Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'battleship'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • 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


There are no results to display.

Found 306 results

  1. The following is a review of Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya, a ship kindly provided to me by Wargaming. This is the release version of the vessel and these stats are current as of July 27th, 2017. You don't wanna know how many times I misspelled that. Quick Summary: An ugly-as-sin Soviet battleship with twelve 305mm guns, surprisingly good anti-aircraft firepower and a unique Damage Control Party consumable. Cost: Undisclosed at the time of publishing. Patch and Date Written: 0.6.8. July 24th, 2017 until July 27th, 2017. Closest in-Game Contemporary Imperator Nikolai I, Tier IV Russian Battleship Degree of Similarity: Clone / Sister-Ship / Related Class / Similar Role / Unique The Gangut-class of Battleships, to which Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya belongs, precedes the Imperator Nikolai I through the Imperatrista Mariya-class of battleships, making the two ships two generations removed from one another. The two ships look very similar, though Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya is quite obviously a more modernized (and ooglay) looking ship that shares the same design philosophy. Overall, Imperator Nikolai I is slower, tougher, with easier to use artillery. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya is faster (but not much faster), with a quicker reload and comes with much better anti-aircraft firepower. Tier for tier, Nikolai is the better boat, hands down. I don't think anyone's surprised. PROs Unique Damage Control Party consumable, with an accelerated recovery time (30s/20s) between uses. Excellent waterline protection for bow tanking. Powerful broadside with twelve 305mm rifles, creating large alpha strikes & good DPM. Except for tiny sections of the bow and stern, her main hull and deck are all but immune to cruiser-caliber HE shells. Good anti-aircraft firepower for her tier. Small surface detection range for a battleship of 13.68km. Gangut butt is best butt. CONs Damage Control Party has a finite number of charges per match. Small hit point pool of 42,500. Poor overall protection with 225mm belt armour, 203mm turret faces and 10% torpedo damage reduction. Awkward gun placement combined with a slow turret traverse makes gun handling feel frustrating. Her 305mm lack penetration power, especially when facing tier VII ships. Pathetic secondary gun battery. Short ranged AA firepower and unable to benefit from Manual Fire Control for AA Armament. Feels rather blind without a spotter aircraft or float-plane fighter. This is one of those warships that I've been eagerly awaiting to join the game. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya is the lead ship of the Gangut-class Battleships. She's actually the Gangut-herself, renamed by the Soviets after the Revolution. She appears in this game in her full modernization received by 1944/1945. This means she's a contemporary to the British Dreadnought-class battleship gussied up and shoe horned in a tier V. Colour me amused. Let's take a look under the hood. Options Like all battleships that aren't American or Japanese (or Warspite), Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's Damage Control Party has a 15s active period where it will not only remove any critical hits from damaged modules (as well as putting out fires and stopping floods), it will also prevent such damage from being reapplied so long as the consumable is active. Where this ship differs is with this consumable's reset timer. Normally, battleships suffer up to a two-minute cooldown between uses. This can be reduced to a minute and twenty seconds with the premium version. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya has a thirty second reset timer, standard. The premium version drops this down to a mere twenty (!) seconds. And you're going to want the premium version of the consumable -- stock, Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya can only use this consumable three times. Taking the premium version will not only accelerate her reset timer, it will also provide an additional charge. This can be further boosted with the Superintendent commander's skill to bring the total up to five. Her Repair Party is standard for most Battleships, healing back 14% of her maximum HP over 28s Consumables: Damage Control Party Repair Party Module Upgrades: Three slots, standard Battleship options. The Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya does not get access to the American Artillery Plotting Room 1 upgrade. Premium Camouflage: Type 9, tier II to V standard. This provides 30% bonus experience gains, 3% reduction in surface detection and 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. For upgrades, select the following: In your first slot, take Main Armaments Modification 1. This will help keep your guns active and will better allow you to face-tank incoming rounds. Your turrets will be disabled frequently and this will help mitigate this. In your second slot, take Aiming Systems Modification 1. Oktyabrskaya is a Soviet Battleship and she needs all of the dispersion help she can get. Alternatively, if you want to play with something sub-optimal, you can play up to her AA strengths and use AA Guns Modification 2 to help boost their range. This really helps if your Captain also has Advanced Fire Training. This can make tier IV and V carriers cry though be aware she'll never hold a candle to USS Texas. Do keep in mind this is highly situational in its use, it will not protect you against tier VI+ CVs and you do suffer a small performance hit for taking this upgrade instead of the aiming modification. In your final slot, take Damage Control System Modification 1. This will bump your torpedo damage reduction up from 10% to 13%. Firepower Primary Battery: Twelve 305mm rifles in an A-P-Q-X configuration. Secondary Battery: Ten 120mm rifles in casemates with six forward facing and four rear facing emplacements. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya has marginally worse shell penetration compared to Scharnhorst which weighs in at 455mm / 363mm / 289mm respectively. This sits much further behind the 356mm guns found on New York and Texas with their values of 575mm / 467mm / 381mm and even the poor penetration values of HMS Hood at 491mm / 406mm / 337mm. This explains some of the difficulty this ship experiences when uptiered, especially against German and American Battleships. When this happens, choose soft targets or be flexible with your ammunition types. Let's start with her secondaries: They're terrible. By late WW2, the Soviet Army had already cannibalized six of her sixteen original secondary gun mounts for use in the defense of the Siege of Leningrad. This leaves Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya with a mere ten gun mounts for self defense and these guns are not up to the task. They are mounted in casemates down the sides of the ship, with three facing forward and two aft per side. In theory you could get five guns to engage an enemy ship, but that's seldom the case. Usually it's only three. They have many problems. We can forgive their lack of range. 4.0km is pretty typical for low to mid tier battleships. What's less forgivable is their horrid rate of fire at a mere 7.0rpm. We'd expect this of larger caliber guns as the alpha damage (and increased penetration) from individual hits would make up for the disparity in DPM. However, Oktyabrskaya Revolutisya's secondaries are a mere 120mm in size, dealing a pathetic 1,700 alpha damage and being capable of penetrating 19mm of armour or less. The only redeemable quality is their high chance to set fires per hit at a respectable 8% which, some will rightly argue, is a very sizable perk. Still, with the low volume of fire coming off the ship, any blazes will be a surprise. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya uses the same guns found Imperator Nikolai I but with improved characteristics in range (16.8km versus 14.1km), rate of fire (1.88rpm versus 1.67rpm) but worse overall shell groupings (1.8 sigma versus 2.0 sigma). Their weapon performance is otherwise identical . While these are formidable weapons in the limited matchmaker enjoyed by Nikolai at tier IV, the maps upon which Nikolai plays are small, the engagements ranges short, the action close and her opponents soft skinned. They really start to feel long in the tooth when regularly facing the demands found at tiers VI and VII that Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya faces. These are not bad weapons. For 305mm rifles, they have very high damage potential. Her AP shells are the hardest hitting of any of the twelve-inch guns with 8,600 alpha strike. The improved rate of fire over Nikolai combined with the twelve rifles enables Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya to compete well with the damage output of her peers. She is quite capable of deleting any cruiser withing her matchmaking spread from nearly any angle and at anywhere within her range, or biting big 9,000 to 12,000 chunks out of a battleship, even without any citadel penetrations. These guns aren't without their issues, however. First, they are not as well situated as Nikolai's guns. One of the notable strengths of Imperator Nikolai I is her ability to quickly reacquire targets on either side of the ship grace of having her A, P and Q batteries all forward facing. This made it very easy for her to brawl and face tank. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's P turret is rear facing, reducing her ability to shift her fire from port to starboard and back with anything resembling alacrity. It's not uncommon for P turret to be horribly out of position and unable to fire, or the ship needing the use of rudder to bring all of her guns on target. With a glacial rate of rotation of 56.3s for a 180º turn, this problem is exacerbated. This is, singly, the most frustrating aspect about this ship. Combined with this, her X turret has limited fields of fire and can only engage targets 39º off her bow. Opening fire with her X-turret opens this ship up to reprisals, so make sure you time your fire correctly. That ticks off problems two, three and four. Problem number five is one of penetration. As mentioned previously, these guns perform brilliantly on Imperator Nikolai I with the close-range encounters she typically faces. With Oktyabrskaya Revolutisya's ability to extend the weapon reach another 2.7km, the deficiencies in shell penetration become much more pronounced. These are not high-penetration guns and their performance drops below 400mm worth of penetration at about 7km, precluding her from reliably landing citadel hits on enemy battleships beyond this range. She loses the ability to reliably challenge battleship belt armour at 11km. Like other low-penetration battleships such as HMS Hood and Scharnhorst, it's important to shift fire from attempting citadel hits to instead aim for the upper hull of enemy dreadnoughts at these ranges. Otherwise, you'll find a lot of shells shatter, scatter and bounce off armoured belts. Her high explosive shells are passable but unremarkable. They do enjoy a high chance to start fires per shell at 33% and this can be a reasonable alternative when facing hard targets. This shouldn't be the default ammunition selected when facing an angled ship, however. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya can overmatch up to 20mm of bow armour which includes all cruisers within her matchmaking spread as well as all tier IV and V battleships. Here's the final fly in the ointment: Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's main battery has only 203mm worth of armour and a maximum of 150mm of barbette protection. Her guns take penetrating hits often. Even with Main Armaments Modification 1 and Preventative Maintenance, critical hits are common place and catastrophic turret destruction isn't a rare occurrence. The closer Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya gets to the enemy, the more often her turrets end up taking a lot of the abuse thrown at her. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya has guns that are meant for brawling, but they're not quite ideally suited for such. Her guns are vulnerable for a battleship. The combination of poor turret placement, traverse times and fire angles increases the challenge too, and you can forget about her secondaries helping out. Still, it's hard to argue with twelve rifles that put out more potential damage than ten 356mm guns. Summary: Gun handling is very poor and cannot be significantly improved. Range is decent, firepower is good, penetration is fine at close to medium ranges. Challenging battleships outside of 10km requires careful aim or switching to HE. Her secondaries suck moose balls. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya allows us to now plot the progression of Soviet Battleship dispersion over distance. It appears to be similar to American Battleship dispersion but with very slightly improved accuracy over distance and slightly worse accuracy at closer ranges. This places the Russians behind the Japanese and British for battleship accuracy and ahead of American and German Battleships and probably the French. We'll need another French battleship in game before that can be made conclusive. Manoeuvrability Top Speed: 23.0knotsTurning Radius: 630mRudder Shift: 12.6s Maximum Turn Rate: 4.3º per second. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya is faster than a brick. Hooray! At a maximum speed of 23 knots (23.2 knots on a good day) she's not much faster, though. In practice, if you're taking the appropriate WASD anti-torpedo hax counter measures in mind (or just helping her sluggish turrets track targets), she's usually sailing at less than 20 knots. Like most battleships, Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya loses about a little more than a quarter of her maximum speed while under manoeuvres. With her rudder hard over, she'll bleed down to 17.2 knots and she will not recover this speed quickly. This isn't a very flexible ship and on larger maps, she struggles as much as Warspite does to get from A to B. For a rate of turn, Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya measures up rather well. She's not as agile as HMS Warspite -- arguably one of the fastest turning mid to late tier Battleships, but she does alright. At 4.3º per second, she's halfway between Warspite's 4.5º and the 4.0º per second rotation of New Mexico. Her 630m turning circle is comfortable, as is her 12.6s rudder shift time. Both allow her to slip between islands and slide between torpedo runs with ease. Be advised that as a tier V ship she cannot improve her rudder shift in any way. The only downside is that her turrets cannot keep up. They rotate at a mere 3.2º per second, and even Expert Marksman will not correct this, capping them out at 3.9º per second. Players will be tempted to use their rudder to accelerate the rotation of their guns -- a problem compounded by the need for P & X turret to rotate a minimum of 180º to engage targets on the other side of the ship. Given the problems Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya has with her armour scheme, the inevitable over angling this causes can lead to the ship's destruction in short order. As you'll see in the next section, Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya excels at tanking but from one direction (and one direction only). This places a burden on her movement expectations. You need to very carefully consider your lines of engagement. Her guns will not allow her to quickly acquire a secondary target coming from an unseen quarter and her armour will not stand up to abuse. Over extend, and you're dead. Allow someone to get your flank and you're dead. Careful positioning is the only way to counter this and she's not fast enough to allow you to recover from these mistakes. DurabilityHit Points: 42,500Citadel Protection: 225mm belt + 38mm turtleback + 19mm citadel wall Min Bow & Deck Armour: 19mm (50mm to 125mm waterline protection) Torpedo Damage Reduction: 10% The major external armour values of Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's protection scheme (rear architecture visible in insert). Note that while her armour isn't thick overall, having a little bit of armour almost everywhere provides some interesting quirks where HE and AP penetration are concerned. Her major weak spot is the 19mm 'beak' of her bow. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya will deliver a lot of mixed messages when you begin to analyze her survivability. She's a story of contrasts. It's best summarized by a quick lists of pros & cons The Good - Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya has an armour design of a first generation dreadnought where the armour is spread out across the whole vessel. The armour isn't as thick around her vitals as it will become with more modern designs, but this does provide the following benefits: Short of her superstructure and tiny weak spots on her bow and stern, she is largely immune to direct damage from destroyer and cruiser-caliber HE shells. Only the Yorck can damage her reliably with HE. Even Inertial Fuse for HE Shells does not provide 152mm armed cruisers with enough penetration to regularly land damaging hits. The entirety of her waterline, from bow to stern is covered by a minimum of 50mm worth of armour with most of it being at least 125mm. She will bounce almost everything thrown at her when she angles properly. She can absolutely shut down attempts to stack damage over time effects on her with her short cooldown Damage Control Party. The Bad - The big flaw about having armour spread out everywhere is that it's not especially thick where you need it most. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's citadel protection is the worst at her tier with a maximum of 282mm worth of protection between the three layers of armour over her machine spaces. She is extremely vulnerable to taking citadel hits when she does not angle properly. Her turret faces are extremely thin for a battleship at a mere 203mm thick. Even sloped back as they are (40º) this provides no more than 265mm worth of protection against shots at point blank range. Her barbettes are worse at only 150mm thick. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya takes frequent critical hits to her guns, even from cruiser-caliber shells. She has almost no torpedo protection. Her Damage Control Party can run out. She has the lowest hit point total among battleships at her tier. So, she's a tough battleship that seems to shrug off AP and HE shells without issue one minute and, with one mistake, she's a sinking wreck the next. She can seem very forgiving but she punishes players dearly for their misplays. The end is usually quite abrupt. One of the culprits for this feast and famine durability is her low hit point total. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya is not a very large vessel. Not only can she survive less damage overall, this also reduces the amount of returns she sees from her Repair Party. Her healing consumable can only recovery 5,950hp per charge. The two most likely culprits of Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's demise are torpedoes and AP shells. 'Well DUH,' you might say, but Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya takes battleship AP and torpedo vulnerability a step further than most battleships. Over angling is deadly to this battleship, with her belt armour at 31º only increasing to a relative thickness of ~435mm. This is well inside the penetration values of the American and Japanese 356mm guns at 10km or less and can result in the Oktryabrskaya Revolutsiya taking heavy damage from volleys. This is an affliction similar to the one affecting Kongo -- veterans of this ships should be well familiar with this frustration. Texas and König are more forgiving of angling mistakes, grace of the raw thickness of their belt armour which can present a formidable obstacle. Proper management of Oktyabrskya Revolutsiya's angles of approach is key. Never, ever give up her sides. Fortunately, Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's armour scheme is proof against most heavy cruiser fire. Even the high penetration, high Krupp values of the USN 203mm from Pensacola and Indianapolis cannot citadel her outside of 5.0km ranges, even against her flush broadside. This ship has very little in the way of torpedo protection, taking near full health strikes from any fish that strike her hull. She starts with only a 10% damage reduction while König, Kaiser, New York and Texas boast a minimum of 22% and as much as 31%. Citadel protection of the tier V Battleships, including the WiP Iron Duke. * Hits penetrating torpedo bulges but not into the ship itself do not strip hit points from a vessel. To this end, the thickness of the belt armour is paramount for preventing ships from taking penetration damage. This explains why ships like Kongo still feel "soft skinned" even though she has similar levels of citadel protection to other battleships. Note that the angle turtleback armour is measured from the vertical, so 90º would be a horizontal piece of steel. Turtleback armour isn't the be-all, end-all for citadel protection. Burying the citadel deep beneath the waterline seems to do more for keeping these vulnerable areas safe. Where Otkyabrskaya Revolutsiya really stands apart from all other Battleships is her Damage Control Party. As previously mentioned in the options section, this has an accelerated reset timer of 30s/20s depending on the stock or premium version. With the skills High Alert, Jack of All Trades and the signal flag November Foxtrot, you could theoretically get this reset timer down to 16 seconds (that's a hell of an investment for a mere four second gain). On paper it would appear to give this Russian battleship near immunity to damage over time effects. However, the limited number of charges on the consumable precludes that. In my experience, it's better to keep to the same habits you would use with other battleships. Do not activate Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's Damage Control Party until there are two fires or a flood present. This will prevent you from running out of charges too early on in a match. You have the option of accelerating the use of the consumable when it will save you, but be cautious of over use. When I played this ship, I always began with five charges available and I only ran out during one match. Concealment & Camouflage Base Surface Detection Range: 13.68km Air Detection Range: 9.8km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 11.41km Main Battery Firing Range: 16.83km Surface Detection Rank within Tier: 1st Surface Detection Rank within Matchmaking: 3rd Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya is one damn stealthy battleship. Only Imperator Nikolai I has less stock surface detection range. Arkansas Beta can out match her grace of its ship-defining access to extra upgrade slots that lets her potentially use Concealment Modification 1. But other than that, Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya is always going to see enemy battleships before they see her. This is a good thing for this vessel as this not only shores up her survivability, but it also lets her undermine one of the weaknesses of her main battery. She can close the distance and get close to her optimal firing range and not have to suffer the issues of her penetration. I do question how exactly Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya is justified as being so stealthy. I mean, she's got a large enough superstructure to make Fuso say: "Whoa, that's a bit excessive, don'tcha think!?" Maybe the lookouts get blinded by the hideousness of this ship that they fail to relay her position? Well, that's certainly one way of staying undetected. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Battery Calibers: 76mm / 37mm / 12.7mmAA Umbrella Ranges: 3.5km / 3.5km / 1.2kmAA DPS per Aura: 21 / 103 / 47 For a tier V battleship, Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya has good AA defense. It's not exceptional, however. She stands above all of her contemporaries with the notable exception of the American premium, USS Texas. She actually shares the Lone Star State's AA flaw with her anti-aircraft guns being limited to self defense ranges. Her DPS weighs in at just shy of half the overall firepower of the American vessel and is comparable to HMS Warspite's totals while being a full tier lower. This is a very respectable sum and can form the basis of an efficient self defense umbrella should a player elect to increase this further. Basic Fire Training and Advanced Fire Training along with the upgrade AA Guns Modification 2 will round out Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's AA total at approximately 207dps with the majority of that firepower reaching up to 5.1km. She does not possess anti-aircraft mounts big enough to benefit from Manual Fire Control for AA Armament, so this skill should be avoided. Short of taking the November Echo Setteseven signal, this is the limit of the pre-game improvements that can be made. Left on it's own, Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's anti-aircraft firepower is okay -- enough to bruise carrier squadrons up to tier V and make it far too expensive for tier IV carriers to make continued attack runs against you. The heavy specialization will make her a similarly prickly target for tier V carriers, draining their flight hangars of strike aircraft. However, she cannot make her anti-aircraft firepower strong enough to dissuade tier VI+ carriers, never mind provide her with the illusion of being safe from their predation. As word gets out about her Damage Control Party, it's possible that focus from enemy carriers will drop off. Carriers cannot stack damage over time effects on Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya. Dive Bombers start fires? Put them out. Within twenty seconds after it's active period ends it will be available again to stop any follow-up floods. It often takes carriers that long to line up their second attack run so the risks of receiving stacked damage effects is very low. Short of dealing massive alpha strikes, picking on Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya with combined air strikes just isn't worth the time and effort. A Tale of Two Builds Let's not mince words. Here's the optimal build for Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya. Here's what you take for your first 10pts: From the first tier, Preventative Maintenance is the best choice. However, if you find yourself struggling not only with situational and map awareness, but risk assessment, then Priority Target becomes more valuable. From tier two, take Expert Marksman. This will increase your turret rotation up to 3.9º per second. This is still terrible, but it's a damned sight better than it was. At tier three, take Superintendent. This doubles up to give you an extra charge of both Damage Control Party and Repair Party. You should still be taking the premium version of both of these consumables, by the way. This skill doesn't substitute the premium consumable, it only supplements it. And finally, take Concealment Expert at tier four. This plays to Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's strengths and lets you get into and out of trouble so much easier. From here, pick up Adrenaline Rush to boost your rate of fire as you take damage. This should be followed up with Basic Fire Training and Advanced Fire Training to boost your good AA power. Carriers are much more commonplace at low tiers, so you will get good use out of these skills, though they have diminishing returns when facing tier VI and VII aircraft carriers. The standard battleship survivability skills have much less value due to Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's Damage Control Party. However, a reasonable alternative to the AA build is to keep Adrenaline Rush but take Basics of Survivability and Vigilance instead. The former will reduce the damage taken from single-fires (which you should normally let run their full course) and Vigilance will give you a bit more warning on torpedoes. This is handy given her preference to be up front. With the one point leftover, double back and grab Priority Target or Preventative Maintenance -- whichever one you skipped out on at tier one. Overall Impressions Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult I still have concerns that the management of the charges on Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya's Damage Control Party will present a skill-barrier for casual players who pick up this ship. Having five charges through the use of Superintendent and the premium version of the consumable is very comfortable. Three would not be. There's the added problems of her bad traverse and her squishy-as-an-Omaha (I exaggerate) citadel. Yeah, I can see a lot of inexperienced players being frustrated with this ship. Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme This ship is rather inflexible. While she has the firepower to really carry a match, she's missing that element of speed to take her carries to the penultimate level. Most of the usual battleship tricks apply to this ship. The gimmick of her Damage Control Party is another parlor trick she can play against her opponents. Mouse's Summary: You're probably going to hear a lot of negative press about this ship facing higher tiered ships. Look, if you're normally intimidated by facing ships two tiers higher, then yeah, keep clear. However, Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya can easily punch over her weight class. Seriously. Her guns are good. Her stealth is good. Her durability is good. You can make that work. Speaking of her guns -- treat them like Scharnhorst's AP shells and you'll do just fine. It's twelve Scharnhorst guns every 32 seconds as opposed to nine every 20s. The biggest hurdle in this ship is overcoming the awful traverse and placement of P-turret. Seriously, you're going to want to use your rudder to accelerate it's turn. Just don't do it. I dunno how many times this caused me to over angle and get me sunk. I loved playing this ugly ship. It's amazing how many problems you can solve with 5.65 tons of Stalinium. Every thirty-two seconds, there's another problem solved. Despite the teething issues I had with her gun traverse, this is a fun ship to play. She's as unsubtle as she looks. She hits like a truck, she tanks like a truck, and she looks like something a truck ran over. There was only one problem I really had with her: She doesn't brawl well. Imperator Nikolai I brawls with the best of them, so I thought it natural to give it a go in Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya. Imagine to my surprise to find out she had issues here. Don't get me wrong -- she's an absolute rockstar from the moment you set your sights on your prey and during the opening stages. She bow tanks with the best of 'em and her 305mm guns really put down the hurt. She just can't seem to finish the fights she starts. Everything on the approach will be just fine, but it's that key moment when your ship's paths cross alongside one another that everything goes to Hell. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya eats citadel hits like an Omaha in these engagements. It's like one moment she's a big ol' battleship and the next she's some wussy German light cruiser with an allergic reaction to loud noises. If you can survive that crossover, you should be okay. Her best-butt is pretty tanky. Just don't over angle. But it's surviving that crossover that's really going to be the clincher. I've only managed it once in all of my test games. It made me have a sad. Overall, this ship is a great addition to the meta. She's strong without being unfair. She's got flaws that can be exploited and I appreciate that not only from the challenge playing her well but also in anticipation of playing against her in the future. This battleship will make cruisers and gunship destroyers cry for the ease at which she shrugs off their fire damage. She'll frustrate CVs by negating their damage over time effects. Yet, torpedo boats will laugh at the ease at which they dispatch her small hit point pool and lack of torpedo protection. Enemy battleships that learn her weaknesses can bully her for days. I am very much looking forward to this ship being made widely available. Would I Recommend? Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya is tier V and that's going to be a huge strike against her for many players. This tier is the first one out of the kiddy-pool, so to speak, and she shoulders an undue amount of Matchmaking burden to populate tier VI and VII matches. Tier V faces higher tiered opponents often in Random Battles -- maybe too often in the views of some players. Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya isn't ideal for such fights, but she can certainly hold her own and she can certainly perform. PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? She does splendidly in PVE Battles, so I would recommend her for Co-Op and Scenario Players. Most battleships tend to do well here and Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya is no exception. In Scenarios, she might be a bit slow, both on straight-line speed and gun traverse to respond to threats quickly, so make sure you evaluate the needs of the mission before blindly taking this ship out. She's good for applying direct firepower and tanking from one direction (and one direction only). Random Battle Grinding:This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. It's harder to recommend her here, so I'm going to give her a pass. Lemme explain why: First, she's not a big credit earner. Anything below tier VI really struggles in that department, so that's out. Two, the experience gains for a truly excellent game will struggling to exceed 1750 base experience. This in turn means lower captain training. Three, she has some pretty specific needs for a Captain that do not gel well with the current Soviet tech tree, so she's a bad trainer. The one thing she is good at is achievements. She farms High Caliber, Confederate and Dreadnought achievements like a champ. For Competitive Gaming:Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. She'll pad your win rate in Random Battles if you're confident with facing higher tiered opponents. She clubs seals like no one's business on top of that. If Wargaming opens up Ranked Battles for tier V, she'd be a good choice. The mix of firepower, durability, agility and AA power are all welcome. For Collectors:If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. I still have very fond memories of sinking the Marat in IL-2 Sturmovik. This one is a no brainer for me, but I have a history with this class of ships. Some of you might not. For Fun Factor: Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? If you can get past her awful turret traverse, then heck yeah, she's a lot of fun. What's the Final Verdict?How would the ship rate on an Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage - Meh - Gud - Overpowered? GARBAGE - Grossly uncompetitive and badly in need of buffs.Mehbote - Average ship. Has strengths and weaknesses. Doesn't need buffs to be viable, but certainly not advantageous.Gudbote - A strong ship that has obvious competitive strengths and unique features that make it very appealing.OVERPOWERED - A ship with very clear advantages over all of its competitors and unbalancing the game with its inclusion.
  2. Well howdy folks and welcome back to your home port! I have a quick review of the Tier V Premium Soviet Battleship, OKTYABRSKAYA REVOLUTSIYA. This ship was provided to me by Wargaming for the purpose of creating this review video and at this point it must be considered a Work in Progress as specifications shown here are not officially finalized. In addition, this review was created using a 19pt captain and the following Upgrade modules: Main Armaments Modification 1, Aiming Systems Modification 1, and Damage Control System Modification 1.
  3. Lol you gotta be friggin' kidding me... Just finished a Ranked Battle, the outcome was interesting haha. I was the last man standing, and it was 1v1 at the very end. The Gaede in game Flesh-Wounded me, giving an enemy Cleveland the win. When you see it, tho! XD That being said, it was a great game and props out to the Reds- Warspite almost carried us through!
  4. I've done some digging around to find a proper model/mod of Space Battleship Yamato, but haven't been successful so far. I'm just genuinely surprised that no one has released/shared a model /mod of this yet (not referring to the April fools special space yamato back in the closed beta). I'll continue my search to find a model/mod of it, but if anyone else finds one or knows where one is it would be very much appreciated if you shared the location and the creators name (to give proper credit).
  5. Hello everyone! Was just looking into the threads and noticed a lot of people talking about animes and games that look at war and naval battles. Are there any great movies, animes, games etc that you would recommend? What is your favourite movie featuring war scenarios/naval battles? Have you ever been watching something and recognised a ship from your WoW playthroughs? Or watched a scenario play out and thought 'pfft the German ship is actually superior' etc?
  6. Please be aware that all of the statistics and performance discussed in this post reflect the version of the ship as she appeared during the testing period. These are subject to change before release. The following is aimed at new(ish) players looking to find a little more information about various ships from events, for premium currency or for real-world cash. The goal is to allow players to make an educated decision before parting with their time and money and to find premium vessels that suit their chosen style of play, whether that is competitive, cooperative, or simply for fun. The idea here is to elabourate on information not commonly available through reading statistics and provide some (heavily) biased anecdotal evidence to encourage or dissuade you from making your purchase. The usual disclaimers apply: everyone knows the Matchmaker clearly loves me because I spend money so that's why I occasionally get really good games, not because I have any particular skills of note. Mustu-have? Quick Summary: A faster Nagato-class Battleship with less armour, less efficient AP shells and almost no AA power whatsoever. She does get deck mounted torpedoes, though. Patch and Date Written: - January 30th, 2017 through to February 3rd, 2017. Cost: Undisclosed at the time this article was published. PROs Largest hit point pool of any of the tier 6 Battleships at 58,400hp. Her 410mm shells are the highest damage rounds found at tier 6. Able to easily overmatch the bows armour of any Tier 5 through 7 battleships. Decent accuracy, including a 1.8 sigma vertical dispersion value. Excellent range at 20.4km. Armed with deck mounted torpedoes (!) Very heavy secondary gun battery. Good top speed of 26.5 knots. CONs Her citadel sits high in the water and is vulnerable to long-range, plunging fire. Poor overall armour values. Low Krupp (and penetration) values on her 410mm shells. Secondaries are short ranged at 4.0km stock. Very limited fire arcs and performance on her torpedoes. Rather large turning circle of 770m. Enormous surface detection range of 16.9km and the largest aerial detection range of the tier 6 Battleships at 13.3km Mutsu sets a new standard for poor anti-aircraft defense. Like, seriously. Her AA power would be shameful at tier 4. Patch 0.6.0 removed the stock hulls for Amagi and Nagato in the research tree and rendered these hull designs into two new premiums, Ashitaka and Mutsu respectively. Mutsu is the first of these ships to be released -- we'll see Ashitaka later on in the year. For those unfamiliar with the IJN Battleship line, the stock versions of these hulls weren't exactly good. While not as hamstrung as Fuso while stock, they certainly were not competitive at their tiers. For this reason, Mutsu appears in World of Warships as a tier 6 vessel instead of at tier 7 like her sister, Nagato. This allows this ship to be re-balanced based on her own merits and flaws rather than trying to shoe horn her into a tier where she doesn't belong. Mutsu as she appears in game represents the ship after her 1924 refit, where she acquired her serpentine shaped funnel but before 1926 where she lost her torpedoes. Of course all of this date specificity is moot when you you realize that she didn't get her catapults until the 1930s. Yay, fiction! I'm joined once again by Lert who will be providing his usual smarmy comparisons of some of this ship's contemporaries. I'm also trying something new. GrafZeppelinKai, one of the Wiki-Staff volunteers has written a lovely piece on Mutsu's history which can be found on the ship's wiki page. The wiki staff perform some wonderful written work and I'm trying to help give them a little more just deserved attention. I hope you all enjoy a bit of history about the ships. The Lertbox Hello and welcome to another Lertbox, in which I try to offer a counterpoint to LittleWhiteMouse's more in-depth review of an upcoming premium ship. This time it's Mutsu, a ship that earned its place in history for the same thing Arizona did: tragically blowing up in port with a lot of people inside. The cause of Mutsu's destruction is slightly more controversial than Arizona's, a Japanese investigation concluded that a disgruntled crewman sabotaged #3 turret and blew up the ship, while an alternative theory is that of a fire caused by 20+ year old electronics near #3 turret. All we know for certain is that Mutsu took 1121 crew and visitors with her, only 56 less than Arizona's demise claimed. For this Lertbox I will discuss how you would take on an Arizona, a Warspite and a Dunkerque in a theoretical 1v1. I hope this will give the reader an idea how Mutsu will perform compared to her peers. Given the Mutsu's large surface and aerial detection range, in combination with her vulnerable armour scheme to ranged fire, it's often best to let some of your allies screen your advance. History with the Wiki: Mutsu By GrafZeppelinKai, Originally published on the Mutsu's page for the World of Warships Wiki The Nagato-class battleships were the last pair of battleships build by the Japanese Navy before the global hiatus on capital ship construction due to the ratification of the Washington and London Naval Treaties. As such, the Nagato-class is seen as the culmination of all the experience learned by the Japanese Navy in dreadnought design and construction up through the end of World War I. Led by famed naval architect Yuzuru Hiraga, planning and design for the Nagato-class began in 1916. By this time, Japan was a steadfast, growing naval power and wanted their designs to reflect such a status. As such, from the outset the Nagato-class were set to be first-rate dreadnoughts, competitive with the offerings of the other navies of the world (chiefly the Colorado-class battleships that were being built by the United States). Hiraga and his team were meticulous, delaying final completion of her plans until mid-1917 in order to incorporate the lessons learned from the Battle of Jutland the previous year. What ultimately emerged were the most advanced battleships afloat in the world. The Japanese determined that high-speed was an integral asset to making a battleship an effective weapon; as such, the Nagato-class were designed to be the fastest battleships in the world. It was decided to fit no less than twenty-one (21) Kampon boilers into them: fifteen (15) oil-fired and six (6) mix-fired. These boilers then fed into four (4) geared turbines that each powered a single screw. Altogether, they generated 80,000 shaft horsepower and propelled the ships to speeds above 26 knots, significantly faster than their competition. This was not a fact the Japanese Navy boasted about, however, instead electing to keep the true speed a closely guarded secret. In fact, the US Navy didn’t know the true speed of the class until well into the late 1930s. In electing to focus on propulsion and speed, weight had to be saved from the armoring. Ergo, the Japanese opted to implement the “all-or-nothing” armor principle that was championed by the US; maximal armor to the vital areas whist non-critical surfaces receives minimal armor. The main belt and the barbette rings received 12 inches of armor, whilst the conning tower and the turret faces received 14 inches and 18 inches of armor, respectively. While this was sufficient to rival other battleships of the period, British and US battleships all had heavier armor, with belt armors exceeding 13 inches for many classes. After experimentation with the six turret design of the Fuso and Ise classes, Hiraga and his designers decided to revert back to a quadruple turret design, determining this configuration to be the most effective. In order to not decrease overall firepower — by reducing the number of barrels from 12 to 8 — the caliber each rifle was increased from the traditional 14 inches to 16 inches; in fact, the Nagato-class battleships were the first ships in the world to mount 16-inch naval rifles. To supplement the primary artillery, twenty (20) 5.5-inch casemate guns were added to the hull. Interestingly, the Nagato-class retained the Japanese tradition of fitting torpedo tubes to their battleships. Historically, eight (8) total tubes were incorporated in the design; 4 above the waterline and 4 submerged (only the four above the waterline are available in-game). Mutsu (named after Mutsu Province) was the second of the two Nagato-class battleships, built at the Naval Arsenal in Yokosuka. She was laid down 1 June 1918, launched 31 May 1920, and completed 24 October 1921. The Nagato-class underwent a modernization in the late 1920s and a reconstruction in the 1930s to keep the designs combat-capable. During the 1920s modernization, the first funnel was replaced with a serpentine funnel with a raked-top in order to attempt to fix the issue of the superstructure being occluded with smoke; the very funnel seen in-game. Furthermore, the torpedo tubes were traded-in for anti-aircraft artillery, in order to counter the growing threat of aircraft. Unique to Mutsu, her bow was remodeled in order to decrease water spray to her foredeck. The 1930s reconstruction proved to be a more extensive overhaul. The iconic 7-masted superstructure was replaced with a pagoda-mast style design, and the first funnel was removed altogether. The old boilers were replaced; the overall number was also reduced to just ten (10). Interestingly, the old turrets were replaced by the ones of the incomplete Tosa class battleships, allowing for greater gun elevation, ergo greater range. Furthermore, torpedo bulges were introduced. To mitigate the loss in ship speed due to the added weight, the length of the battleships were increased. Finally, a catapult was added to launch scout planes off the deck. Service History Commissioned in October 1921, Mutsu survived the Washington Naval Treaty, was assigned to BatDiv (Battleship Division) 1, and began an uneventful interwar career. From 1927 to 1933, Mutsu would receive periodic modifications, but in September 1934 she entered drydock for a complete rebuild and modernization. She remained in yard hands until September 1936. With the beginning of war with China in July 1937, Mutsu — having returned to BatDiv 1 alongside Nagato — joined the fleet for security and blockade patrols off the China coast. Mutsu would continue operations off China until March 1941. In August 1941, Mutsu began preparations for combat as Japan planned for hostilities with the United States. Mutsu would spend the beginning of World War II, from December 1941 to May 1942, in reserve and training. In June, she and the rest of BatDiv 1 — now including Yamato — sortied as part of the Main Body for Operation MO, the invasion of Midway. Other than to receive the transfer of survivors from Akagi, Kaga, Hiryu, and Soryu, Mutsu would not participate in the battle, and returned to Japan. In July, BatDiv 1, less Yamato, was attached to the 2nd Fleet. In August, they departed for Truk after the US landing at Guadalcanal. In late August, Mutsu was assigned to support the Main Body for the Battle of the Eastern Solomons, where she fired at an aircraft shadowing the fleet. This would prove to be her only shots fired in combat during the war. In September, Mutsu landed a party to help train anti-aircraft crews at Truk. She would remain and participate in exercises until January 1943, when she returned to Japan. Excepting one aborted sortie to the Aleutians after the Battle of the Komandorski Islands in late March 1943, Mutsu continued to conduct training and gunnery exercises until June 1943. On 8 June 1943, Mutsu was moored in Hashirajima harbor when, at approximately 1200 hours, her No. 3 turret suffered an explosion. The blast tore her in two, and the section forward the No. 3 turret rolled over and quickly sank. Her stern section sank early the next day. Of her 1,474 crew, 1,121 were killed. An investigation concluded human error was responsible for the explosion, and the Japanese Navy consequently altered regulations for the handling of explosives aboard ships. Mutsu was struck from the Navy List on 1 September 1943. Post-war salvage attempts proved to be failures, though Mutsu’s No. 4 turret, anchors, and other parts of the ship — including her bow — were successfully recovered in the 1970s. The gun barrels from the salvaged No. 4 turret were restored and are now on display in separate locations in Japan: one at the Museum of Maritime Science in Tokyo, and the other outside the Yamato Museum in Kure. Options Mutsu has standard tier 6 IJN Battleship options. There's nothing out of the ordinary here. Consumables: Damage Control Party Repair Party Spotter Aircraft Module Upgrades: Four slots, standard non-USN Battleship options.Premium Camouflage: Tier 6+ Standard. This provides 50% bonus experience gains, 3% reduction in surface detection and 4% reduction in enemy accuracy Firepower Main Battery: 410mm/45 3rd Year Type in 4x2 turrets in A-B-X-Y configuration @ 20.4km Range Mutsu fires a Type88 1000kg AP/APC shell up to a range of 20.4km with a 790m/s muzzle velocity. This is the largest shell found presently at tier 6, eclipsing Warspite's own 381mm, 879kg shell by a healthy margin. Don't mistake these shells for the same ones found on the upgraded Nagato. The ammunition Mutsu uses is a pre-WWII shell and was originally found on the stock Nagato and Amagi. They have worse overall performance than those found on the IJN Battleships at tiers 7 and 8, with lower alpha strike, muzzle velocity and Krupp values while being slightly lighter overall by 20kg. This gives Mutsu significantly less penetration power over distance to the lead of her class, with many shells shattering or ricocheting against enemy warships at medium to long range. Despite my incessant whining, Wargaming wouldn't provide me the exact penetration values present on Mutsu. For now, we have only two sources to give us with a glimpse into what the raw numbers might be. The first comes from Wargaming's own Armada Videos. These are few and far between, but thankfully have included a plethora of ships found in Mutsu's matchmaking spread. Statics drawn from the World of Warships The second, and admittedly more awesome source, is the work done by fnord_disc on the European Server, who reverse-engineered an approximate model of the penetration mechanics. The numbers they worked out provide the following estimated values for Mutsu's AP shells: 548mm at 5km 426mm at 10km 332mm at 15km Even as an estimation, this puts Mutsu's shell penetration among the worst for tier 6 Battleships, ahead of only Warspite at extremely short ranges and only ahead of Bayern at anything beyond that. The net result of this will be less damaging hits against heavily armoured (or angled) targets. Datamining reveals that Mutsu's gun accuracy is decent -- she boasted a 1.8 sigma during testing combined with the typically tight dispersion values found on IJN Battleships. This is superior to anything short of tier 9 and 10 USN Battleships specialized for accuracy. On paper, this should help compensate for some of the penetration issues found on the guns. However, with the small number of barrels Mutsu brings to bear, every shot feels considerably more precious than the 'shotgun blasts' fired by 12-rifle ships. Thus, Arizona which has more overall dispersion but the same sigma value, feels more accurate than Mutsu by combination of having more guns and better penetration values. You're going to simply do more damage more consistently with a ship like the Arizona or Dunkerque despite Mutsu's advantages in accuracy. Comparative data between the tier 6 Battleships + Nagato. Mutsu's strengths are her range, the high alpha damage of her individual AP shells and her ability to overmatch the bows of any tier 5, 6 or 7 battleship. She also has the highest potential DPM values of any of the 8-gun Battleships. Her weaknesses include her low muzzle velocity and poor Krupp and penetration valuesvalues. While Mutsu's guns look like they have the potential to perform, you may find they let you down at long range engagements. I'm trying not to sound too bleak about Mutsu's main battery firepower. There are two versions of Battleship Mutsu's guns. The first was the version that I play tested. The second is the version that's being released. Wargaming let me know in advance what the changes would be and I tried to keep them in mind while I tried out this ship. I'm taking it on faith that Mutsu will be released as Wargaming announced. Mutsu had a 35s reload on her main armament. This is being reduced to 30s. Mutsu had a turret rotation speed of 3.3º per second. This was buffed to 3.8º per second (from 54.5s to 47.4s for 180º rotation). In short, Mutsu's gun handling and rate of fire was buffed rather significantly. This in turn greatly affected the DPM we saw during play testing. This put her optimal DPM down to 170,057 AP damage and 89,143 HE damage. The buffs provided by Wargaming increase her DPM by a full 17% which I think we'll all agree is enormous. Summary: Her main battery has mix of significant strengths and telling weaknesses. Shells are individually hard hitting, long ranged and capable of overmatching the bows of any tier 5 to 7 battleship. However, she is severely restricted by poor penetration values at range, a low Krupp rating and small main-battery. Probably her best feature is her "new" 30s reload which gives her the best potential DPM of the 8-gun Battleships. Secondary Guns Secondary Battery: 140mm/50 3rd Year Type in 20x1 casemates, 127mm/40 Type 89 in 4x2 turrets @ 4.0km Range The lion's share of Mutsu's secondaries are composed of her 140mm casemates. These fire 7.9 rounds per minute at a disappointing 4.0km range. Like all IJN Battleships, her casemates fire an AP shell instead of HE which reduces their overall performance. While on paper, AP shells do more damage, their output isn't consistent. They cannot light fires. They are likely to ricochet and shatter against even slightly angled targets. Her 127mm rifles do fire an HE shell, but these are limited to two pairs of turrets on either side of the vessel. It's difficult to justify investing heavily in upgrading Mutsu's secondaries to improve their performance, primarily given their poor range and unreliability. Torpedoes Torpedo Complement: 4x1 Launchers firing a 533mm Type 6 torpedo at 57 knots for 7.0km. Move over, Kriegsmarine; the IJN now has deck mounted torpedo launchers too. While the Tirpitz introduced Battleship-launched torpedoes to fanfare and fireworks, Mutsu's torpedoes feel like they should be announced by a kazoo. The Type 6 is the same torpedo found on the Isokaze and Minekaze. This strikes for 10,833 damage which, when facing the anti-torpedo bulges of contemporary Battleships, feel lackluster. The devil is in the details with Mutsu's torpedo armament. While its true that she has limited fire arcs, these have a forward facing from 55º to 105º. In addition, these have a ridiculously short reload rate at a mere 21s. These torpedoes do not give her the strength to effectively brawl with enemy Dreadnoughts. While theoretically being able to interweave broadside main battery fire backed by torpedoes, alternating each in rapid succession, practical experience makes it too risky. Mutsu has to expose her vulnerable citadel to launch torpedoes. While this is easily done in the first moments while the engagement ranges are still closing, it becomes impossible to get a second salvo off as ranges close and the fight devolves into a "death circle" at point blank range. Still, if you get locked in a battleship brawl, her torpedoes can be a welcome trump card to end the engagement favourably. Keep in mind that Mutsu does not have the armour profile or secondary ammunition to brawl effectively. Firepower Summary: Main Battery firepower is optimized for a mid-to-short range engagement, between 7km and 12km. Her secondaries are plentiful but are painfully short ranged and focused around a heavy broadside of AP shells which limits their utility. Her torpedo armament reloads very quickly but a broadside does not hit very hard. It is only suitable for finishing off already crippled targets and should not be relied upon as a trump-card. Playtesting Mutsu with a 35s reload wasn't fun. She'll be in much better shape now. Rivals: Arizona Lert: You have longer range, more hit-points, better speed, better dispersion at a given range and your 16" shells will overmatch Arizona's 25mm bow and stern armor. Sounds like a foregone conclusion, right? Well, not quite. Arizona's bow (or stern) is a difficult target to hit at range. Also your large shells lose a lot of penetration when flying that far and are likely to shatter on anything that isn't Arizona's bow. Plus, a low volume of fire makes missing the American ship or shells shattering a relatively more painful event, cutting down your already lacking DPM. Meanwhile Arizona's range isn't that much shorter, and she has a much higher RPM with her 12 14" rifles. Plus, Mutsu's armor is so soft that you're bound to take significant pen damage from any Arizona return volley. If you can, point your bow straight at Arizona and close the distance with your superior speed. Arizona's 356mm AP will mostly bounce off your 25mm forward end with only stray shells going into your superstructure, and your 410mm return fire will go through Arizona's bow like butter - if you can hit it. The ideal situation is to set up a drive-by. Pre-aim your guns when you're almost about to pass, fire your torpedoes into the Arizona's path, quickly switch back to your AP and let loose a devastating volley of 16" AP at point blank range. Mutsu's guns are accurate enough to let you snipe, but they just don't have the penetration value to reliably deal the damage you want at those ranges. Pick your targets carefully. You can still score some pretty impressive early damage if you know who to aim for. Maneuverability Top Speed: 26.5 knots Turning Radius: 770m Rudder Shift Time: 14.7s Mutsu is rather fast for a tier 6 Battleship. Her top speed of 26.5 knots makes her faster than most tier 5 through 7 Battleships with the exceptions of Kongo, Scharnhorst, Gneisenau and Dunkerque which is rather respectable. While this doesn't give her tremendous flexibility, it does allow her to keep up with the pace of combat. She can attempt to dictate engagement ranges instead of having them set for her. Like most IJN Battleships, her turning circle isn't small nor does she answer her rudder especially fast. In truth, her Rudder Shift Time isn't terrible, it's just that when combined with her large turning circle, she doesn't feel especially maneuverable. During play testing, even with this slow handling, she was still quite capable of turning the ship faster than her turrets could compensate for. She initially had a 3.3º per second rotation speed on her main battery guns. I'm assured this will be buffed to 3.8º per second before release which will help. Mutsu has a 1.5 knot advantage over her sister, Nagato. This advantage comes grace of less armour protection. Durability Hit Points: 58,400 Citadel Protection: 305mm belt armour + 76mm turtleback Min Bow & Deck Armour: 25mm Torpedo Damage Reduction: 22% Mutsu shares a lot in common with Nagato, as one might expect. This provides a bit of good news right off the start: Mutsu has the highest hit point total of any of the tier 6 Super-Dreadnoughts. Their armour profiles are almost identical but for the following changes: Nagato has 25mm of extra armour across her sides in the form of anti-torpedo bulges. These afford the lead ship a 5% further reduction in torpedo damage along with their armour benefits. Nagato has reinforced main battery turret and barbette armour, with 457mm turret faces and 405mm barbettes. These values never exceed 305mm on Mutsu. Nagato's forward magazine is protected by a 289mm turtleback. Mutsu has only 76mm on this section of plate. The citadel deck of Nagato ranges from 44mm to 197mm. On Mutsu, these values range from 25mm (!) to 51mm. The Nagato-class has never been considered a heavily armoured ship and the deficiencies on Mutsu only exaggerate this weakness. While she can angle against 356mm rifles, if she doesn't angle properly she can (and will) get citadelled with alarming regularity. Her citadel sits over the waterline and while her belt armour and the turtleback protecting these machine spaces looks formidable, these are often bypassed by shots striking her from range, which need only contend with the 25mm + 70mm deck armour found amidships and the pathetic 25mm roof her citadel. She has objectively worse protection than the Warspite at all ranges. This emphasizes the gunnery strength of Mutsu which seems designed around a mid to short ranged engagement. However, with her citadel sitting over the waterline, short of bow-on angles of attack, she is far too vulnerable to risk at point blank ranges against other battleships. This illustrates some of the dangers of trying to make use of her torpedo armament. Angling out to take the lead on a closing enemy Battleship at the very least exposes her forward magazine to citadel hits. So to maximize her armour values, Mutsu seems best at medium ranges -- approximately 7km to 12km away from her targets. Of course, this all goes to pot if she's facing anything with 380mm rifles or larger which overmatch the 25mm sections of her armour. When facing tier 8 opponents, her armour feels very deficient indeed. Like all IJN Battleships, Mutsu is shackled with the worst Damage Control Party consumable in the game. This makes the Battleship exceedingly vulnerable to fire and flooding damage. Rivals: Dunkerqueueueeueeeuueueue Lert: You have the advantage in hit-points, range and firepower. Dunkerque beats you in speed, agility and size, being a smaller target. She has the speed to dictate the engagement, allowing her to keep you at the max of your range where your dispersion and low volume of fire means you won't hit many of your shells. The ones that do hit and manage to avoid the Frenchman's armored belt will bloody her nose, but that's not reliable enough to count on. Meanwhile Dunkerque's 330mm rifles will struggle to do meaningful damage to you as well, especially if you keep properly angled .. ... But that's when the dastardly Frenchy will just switch to HE and burn you down. While your own HE shells aren't bad, they have 5% less fire chance and you have a lower RPM, so in a fire-hose contest you're going to lose. If you're taking on a Dunkerque in your Mutsu you better hope that you're going to get lucky or your opponent is stupid, because barring luck a smart Dunkerque driver will just wiggle around at range and burn your lumbering stern to the ground. This will happen a lot. Concealment & Camouflage Surface Detection Range: 16.9 km Air Detection Range: 13.3 km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 14.1km Concealment Penalty while Firing: +12.3km (vs 20.4km gun range) Mutsu has arguably the worst detection range of any of the tier 6 Battleships. Actually, Mouse, Fuso has worse surface detection range, and while that's technically correct, Mutsu will be spotted from the air a full kilometer sooner while still having an astronomically huge surface detection range. If there's an enemy carrier present, you can expect to be the first ship spotted in Mutsu. This in turn means that you'll have every gun pointing at you first until squishier (and closer) targets get lit. Priority Target is well worth the investment. Given Mutsu's vulnerability to long range fire, it's important to engage in evasive maneuvers when she finds herself lit in these early moments of the engagement. Alternatively, she can elect to begin her own advance a little later than the rest of her team. Her large surface detection range makes disengaging from enemies exceedingly difficult. She does have the speed to help dictate engagement ranges against most Battleship opponents in her Matchmaking spread, along with the range to hammer them beyond their own reach. However, she is always going to be reliant on Allies to keep her opponents lit while attempting to keep enemies at arm's length in this manner. Anti-Aircraft DefenseAA Battery Calibers: 127mm / 40mm / 12.7mmAA Umbrella Ranges: 5.0km / 2.0km / 1.0kmAA DPS per Aura: 40 / 16 / 5 To say that this Battleship has poor anti-aircraft firepower is a gross understatement. Mutsu has worse anti-aircraft defense than any of the research-based Battleships at tier 4. She's setting a whole new standard for what "bad" anti-aircraft firepower is at tier 6. She has half the DPS of Fuso, a Battleship that has some of the worst AA firepower at tier 6. Combined with her horrible aerial detection range, the sight of Mutsu on the enemy team should ring a dinner bell for all CV players. Rivals: Warspite Lert: A more even match, since both of these ships operate on the same basic principle: trading in number of barrels and DPM for shells large and powerful enough to overmatch the 25mm bow plating found on even tier battleships. Again, you have the larger health pool, better range and larger shells, but Warspite is notoriously wiggly making her a difficult target at range, has a superior healing potion and her shells aren't that much smaller than yours to begin with. She'll overmatch your bow as easily as you'll overmatch the grand old lady's, so face-tanking incoming fire isn't a thing like it is against Arizona or Dunkerque. Use your superior range to whittle her down and your superior speed to keep her at range. Conversely, you could go for the same drive-by tactic that I recommended for taking on an Arizona, but be aware that Warspite's 15" rifles will smash through your bow plating and bite chunks offa your face while you do it. Where against an Arizona you would charge in head on, you might try closing the distance under an angle to try to lure Warspite's return fire away from your bow and into your armor belt, where it will bounce off instead of eat up large chunks of your hit-points. A lot of CV pilots "experimented" with the AA defense on Mutsu while I was play testing her, but most weren't too interested beyond a cursory strike or two. As word gets out about Mutsu's vulnerability to air power, you can expect more concerted attacks. Overall Impressions Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme Mutsu, as a tier 6 Battleship, already has a couple of strikes against her when it comes to evaluating her suitability to a novice player. She punishes players for exposing her broadside while simultaneously having a gimmicky weapon system that encourages exactly that. With poor armour, a (relatively) small number of main battery guns and secondaries that won't be of much help, a novice player could be forgiven for struggling to get any kind of reliable performance out of this ship. For the expert, Mutsu will reward good gunnery with excellent DPM values for an 8-gun Battleship. Her torpedoes will be a fun (if seldom used) gimmick that will clinch select engagements. Still, her horrible surface detection range, poor AA defense and poor armour values will limit her carry potential. The Lertbox I wanted to like Mutsu, but I just can't. She's wonderful in co-op where she'll just eat off everyone's face with her brutality, but against other people I found her lacking. Her WWI era shells don't have the penetration or the Krupp hardness to do significant damage at range, and she doesn't have the armor to mingle up close. Her hit-point pool gives her some staying power in a brawl and her torpedoes are a nifty poison dagger, but this is a ship with weapons that want to move in close and a hull that wants to stay far away. Comparing her to other tier 6 battleships makes her look better than she is. Truth is, Mutsu starts falling apart quickly against higher tiers, and I would take any of the other three into a tier 8 battle over Mutsu. Plus, there's the T6 MM to worry about, and Mutsu really does not up-tier well. I won't say that Mutsu is a bad ship per say, just that she's an alright ship in a pond of great ships, namely the trio I pit her against. Mouse's Summary: I have a love-hate relationship with Mutsu's guns. It was awful play testing with that 35s reload, but I could still make some great plays with them. I am very excited about their 30s reload. While I wasn't landing citadels as often against Battleships, they're perfectly adequate for regular penetrations. Her armour is super squishy for a Battleship. Also -- fires. Oh god, the fires. Her torpedoes were nice to have, but its rare when I got any good use out of them. Mutsu's secondaries were disappointing. She's a perfectly adequate ship ... until she has to face tiers 7 & 8. Wargaming didn't want a repeat of the German Destroyer incident. They let us Community Contributors know in advance that the Mutsu we were playing wasn't the final version. There were all of three changes that they gave us, but let me be be clear -- there may be others. As values like vertical dispersion, Krupp and shell-drag coefficient are not intended to be public knowledge, there are lots of parameters that could still change before release. So while I appreciate Wargaming striving to keep us in the know about what the release version of the ship may be, it pays to keep that disclaimer at the top of this article in mind. There was a third change, beyond rate of fire and gun traverse that Wargaming informed us of. It was this: "Increase rudder deflection speed from 19.2 to 17.9." Now, you would think that would coincide with Rudder Shift Time, but her rudder shift time is 14.7s. Whatever this value is, it represents a 7.3% change. From the way it's worded, it could represent either a buff or a nerf. If anyone has any grasp on what this is, feel free to let me know. My contacts at Wargaming who were relaying the information didn't know what it was either and couldn't get it clarified, so obviously someone at St.Petersburg has the info and simply assumed that we'd also know what it was. And so, I played Mutsu with a 35s reload and a 54.5s for 180º turret rotation speed and was asked to evaluate her performance. I won a heck of a lot of games. One day's worth of playtesting saw me win 12 out of 13 matches. However, let me add a qualifier to this win streak: I still have not broken a 2,000 base experience game in Mutsu. It wasn't a case of not being able to get the damage totals -- getting in excess of 100,000 damage wasn't impossible. But I never had any truly spectacular games. My personal best is 1,716 base experience which is disappointing with the typical "good" game sitting around 1,300 to 1,500 base experience. I took the occasional break from Mutsu by playing with my Warspite and Nagato and easily crushed that 2,000 base experience ceiling. I should warn everyone: I love Nagato, so it's probably no surprise that I took well to Mutsu, The improvements this ship will receive in terms of reload and gun handling (and the changes to whatever the heck rudder deflection speed is) will be welcome. Still, the ship isn't without its disappointments for me. The increased vertical dispersion of her guns over Nagato and the poor range on her secondaries really made me have a sad. Overall, Mutsu is a decent IJN Battleship but she's not phenomenal. I don't think anyone was expecting her to be outstanding, though -- not as an early version of a Nagato-class Battleship. So in that regard, she doesn't disappoint. Now if only the Matchmaker would let her be top tier more often... Would I Recommend? Mutsu makes a great Co-Op warrior. She's got powerful guns and she faces enemies that are, quite frankly, dumb as posts. The bots are unlikely to shoot at you when there are still cruisers and destroyers alive. This gives you lots of time to exercise your 410mm rifles often at very close range where their penetration issues aren't present. You'll also be able to use your torpedoes a lot and score hits too. Outside of Co-Op, Mutsu begins to suffer. It would be one thing if she was top tier as regularly as a tier 7 or 8 ship, but she exists in that special Hell that is tier 5 and 6 Matchmaking. She doesn't up-tier very well -- holding her own against tier 7 ships (if at a bit of a struggle) but really hurting once she faces tier 8s. Of course, this could be said about most of the tier 6 premiums, so that's nothing new. For Random Battle Grinding Mouse: It's sad to say, but Japan is rather lacking when it comes to premium Battleship trainers. The Ishizuchi is okay but, let's be honest, she's no Scharnhorst / Tirpitz / Arizona / Missouri. While Mutsu is a better fit, I wouldn't say she's a great fit. She can do what she needs to, however, and if you're hard pressed for a training ship, then Mutsu can step up to the plate. But I think you might be looking over your shoulder for the next IJN Premium Battleship. Lert: No. Arizona is IMO a far better ship, as is Warspite. And both of those are available in the tech tree for doubloons at the writing of this article. Consider Mutsu if you really need a Japanese battleship crew trainer, but buy American or British if you want a good ship to carry in. GrafZeppelinKai: Mutsu is a dependable battlewagon. Her above average gun handling characteristics, combined with a little practice, will come into it’s own. Similarly, if you’re looking for a dedicated IJN BB Captain trainer, Mutsu is your best option for now. For Competitive Gaming Mouse: No. She's too squishy and too huge. Lert: No. If you need range, bring a Fuso. If you need overmatching ability, bring a Warspite. If you need staying power, bring an Arizona.GrafZeppelinKai: It will take a bit more work to make her shine here, and her deficiencies will feel more glaring. Similar to Warspite, having good planning ahead of time will mean you’re able to dish the damage while not being the focus of the enemy. For Collectors Mouse: Yes. She's a beautiful ship with an interesting history and a tragic story. Lert: Yes. Mutsu has a place in history, and her configuration might appeal to people who like WWI era dreadnoughts. GrafZeppelinKai: I’m gonna be honest here: I like 1920s Mutsu. She’s very pretty to look at, and there are many subtle details that make her very period accurate. For that reason alone, she has a spot in my port. For Fun Factor Mouse: Well I liked her. However, I don't think I would play her very often, not compared to the other premiums 6s.Lert: She handles comfortable enough, if a bit sluggish on the rudder. I would consider her a fun ship if her shells didn't tend to shatter at long range, or her hull held up a bit better under fire. Plus, her torpedoes are just funny, if you get a chance to use them. Those are big if's though.GrafZeppelinKai: I enjoyed my time testing Mutsu. To me, the gunnery felt familiar and comfortable, and you can never resist a giggle when you surprise an adversary by pooping out a torpedo. In a brawl with Bayern and Nurnberg. Mutsu uses her main battery to finish off the German cruiser while dumping fish into the bows of Bayern. Brawling is exceedingly risky with Mutsu. Don't expect your torpedoes to clinch a fight for you. Outfitting Mutsu Mutsu doesn't require anything beyond the norm for IJN Battleships, which is a welcome relief. Recommended Modules For your first slot, take Main Armaments Modification 1. This should be no surprise. The armour around Mutsu's main turrets along with her barbettes is pretty substandard for her tier, so this will help keep them in the game. It should also help mitigate damage to your torpedo tubes, but they tend to go belly up if anyone looks at them funny. For your second slot, you may be tempted to try a secondary build, but in my experience this is a mistake -- you can't get her range out high enough to make it a credible threat.. Aiming Systems Modification 1 is arguably the most effective choice here. For your third slot, take Damage Control System Modification 1. This will help mitigate fire and flooding damage while increasing your torpedo damage reduction to 24%. And finally, take Damage Control System Modification 2 to reduce the burn-time of fires. You can take Steering Gear Modification 2 if you prefer, especially if you've taken Captain Skills to mitigate fire damage. Recommended Consumables Don't skimp out on the premium consumables for this ship. Taking a premium Damage Control Party is an absolute must. I also strongly recommend taking a premium Repair Party as well to reduce the reset timer of your healing potion and to give you an extra charge. I don't see much need in breaking the bank with a Spotter Aircraft, so it's up to you to invest in the 22,500 extra credits to make this premium or not. Captain Skills For the core build, we're going to want to emphasize her damage control abilities. For your first skill, you have a choice between Priority Target and Preventative Maintenance. I prefer the former on my first pass -- it's helpful to know when potential damage is incoming. The latter has currency with Mutsu due to the relative fragility of her weapon systems compared to other tier 6 Battleships. Next, at tier two, grab Expert Marksman. This was absolutely essential with her 3.3º per second rotation speed and it will still be worth while when this gets buffed to 3.8º per second. At tier three, Basics of Survivability should be the skill to grab to help mitigate fire damage. And finally, when you hit tier 4, take Fire Prevention. After this first pass, there are other skills to consider. The best of the bunch are Adrenaline Rush and High Alert at tier 2 and Superintendent at tier 3. This is one of those rare ships where I will not recommend Basic and Advanced Fire Training as the top picks. While these will help prop up her horrible AA firepower, it's really not going to move the needle enough to make it anywhere near acceptable. Similarly, her secondaries are just a little too short ranged to be worth specializing into. You can certainly try it out for yourself, but I don't think you'll find it pays off as well as it would for her tier 7 sister.
  7. So question: In the Hunt for Bismark mission, you would get the Bismark for free, along with the Cammo: Bismarck - From the Bottom of the Ocean So, I already had the Bismark, so I got the Silver instead. However, I do not see the Cammo available for my Bismark. The premium cammo that you get from the Hunt would give. -3% to detectability range. +4% to maximum dispersion of shells fired by the enemy at your ship. +50% to experience earned in the battle. So, what gives? Did I miss something or? I would prefer to load up the premium cammo on my Bis so I can get the extra XP. Thanks....
  8. Here's a sheet made by myself, AdmiralFrenchFry on the EU server, I'd like to have opinions on my sheet ! I didn't put Bretagne's and Normandie's, Lyon's AA defense right now, I may add them later
  9. Please be aware that all of the statistics and performance discussed in this post reflect the version of the ship as she appeared during the testing period. These are subject to change before release. The Mighty. Quick Summary: A modified Iowa-class Battleship with reinforced forward and rear citadel protection, a radar consumable and tremendous credit earning potential. Cost: 750,000 free experience. This works out to 30,000 doubloons for conversion, or approximately €100 ($110 USD). Patch & Date Written: 0.5.15, December 6th, 2016 Closest in-Game Contemporary Iowa, Tier 9 American BattleshipDegree of Similarity: Clone / Sister-Ship / Related Class / Similar Role / Unique I don't think anyone is surprised here. The differences between the Iowa and the Missouri are minor and well advertised. The Missouri loses the aircraft of the Iowa and gains radar instead. There's slight differences to their AA load out. Most telling, the Missouri has reinforced citadel armour along the transverse bulkheads, making her better at bow-tanking while avoiding citadel damage at this angle. PROs: Reinforced forward bulkheads, providing better forward protection than the Iowa. Versatile guns with tremendous AP hitting power for their tier. Guns can specialize for either the best medium range battleship accuracy in the game or for the best battleship DPM at her tier. Excellent range of 23.4km which can be increased to 27.1km with a module. Very good anti-aircraft firepower, especially at medium range. For a Battleship her size, she's very fast at 33.0 knots. Has the same Radar as the Tier 9 Baltimore-class Cruiser. Choice of two camouflage patterns. Earns 100% bonus experience. Earns 50% more credits than a tier 8 Premium, 100% more than a tech-tree ship. Available for "free" just by playing the game. CONs: Extremely vulnerable citadel that sits high over the water. Bow is easily overmatched by the 460mm rifles of the Yamato. Poor torpedo defense with only a 25% reduction from hits. Large base dispersion values coupled with a low muzzle velocity on her AP rounds. Without the accuracy module, the Missouri is one of the least accurate ships in the game. Wide 920m turning circle and 19.4s rudder shift time. The amount of free experience required to unlock her is prohibitively high and will nominally require clever use of premium time, consumables or simply spending money to acquire her. The Missouri doesn't correct a lot of the problems found on the Iowa-class. In fact, for those accustomed to the Iowa, she will seem familiar -- perhaps painfully so. The Missouri is the twelfth premium Battleship to be added to World of Warships (not including the Arpeggio Kongo-class sisters) and she certainly tops all of the others for the attention she's grabbing. The promotion of a certain action-hero aside, the Missouri is an important historical vessel. Wargaming has paid a nod to both their Hollywood endorsement and the Mighty Mo's 15 minutes of fame with fun details visible on her decks in port. But perhaps most importantly to players of World of Warships, the Missouri represents a departure from premium ships that have come before it. This is a premium tier 9 ship with accelerated economic boons. She earns 50% more experience and credits than tier 8 premiums. It's this latter ability that made me raise an eyebrow. A lack of credit earning has long been the bottleneck in progression in World of Warships and the Missouri steps all over this. If you have her, earning a couple million credits in the span of an hour's worth of casual game play is laughably simple. Players with this ship will be at a marked advantage over those who don't when it comes to acquiring new vessels or simply financing premium consumables or high tier content. In fact, the Missouri could be an utter potato boat and she'd be worth looking at if only for these economic gains. But let's take a closer look at what Wargaming has cooked up for us and see if she's worth the astronomical sum of 750,000 free experience. NoZouforYou puts together a nice summary of the ship. OptionsThere's two big points to mention in regards to the Missouri's options. The first, during testing we had two camouflage patterns to play with. These both did the same thing, providing a bonus 100% to experience gains as opposed to the 50% normally provided by premium ship camouflage between tiers 6 and 8. This is on par with premium camouflage purchased for tech tree ships at tiers 9+, though, so it's good to see the Missouri keeping pace. Note that the Missouri's credit earning potential isn't baked into her premium camouflage, but rather the ship itself. The camouflage also doesn't provide any reduction to repair costs. So your choice between the two is purely cosmetic. Or you could use some other camouflage in your reserves if you prefer. It won't hurt your credit earning. In addition, the Missouri has access to Radar. This has a 9.45km range with a 35 second active period. This is identical to the radar found on the tier 9 USN Cruiser, Baltimore. She does not have the option for any kind of aircraft. Consumables: Damage Control Party Repair Party Radar Module Upgrades: Six slots, standard USN Battleship options. Premium Camouflage: There are two versions of the Missouri's camouflage. Both provide a 3% concealment bonus, a 4% increase to enemy gunnery dispersion and a 100% bonus to experience gains. The two colour schemes for the Missouri. One nearly matches the colour scheme of the premium camouflage of the Iowa. Firepower Primary Battery: Nine 406mm rifles in 3x3 turrets in an A-B-X configuration. B is stationed in a super firing position over top of A. These have a stock range of 23.4km. Secondary Battery: Twenty 127mm dual purpose rifles in 10x2 turrets along the sides of the ship. The American 406mm 50-calibers Mk7 rifles are interesting. They combine some of the hardest hitting shells at their tier with some of the worst gun dispersion. Yet, thanks to the combination of modules the American ships can take, the Missouri can potentially be the most accurate Battleship in the game at ranges around 12km, and on par with the IJN Battleships at about 18km but at the cost of her rate of fire. It's that 6th module slot which unlocks at tier 9 which is the culprit for this. Every other nation in the game gets a 7% dispersion reduction module for their 2nd slot (found at tier 5+) with Aiming Systems Modification 1. The American Battleships instead have a range boosting module. It's only with the 6th slot where the USN can reduce their dispersion. Artillery Plotting Room Modification 2 provides an 11% reduction to dispersion. However this comes at a price. The other module competing for everyone's attention in the 6th slot is Main Battery Modification 3 which provides a rate of fire increase. This forces USN players to choose between DPM and Accuracy. Player preference will largely dictate which setup they prefer. If a player chooses to accelerate her reload then the Missouri, like the Iowa, will have the best DPM of any of the tier 9 Battleships with her AP shells. At 13,500hp per citadel hit, these can quickly doom anyone rash enough to make themselves a target. I personally believe that the accelerated reload is the way to go though there's a firm argument to be made in favour of accuracy. There are two primary downsides to these guns. The first has been touched upon already. Their dispersion, unless properly mitigated, can be downright trollish. This is combined by a rather slow muzzle velocity for her shells of 762m/s with her AP rounds. They thankfully retain energy well due to their heavy mass but this still leads to a longer lead time than with the IJN guns, for example. The only other 'bad' point worth mentioning is that due to the overmatch mechanics, anything with 32mm of bow armour can tank the Missouri's guns and remains largely immune to her AP shells so long as they keep their prow pointed towards her. This includes all tier 8+ Battleships which can make for long, drawn out stalemates. The secondary gun batteries of the Missouri are regrettably forgettable. While deadly enough to a low health destroyer that strays within range, the Missouri doesn't put out the same fearsome volume of fire of the German or Japanese Battleships. While it's possible to specialize into their performance, this usually happens as a happy coincidence rather than a deliberate act, with skills such as Basic and Advanced Fire Training being taken primarily to boost her AA power rather than with an aim to increase her secondary potency. Summary: Versatile guns that can be specialized for either high DPM or high accuracy. Excellent range. Very hard hitting AP shell with excellent alpha strike potential. Struggles somewhat against angled enemy Battleships due to overmatch mechanics. Secondaries are adequate but weaker than her contemporaries With a range that can exceed 27km, the Missouri often finds herself engaging enemies from one extreme of the map to another. Without an accuracy modification, doing any damage at these distances is chancy at best. Like all Battleships, she really starts coming into her own at medium to close range, however her fragility makes getting this near to the enemy extremely risky. Sometimes the rewards are worth it. Maneuverability Top Speed: 33.0 knotsTurning Radius: 920mRudder Shift: 19.4s The Missouri has some very long legs. It's a shame she so seldom gets to flex them in the current high-tier meta. At 33 knots, the Missouri and Iowa are the fastest Battleships in the game, bar none. This should, in theory, allow her to dictate the range of any engagement with other Battleships while also allowing her to redeploy as needed. However, this straight line speed comes at a cost. Her handling is downright horrific with a 920m turning circle and a sluggish rudder shift to boot. So while you can navigate from point A to B with alacrity, you're not going to want to do so under fire as it will expose your Missouri to enemy artillery and torpedoes. Dodging the latter, never mind the former will be an extreme challenge. DurabilityHit Points: 78,300Maximum Protection: Up to 368mm + 38mm external citadel protection, 432mm turret faces, 439mm conning tower. Min Bow & Deck Armour: 32mm (immunity to 420mm rifles)Torpedo Damage Reduction: 25% The Missouri is much lauded for its improved forward protection with the reinforcements made to her transverse bulkheads. This beefs up her citadel protection to 368mm + 19mm at best or 297mm + 19mm at worst, depending on how high or low these forward penetration shells strike. The only ship that will severely be testing these forward bulkheads is the Yamato unless you over angle your Missouri. While this looks great on paper, it pays to look at the Missouri (and the Iowa-class overall) objectively where her durability is concerned. For people hoping that the Missouri would correct the errors in the Iowa citadel placement, don't hold your breath. It's still enormous. It's still extends well above the water line. She bow tanks decently, and that's about it. The buffs to her transverse bulkheads aside, the Missouri isn't the fixed Iowa-class some have been praying for. The German Battleships created a new standard for what "good" armour protection is back when they were introduced in the third quarter of this year. I hate to parrot my Iowa-review, but the Missouri doesn't have good protection. Her citadel is placed far too high in the water for that. If an enemy ship catches her broadside, you will take citadel damage -- it's almost a matter of course. Combined onto this, she has weak torpedo defenses with a paltry 1/4 reduction of torpedo strikes She also still has that enormous hole in her citadel protection directly to the rear, just beneath her #3 turret. In order to stay safe, the Missouri needs to bow tank -- keep all of her enemies directly in front of her. In this way, she can bounce an enormous level of punishment, forcing enemies to instead pick on her superstructure or switch over to high explosive fire in order to stack any reasonable form of damage. This isn't a trait unique to the Missouri or the Iowa-class as a whole. The Friedrich der Große is just as good at it, if not better with her improved deck armour around the turrets which can make even Battleship caliber HE explode for no damage. So what does this buff to the Missouri's transverse forward bulkhead mean, exactly? Well, it means it's a little harder for a Yamato to citadel you through the bow. It might occasionally come into play if you over angle and another battleship tries to bulls-eye your citadel from the front. I couldn't test this out in a training room to see for certain so pay close attention to this if you pick her up. Bow-tanking. It's not pretty. It's not historical. But it is effective. Concealment & Camouflage Surface Detection Range: 16.2km Air Detection Range: 14.2 km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 12.16km Concealment Penalty while Firing: +12.2km (vs 27.1km gun range) For a tier 9 Battleship, the Missouri has good concealment, particularly if she specializes into keeping herself undetectable by enemies. This allows her to finally make use of her speed and redeploy without nearly as much fear of having her citadel blown out the moment she's not presenting her bow towards her opponents. This all goes away the moment you fire her guns though, but that's to be expected with any Battleship. Anti-Aircraft DefenseAA Battery Calibers: 127mm / 40mm / 20mmAA Umbrella Ranges: 5.0km / 3.5km / 2.0kmAA DPS per Aura: 151 / 318 / 104 One of the most significant differences between the Missouri and the Iowa is her AA power. The Iowa has nineteen quad 40mm Bofors mounts while the Mighty Mo has twenty. The Iowa bests her with small caliber guns with thirty two dual-20mm Oerlikon mounts (for a total of 60 guns) to the twenty-nine single mounts found on the Missouri. It's these Oerlikon mounts which makes the difference giving the Iowa a 75dps advantage over the Mighty Mo up close. In practical terms? No CV player is going to want to get close to the Missouri when there are softer targets available, especially lower tiered carriers. Still, she shouldn't venture alone when there's an enterprising CV present. Midway and Hakuryu are more than capable of overwhelming even the formidable guns of the Missouri and ruining her day, especially with her general lack of agility to facilitate dodging a point blank drop. Nope.jpg. Try again, Hiryu. Overall Impressions Skill Floor:Simple/ Casual / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling:Low/ Moderate / High / Extreme How patient are you? Patience and planning largely defines success in the Iowa-class and the Missouri is no different. Reckless aggression will get you sunk in a hurry. Being overly cautious may preserve your ship but it won't win you any battles as your guns keep idle for fear of reprisals. This is a challenging ship to do well in, largely because of her fragility and how the bow-tanking and passive meta found in high tier game play will make finding those juicy targets so much more difficult. When top tier, you carry the heavy burden of needing to punch at your weight class and do a lion's share of the damage, but the Missouri's fragility to being caught broadside makes finding those opportunities difficult. Much of what I said in my Iowa review holds true to the Missouri. She's not terribly forgiving. If you catch the enemy in a bad position, you will look like a total rockstar, farming enormous amounts of damage. But if you just opt to trade fire with wary opponents, your results will be very lackluster. The truly excellent Iowa players look for and create these opportunities to shine while the mediocre wait for those one off games which hand them great results. Mouse's Summary: Excellent guns. Her protection almost seems good enough until it isn't. Which is often. Turns like a pregnant Yak in a mud wallow. Very respectable AA power. Pees on the high-tier economy and laughs at everyone who struggles to afford their tier 10 boats like they were filthy peasants. I spent a lot of time in Co-Op with the Missouri trying to isolate her credit earning potential. I suppose I owe the few not-bot team mates a sincere apology for my lack of performance in said matches. The only way to reliably get a measure of just how much the Missouri earned compared to other premiums involved getting myself killed without doing anything of consequence. A half dozen matches in the Missouri and the same done in the Tirpitz, Atago and Mikhail Kutuzov helped pin down the value of the Missouri's credit income. I can say with confidence: She earns approximately 50% more credits than a tier 8 premium ship. This is before any expenses, of course. For repair costs, the Missouri will set you back 60,000 credits. Compare this to the Iowa with premium camouflage, which spends 96,000 credits to fix the ship and earns only half of what the Missouri does. In the days leading up to the Missouri's release, there's been a lot of talk about equivalents to the Missouri's earning potential. This naturally comes at a consequence of the very high cost of the Missouri. 750,000 free experience is nothing to sneeze at. If you weren't already sitting on a significant pile of free experience before the price was leaked, you weren't likely to see this as an affordable sum -- not without some herculean grinding tolerances. While ships like the Montana and Iowa can match the Missouri for experience gains, they cannot touch her where credit earning is concerned. Tier 8 premiums are comparable to her earnings but even they fall short. In terms of time spent to rewards earned, the Missouri will outpace the tier 8 premiums. You'll need to play 3 games in your Atago to equate 2 in the Missouri for income earned. For those players who feel perpetually strapped for credits, I cannot stress how liberating this ship will be for them once they own it. Bad games in Random Battles will net you 200,000 to 300,000 credits. Good games can score upwards of a million. Even Co-Op becomes economically feasible for grinding credits with the Missouri and a premium account. So long as you can earn a minimum of 250 to 300 base experience, you will make money (not much at that low experience, but a fair chunk at 500xp games or higher). Once you peel back all of this money talk, the Missouri is an Iowa-class at the end of the day. She can bow tank. She can spank enemies with her 406mm rifles just as well as the Wisconsin ever could. But the buff to her forward armour didn't solve the vulnerability problems inherent with the class. The Iowa-class has always been reasonably strong when bow tanking -- that's not where the problem was. It's that enormous, high-water citadel that causes so many issues for the ship and that's not corrected in the Missouri. If you were hoping for an improved Iowa, I'm sorry to disappoint, the Missouri is only an incremental improvement in that regard and not the big step forward some of us were hoping for. Link to the Q&A Regarding the Missouri from this Thread: Cool stuff like this only happens when someone royally screws up. Would I Recommend? So let's talk about cost. The Missouri will set you back 750,000 free experience. This will make her largely inaccessible for non-veteran players in World of Warships and reflects a rather unique way of selling a premium ship. Theoretically, any player of World of Warships could earn her for free given enough time. Realistically and practically speaking, most players are going to end up spending some form of real-world money to facilitate acquiring this ship. There's some pretty ingenious suggestions out there, such as combining signal flags and premium camouflage onto an Anshan or tier 9+ tech tree ship with premium camouflage for maximum free-experience gains. For someone to pay for enough doubloons for the equivalent, the EU server has a bundle of 30,500 doubloons (500 more than needed) for €100 -- which is about $110 USD. Of course, said bundle isn't (currently) available on the NA server which means on this side of the pond, a player will be shelling out about $130 USD. For different players, this represents an obstacle of varying difficulty. Some will be able to throw that kind of quid at the ship without a second thought while others will see it as insurmountable. Few ships create such a change in the game experience as the Missouri, if only from trivializing credit earning. Let me be clear, it's not like the amount of credits she earns cannot be obtained by other means. She simply makes it easier and laughably so. Time is money, after all, and those with the Missouri will have time to spare. ForRandom Battle Grinding: I would absolutely recommend her for grinding. She is, hands down, the best USN training ship and credit earning ship in the game -- a fact that is unlikely to be challenged anytime soon. The only ship that comes close to her totals is the German Prinz Eugen for Captain Training, but the German ship doesn't come close to her credit earning potential. So if you want to earn bank and accelerate training up your Captains, the Missouri is a must have. For Competitive Gaming: Is the Iowa-class competitive? You'd be a fool to take her instead of the Friedrich der Große, IMO. But this whole question is sort of moot with there being a distinctive lack of tier 9 competitive game play. If it ever comes up? No, don't use your Missouri. Use the Friedrich instead. For Collectors: What's wrong with you? Yes, it's the Missouri. For Fun Factor: I don't like the current high-tier meta in Random Battles of World of Warships. So the Missouri wasn't fun for me. I prefer my action up close and personal and that's difficult to achieve in high tier games on the North American server. Most Battleships seem terrified of getting anywhere near the cap circles. Engagement ranges are usually up in the 18km vicinity. It's passive, dull and heart breaking. It involves waiting for one side to make a mistake and punishing those that try and make a move. Outfitting your Mighty Mo I'm totally cutting corners here and repeating what I said for the Iowa. When you're equipping your Missouri, there are two primary roles to consider. The first is whether or not you intend to fully specialize her as an AA-Ship or not. This is hardly an optimal build, but if you hate Carriers with a vengeance, it has its merits. If you decide against this, you can instead choose one of two gunship builds which focus on either accuracy or firepower. Recommended Modules If you are selecting an AA build, you want the following choices to best optimize your firepower. This will provide extra range and extra DPS off of your AA guns. In addition, this build also adds to your agility, reducing your rudder shift time. For your first slot, take Main Armaments Modification 1. Even if you're specializing for anti-aircraft firepower, you're still a Battleship and increasing your main battery survival should be near paramount. If you really hate detonations, you can alternatively take Magazine Modification 1. This will make the chances of it happening absolutely miniscule. For your second slot, take AA Guns Modifaction 2 to increase your AA range by 20% if you want to be a flak-boat. Otherwise, you should be taking Artillery Plotting Room Modification 1. This will boost your secondary range and accuracy by 5% and your main battery range by 16% which is huge. For your third slot, AA Guns Modification 3 is your next choice for an AA-ship. This will add an additional 25% to your AA power. If you're choosing to be a gunship, now you have the choice. If you want to go for rate of fire, take Main Battery Modification 3. If you want to go for accuracy, take Artillery Plotting Room Modification 2. All of the choices in the fourth slot are pretty terrible. At least Damage Control System Modification 1 will add 2% to your torpedo damage reduction, so take that one. You're again faced with a choice here for the fifth slot and each have their own merits. If you want to improve your rudder shift time, take Steering Gears Modification 2. If you would prefer to reduce the amount of damage you take from fires that are left to burn for their full duration, then Damage Control System Modification 2 is your best choice. And lastly, for your sixth slot, between the two options, Concealment Modification 1 is the better option for all builds. Recommended Consumables When it comes to premium consumables, it's easy just to splurge with the Missouri because of how many credits she tends to earn. The only players that need really concern themselves with their inherent costs would be those without a premium account looking to focus primarily on Co-Op. However, there are some that are just worth taking from a game play perspective. The premium version of both the Damage Control Party and Repair Party are both very important for mitigating damage in a Battleship. This reduces their reset timer considerably and it can (and will) save your ship on numerous occasions. Of less importance is taking a premium version of the Radar consumable. This will reduce the reset timer from three minutes down to two. I find the Radar on the Missouri to be highly situational. I went for a premium version, but to be honest, I seldom use it. Recommended Captain Skills Again, depending on whether or not you want to specialize as an anti-aircraft vessel or not will affect your Captain Skill choices. Optimally, you'll want to build towards specializing her for concealment and firepower, not for anti-aircraft duties. From tier 1, Basic Fire Training is your best choice. Basics of Survivability is a nice follow up after you've unlocked your 16th skill point. From tier 2, Expert Marksman is best. At tier 3 you've got a choice. Superintendent is nice for the extra charge of your Repair Party, but is only really worthwhile if you regularly find yourself going through all four charges that you have with the premium version of the consumable. Alternatively, Vigilance can assist with spotting torpedoes early which is of more importance on the Missouri without access to a float plane. Lastly, High Alert is handy for reducing the strain on your already taxed Damage Control Party. At tier 4 this is where you will differ between AA and gunship builds. For both builds, take Advanced Fire Training first. AA builds should follow up with Manual Targeting for AA Armament to make CV lives miserable. Lastly at tier 5, Concealment Expert is very handy for the Missouri. It gives her the opportunity to finally use her long legs and redeploy as needs be -- or simply fade from a gunfight she doesn't want to participate in anymore. For more articles in this series, please visit: LittleWhiteMouse's Mega Ship Review Guide
  10. Welcome to a new pet project of mine, tech tree proposals. What I attempt to do in these articles is that I try to make a coherent and clear proposal as to what I think we can expect from Wargaming if they ever make such a tech-tree line. Might even work as a proposal for Wargaming to put something in (in the unlikely case that they haven't mapped all this)... This article will touch only on the tech-tree ships, the snippets on each premium ship will come at a later date. For each ship, I provide the layout of how the ship's weaponry is distributed, its technical specifications and with the same formulas I used for the ADLA articles, their in-game values. Finally, I provide a small piece of analysis of what I think about the ship and how it'd fit with its tiermates. Essentially, each of the ships gets a mini-ADLA with all the information you might be looking for to compare it to its tiermates that are already in-game. Let's hope we see these ships in the virtual seas soon! Read Full Article... Let me know what you think of this! I've almost finished writing the premiums of the tree and then comes the Italian Cruiser tech-tree line! All feedback and comments are welcome!
  11. So, I did the comparisons of the two carrier lines, and I'm going to do one for each class. I like seeing the pertinent numbers right next to each other so I can see how each nation stacks up against the others. This chart is for players who have played a few matches, understand the fundamentals of the game, and want to either get some good performance data to help them choose a line, or to get the quick-and-dirty of what they are up against. I really hope this helps some people understand the differences in the ships, especially if you're a numbers guy like me. Here is how to read the entries: [Tier] [ship name] [hit points] [armor thickness] [Torpedo Protection (damage reduction)] [maneuverability value] [speed, in knots] [# of main turrets X guns per turret] [reload speed/180 degrees turn speed/max. range] [High Explosive damage value/chance to cause fire] [Armor Piercing damage value] [Maximum Dispersion of main turret shots] [# of secondary turrets] [# of turrets in group/reload speed/max range/shell type and damage, chance to cause fire (if any)] [Anti-aircraft value] [# of turrets in group/damage per second of group/max range] I have edited the chart with colors to better help one determine the best/worst numbers for each tier. Red will indicate that ship has the worst statistic among ships of its class for that tier. Blue will indicate that ship has the highest statistic among ships of its class for that tier. Data left black will mean either the ship is tied with another for highest statistic or ranking that statistic doesn't matter, such as the number of secondary guns. Some of the things I did not, or could not, take into account are the number of upgrades you can purchase per ship, the placement of main turrets, special abilities (such as hydroacoustics or spotter planes). If anyone who has played higher tier battleships and knows what sort of special gizmos or whizzfits a ship has, please comment and I will update the chart. Also, I will not be including premium ships to these comparisons, as they are not part of the advancement lines. I created these to help people choose which line they would like to play, because it was a little overwhelming for me at first and I could not find anything like this. Also also, all the numbers in the chart for each ship represent the ship when it is fully upgraded and without equipment, camo, or signals. The numbers can be misleading if you are looking at your ship without any upgrades. For instance, the Myogi has a torpedo protection of 0%, until you research and equip the "C" hull upgrade. These disparages are not reflected in the chart, only fully upgraded ships. Tier 3 Kawachi Hp 38700, Armor 16-305mm Torpedo Protection: 13% M-16, 20 knots #MT-6x2, 30s/40s/10.9km HE 5100/29% fire AP 8100 Max. Disp. 162m #ST-18: 8/5s/3km/HE 2100, 10% fire; 10/10s/3km/AP 2900 AA-7: 4/6dps/3km Tier 3 South Carolina Hp 31700, Armor 13-305mm Torpedo Protection: 19% M-11, 18 knots #MT-4x2, 30s/45s/15.7km HE 4100/20% fire AP 8100 Max. Disp. 217m #ST-20: 20/6s/3km/HE 1100, 4% fire AA-8: 4/8dps/3km Tier 3 Nassau Hp 35400, Armor 16-270mm Torpedo Protection: 13% M-17, 20 knots #MT-6x2, 22.2s/51.4s/11.9km HE 3200/19% fire AP 7200 Max. Disp. 172m #ST-28: 4/4s/4km/HE 1100, 7% fire 12/4s/4km/HE 1100, 4% fire; 12/8.6s/4km/AP 3700 AA-7: 4/7dps/3km Tier 4 Myogi Hp 45700, Armor 19-203mm Torpedo Protection: 34% M-38, 28 knots #MT-3x2, 30s/37.5s/18.6km HE 5700/25% fire AP 10000 Max. Disp. 206m #ST-22: 6/6s/3.5km/HE 2000, 8% fire; 16/10s/3.5km/AP 2900 AA-24: 8/40dps/3.1km; 6/15dps/4.5km Tier 4 Wyoming Hp 43800, Armor 13-305mm Torpedo Protection: 16% M-16, 20.5 knots #MT-6x2, 30s/51.4s/15.8km HE 4200/23% fire AP 8300 Max. Disp. 204m #ST-6: 6/7s/3.5km/HE 1800, 6% fire AA-25: 14/50dps/1.2km; 6/41dps/3.1km; 8/22dps/3.5km Tier 4 Kaiser Hp 46400, Armor 19-350mm Torpedo Protection: 22% M-25, 23 knots #MT-5x2, 26s/60s/16km HE 3500/23% fire AP 8400 Max. Disp. 208m #ST-18: 4/4s/4.5km/HE 1100, 7% fire; 14/8.6s/4.5km/AP 3700 AA-28: 17/51dps/2km; 5/13dps/3.5km; 4/32dps/4km Tier 5 Kongo Hp 54100, Armor 25-203mm Torpedo Protection: 25% M-44, 30 knots #MT-4x2, 30s/54.5s/21.1km HE 5700/25% fire AP 10200 Max. Disp. 207m #ST-18: 4/5s/4.2km/HE 2100, 8% fire; 14/10s/4.2km/AP 2900 AA-34: 4/14dps/1.2km; 2/10dps/1.2km; 6/30dps/3.1km; 4/40dps/5km Tier 5 New York Hp 49100, Armor 19-305mm Torpedo Protection: 28% M-18, 21 knots #MT-5x2, 34.3s/60s/18.0km HE 5000/30% fire AP 10300 Max. Disp. 224m #ST-6: 6/7s/4km/HE 1800, 6% fire AA-30: 8/29dps/2km; 4/45dps/3.5km; 10/28dps/3.5km Tier 5 Konig Hp 47100, Armor 25-350mm Torpedo Protection: 24% M-31, 25 knots #MT-5x2, 26s/60s/16.5km HE 3500/23% fire AP 8400 Max. Disp. 198m #ST-18: 4/3.4s/4.5km/HE 1300, 9% fire 14/8.6s/4.5km/AP 3700 AA-38: 6/18dps/2km; 2/12dps/2km; 8/16dps/3.5km; 4/66dps/4.5km Tier 6 Fuso Hp 57100, Armor 25-305mm Torpedo Protection: 34% M-26, 24.5 knots #MT-6x2, 28s/56.3s/21.8km HE 5700/25% fire AP 10200 Max. Disp. 227m #ST-18: 4/5s/4km/HE 2100, 8% fire; 14/10s/4km/AP 2900 AA-39: 17/31dps/3.1km; 10/50dps/3.1km; 4/40dps/5km Tier 6 New Mexico Hp 53200, Armor 16-343mm Torpedo Protection: 40% M-17, 21 knots #MT-4x3, 34.2s/60s/16.1km HE 5000/30% fire AP 10500 Max. Disp. 206m #ST-18: 8/4.5s/4km/HE 1800, 9% fire 10/7s/4km/HE 1800, 6% fire AA-44: 3/11dps/2km; 8/49dps/2km; 4/30dps/3.5km; 4/45dps/3.5km; 8/58dps/4.2km Tier 6 Bayern Hp 51600, Armor 25-350mm Torpedo Protection: 19% M-31, 25 knots #MT-4x2, 30s/51.4s/16.6km HE 4500/35% fire AP 10900 Max. Disp. 224m #ST-16: 6/3.4s/5km/HE 1300, 9% fire 10/8.6s/5km/AP 3700 AA-45: 6/25dps/2km; 1/6dps/2km; 6/16dps/3.5km; 6/100dps/4.5km Tier 7 Nagato Hp 65000, Armor 25-305mm Torpedo Protection: 25% M-27, 25 knots #MT-4x2, 32s/47.4s/20.5km HE 6500/30% fire AP 12600 Max. Disp. 231m #ST-22: 4/5s/5km/HE 2100, 8% fire; 18/8s/5km/AP 2700 AA-49: 14/70dps/3.1km; 4/40dps/5km Tier 7 Colorado Hp 50100, Armor 13-343mm Torpedo Protection: 37% M-17, 21 knots #MT-4x2, 30s/45s/18.8km HE 5700/36% fire AP 12400 Max. Disp. 231m #ST-16: 8/4.5s/5km/HE 1800, 9% fire 8/7s/5km/HE 1800, 6% fire AA-56: 37/133dps/2km; 3/34dps/3.5km; 8/127dps/3.5km; 8/58dps/4.2km Tier 7 Gneisenau Hp 58200, Armor 25-350mm Torpedo Protection: 22% M-49, 32 knots #MT-3x2, 26s/36s/19.5km HE 4400/34% fire AP 11600 Max. Disp. 240m #ST-11: 11/5s/5km/HE 1500, 5% fire Torpedoes-2x3: 68s/6km/64kts/13700 max. damage AA-64: 12/50dps/2km; 7/42dps/2km; 6/62dps/3.5km; 11/136dps/5.2km Tier 8 Amagi Hp 66300, Armor 19-254mm Torpedo Protection: 43% M-42, 30 knots #MT-5x2, 30s/41.9s/19.9km HE 6500/30% fire AP 12600 Max. Disp. 214m #ST-24: 8/6s/5km/HE 2100, 8% fire; 16/8s/5km/AP 2700 AA-60: 18/32dps/3.1km; 24/120dps/3.1km; 12/73dps/3.1km; 8/81dps/5km Tier 8 North Carolina Hp 66000, Armor 19-305mm Torpedo Protection: 19% M-36, 27.5 knots #MT-3x3, 30s/45s/23.3km HE 5700/36% fire AP 13100 Max. Disp. 271m #ST-10: 10/6s/5km/HE 1800, 5% fire AA-77: 44/158dps/2km; 15/238dps/3.5km; 10/151dps/5km Tier 8 Bismarck Hp 69200, Armor 32-320mm Torpedo Protection: 22% M-46, 31 knots #MT-4x2, 26s/36s/21.2km HE 4400/34% fire AP 11600 Max. Disp. 255m #ST-14: 8/3.4s/7km/HE 1300, 9% fire 6/7.5s/7km/HE 1700, 9% fire AA-62: 14/42dps/2km; 16/96dps/2km; 10/103dps/3.5km; 8/133dps/4.5km Tier 9 Izumo Hp 78900, Armor 21-356mm Torpedo Protection: 28% M-34, 28 knots #MT-3x3, 30s/40s/21.7km HE 6500/30% fire AP 12900 Max. Disp. 226m #ST-13: 12/6s/7km/HE 2100, 8% fire; 1/12s/7km/AP 3300 AA-66: 24/43dps/3.1km; 28/171dps/3.1km; 12/121dps/5km Tier 9 Iowa Hp 79000, Armor 16-307mm Torpedo Protection: 25% M-51, 33 knots #MT-3x3, 30s/45s/23.3km HE 5700/36% fire AP 13500 Max. Disp. 272m #ST-10: 10/6s/6km/HE 1800, 5% fire AA-81: 32/195dps/2km; 19/302dps/3.5km; 10/151dps/5km Tier 9 Friedrich der GroBe Hp 84300, Armor 32-300mm Torpedo Protection: 25% M-41, 31 knots #MT-4x2, 32s/32.7s/20.3km HE 5000/41% fire AP 13500 Max. Disp. 247m #ST-14: 8/3.4s/7km/HE 1300, 9% fire 6/7.5s/7km/HE 1700, 8% fire AA-71: 6/38dps/2km; 26/268dps/3.5km; 8/133dps/4.5km Tier 10 Yamato Hp 97200, Armor 18-410mm Torpedo Protection: 55% M-31, 27 knots #MT-3x3, 30s/72s/26.6km HE 7300/35% fire AP 14800 Max. Disp. 276m #ST-14: 6/6s/7km/HE 2100, 8% fire; 6/5s/7km/HE 2100, 8% fire; 2/12s/7km/AP 3300 AA-69: 46/281dps/3.1km; 6/61dps/5km; 6/61dps/5km Tier 10 Montana Hp 96300, Armor 19-409mm Torpedo Protection: 37% M-41, 30 knots #MT-4x3, 30s/45s/23.6km HE 5700/36% fire AP 13500 Max. Disp. 297m #ST-10: 10/4s/6km/HE 1800, 9% fire AA-84: 20/72dps/2km; 20/122dps/2km; 20/318dps/3.5km; 10/157dps/5.2km Tier 10 GroBer Kurfurst Hp 105800, Armor 32-380mm Torpedo Protection: 25% M-41, 30 knots #MT-4x3, 32s/40s/20.6km HE 5000/41% fire AP 13500 Max. Disp. 268m #ST-14: 10/5s/7km/HE 1500, 5% fire 4/7.5s/7km/HE 1700, 8% fire AA-82: 10/62dps/2km; 8/195dps/5km; 10/124dps/5.2km
  12. Warning!: This is not confirming that Musashi will be present in the game, this is just my speculation as to if the Musashi was in the game this is what I think she would be like. Alright lets start. First thing is that something similar would happen to Musashi as what happened to the Konig Albert. The Konig Albert is a tier 4 Kaiser with reduced anti air. (This data is pulled from the official wargaming wiki) As seen by the image on the left is the Konig Albert's AA defence, while on the right is the Kaisers AA defence. Konig Albert only has one type of AA which is 4 x 88 mm L/45 MPL C/13 guns (4 x 1), while Kaiser has 17 x 20 mm Flak 38 guns (17 x 1), 5 x 37 mm Flakzwilling 30 guns (5 x 2) and 4 x 88 mm L/76 Dop. L. C/32 guns (4 x 2). (The stats on the right are of a fully upgraded Kaiser) There are also noticeable differences in appearance between the two ships aswell. As seen here (besides the white coat of paint on Konig Albert) (Above), Kaiser (Below) has more prominent superstructure on both ends, the funnels on Kaiser have an extra bit added at the top of the funnel, The secondaries on the bow and stern of Konig Albert are not present on the Kaiser. Alright now lets get to Musashi. I believe Musashi would have its 1941 hull which is what it was equipped with when its construction finished, unlike Yamato in the game which has its 1945 refit. As seen below this is Yamato with her 1941 refit. (The next information comes from Wikipedia) In this state she has 9 x 46 cm (18.1 in) Type 94 guns (3 x 3), 12 x 15.5 cm 3rd Year Type guns (4 x 3), 12 z 127 mm Type 89 guns (6 x 2), 24 x 25 mm Type 96 AA guns (8 x 3) and 4 x 13.2 mm Type 93 guns (2 x 2). Below is a colourised photo of Yamato at Kure Naval Yard, 1941. Next is Yamato with her 1945 refit. In this state Yamato is equipped with 9 x 46 (18.1 in) Type 94 guns (3 x 3), 6 x 15.5 3rd Year Type guns (2 x 3), 24 x 127 mm Type 89 (12 x 2), 162 x 25 mm Type 96 AA guns (1 x 1) and 4 x 13.2 mm Type 93 (2 x 2). Below is photo taken from a US aircraft over Yamato during her final encounter at Okinawa, 1945. Comparing the two refits I believe that Musashi would be equipped with the 1941 refit. She would have reduced amount of secondaries and AA defence making her more susceptible to air attack from aircraft carriers. People have made claims that Musashi would be at tier IX, if so her 1941 refit I believe would make her help balance her while being down tiered. As stated before having a reduced secondary and AA count would make a more approachable target and would force to manoeuvre more as the captain would have to be more aware of enemy aircraft movements to prevent being caught with little chance of defending herself. I believe her AA DPS while it would not be terrible it would be less than that of Yamato. While down tiered she could possibly meet tier VII ships which could create problems, the reduced AA, secondaries and possibly another change such as a longer reload say to 33 sec instead of 30 sec could also help balance her as she would very powerful against tier VII battleships ships such as Nagato, Gneisenau and Colorado considering she can bow pen every ship in the game. Another change could be the torpedo bulge could be reduced from 55 % to 45 % or so or the range on her secondaries being reduced to maybe 5 km instead of 7 km. Well that's mine opinion on Musashi and what she would be like if she was ever introduced into the game. Feel free to leave your own suggestions as to how you would possibly balance Musashi. Thanks for listening! :D
  13. I recently took a trip at the end of this past summer to visit the USS Massachusetts BB-59, a South Dakota Class Battleship moored at Battleship Cove in Fall River, MA. The USS Massachusetts is famous for shooting the first and last US 16in rounds of World War II, being the Flagship of Operation Torch, and earning 11 Battle Stars (most from the Pacific Theater) throughout World War II. The Big Mamie is a very proud veteran and she is in need of our help. Decades of sitting in the salty waters of the Fall River harbor have taken their toll on the old vet. Her paint is peeling away in large chucks, exposing massive rusting holes to the public. In fact the first thing you see as you walk on to the Big Mamie, is a big rusty hole on the middle cannon of her famous 16in guns. When I was a kid, I would do sleepovers on the USS Massachusetts with my boy scout troop and I remember fondly spending all day with my friends, crewing the large AA guns on the ship. Swinging the guns all around, tracking passing cars as if thet were Japaneses Planes making attack runs. Now all those gun are rusted in place or fallen apart to the point that you barely recognize what they were. Not all veteran are able to ask for help when they need it, and the Big Mamie is one of those vets. So I'll ask for her, that any players that lives near the MA area, please visit the USS Massachusetts at Battleship Cove this upcoming summer and if you can please donate to the repainting project. I also ask upon Wargaming, that if you made the USS Massachusetts into a premium ship in the game, to please arrange that part money to buy the ship in game was used as a donation to the museum. I know myself and many other player would be more than happy to pay the high price of a premium ship knowing our money was going to great cause like a veteran in need. And please add Battleship Cove to your list of places to host WoWS events, the Big Mamie would love the attention. The United States is very lucky to still have ships like the USS Massachusetts to remind us of a history that should never be forgotten. So please help this amazing veteran so we can pass on her gifts of history to the many generations to follow.
  14. So i got off work today and checked my facebook, only to see 9 different articles talking about how the USS Texas is sinking, AGAIN. I would love to do another restoration event like WG did with the Kamikaze R. WG has already done SOOO MUCH to help preserve pieces of History in ways that NO other game company would even bother with. WG helped restore a Kamikaze destroyer, they are working to REBUILD a Maus Heavy Tank, they donated money to help repair the Arizona Monument in Hawaii. What is stopping this playerbase from helping WG do it again? I think we could do an event for the USS Texas and give her a proper Dry dock type berth so that she never has to worry about flooding and rust damage to her hull ever again. I for 1 am totally down with donating money, playing the game for a special Black Camo or something ingame, or even playing in another Restoration type event. What do you say?
  15. Looks to be a modernized K2 design, likely the new RN Tier X BB.
  16. The following is a PREVIEW of the upcoming release of Hood, a ship Wargaming very kindly provided me. This is the second version of the ship seen during testing and her stats are current as of May 15th, 2017. However, the statistics and performance discussed here are still being evaluated by Wargaming's developers and do not necessarily represent how the ship will appear when released. Error 404: Detonation joke not found. Quick Summary: A large, very fast, if under armed battleship with curious AA mechanics.Cost: Undisclosed at this time.Patch and Date Written: 0.6.4 to April 22nd, 2017 to May 15th, 2017. Closest in-Game Contemporary Kongo, tier 5 Japanese BattleshipDegree of Similarity: Clone / Sister-Ship / Related Class / Similar Role / Unique Are you as surprises as I am that Warspite isn't listed here? Hood reminds me very much of some of the early days of playing Kongo, when she was one of only two tier 5 battleships. Hood, like Kongo, has speed but not the firepower. She has good protection when angled but she falls apart when she's caught out of position. When top tier, she's a great ship. When she's not, she feels lackluster -- more so than some other battleships. PROs Excellent fire angles on her main battery. Guns are very accurate at all ranges with tight horizontal and vertical dispersion and 1.8 sigma. Improved fuse timers and better auto-ricochet angles makes her well suited to damaging even evasive cruisers. Very fast with a top speed of 32.0 knots. Good rudder shift time of 13.4s. Deceptively agile for her size with a turning rate of over 4º per second. She's the first Battleship with a (albeit limited) Defensive Fire consumable. Possesses an improved version of the Repair Party consumable, queuing up to 60% of penetration damage received. CONs Hood is a very large target with an enormous citadel. Small main armament of eight 381mm rifles leading to poor penetration, alpha strike and DPM. Small and poorly positioned secondary gun battery with limited arcs of fire. Defensive Fire consumable only affects her Anti-Aircraft Rockets. Rocket AA mounts are incredibly fragile and small in number with only 200hp each and are easily knocked out by single HE hits. No Royal Navy Battleships to train Captains for (yet). Where did the last month go? Hood has had a long development cycle -- at least it's felt very long because of all of that testing I was doing. I haven't spent this much time, energy and focus on a single review since Saipan. The ship had two major iterations during the testing period and rather than release one for each, I've held off on publishing while I waited for the ship to finalize. Instead, I spent time trying to learn everything I could about the ship, including testing her shell dispersion patterns, acceleration rates and even the vulnerability of her citadel and magazines. Despite holding off as long as I have, Hood still isn't finalized. Changes may still be coming, but on the eve of her release, I am pulling the trigger to give you all a glimpse of the ship that was. I present the Mighty Hood. OptionsHMS Hood is the first Battleship to have access to the Defensive Fire consumable. This version of Defensive Fire is special, affecting only her short-ranged Anti-Aircraft Rocket mounts to a pronounced degree, lasts 60s and comes with three charges standard. In addition, Hood has a special Repair Party consumable. It may heal up to 60% of all penetration damage done by all sources instead of just 50%, similar to that of HMS Warspite. It still only recovers a maximum of 14% of Hood's HP over 28 seconds like normal battleships, unlike Warspite which recovers 16.8% per charge. Consumables: Damage Control Party Repair Party Defensive Fire Module Upgrades: Four slots, standard British Battleship options Premium Camouflage: Tier 6+ Standard. This provides 50% bonus experience gains, 3% reduction in surface detection and 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. During the Hunt the Bismarck campaign, two additional camouflage patterns will become available through completing Mission #6. The exact bonuses they provide were not disclosed by the time this was published. For upgrades, Hood should equip the following modules: In her first slot, take Main Armaments Modification 1. You're going to take a lot of hits in Hood and because of the aggressive angles you'll be taking, many of them will strike your forward turrets and barbettes. This will help keep your guns in action against such punishment. If you're planning on specializing her anti-aircraft armament, you should consider Auxiliary Armaments Modification 1 to increase the survivability of your rocket-mounts. In the second slot, you have two interesting choices. Optimally, taking Aiming Systems Modification 1 is best. This will tighten her shell groupings, especially at range, while simultaneously providing a slight increase to the range of her secondary gun batteries. Alternatively, you can seek to maximize her AA power by taking AA Guns Modification 2. This latter choice will not make her a threat to enemy aircraft carriers but it will provide some functionality with her Defensive Fire consumable but only if paired with Advanced Fire Training, so keep this in mind. In your third slot, Damage Control System Modification 1 is your best choice. This will increase her torpedo damage reduction from 16% to 18% And in your last slot, you have a choice of either Steering Gears Modification 2 or Damage Control System Modification 2. Take the latter if you're afraid of fire, though she's not any more flammable than other tier 7 Battleships. Firepower Primary Battery: Eight 381mm rifles in 4x2 turrets in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration. Secondary Battery: Fourteen 102mm rifles in 7x2 turrets with three down each side behind the funnels and the last mounted rearward on the center line. Let's start with the bad news: Hood doesn't have very good weapon systems. Her main battery lacks penetration and her secondaries are horribly placed. These elements really hold the ship back from being truly excellent. Hood has fewer secondary guns than Colorado and they're largely placed towards the rear half of the ship..This creates large blind spots forward preventing them from being brought to bear when on the attack until a target is 35º off her bow. More often than not you will only have one or two turrets firing at most. While they may pick up the occasional low-health kill, it would be a serious mistake to rely upon these weapons or the specialize into improving their performance. Hood's 381mm/42 MkII guns superficially resemble those off Warspite. In fact, looking at their stats in port, you would have a hard time finding much in the way of difference between the two ship's guns beyond range and rate of rotation. It's within her hidden stats, namely shell normalization, AP fuse timers and penetration that Hood steps further away from Warspite. Hood's penetration values are bad. To compensate for this, Wargaming made Hood better at avoiding ricochets and damaging lightly armoured targets. The exact changes are as follows: Hood shells auto-ricochet at 67.5º instead of 60º like Warspite. With the notable exception of Hood, all Battleship shells that do not overmatch the thickness of armour will auto-ricochet if they strike a shell angled less than 30º to the horizontal regardless of the relative penetration power of a given shell. This value is common in most warships in the game with a few notable exceptions -- the most common being the high tier American Heavy Cruisers. Hood's shells will not auto-ricochet unless they strike at an acute angle of less than 22.5º to the horizontal. This is designed to make Hood more likely to penetrate vessels taking an aggressive bow-on attack posture and to ensure she has fewer shells that careen off of funny angles of turret faces and the like. Note, that this does not provide any bonus value to penetration or normalization. An armour plate at the acute angle of 31º to the horizontal effectively doubles its relative thickness so while a shell might not ricochet from the angle of impact, it may still shatter against the relative thickness of the plate it encounters from a lack of penetration power. Hood has faster fuse-timers at 0.015s instead of Warspite's 0.033s. An AP shell's fuse arms by passing through a sufficiently thick piece of steel plate or striking a structural divide between ships sections. After a small delay, the shell detonates. For most ships with 330mm guns and larger, this fuse delay is set at 0.033s while those of a smaller caliber have 0.01s delay. The shortened delay timer makes it more likely that her shells will explode inside a target -- particularly narrower sections of a ship, such as the extremities battleships or the broadside of light cruisers at close range. However, the fuses still only arm when they strike thick enough metal so this doesn't guarantee that they will penetrate soft skinned ships like destroyers and French cruisers. Hood's fuses need to strike a plate 64mm thick (or a structural divide) in order to arm. Striking at the maximum angle, Hood would need to hit a minimum 25mm steel plate in order to arm in this manner, so it's still very possible to see over penetrations from a broad range of targets. Hood's accuracy is slightly worse than Warspite's with 1.8 sigma instead of 2.0 sigma. While Hood's shell grouping aren't as tight as those of Warspite, she's still a Royal Navy Battleship which brings an accuracy perk. These vessels have some of the tightest horizontal and vertical dispersion in among the current dreadnoughts. Due to the lower shell velocity of her 381mm guns, the overall dispersion area per shot is comparably less than that to any other nation. This does mean that you can drop some rather accurate shells on unsuspecting targets. Aim well and pick your targets right and Hood can still perform. Without a target lock, the shell dispersion patterns seen here are roughly double what would be seen when firing at enemy ships. There is approximately 350m between nav buoys. Shells are traveling from right to left. Hood has approximately 7% worse penetration than Warspite at all ranges. It's the drop in penetration power that's telling and largely dictates why her guns have sub-standard performance. She has less penetration power at 10km than Gneisenau has at 15km. Due to her lower shell velocity, her volleys come in at a higher angle than other battleships which further increases the relative thickness of plate against which it strikes. Thus even armour you might assume Hood possesses enough raw penetration to best can end up shattering her shells. At ranges greater than 12km, you can't expect Hood to reliably penetrate the belt armour of any enemy battleship you come across. Instead, aim a little higher and try and hammer the upper hull or superstructure. Looking back at port values, two statistics should stand out: range and gun rotation. On paper, Hood has the second lowest range of any of the tier 7 Battleships, though it pays to keep in mind that Colorado can boost her reach from 17.1km up to 19.9km with her Artillery Plotting Room 1 upgrade. Unfortunately for Hood, she doesn't have access to the same. Hood's 18.6km reach will often feel insufficient, especially when she gets up-tiered. Unlike Warspite, she doesn't have access to a Spotter Aircraft to temporarily boost her range, functionally giving her less maximum range than her tier 6 cousin. All of Hood's main battery drawbacks could be done away with if she was a good brawler. Her penetration woes would fall away. Range wouldn't be an issue. This would really exemplify the strengths of her improved auto-ricochet angles and the decreased shell fuse timer. In truth, she does have some qualities that would make her a good medium to short range brawler, such as her agility and protection scheme (see below for more on that). On top of this, her gun angles are excellent. Her #4 turret can engage enemies 30º off her bow and her #3 can do so with enemies at 31º. If only she had decent secondaries or working torpedo launchers to back them up. So while Hood has arguably the worst guns (both primary and secondary) at her tier, they're not without their merits. While their performance will not do players any favours, proper target selection and aim can go a long way towards mitigating their drawbacks. What about her gun Rotation? At the time of writing this, HMS Hood had a 3º per second main battery rotation speed -- 60s for 180º turn which is pretty terrible. Unconfirmed rumours had mentioned that Hood's turret rotation would be buffed up to 5º per second before release. I don't like to write my reviews based on rumours, especially not ones Wargaming themselves cannot confirm or deny. As it stands, with her original traverse rate, this is another drawback to her weapons, albeit a minor one. Her excellent firing arcs makes it very easy to mitigate this issue by locking the rear turrets in an 'over the shoulder' position and just apply small touches of rudder to unmask them before slipping back into a more aggressive, not-quite bow on stance to emphasize the strengths of her armour once more. Should Hood receive this turret rotation buff, this would give her some of the fastest turning turrets among Battleships in the game -- just behind the quick turning rates of Friedrich der Große and on par with the likes of Bismarck and Dunkerque. This will again bring up the question of brawling with Hood and ... while possible, it's still a very dangerous game to play, especially without good backup weaponry in the form of torpedoes or awesome secondaries. Still, it might be the play to make in select circumstances, but I wouldn't rely on it. Summary: The gimmicks of shortened fuses and improved auto-ricochet angles are nice and all, but they don't prop up what are ultimately the weakest guns at their tier. Hood is under-armed with low DPM, low penetration and low range. Her secondary's suck moose balls. Her accuracy is good, though, being as good as (or better) than some of the 2.0 sigma warships at her tier grace of the tighter British dispersion. Manoeuvrability Top Speed: 32.0 knotsTurning Radius: 910mRudder Shift: 13.4s Turn Rate: 4.08º per second HMS Hood's agility is a story of contrasts. She's very fast, but she takes a long time to get up to speed. She has an enormous turning circle, yet she can change her heading very quickly for a ship of her size. It's all too easy to dismiss Hood's handling as "bad" -- especially with her turning circle of 910m. This is the worst at her tier, and by a significant margin. While it's true that requires a lot of room to turn around, the rate at which she does turn is surprisingly fast for her size. Hood manages just shy of 4.1º per second in a turn grace of her high speed. This is well ahead of Nagato (3.7º per second) however it falls short of all of the other tier 7 battleships. This still puts her ahead of ships with smaller turning circles, like North Carolina and Arizona. So while Hood's ability to turn isn't "good", it's not terrible either. She'll surprise many opponents with how quickly she changes her heading or how aptly she can wiggle and dodge. Her rudder shift time can be dropped down to a mere 10.7s which only adds to her responsiveness. The only downside to this agility is that during play testing, she was out turning her turrets and by quite a bit. If Hood has a real shortfall it's in her acceleration. Compared to her closest contemporary, Gneisenau, she's slower in the turn (23.9 knots versus 24.1 knots) and she takes longer to accelerate to full speed from a dead stop (73s versus 65s). The difference between the two in manoeuvres is more telling -- Gneisenau recovers from deceleration faster, reaching her full speed again within 30s while Hood needs 35s. This can limit Hood's ability to dictate engagement ranges unless she sails in a straight line. Indeed, the strength of her high top speed -- as fast as or faster than any other Battleship she'll encounter short of the Iowa-class -- is predicated by sailing on a straight line course. Pray there are no torpedo armed destroyers able to draw a bead on her. If there's room to pull this off, she can effectively kite opponents that attempt to give chase. Even destroyers (particularly the slower IJN Destroyers) will struggle to keep pace with Hood when she has a mind of opening up the distance. This has the added benefit of pointing her badly positioned secondaries at whatever is pursuing her. On the attack, Hood can dominate slower Battleships and unwary cruisers, using her speed and handling to bow in, angle against incoming fire and close into her own optimal firing range while. Cruisers cannot comfortably outpace her without sailing in a straight line and Hood will punish them for moving predictably. In the latter stages of a match, Hood can really make all of the difference, with her high speed allowing her to power from one flank to the other and address the needs of her team mates. This even makes up for some of the disparity of her range. High speed should never be discounted -- it's an incredibly powerful asset. Finally, Hood's manoeuvrability combines with her excellent firing arcs of her guns and her fast rudder shift. It's quite easy to keep the ship heavily angled, touch the rudder to unmask turrets 3 and 4, fire and then touch the rudder back to return to a defensive stance. When she elects to take a brawling stance, her speed and handling doesn't let her down. Om nom nom, Atlanta. Hood has the speed to chase down many cruisers, especially if they don't turn tail and run flat out. DurabilityHit Points: 67,700Maximum Protection: 25mm + 305mm + 40mm Min Bow & Deck Armour: 25mmTorpedo Damage Reduction: 16% Hood's reputation for fragility precedes her, so it may be a bit of a tough sell for me to declare that she's rather well protected. There's some obvious points to get out of the way -- she's not German so her citadel can be penetrated. She's also tier 7 and not tier 8, so this hamstrings her with her tier mate's 25mm bow and stern armour which can be overmatched by 380mm guns or larger. But overall, she's not an especially fragile battleship. Hood's citadel protection over her machine spaces is comparable to Nagato's, but she rides much lower in the water. This fully immerses her citadel beneath the waterline, which is an immediate plus. The downside is that this also immerses most of her belt armour, leaving only a bacon-thin stripe over the water's surface. Without angling, the large slab sides of the ship are vulnerable to letting in AP penetrations from even cruiser-caliber guns, so be careful about giving up her flanks. Her armour scheme works best at medium to close ranges where she can turn in against incoming firepower. Like all ships with turtlebacks, Hood has to be especially wary of long range fire. Most of the citadel damage I've taken has come from long range shell strikes from distances greater than 15km. Giving up your flush broadside is also asking to have your machine spaces blown out. Her vulnerabilities lie primarily with her turrets and barbettes which aren't as well protected as her contemporaries, leaving them vulnerable to direct fire. It's quite common for these guns to get temporarily disabled, so Main Armaments Modification 1 is a sound investment. Preventative Maintenance on your ship's Commander wouldn't be remiss either. It's against high explosive fire that Hood is surprisingly adept. She shares the usual vulnerabilities of her superstructure to all gun calibers and her bows and stern can be easily damaged by 152mm guns or larger. However, like the German Battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, amidships, her deck is too thick for even heavy cruiser HE shells to damage. Similarly, above her armoured belt, her plate never gets thin enough for high explosive to damage either, being immune to everything up to and including Battleship caliber HE shells. Hood is highly vulnerable to torpedoes, however. Her long keel presents an ideal target for broadside spreads. Her propensity to want to sail in straight lines to maximize speed can set her up for disaster, so keeping a wary eye on the minimap is necessary to avoid unwelcome surprises. Concealment & Camouflage Base Surface Detection Range: 16.2km Air Detection Range: 13.9 km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 13.5km Main Battery Range: 18.6km Hood is a large ship and she understandably has a rather large surface detection range. It's perhaps a surprise that it's not the worst at her tier. She sits comfortably in the middle -- outdone by 500m when compared to the commerce raiders Scharnhorst and Gneisenau but ahead of Colorado by the same margin and with nearly a full kilometer's advantage over Nagato. This happy middle ground evaporates when her aerial detection is concerned -- she has the largest surface detection by a large margin. You're not sneaking up on anything in Hood. Even if you specialize in concealment, you're still going to be sniffed out from the air at a range of 11.9km and from the surface at 13.5km. This can put a real hurt on her efforts to take up flanking positions, as she's more visible than most of the American and German Battleships (especially when they're higher tier and rigged for concealment) and she stands little chance of catching a cruiser off guard. What really hurts Hood's concealment is that without allies, she has to do her own spotting. She has no access to Hydro, Radar or some kind of catapult aircraft to give her early warning about another ship's approach through concealment or obstacles. So not only is a she a big ship, she's also a blind big ship. Destroyers can approach her confident that she won't spot them early and that her secondaries are ill placed to fend them off. This allows Hood to be out played by another ship that can control vision. Were it not for Hood's speed, she might be surrendering all initiative to the enemy because of this deficit. I ran lots (and lots, and lots) of tests of Hood's anti-aircraft ability, both against bots and against volunteers like Lert. The more heavily specialized she became, the more more brutal her AA power became under the Defensive Fire consumable. It's almost meme-worthy, but don't swallow the hype wholesale. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Battery Calibers: 178mm / 102mm / 40mm / 12.7mmAA Umbrella Ranges: 1.5km / 5.0km / 2.5km / 1.2kmAA DPS per Aura: 50 / 56 / 69 / 8 Much ado will be made about HMS Hood's anti-aircraft defenses. Let's get this out of the way before we go any further: Hood is selfish. Whatever you feel about the final values of Hood's AA power, she isn't designed around fleet-defense. Her dual purpose, 102mm guns may have the reach but can only do so much to help to a beleaguered ally, even when fully upgraded. Instead, Hood's flak is meant to selfishly protect herself from enemy air attack. The only redeemable quality of Hood's anti-aircraft defenses comes solely from her two unique features -- her anti aircraft rockets and her Defensive Fire consumable. On the surface, her rockets are pretty lackluster too. She has five mounts, each adding 10dps to the collective whole which isn't spectacular. Worse, they have only a 1.5km range. Stock, they are utterly incapable of engaging enemy torpedo planes before they make their drop. At best, they can engage enemy dive bombers on their final attack run. Worse, her Defensive Fire consumable only affects these rocket mounts, meaning that the disruption effect provided by this consumable only touches planes that have slipped within this 1.5km window. Clearly, we're not off to a great start. Thankfully, it gets better. While Defensive Fire is limited to her rocket mounts it does have two buffs over the standard consumable. Instead of buffing her DPS by a factor of three for forty seconds, Hood's Defensive Fire lasts sixty seconds. And, the DPS of her rockets is buffed twenty-five times. Yes, you read that right: Twenty-five times. Without any other bonuses, Hood's rockets generate an average of 1,250 DPS for sixty seconds. To put this in perspective, Minotaur, the tier 10 British cruiser that's renowned for her anti-aircraft firepower, generates a total of 494 DPS stock. Anything that wanders into the rocket's aura is going to take heavy casualties, but this won't be enough to do more than maul most air groups. Most carriers will be able to stomach such losses if it means being able to drop ordnance. So while Hood might cause a few casualties, stock she's not going to scare anyone off. This changes if you choose to upgrade heavily into anti-aircraft defense. Taking the AA Guns Modification 2 upgrade in combination with Advanced Fire Training on your commander will nudge up your rocket's range to 2.2km. This range may not feel like much but it's significant. First, it gives your rockets more time to engage dive bombers. Second, this range will also catch torpedo planes -- sometimes before they drop but almost always after they drop. So while this will again make attacking Hood expensive, range boosts alone will not discourage carriers from engaging her. Boosting her DPS will. With the Captain Skills Basic Fire Training and Manual Fire Control for AA Guns, Hood's rocket DPS spikes up over 3,000dps. This is the equivalent of two Montana-class Battleships specialized for anti-aircraft firepower firing in tandem at the same target. In short, nothing survives inside of 2.2km. Attack plane squadrons melt like they hit a wall. Carrier players have no reaction time to recover aircraft that slip inside this barrier and the only answer is to either wait out the consumable or launch torpedoes at very long range. Torpedo planes will always be Hood's bane, though. While it is possible to annihilate a poorly managed torpedo bomber wave before they drop, usually they will get at least a few fish into the water. Hood's large size and huge turning circle does make dodging fish challenging (though not impossible with her good turning speed), so it's likely she will take at least some damage from a concerted attack. However, her AA defense does have an Achilles Heel. The weakness in her AA defense is the survivability of her rocket mounts. Though they count as a large-caliber weapon, they do not have the protection of large caliber guns. Hood's rocket AA mounts have the same hit point totals as small and medium caliber AA Guns -- a mere 200hp as opposed to t he 800hp of dual-purpose mounts. Using Auxillary Armaments Modification 1 will double this to 400hp, but this will only keep her safe from 130mm HE rounds -- nothing bigger. This makes them exceedingly vulnerable to cruiser fire and it''s very unlikely that her defenses will be intact once she's taken even a modest amount of high explosive damage. Each mount lost cuts her heavy-hitting AA power by one fifth so it doesn't take much to neutralize her anti-aircraft aura to a pittance. This makes a heavy investment into AA firepower seem foolish as it can be largely dismantled even from light damage from surface vessels. When an enemy carrier faces a Hood, the question will always be: "Is it worth engaging her?" The truest test will always be to see at what range Hood's batteries engage those aircraft. If her guns remain silent at 7km or even 6km, then she's probably a safe target for torpedo planes. Dive Bombers should stay away until Hood is on half health or less. Braving attack runs on a specialized and weary Hood will only empty out your hangar for very little gains. Personally, I found using a fully specialized AA Captain hilarious. The comments from carrier players when everything died before dropping their warheads was always so satisfying. Proper management of her anti-aircraft guns was key, including disabling her AA guns to lure planes in and shutting them off again after an attack run to accelerate the reset timer on her Defensive Fire. However, let's be clear: It's a heavy investment for what amounts to little gains in the majority of your battles. It hinges on:a.) Matchmaker placing you in a game with enemy carriers...b.) ...that are intent on trying to attack you with their planes...c.) ...before enemy surface ships destroy your AA rocket mounts. If this seems incredibly specific and unlikely, you're not mistaken. The skill points and modules are likely be better spent elsewhere. But there's no denying the joy of annihilating enemy aircraft. How to be MightyThere are two main Commander builds to consider for Hood. Anti-Aircraft Build, to maximize the defensive potential of Hood's hilarious AA mechanics. A conservative, defensive build to stress concealment and fire damage mitigation. The core skills you'll want for both Hood builds starts with Priority Target (1pt) followed by Adrenaline Rush (2pts) to help prop up her awful DPM totals. From here, the paths of the two builds diverge greatly. The anti-aircraft build requires the use of Basic Fire Training (3pts) and a rush to get Advanced Fire Training (4pts) as soon as possible. This last skill should be combined with the AA Guns Modification 2 upgrade to push the range of her rockets out to 2.2km. The next skill to grab is Manual Fire Control for AA Guns (4pts). It's highly recommend you take Superintendent (3pts) as a follow up to add another charge to your Defensive Fire consumable. This will give you a maximum of 5 charges. This will leave you with 2pts remaining to be placed where you prefer. Expert Marksman (2pts) or High Alert (2pts) are the best choices. The defensive build for Hood should look familiar to veterans of battleships and stresses reducing the reset timers of consumables while mitigating the risks of fire. After taking the first two skills listed above, grab Basics of Survivability (3pts), then Concealment Expert (4pts) to get your surface detection range down. Next, you have a choice. I would put points into Superintendent (3pts) for the extra charge of her Repair Party, High Alert (2pts) and Vigilance (3pts) with the final point going towards Preventative Maintenance (1pt). Alternatively, drop the last two skills for Fire Prevention (4pts) instead for those that really hate fires. It's possible to mix and match skills from both builds to create a hybrid. Advanced Fire Training is the key skill to make the anti-aircraft build work, provided it's combined with AA Guns Modification 2. You may not kill every plane this way, but at least you can make it expensive for CVs to engage you. "Hood has Defensive Fire? That would have been nice to know," said a Taiho Captain after this attack run. Hood's AA couldn't prevent the drop of all three stacked torpedo squadrons, but it could shoot most of them down, making attacks like this prohibitively expensive. Overall Impressions Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme Hood is a battleship -- and a battleship with good durability and accurate guns which makes her rather forgiving on the surface. However, she's not idiot proof like the low tier German Battleships, nor will she do you any favours where dealing damage is concerned. One of the main complaints about her will forever be her guns which simply don't hit hard enough without compensations to the volume of fire. In the hands of an expert player, Hood will tick all of the same boxes that Dunkerque and Iowa do. She's a fast, flanking Battleship that can really cause a lot of headaches to the enemy. Hood is one of the best ships out there for denying a flank to enemy cruisers and dreadnoughts by being annoying and hard to kill. Her speed lets her control the engagement and delay even a hard push by tanking far more damage than anyone expects her capable. Her carrying potential is limited by her small main battery and awful secondaries. Mouse's Summary: Held back by her weapons. Hood really makes you work for every scrap of damage done. Her anti-aircraft armament is a fun gimmick. Not very practical, but a lot of fun. Hood is a lot tougher than her historical reputation would suggest. Never underestimate the value of her speed. I was (not-so secretly) hoping Hood was going to be a 30-knot, faster-firing version of HMS Warspite: Fast. Agile. Good DPM for her tier. Tough as nails if played right but uncompromising if mishandled and absolutely brutal in a close range fight if push comes to shove. That's not what Hood ended up being and admittedly, it took me a little while to get over my disappointment of not being able to replace my favourite ship with something better. It's almost like Wargaming didn't want to give a Royal Navy fangirl a(nother) super-overpowered British boat. Harumph. Now, those unrealistic expectations aside, I had a lot of fun play testing Hood. I put this ship through her paces. I mapped her shell fall patterns. I drag raced her against the other tier 7 Battleships to check her acceleration and put her through my usual tests to find her rotation speed. I even went head to head with iChase's Nagato in a trio of one-versus-one duels in the original build of Hood. We really hammered out the strengths and weaknesses of the ship in those engagements. It made a few lessons abundantly clear: Her speed is amazing. She's painfully blind with no aircraft or spotting consumable. Her guns may not hit hard, but they hit reliably and the damage she can do is not insignificant if you aim well. Brawling is largely a mistake unless it's to finish off a low health and vulnerable foe, then it can be amazingly decisive. She's also a lot tougher than she looks (though she'll still get her citadel blown out), and her anti-aircraft armament is hilarious. I want to be able to say clearly how I think Hood is going to perform in the community at large. I think people will really love her durability and handling. I do think that her gun performance is going to hold her back from topping those vaunted damage charts everyone hovers over as the yardstick for a successful boat... however, her survivability and speed might let her snatch up a few extra scraps of damage that might be otherwise denied to a Nagato or Colorado. I don't think anyone will be disappointed to see HMS Hood on their team -- in fact, they may prefer her there over the presence of a Colorado. I don't think she will displace the Scharnhorst-sisters as some of the best ships at their tier. Finally, Hood isn't overpowered. I do think she'll polarize players though. You'll love her quirks or you'll get turned off right away by her guns. So while I didn't get a better, faster Warspite, I did get to play something different and ultimately enjoyable. Would I Recommend? It's always fun phrasing recommendations for famous ships. It's understandable that a lot of people will have already made up their minds well in advance -- HMS Hood is just one of those iconic vessels that demands attention. PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? As a Battleship, Hood is well suited to bullying bots and is a good choice for PVE Battles. She has an enormous hit point pool which keeps her low on the bot's priority list and her AA power and agility is more than sufficient to avoid hits from CV auto-drops. Her repair costs sit at 26,775 credits with 90 credits spent per shell fired. However, she won't make bank. A typical 400 base experience game will net about 50,000 credits after expenses without a premium account. Random Battle Grinding This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. While I do feel that Warspite is the better Battleship trainer between the two, Hood isn't a bad ship. If you need only one Royal Navy Battleship trainer, I would recommend the former -- she'll be more cost effective. However, taken on her own merits, Hood is a good ship for grinding in Random Battles. For Competitive Gaming:Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. It's hard to recommend Hood for competitive gaming. While she would enjoy relative immunity from enemy CV predations, she's just too blind and too under armed to be as strong a contender as Nagato, Scharnhorst or Gneisenau. For Collectors:If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. Do I seriously need to fill this section out? For Fun Factor:Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? Yep. I enjoyed my time with her. Although, I admit that the "look out for Bismarck" jokes got pretty old after a while. What's the Final Verdict?How would the ship rate on an Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage - Meh - Gud - Overpowered? GARBAGE - Grossly uncompetitive and badly in need of buffs.Mehbote - Average ship. Has strengths and weaknesses. Doesn't need buffs to be viable, but certainly not advantageous.Gudbote - A strong ship that has obvious competitive strengths and unique features that make it very appealing.OVERPOWERED - A ship with very clear advantages over all of its competitors and unbalancing the game with its inclusion. I still want one.
  17. Pretty easy poll, what class ship have you obtained the most solo warriors in? (If you actually obtained any.)
  18. Bom dia pessoal. Então hoje a World Of Warship publicou umas promoções boas. O que eu fiquei mais interessado foi o DUNKERQUE já vi ele em algumas batalhas e pelo que eu vi parece ser muito bom. Como sempre antes de eu fazer qualquer compra, procuro saber sobre o navio, saber principalmente a opinião de quem tem o navio e batalha com ele. Quem tiver o DUNKERQUE gostaria de saber se vale a penas investir nele, se o poder de fogo dele é bom, blindagem, etc.. Os pros e contras do navio. Ficarei agradecido se alguém puder compartilhar informações sobre o DUNKERQUE. Obrigado
  19. As you can see from the above-quoted post, St. Petersberg, we (might) have a problem For everyone just joining the discussion, the new armor viewer has revealed several potential errors in the armor modeling of a number of ships. Some of these are probably down to the armor viewer not showing enough detail in certain areas or having certain armor features not show in the listed layers (though they may still be present), and some are probably due to other relatively mundane game design reasons that have little or no impact on gameplay and/or are easily fixed. However, a few others seem... off. The threads where this discussion was most active recently are here (concerning the IJN cruisers and a few other ships) and here (which talks about the Großer Kurfürst compared to the Montana), so if you want to check where this is coming from (including the quoted post above), that's where some of this originates. I won't be speaking to the IJN cruisers' potential modeling problems, since I know nothing about them historically (there is, apparently, also a potential issue with the New Orleans, although I admit not knowing much about it, being too lazy to search, but apparently the Chieftain is looking into it, and there have been a few checks made with third-party armor model viewers comparing stats from patch to patch, so we'll see where that goes). This post is solely to do with a potential issue with the Montana. Wall of text incoming. Thanks for reading. We now return you to your regularly scheduled arguing about digital ships.
  20. plz release hms hood now i'd like to BUY BUY BUY IT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  21. Where should I put the rest? Or save for a 4pt for that matter and on. Ive read up many guides and videos, but figure this might be easier. This captain was originally going to be moved towards the Bis(Could actually buy now), but in the upcoming event the reward gives you a 10pt already. I play med to brawl ranges per usual with late German BBs. I figure maybe Fire Prev(Though I rarely get set with 2+ fires anyway), Surv Basics, Or maybe even Demo Exp for secondaries. I don't want Secondary Manual since I prefer them engaging more than one ship when I'm brawling with a few targets. Anyway, hopefully get some good suggestions here.
  22. This may sound a bit odd, but the devs really should consider putting a speed boost consumable on Colorado similar to the ones on the French cruisers to improve her tactical mobility on the larger high tier maps. It seems a bit silly at first thought (and I keep conjuring images of rockets attached to her sides), but Colorado's biggest problem right now is speed. I know 21knots was the real speed for the US standard battleships. That wasn't too problematic in the real world because the entire fleet was built to move at those speeds (at least until WWII), but WoWS' current tiering mechanic makes that speed is absolutely punishing on the big maps seen at T8+. It is difficult to even get Colorado into the fight when she is placed on the huge high tier maps. Giving her a higher baseline speed would not be historic and a lot of people would object, (although a sizeable number of ships and upgrades in the game themselves are not historic), but giving her a couple of temporary speed boost consumables to kick her up to say 25-27knots for a minute or two similar to what the French cruisers use would be a decent compromise. Algerie for example is the slowest T7 cruisers by default, but with her speed boost she can kick her speed up to useful numbers for a minute or two and let her get into position. A similar boost would improve Colorado mobility a bit (long enough to help her get into position) without getting overwhelming and would add a bit of tactical decision making for the player about when to use it. The temporary speed boost to 25-27 knots for a minute or so at a stretch is not unbalanced because 27 knots is pretty much the slowest speed of any superdreadnought at T7 or above anyway (minus Colorado herself). IT would allow her to mimic what every other superdreadnought her tier can do by default if only for a minute at a time and at least let her get into the match. What do people think?
  23. Some rules for the road I've come across in my endeavors. 1. Don’t go in first…unless you have a plan IDK why people just derp in and waste their ships for no reason early on. This is a game of finesse. If you want breakneck action with high intensity excitement then go try out badminton. 2. Remember your ABCs Always. Be. (you get me). Wreck everyone at all times with a fiery desire to watch endless ribbons pop up on your screen. Dedicate yourself to the pursuit of this goal by training, watching good streamers, and practicing aiming/strategy. 3. Don’t go naked If you have no camouflage on because you think it’s “too expensive” or you want the ship to look “historically accurate” then go play Co-op because you’re a donkey to us in random/ranked battles. I always assume anyone with no camo is a window licker and I’m usually right. The only exception is China. Those players go streaking in every match yet still somehow manage to wreck kids. Anyway, I always focus the no camo guy because he’s far more likely to drive in a straight line, shoot AP in a Japanese cruiser 100% of the time, and be otherwise useless to his team. Treat yourself, don’t cheat yourself; put on that pretty dress before you leave the house. 4. Look at the map Ever see the one BB running up the 10 line on north in a CV game when everyone else goes to the A/B cap? Yea me too. And he’s a mouth breather who is either non-responsive in chat or a vehement defender of his assjackery. Then as soon as he gets dev struck by the CV he calls the rest of the team out for being cowards. This guy falls in the “Stupid-Mean” category of captains. Not only is he unaware of his folly, he is hyper sensitive to criticism of it. This guy is never left scratching his head wondering how he is sitting on a 38% WR because his interpersonal skill compass has gone the way of your ex-girlfriend; batshit crazy. 5. Always shoot DDs Wanna win and not get stalked to death by the cancer that is the DD threat? THEN KILL THEM DAMMIT! KILL THEM GOOD! If you’re in a BB this is especially true. You need to absolutely annihilate these lesser creatures or you will play ‘smack the desk with your head’ until you’re in the emergency room. Any DD on the enemy team is worthless and doesn’t deserve to draw breath in the same game as you. Friendly DDs are of course cool and stuff (unless they are Shimakazes). Practice your DD shooting skills, lead them a lot, aim UP on them because they usually turn away, keep planes for spotting, and watch them cry baby tears when they get a free trip back to port courtesy of your mandingo batteries. SHOOT AP. Yes your heard me. ARMOR PIERCING. Hits do guaranteed damage that way. An overpen can be a citadel to those rats. 6. Always focus the closest planes that can hurt you Bro, if you hate planes then guess what? SO DO I. Second to DDs I despise them. They are Zika infested mosquitos flying over you constantly and trying to ruin all future destruction you’re trying to give birth to. Wreck them with no remorse. I always run full AA on U.S. BBs. Sometimes I even do it on a Yamato, that’s when the CV tears really come and of course the hackusations. You need to ensure that between shots you are constantly looking around so you can spot these little buggers. By the time you hear your AA firing off to pay attention, then it’s probably too late. Keep pushing SHIFT and right clicking around your ship to gain situational awareness. 7. Never Follow a Shimakaze Literally never do this. You will almost always die or get ditched. The typical type of player that is attracted to this ship is usually the selfish punk you met during recess who got made fun of and took the kick ball away; leaving everyone around to stare at each other and try to figure out something else to do with rocks or sticks. These high octane warriors like to spam walls of torpedoes in every direction and are often pink because of it. The color pink and Shimakaze go together like Charlie Sheen and cocaine; it’s never a good thing. 8. Find a stupid target If you haven’t identified the oblivious enemy player in the first 3 minutes then it’s probably you. Having trouble picking a juicy target to lay into when there are 5 ships sitting in the same area? That’s easy, just pick the no camouflage Pensacola running broad to the whole team. That ship is the escargot delicacy of WoWs. Hit it and see how delicious it is. Nurembergs fall into that category as well. Ships with a life expectancy shorter than that of a Natalie Imbruglia music career; they get torn. 9. Read the chat Hate the chat because it’s too “toxic” and hurts your special feelings? Guess what, nobody likes each other on the internet. It’s the cruel reality of the world we live in. Someone got stuffed in a locker when they were in 10th grade and now it’s time to show the world how tough they are by “flaming” dat [edited]in chat right? We’ve all seen it. Luckily WoWs has a much nicer community than most other games so this problem isn’t as prevalent here. However, some overly sensitive types go running to the Aslain’s modpack safe space of “disable in game chat” because words hurt. You know what else hurts? The enemy shells into your broadside because you can’t receive intel reports to work with the team. 10. Be a good smoke buddy; unless you’re Dort See that tempting smoke? It’s like an oasis in a literal sea of jumbled [edited]right? Ships run to them like frat guys to a cheap keg party. Smoke provides concealment and NOT cover. Know the difference. Also understand that the prime target for an enemy DD is a smoke cloud. Travel in there at your own risk. Smoke is the Bangkok of the game, once it has you now there’s usually no going back. If you’re a BB I’d advise using it sparingly. Add it as a tool to your strategy rather than the centerpiece of it. If you’re going to be in someone ELSE’s smoke that they didn’t lay for you. Don’t hit or shoot them because it’s a [edited]move. I am allowed to be guilty of this because I’m like a bull in a china shop. I of course hold the rest of the population to a higher standard lol. **** Moderated by Mezurashi. 12. Don’t use your real name as your game name Names like John_Brown is 238% more likely to get devastating struck off the map in the first 6 minutes of a game than anyone else. This is of course, a scientific statistic resulting from months of testing. (your first name)_(your last name) almost never does well, and yes that includes middle names/initials as well. Your lack of creativity is indicative of your lack of ability to hit targets and dodge incoming shells. This is the internet, have fun and be someone you’re not. John_Brown can easily switch to GangstaCryptKilla69 for 2500 dubbies. 13. Always make the enemy fight you in two directions Lemming trains sometimes work, but it’s the exception rather than the rule. You want to create situations where you are forcing your enemy to go broadside to someone. It’s hard to do that if you are all huddled in a circle like a bunch of bison grazing on a pasture. Get aggressive, split the force up a bit. THIS IS NOT AN EXCUSE TO GO ON THE 10 LINE ON THE NORTH MAP BY YOURSELF. YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE AND JUST STOP IT. 14. Only go bow in with a BB during emergency situations No, getting spotted by an enemy 21k away in the first minute of a match does not constitute an emergency. We’ve all seen the guy who sits bow on the entire game, and in extreme cases, never finds the W key. He plays like Floyd “Money” Mayweather and looks tough, is hard to knock out, but never takes a serious fight. This is especially frustrating when you see it done in a German BB. For Christ sake they usually only have two guns per turret. Don’t you people get sick of missing all game? You want to have some fun in a BB? Stay on the damn move. Use steering gears as a module and rope a dope the enemy into frustration so they grow tired of you and decide to shoot something else. Your BB should have 3 speeds; Full Forward, Full Reverse, and Stop. You can throttle jockey to dodge torpedoes and other obstacles as necessary but you will NEVER find me going ¼, ½ , ¾. Those speeds reek of a lack of testosterone and I don’t approve of them. 16. Don’t reverse broadside Why would you do this? It’s usually the guy who sits in sniper mode all game and can’t zoom out to gain situational awareness 17. Don’t ever trust a premium ship that just came out of the shop Everyone enjoys the excitement of a new ship with the new ship smell. Well more often than not that ship smells like latex and shame when it’s on your team or the enemy’s. It happens and people are just trying to learn what to do. Just don’t rely on them for quality support. It’ll take a few weeks to get the skills needed to see solid play. 18. It’s always an Iowa Never have I uttered the phrases “Oh thank God we have an Iowa with us” or “Damn there’s an Iowa on the enemy team we are screwed”. I’m starting to think the majority of Iowa class captains are our WoWs role players. They went out and got the outfit and send transmissions to their team by making the squelch sound after every message. And honestly, that actually sounds fun as hell haha. Like I would totally do that. However, that has nothing to do with their skill level! Lightning speed, slow rudder shift, and fast moving turrets make people lose sight of finesse in this ship so they derp in all the time. 92.33333 (repeating of course) Iowa class players are broadside and easy to nuke off the map. 19. Server pride makes about as much sense as a football bat “My server is better than your server and this server cuz mommy tells me I’m special.” Give me a break. Guess what? When you follow all of these rules, every server sucks compared to you. Plain and simple. Newsflash children, unless you’re Chinese, your server sucks. There are literally donkeys everywhere. I’d take some of their bots on my team over the ash and trash I find in the free world. What does this all mean? Play your game and get busy wrecking kids. 20. Have fun Hahaha just kidding screw your feelings. I only have fun when I win. XOXO, generaldort “Voted 2017's Most Humble Player Worldwide”
  24. The Tirpitz's secondary buff came out and I gave it a try. I found it too similar to the Bismark in terms of gameplay, so I tried an alternative build favouring the main battery, survivability, and stealth. It works very well with the Tirpitz and it provides a flexibility even when uptiered; the stealth allows you to withdraw from unfavourable engagements and the survivability lets you outlast your opponents. Nobody gets close to a Tirpitz due to its torpedoes so the buff to the main battery is greatly appreciated. The secondaries still reach out to 7.7km, so once I have the points I'll add manual secondaries as well. I'm not here to debate the validity of the buff. I just want to offer from variation in terms of gameplay for these two ships. Give it a shot - I've had some epic matches with this build!
  25. The Hood draws near and I have a preview. Beautiful despite plain Jane camouflage, she's fast at 32 knots if not unremarkable. No major gimmicks aside from defensive fire, if you liked Warspite you'll like this ship, which is essentially a faster Warspite. Her slow turning guns and 17.2km range hurt her, but the guns play decent enough. In her own tier she is probably most similiar to Nagato. She suffers when up-tiered. She is very much the Overwatch Soldier 76 of WoWS. She feels very comfortable and anyone can figure her out, though it might be hard to make her excel.