waste 4 points on CE when ideally Khab would always be focused on maximizing DPM and speed-tanking, but given that sometimes one has to use Khab in suboptimal ways to compensate for other DDs that won't play to win, this helps make her a bit more versatile.
  2. Hello Commanders, Captains, and Squids (I'll let you fight among each other who is who ) Please post any feedback you have about 0.6.0 here and we will submit it to our development team for improvement. The more concise the feedback, the more it helps!
  3. Allow me to highlight the problem: I am TERRIBLE. Yes, that's the long and short of it. You all were able to help me out a LOT with Tashkent, I am hoping you might do me a solid for Bismarck as well. I read Pope's review - "drive it like you stole it" says he...and he's a good player, so maybe that works at his skill level. Here are my problems, in no particular order: 1. I cannot do damage worthy of a BB - in fact, I do comparable damage in Fuso... if Tier 8 != Tier 6 returns False = BB Captain is crap...or something 2. I cannot stay alive...at all...I eat damage from everything like a champ - torps, AP, HE, fires...so much damage...from everywhere....ahhhhh End Result: I die quickly, having done very little damage, pretty much every match. Bismarck is one of my absolute worst ships...like New York with less than 100 games played, no idea what I'm doing because WoWS is still new to me bad. Sadly, super limited bandwidth, so no replay to upload at present...working on it. I guess my questions would be: 1. What sort of positions should I be looking for? 2. How do I know when it's time to go "all in?" Title edited by Mezurashi.
  4. My thoughts on the upcoming ranked season, and why the ranked meta makes premium ships far more important at tier 7 than tier 8, thereby effectively slanting the balance farther toward pay2win in a tier 7 ranked season than either tier 8 ranked or random battles. The ranked meta The meta in ranked is different than randoms, and I expect it to be even more so with the inclusion of epicenter. Ranked uses epicenter and 2-cap domination modes, often with the 2 caps close together (especially Fault Line and Neighbors.) This forces a very small, tight battlefield. Especially in epicenter, DDs (played well) will need to close in and cap, and radar is potentially hugely more powerful than in randoms since the battlefield plays so much smaller (same maps, but the actual effective area in play is far tighter.) As always in epicenter or domination mode, good DD play is critical for a win. If both teams have poor DD play, it tends to be a slugfest. But if one side has markedly better DD play than the other, *or* if one side has markedly better anti-DD play than the other, they can control the cap or caps and thus accumulate points even without killing ships. The side with better DDs (or the side whose DDs are able to survive long enough to cap/control caps) has a markedly better chance of winning. This is also why, in ranked season 5, Bismarcks were the dominant BB and Chappy appeared to be the dominant cruiser; in that tight battlefield, killer secondaries and hydro were a huge factor in helping control caps by killing or driving off DDs. Changes in Radar since Ranked Season 5 Since Ranked season 5, the cooldown time for radar has been halved. Radar did not make a huge difference in season 5, because it was very slow to cooldown and because the meta was BB/DD heavy and because that season did not have epicenter, so there were two caps to try and control. In epicenter and with the shorter radar cooldown, a single radar cruiser can illuminate the entire center zone every 2 minutes (with premium radar, but anyone worth a damn runs premium consumables in ranked). Two or three of them can keep it illuminated almost constantly, making it very difficult for the other side to cap. If one side has three radar cruisers and the other has one, or even zero, that's a massive disadvantage to one side. Why This Matters & An Overview Of Ships WG has consistently stated their goal for premiums is to make them slightly less powerful than the tech tree versions of the same ship, but often with gimmicks that other ships of that tier/type don't have (i.e. Atago with heal, Kutuzov with smoke, Lo Yang with hydro.) This usually works. There are cases where a premium is drastically OP, but WG does a fairly good job of identifying blatantly OP premiums and no longer selling them. However, these ships are balanced for randoms and co-op, not ranked. And ranked has a different meta, which means some ships are going to be much more OP compared to their tech tree cousins in ranked than they are in randoms. For several reasons, tier 7 is the tier where this is most obvious and most problematic. Radar is a consumable that is only available for tier 8 and up ships, with three exceptions, all premiums: Indianapolis, Belfast, and Atlanta. None of these ships are notably OP in randoms; if anything, Indy seems a bit underpowered. Radar will be huge in ranked, especially for epicenter mode, as stated above. And the only way to get radar at tier 7 is to use one of these three premiums. I expect this season to be cruiser/DD heavy because epicenter. That seems to be a common opinion. We won't know until we're partway through the season. But because radar will be so important, and because of the general way epicenter battles play out, DDs and cruisers will decide a lot of games. Tier 7 cruisers and ranked Fiji will be workable for ranked because she's got smoke and can be very stealthy. A fully stealthed Myoko may be workable, especially with her area denial torps. Pensacola is too visible, Shchors too visible and not maneuverable, Yorck...just no. You have two tech tree cruisers that are viable (with the caveat that very good players can probably make any ship work....but we're talking about the average player here.) Even leaving out Flint, because the only players who have her have proven they are good enough to excel at ranked anyway, both Belfast and Atlanta have a combination of attributes that make them incredibly well-suited for the likely meta of ranked. Atlanta brings the ability to fire over islands, which mitigates her survivability issues, plus radar. Belfast has smoke and incredible guns, plus very high stealth, plus radar. Let's take Trident as an example for Epicenter mode. An Atlanta can park behind the island at NE of epicenter circle and use radar to illuminate the whole cap, then rain down shells anywhere in the central zone without exposing herself to return fire, unless enemy ships flank her, and to flank her requires being way outside the capping area and likely being focused by Atlanta's teammates. A Belfast can smoke up anywhere and illuminate the capping circle; she just has to be aware of lanes through which her smoke can be torped, or astute BB/cruiser players raining shells into her smoke. There are no free ships that can replicate these abilities at tier 7. And that's huge. In randoms, the fact that a few tier 7s have radar is no big deal. Radar is not gamebreaking. It's not even a huge difference maker. Fiji is competitive with Belfast in almost all ways. Atlanta is clearly not that OP in randoms. Yes, in a tier 8 ranked season, Atago has repair party which most cruisers can't match (other than Edinburgh) and Kutuzov brings smoke which no one else can match (once again, other than Edinburgh) but neither of those are as critical as radar in the ranked meta. While Kutuzov was a very strong ship in t8 ranked, she wasn't as OP relative to tech tree ships as I believe the premiums will be in tier 7. The ranked meta makes radar far more valuable, due to the smaller battle areas and teams. Belfast and Atlanta both bring that capability to a tier 7 ranked fight that no free ship can bring, and that alone makes tier 7 ranked cruiser play much more pay2win than tier 8 would be. BBs and CVs in t7 ranked BBs, CVs, and DDs are a little less blatant than cruisers as far as the disparities between premiums and tech tree ships at t7, so on their own I don't think it's a huge issue. But it's worth pointing out that the ranked meta does favor premium ships over tech tree ships in all three categories in ways that random battles don't. Scharnhorst and Gneisenau will almost certainly be the BBs of choice for t7 ranked due to strength at close range. But Scharn's power as a cruiser killer will be exacerbated by the dominance of radar cruisers...if radar cruisers are as important as I think they'll be, Scharns will have a field day and clearly be more dominant than any of the three tech tree BBs. Gneis will be a close second, so I can accept this. CVs...Saipan is so dominant in t7 that she'll be by far the top CV, and this will be exacerbated by the fact that unlike multi-tier randoms, she will only face t7 AA with her t9 planes. DDs in T7 ranked My thoughts on DDs in ranked are here in more detail, Essentially, Blyskawica's versatility will make her dominant, and Sims will also be very strong. Mahan will be in the running but is less stealthy than Blys or Sims. Shiratsuyu may be workable because of her stealth, but that will be negated if radar cruisers are as prevalent as I expect them to be. I think Mahan will be workable compared to Blys and Sims, so I'm not as concerned as I am with cruisers, but I do think that ranked at tier 7 will favor premiums over tech tree. At t8, Benson has consistently been the top DD, although I think Akizuki and (possibly, and to a lesser extent) 150mm-armed Z-23 would have given her a run for her money in a t8 ranked season now. (Honestly, a lot of my disappointment was because I was really looking forward to seeing t8 ranked with more variety since Benson has been so dominant...I really wanted my Akizuki in ranked ) Lo Yang was OK in ranked, but still no stronger than Benson...Lo Yang traded 20% of gun firepower compared to a tech tree Benson in order to get hydro, plus having the choice for faster, shorter range torps or the stock low-damage but longer range Benson torps. T8 DD play, in other words, is pretty balanced as the one t8 DD premium is different but not stronger than the tech tree DDs in the ranked meta. In randoms, some DDs do better and some do worse than some tech tree ships...it's pretty balanced. But in the ranked meta, Sims and Blys will likely use their good guns, decent stealth and good area denial torps to dominate, with Mahan close behind. If radar cruisers are successful in keeping DDs from too aggressively pushing the cap, Blys becomes an even better choice because she has the versatility to gunfight at longer ranges, whereas the USN ships can't hit shots at range as easily, but can still hold her own in the caps later in game if the radar cruisers are are gone or pushed out. Shiratsuyu has better stealth than anyone and superior area denial with her torp reload booster, but radar can nullify her stealth advantage. Also, Leningrad might actually be workable depending on how much impact radar has because she is stealthier than Blys and can snipe when needed, although she can't knife fight well. I rank Blys, Sims, and Leningrad the three best DDs for ranked if radar is prevalent, with Mahan and Shiratsuyu both being better than Leningrad (but not better than Blys or Sims) if there is only one or zero radar cruisers in a match. Conclusion / TL;DR It's OK, in ranked, that premiums confer capabiltiies on some ships that other ships don't have. I have no issue with this. But, because of the changes made to radar cooldown since the last season, making epicenter a ranked game mode, and how compact the key battle area is in ranked due to epicenter and 2-cap domination, radar will be a huge factor, and the only tier 7 cruisers with radar are premiums. I believe that this potentially shifts the balance in ranked farther towards pay2win than it should. I don't know that WG has considered the effects that the combination of further compacting the effective battle areas and shorter radar cooldowns, and moving the ranked tier down a tier to where only premiums have radar will have on ranked this season. Thanks for reading! I'll be interested in thoughts of others, but note that I have not suggested anything about radar being OP in general orother common things people whine about, and will mock any fallacies or strawmen deployed in this thread.
  5. Saiba as recomendações do WOWS-RU sobre os novos pontos de Comandantes no mais recente pacote de atualizações! - Compare com suas escolhas e veja se você fez o trabalho de casa corretamente! Segue o link do Blog Doca WOWS: http://docawows.blogspot.com.br/2017/01/novos-pontos-para-comandantes.html
  6. With tier 1 best pick BFT and BoS moved to 3 points and a myriad of carrier-only skills at tier 1 (at the cost of others, which most choices are rendered useless), picking skills for carriers is now harder than ever. Before it's pretty much a no-brainer to go BoS/BFT (1), Torpedo expertise(2), Torpedo acceleration(3), ASE(4), then Air Superiority(5)...it seems there's a lot of ways to go nowadays with at least 9 free points and a more reasonable grind to the top with an end in sight (though grinding up to 10 becomes longer now). I think that there is still a no-brainer groundwork build for the first 10-points though: ASE (1 point, faster rearm and slightly more HP), Torpedo Acceleration (now 2 points), Torpedo Expertise (now 3 points, 20% faster torpedo plane rearm), and Air Superiority (now 4 points). But now that there are up to 9 points to play around (even more if you do things differently) after AirSup and a number of skills that are useless for carriers (e.g. IFHE and RPF, both of which are 4-pointers, and stuff involving main batteries)... Carrier rework probably won't come quickly enough, so carrier skippers got to live with that there is...so, let's discuss the possibilities of carrier captains in this new regime which choices has greatly expanded...or is it? Any input is appreciated...it's a whole new paradigm, after all. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I spec'd my 14-point Ranger captain as follows: The No-brainer "groundwork" build (10 points) ASE, Torpedo Accel, Torpedo Expertise, AirSup The remaining 4 points go to Fiery (emergency) takeoff (3 points) and evasive maneuver (1 point). Haven't got the chance to use Fiery takeoff yet (I did take some damage but those were AP hits so no fire), but the evasive maneuver buff seems huge on first impression (one strike group managed to survive relatively unscathed while under fire from one squad of T7 JPN fighters as they were locked into pursuing as my planes flew over friendly AA and down the pursuers went) ...with US strike running 0 fighters guarantees that everything I send out benefit from this. The reduced speed can be compensated by manual orders to move close to flattop and queue return order afterwards. It seems to work as far as I can tell. Now I got to retrain the guy for Lex (starkly stock)...37.5k XP after silver before he can utilize all those skills...
  7. (Copied from my post in Pigeon of War's feedback and thoughts thread.) A few thoughts about the upcoming skill tree changes: 1. Radio Position Finding. Skilled players will see little benefit from this skill, and therefore will not use it. However, unskilled BB players who drive in straight lines with little maneuvering will find it much easier to predict where the torps will be coming from. Therefore, many players from the lower end of the skill-spectrum will use this skill. Since this skill can mean the difference between being deleted or taking minor damage for poor players, this will arguably be better than AFT, Manual AA, or other equal-tier skills for the aforementioned players. So the effectiveness of stealth-torping changes as follows: Against good players: Poor -> Poor (no change) Against bad players: Good -> Poor (nerf). While we don't know how much negative impact this will have on USN, IJN, and KM DDs, no one can deny that it will be a nerf. But I think the concerns of the DD players are being ignored, and all i've heard from the Devs on this skill is that "this update is not about class nerfs/buffs", even though it is clear that this particular skill will have a significant negative impact on a lot DDs. IMO, the impact of this skill on the game has not been thought through enough. 2. HE/AP (Can't remember the new name for it, sorry.) About this skill, I don't think it is going to have a good impact on the game. This change is not beneficial at all for most ships, but for some, they give a huge advantage. Take the Akizuki as an example. The only thing that's keeping this ship's insane DPM in check is the poor penetration power of its 100mm HE. But once the HE/AP skill is added, it will melt any DD. Of course it will be weaker against BBs now, so overall its power balance is not changed much. However, I don't think it's a good idea to specialize a ship to a degree where it is absolutely dominant in one area, even if it may not be very strong in others. Again, I don't think this skill is necessarily overpowered, it's just it doesn't seem like a captain skill that will make the game more enjoyable. 3. Fog Expert I think everyone agrees that we don't need any more smoke in this game. Yet we're getting a skill that increases the area a smoke screen covers? I just don't think it makes sense, and it may encourage even more smoke camping (which is necessary in some situations, but the amount that we are getting is a bit over the top.). 4. Two is Better While I like the idea, I think that it could potentially have a negative impact on some aspects of the game. With 2 captapult fighters flying around, torpedoes will be too easily detected. I'm not sure if it's possible, but it would be better if only one of the planes could spot. Or alternatively, change the skill so that instead of two planes, you get 1 with double the DPS. Or perhaps catapult fighters could lose the ability to spot if this skill is taken. 5. BoS and BFT While I think these skills were too powerful to be one point skills, three points is a bit too much. I know there isn't any room in the 2 point skills row, but 2 points is a much more suitable cost for these skills. Please leave a comment below!
  8. Has anyone tested the skill with the Mogami on the PTS? I didn't quite have enough time to get around to testing the Mogami with it. With it, it seems that you can now penetrate the bow and stern armour of all battleship and the upper belt sections of most T10 CAs, but you lose more than half of your fire chance. So how well does it work in practice?
  9. So on the test server I tried out the new Inertial Fuse for High Explosive shell skill. What it does is decreases the fire chance of your HE shells by 3 in exchange for 30% more penetration. The Budyonny, Shchors, and Chapayev all have 152mm HE shells. An HE shell has penetration equal to 1/6 its diameter (with some exceptions that aren't Russian cruisers and will be ignored). 1/6 of 152 is 25.3333etc. Multiplying that by 130%, we get 32.9333etc. That's higher than the 32mm that covers the extremities of most ships. This means that when you face a North Carolina, or for that matter a Yamato, you can get HE pens on the exterior plating.
  10. Does anybody know if HEAP is worth it on the Atlanta? It seems like small caliber guns benefit the most, but the raw damage of the shells are usually lacking. Any thoughts?
  11. This could be called your standard, expected post of "Waa waa waa this doesnt work like it used to work" thread. But it seems strange these days. I'm curious if something was tweaked or nipped, tucked and loosened when it comes to the whole target, aim, fire and results process. Aiming "seems" to have changed and I can't really see anything different in the skills that is directly related to aiming. Have I missed something in the skill changes that may have effected this process/mechanic? On my side of the game, it feels/seems like I'm firing a delayed salvo. The rounds "seem" to go every-fricking-where as opposed to pre-update. So just wondering if anything changed. TIA for your comments.
  12. Olá pessoal, fórum RUSSO já atualizou seu MODPACK EXPRESS para a versão mais recente, segue o link do BLOG DOCA WOWS: http://docawows.blog...05120-wows.html [Hello everyone, Russian forum has already updated their MODPACK EXPRESS to the latest version, access through the link DOCA WOWS BLOG]
  13. Este vídeo tem o intuito de auxiliar a todos os players que ainda não estão habituados ao funcionamento das novas skills e ao novo sistema de grind de capitão. Neste mesmo vídeo saiba como ganhar e utilizar a Elite XP. Saudações
  14. In this post, I'll be sharing my captain builds for my favourite/most played ships. This post has two purposes: -Help less experienced players choose a commander skill build that they like -Gain feedback from you guys, so I can improve my builds. So I hope this helps, and please feel free to post your preferred captain builds! (All builds assume a 19 point commander, as that's what we are all aiming for eventually.) Thank you for reading! I might add more ships in the future, but we'll have to see about that.
  15. Emergency Takeoff: cost 3 skill points Makes it possible to launch and recover the aircraft while the ship is on fire +100% to aircraft servicing time when the carrier is on fire. Update: Someone commented that the +100% servicing time apply only if the aircraft is recovered while the ship is on fire, and any aircraft that has already began the servicing process before the ship got lit finishes at normal speed. If true, this certainly clear things up a lot. It turns out that this Emergency Takeoff skill is better than I thought. That is, the +100% to aircraft servicing time introduces no additional penalty. Compared to my analysis below, this update provides only a benefit of speeding up the servicing time by 50%, for aircrafts half-serviced when the ship is set on fire. From a mathematical perspective, this new information offers very little improvement. However, from a strategic point of view, the Emergency Takeoff skill can be considered significant, especially by those who have many vivid memories of their carrier being helplessly ablaze. Objectively, I still think this commander skill certainly does not deserve three skill points. Anyway, there is no point, except for aesthetic reasons, in having exactly eight skills for each skill rank. This skill is a nonsense. Emergency Takeoff only benefit a player if aircrafts are being launched or recovered while the ship is on fire. Otherwise, this skill is only a penalty. Since aircraft serving time is twice as long when the ship caught on fire, it is even more unlikely that any aircraft is able to take off before the fire is extinguished. It is only on the consideration that Emergency Takeoff actually allows aircrafts to be recovered and serviced when the ship is on fire, that a person can reasonably argue that this skill not entirely useless. In the end, I will only consider having this commander skill on a JPN (not USN) carrier if this skill is free, and I mean FREE.
  16. Well, all cost went up, but I imagine not many people retrain for free after the first few skill points. So hidden in a drop-down in the pacth notes is a reworking of Captain retraining XP parameters. A quick look at the number got me worried, so I pened up Excel and plugged them in. I'm mostly ignoring full costs because you'd probably have to be insane to do full retraining every time, so I'm focusing on the credit/50% option that I assume most other people use: Skill Points Required XP before 0.6.0 50% Credits Required XP after 0.6.0 50% Credits Difference (50% Credits) 0 600 300 1,500 750 450 1 650 325 1,000 500 175 2 750 375 1,500 750 375 3 1,050 525 2,000 1000 475 4 1,700 850 3,500 1750 900 5 2,900 1450 5,000 2500 1050 6 4,800 2400 7,500 3750 1350 7 8,000 4000 10,000 5000 1000 8 12,500 6250 15,000 7500 1250 9 18,500 9250 20,000 10000 750 10 26,500 13250 25,000 12500 -750 11 37,000 18500 30,000 15000 -3500 12 51,000 25500 40,000 20000 -5500 13 68,000 34000 50,000 25000 -9000 14 89,500 44750 75,000 37500 -7250 15 100,000 50000 100,000 50000 0 16 100,000 50000 125,000 62500 12500 17 100,000 50000 150,000 75000 25000 18 100,000 50000 175,000 87500 37500 19 100,000 50000 250,000 125000 75000 Firstly, the 100,000/50,000 cap is gone, and is now 250,000/125,000. Also, the average XP cost seems to have went up. 0-9 skills is the difference of a game or two whether you do free or credit retraining. Not too bad. But still more than you used to need. 10-14 point builds do get a significant discount compared to the old system. I guess that is good? 15 points is no change. 16-19, well the numbers speak for themselves. As someone with numerous 14/15 captains that still have 2-3 tiers to reach 10, I am not happy right now.
  17. Anyone else having issues launching? My launcher goes to the load screen, and the bar reaches full, but just gets stuck there, and it isn't crashing either, just permanently stuck. Already submitting a ticket, just seeing if anyone is getting this issue.
  18. RPF (or, as it's now called, Radio Location) is not OP. It's not something that DDs should be afraid of, or any other ship. But I still think it's a terrible idea given the current game meta, not for what the skill can do, but for the effects the skill will have on an already camptastic high-tier meta. I played the test server extensively and tested out skills and builds with various ship lines, and as I suspected, the RPF skill is not that big a deal for smart players. I'm a DD main, and I'm fine with facing it. Why? Opportunity cost. If someone spends 4 points on RPF, that's 4 points they can't spend elsewhere, weakening their build. Good players have solid instincts for knowing where ships are, where they'll appear, the flow of the game. RPF is useless to those players, and for potatoes, they won't be able to make good use of it and they'll be giving up other valuable skills. For example, with German BBs...if you take RPF, it's going to be a suboptimal build. My German BBs will use a secondary build (for a 19pt capt): Preventive Maintenance, Jack of All Trades, Expert Marksman or high alert (haven't decided yet), Super (for extra charge of heal and hydro), BFT, AFT, and Manual Secondaries. 19 points. You can't get RPF without giving up a needed skill for a secondary build (imo). It's even worse for cruisers and DDs; I've theorycrafted builds for most of my ships and there's no way that RPF doesn't block you from getting a more useful skill, because 4 points. So, why do I think RPF is a mistake and should not be included? Because potatoes. The NA server is campy AF. And it's hard enough to get DDs to go cap. Hell, part of the reason I play mostly DD is because it's so obnoxious to lose games when DDs won't cap and play the objective. So now, you've got this skill that every potato on the server thinks is OP, and every potato DD driver thinks will result in being permaspotted. Which means getting DDs to push up, cap, and spot will become even harder. Getting cruisers to play aggressive will become even harder. People will camp harder. The high-tier meta is already damn near unplayable, and now you're adding a skill which will make everyone BUT battleships afraid to push up...and that might be worth it if most BBs would play more aggressively as a result, but let's be honest, they won't. So everyone will camp in back and t10 will be even more miserable. RPF is not a skill that people should be afraid of, but they are. As a DD main, radar did not ruin my game. I adapted. RPF will not ruin my game. I will adapt. But there are so many DDs who freak out about radar and won't push or cap or scout (you'd think they'd just stop playing DD if they're afraid to go do DD stuff, but that makes too much sense.) I see RPF as being just like radar; it will create more lopsided steamrolls when you have DDs on one side that are smart and push, and DDs on the other side that are like "OMGWTFBBQ THEY HAVE RPF I CAN'T GO CAP BECAUSE THEY'LL KNOW EXACTLY WHERE I AM OMGPANIC!" Those are the games that make me just stop playing for a day or two or three because it's so frustrating. Close, hard fought losses are part of the game. I can get enjoyment out of a loss, if it was a good game. But when I go on a streak and lose t10 game after t10 game where I'm performing at or above server avg level but my teams are terrified to push, that makes the game not fun anymore. Even when it works against the other side (because I acknowledge this will go both ways, it's just extra frustrating when it happens to my team several times in row,) it's still frustrating, because landslide games aren't as fun as tough, hard-fought, intelligently played matches. And I think RPF is going to exacerbate this problem greatly, not because the skill is OP, but because potatoes will overreact to it. TL;DR: We need to rethink RPF. I am disappointed to see that it is being added to the game. If, overall, NA server players were less whiny about change, smarter about learning the actual effects of skills, and less scared of getting their paint scratched, I'd be totally OK with RPF, because I can adapt to it and it weakens my opponents that choose it. But I am very concerned about how many 'bad losses' we'll see because DDs overreact to the existence of RPF and camp instead of capping and/or spotting. Edit to add this note because some people are missing a major point here: I am not arguing that it can come in handy in some scenarios. It's a potato skill because of the opportunity cost, and the fact that taking it prevents you from using those 4 points on other skills. If it was a 1 or 2 point skill, it'd be silly NOT to take it. I'm glad it's a 4-point skill, because it would be unbalanced if someone could have RPF along with all the other useful skills they want.
  19. Okay... I feel like this is a major change coming our way. So in honor that some folks somewhere might think some folks might be nuts nutz or nutts for doing all this craziness... I offer a tribute for the next version of the game....
  20. My thoughts: -FP is being buffed and being moved to T4: It now has a 10% fire chance reduction. I think that's fair enough, since it was a little bit TOO good for T3. But now that it shares its level with skills like AFT and CE, I don't think it's going to seem as attractive. -SE is being moved to T3 with a nerf: I don't think this is a good idea, because SE has always been an important skill for USN DDs in their cap-fighting role. Sure, now it's less expensive, but the gain of HP points has been reduced by 12.5 percent (400HP/tier->350HP/tier). -IFHE is being buffed, with less of a penalty and and more of a buff: Well, it's official. Once the patch hits the live servers, Akizukis will be eating up your DDs for breakfast. Before, I wasn't sure that many people would take this on the Akizuki, but since now you only lose 1% fire chance if you take DE in conjunction with IFHE, this almost seems like this was made for the Akizuki. She's still slower than all of her rivals, so perhaps she won't be as effective as I think she may be. Other ships that will benefit from this are high tier light cruisers (not the RN CLs of course), because they will now be able to penetrate the bow and aft armour of T8-10 BBs. Before the change, Mogami with her 155mm HE would have been the only light cruiser to benefit from this skill. -Evasive maneuver has been changed: The concealment buff is now less (-40%->-20%), but there is a HUGE HP buff of 75%. So if you are attacking an AA heavy ship, this will mean that you will be able to save more of your planes. This skill was useless before, but now it will be effective under certain circumstances. I think this could be useful for some lower tier carriers that have small hangar capacities. -Adrenaline rush has been changed: It now gives a 0.2% reduction of the reload of all armament for each 1% of HP lost. So at 50% HP, you will have a 10%. If you are about to die, you will have a 20% buff. Looks like it will be pretty useful, especially for certain ships that don't really benefit much from any of the level 2 skills. -BB catapult fighters are being nerfed: The duration is going from 300 secs to 60 seconds. I personally think that this is too much of a nerf. Perhaps a more moderate 120 seconds would be better. -Bismarck's Hydro is being nerfed: I think this is a fair balance decision, switching the role of its HAS from offensive to more defensive.
  21. Now that I have your attention... do you think that's possible? Because you know, they always - or so it seems - drop updates in the middle of contests. If they do drop it this week... you think it would make obtaining the Grafs Pee easier or a bit more challenging? tia - and Happy New Years!
  22. (Before reading this, please note that I do play German BBs and do not intend to nerf them in any way. I just think that they do not need any buffs.) Currently, German BBs and CAs have a HAS torp detection range of 3.84km, 3.93km, and 4.02km for tiers 8, 9, and 10 respectively. With 0.6.0, the captain skill Vigilance will stack with HAS, whereas right now it does not. While for most ships the Hydro range is low enough even with Vigilance, for German CAs and BBs, the range will be around 5km with this skill, and it will almost be enough to spot for a small fleet. But since CAs are technically supposed to counter DDs, I have no problem with German CAs getting access to very long range hydro. But for German BBs, HAS should be more of a self-defence tool, and should not have the ability to have such a long reach. Therefore, I suggest the range of KM BB HAS to be reduced as listed below: Before Suggested Change Base w/ Vig. After Suggested Change (-15%) Base w/ Vig. T8 3.84 4.8 3.26 4.08 T9 3.93 4.91 3.34 4.18 T10 4.02 5.03 3.42 4.27 The base range is still longer than that of any any non-KM CA ship, tier for tier. Thanks for reading. *Edited for massive derp.
  23. Much of the discussion of the 0.6.0 captain skills has, explicitly or implicitly, focused on high-skill point captains (usually) played on high-tier ships. What can one do with 14 or 18 points, etc., and what effects will there be on overall gameplay? A lot of concern about specific aspects of the proposed new tree, such as RPF, also does not differentiate its effects on play at different tiers. My thesis here is that it is worth distinguishing predictable effects of the new skill tree on mid versus high-tier play, and that such effects may in fact be opposite in terms of their impact on ship type balance. If in fact the new tree has one set of consequences at high tiers and another one at middle tiers, this will make it unusually difficult to balance overall. Although there has been a lot of discussion about the 0.6.0 skills already, I think it might thus be worthwhile to devote some attention specifically to mid-tier effects. For purposes of this thread, by mid-tier I mean mostly tier 5-8 ships (centering on 6-7), with captains largely in the 10-13 point range at the helm. Given the proposed new 0.6.0 progression table, and assuming a large proportion of the player base that is just moving a captain up a line, using free or credit retraining, with some but not excessive use of dragon flags, etc., I don't think 10 point captains will be the norm until tier 5-6, and I don't think 14 point captains will be common until some way into tier 8. So, in other words, what does the game look like when we consider captains with access to one, but only one, tier 4 skill? (1) I think we see most non-VMF destroyers, many/most cruisers, and some battleships taking CE the first chance they get. CE is currently the must-have skill at T5 for many builds because of the huge advantage it gives in controlling engagement, and I don't see this changing as CE is moved to T4. Many other captains that do not take CE will likely choose some other T4 skill other than RPF to advance some specific build: AS will likewise be must-have for CVs as the first T4 choice, AFT perhaps for VMF destroyers/AA monster wannabes/secondary build psychos, etc. So in other words, in mid-tier play, I don't predict a lot of RPF on the board, and those captains that do choose RPF will be giving up something significant and relevant to their survival chances or offensive capacity. (2) As a result, the "concealment meta" will extend into mid-tier play before RPF makes a large-scale appearance, and this will provide an overall buff to ships that rely most on concealment - i.e., torpedo destroyers. (And this can be true even as the new skills nerf DDs at higher tiers.) Picture a New Fubuki. Now picture a New Fubuki with CE and, possibly, if someone wants to have some giggles at 12 captain points, Torpedo Acceleration, operating in an environment in which radar is still rare and RPF is as well. (The two-for-one airplane skill at T1 may offset this somewhat.) (3) Meanwhile, another hidden effect of the new skill tree will be to take some amount of AA power off the board at mid-tiers. The same Cleveland that would take AFT at T4 will now have to choose between that at the opportunity to take CE earlier; even battleships that might want to spec into AFT and/or MFAA will be choosing between that and concealment. At tier 3, BFT has a lot of competition: BoS for battleships, DE, etc. So again, the net result is that carriers may have less AA to contend with at mid-tiers, even as they may (as some have argued) get the short end of the stick once one is in the realm of 14+ point captains. TL; DR: If one considers not just ultimate, 19-point builds, there is a progression of different effects the new skills may have on the game at different tiers of play, to the extent that they may affect mid- and upper-tier play in contrasting directions, particularly in terms of ship type (BB, CA, DD, CV) balance. Thoughts?
  24. Title says it all =P But for further explanation... What patch do you think the German BBs are unlocked OR how long does it take for one patch to come out OR does it take more than one patch to implement new ships?