Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'british'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Player Gatherings and Events
    • Community Programs Corner
  • Feedback and Support
    • Support
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Clan and Divisions Hub
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 16 results

  1. So... Something that has been bothering me about the London. It's guns. More specifically, it's range. 13.4 KM. First, that is an atrocious range for a T6. The Exeter, London, and Devonshire all share the exact same guns. The 50 BL Mk. VIII's. However, both the Exeter and the Devonshire outrange it. Even the Hawkins, with worse guns, outranges it by half a kilometer. I mean, I get that it has smoke, and you can 'sneak up and smoke and shoot.' But if that's the case, you would go with a ship like the Leander, which does the same thing, has the same range, fires twice as fast, has a better heal and has 2 KM better firing in smoke concealment. A premium ship is supposed to be on par with the tier that it is at, right? London isn't even on par against the tier below it! There has to be something done. Longer range, or less smoke firing penalty, better concealment. Something. Right now, it's a ship I pretty much regret wasting my time to complete the quests for.
  2. The following is a review of HMS Gallant, a ship kindly provided to me by Wargaming. This is the release version of the vessel and these stats are current as of July 19th, 2017. Are you excited? I'm excited! More Royal Navy ships! Whoo! Quick Summary: A small, agile destroyer with an uninspiring main battery. She has a heavy torpedo armament with the ability to launch each fish individually, but she's held back by poor launch angles. Cost: Bundles started at $21.99 USD with a port slot. Patch and Date Written: June 8th, 2017 to July 18th, 2017, Patch 0.6.6 to 0.6.7.1 Closest in-Game Contemporary Gaede, Tier VI German Destroyer Degree of Similarity: Clone / Sister-Ship / Related Class / Similar Role / Unique As much as I would like to compare these to the Polish Grom-class, Gallant shares a lot in common with Ernst Gaede, the tier VI German Destroyer, especially when the German ship is armed with its (admittedly awful) 128mm guns. Am I foreshadowing bit? PROs Gallant has an 8% chance per shell to start fires and the highest Fires per Minute chance of any Tier VI DD. Powerful torpedo armament doing 15,433 damage per hit, with 8.0km range and 61 knot top speed. Torpedoes may be dropped individually in the same manner of Royal Navy cruisers. Tiny turning circle of 540m with excellent rudder shift time of 3.0s. Second best surface detection range at her tier of 6.8km. Small target -- less than 100m long. CONs Small hit point pool of 12,000hp. Weak main battery armament of four 120mm guns and low DPM. Short 10.2km range and clumsy firing angles on #4 turret. Worse shell ballistics than the American 127mm/38s with even more "float". Horrible fire angles on her torpedoes with a maximum forward fire angle of 68º off the bow. High learning curve with making optimal use of her torpedoes. An absolute laughable lack of any credible AA power. HMS Gallant surprised me when she was announced to be coming to World of Warships. As fighting vessels go, she was in the thick of the action in the early part of the war but she didn't participate in any major surface engagements as far as I could tell. It made me wonder why we were seeing Gallant represent the G-class destroyers in World of Warships when there were examples such as Glowworm which saw surface action against capital ships to draw from. Everything began making sense when the Dunkirk Scenario was unveiled. She's not the first British premium destroyer released in the game (that honour goes to HMS Campbeltown at tier III), nor is she first British-built destroyer in the game (that distinction goes to ORP Blyskawica). What she does provide, however, is a glimpse of what the British destroyer line may end up being in the future. It remains to be seen how many of the features on HMS Gallant will become standard to the British destroyers. Sharkbait_416 of the World of Warships wiki team has volunteered to join me in this review. He'll be providing a look into HMS Gallant's history and his impressions of the ship. Take it away! The Sharktank HMS Gallant, hull pennant H59, was a G-Class destroyer of the Royal Navy, launched on August 26, 1935. With the outbreak of WWII in 1939, Gallant began operating in the North Sea, primarily tasked with escort and patrol duties. Throughout the course of these duties, Gallant participated in rescue operations which saved the crews of multiple stricken ships, such as SS British Councillor, SS Santos, and HMS Princess Victoria. On May 25, 1940, Gallant was detached from North Sea operations to partake in Operation Dynamo, the evacuation of Allied forces from Dunkirk. On May 26, Gallant arrived in the channel. On May 27, Gallant and HMS Vivacious were notified that ORP Blyskawica was tasked to meet them. The Admiralty wanted the three ships to enter the port of La Panne to evacuate RAF personnel. However, Blyskawica was unable to locate the two British ships. The next day, Gallant embarked troops and transported them to Dover. Gallant made a second trip to Dunkirk on May 29, embarking more troops. Prior to arriving at Dover, Gallant was attacked by Luftwaffe dive-bombers. Despite suffering slight damage, Gallant managed to return to Dover under her own power. In total, Gallant rescued 1,466 personnel from the beaches of Dunkirk. In June 1940, Gallant assisted in the search for Scharnhorst and Gneisenau but was unable to locate the two German ships. In July, Gallant was tasked for duty in the Mediterranean, where she joined Allied forces to assist in operations in the West Mediterranean Sea. On October 20, 1940, Gallant used depth charges to assist in sinking the Italian submarine Lafolè. On November 27, Gallant fought in the Battle of Cape Spartivento as a part of Force B. While supporting convoy operations in the Straits of Sicily off Pantellaria, Gallant hit a mine on January 10, 1941. The force of the explosion tore the bow from the ship, killing 65 crewmen and injuring 15. The remainder of the ship was towed stern-first to Malta. Gallant began undergoing repairs, continuing into 1942. On April 5, 1942, a bombing raid resulted in a near miss that severely damaged Gallant. Due to extensive damage, Gallant was declared a constructive total loss. Gallant was used as a blockship in St. Paul’s Bay and scrapped in 1953. Rerences: http://uboat.net/allies/warships/ship/4391.html & http://www.naval-history.net/xGM-Chrono-10DD-25G-HMS_Gallant.htm Picture courtesy of Wikipedia. Options Gallant uses the same Smoke Generator consumable as the Japanese and Soviet Destroyers. This differs from Campbeltown, the other British premium, whose Smoke Generator echoes that found on American Destroyers. On the USN DDs. the emission time is longer and so is the duration of each individual cloud. This isn't the case on HMS Gallant. So, everything is standard here. Consumables: Damage Control Party Smoke Generator Engine Boost Module Upgrades: Four slots, standard cruiser upgrades Premium Camouflage: Type 10, tier VI+ Standard. This provides 50% bonus experience gains, 3% reduction in surface detection and 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. Remember to equip as many premium consumables as you can reliably afford on a per-match basis. The module options you'll be using are the standard fare for destroyers. In your first slot, take Magazine Modification 1. Seriously, don't take take Main Armaments Modification 1 unless you're going into Ranked and taking Juliet Charlie signals -- you're more likely to have your entire destroyer blown out from underneath you before you permanently lose one of your weapon mounts to direct damage. This way you can mitigate some of those detonations. In your second slot, Aiming Systems Modification 1 is the way to go. Note, if you're playing the Dunkirk Scenario, you want to take AA Guns Modification 2 for the extra range. It's useless otherwise, but you WILL NEED IT in the scenario if you're trying for 5 stars. Don't skimp out on this. In your third slot, take Damage Control Modification 1. The other two are terrible (not that DCM1 is much better). And finally, in your fourth slot, take Propulsion System Modification 1. If you have access to Super Upgrades, there's only one really worth considering and that's Engine Boost Modification 1. This would replace your Damage Control Modification 1 upgrade in your third slot. Firepower Primary Battery: Four 120mm rifles in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration. Torpedo Armament: Eight tubes in 2x4 launchers rear mounted down the centerline of the ship. Gallant's gunnery is pretty close to terrible. They may have decent gun handling and a nice krupp rating on her AP shells, but almost everything else is awful. Her 120mm guns are the smallest caliber at her tier and an armament we would expect on tier IV destroyers, not VI. Understandably, on a per-shell basis, they have some of the worst alpha strike qualities, besting only German 128mm HE shells. With her four guns, this makes her volleys rather anemic. But there's worse to come: The ballistic arcs on her 120mm/45 guns are worse than the American 127mm/38s. While Gallant has better muzzle velocity than Farragut's weapons, the shells are lighter and lose speed more quickly. At ranges greater than 5.0km, Farragut's 127mm/38s have better shell flight times over distance. Gallant's shells take 8.62s to hit targets at 10km compared to Farragut's 8.31s with HE shells. Gallant's range normally caps out at 10.2km, so this slow shell time to distance cannot be seen in full measure without Advanced Fire Training. With it, you'll see shell flight times of approximately 1 second per km traveled at ranges in excess of 10km. This makes Gallant's guns utterly ill-suited to engaging anything short of a slow turning Battleship or Carrier at range. You can largely forget about making use of AP except at stupidly close ranges where you'd be better of dumping fish into them instead. To engage enemy destroyers, she needs to be close -- ideally no more than 7km to 8km at most before the lead times greatly inhibit accuracy. And more often than not, she will not want to engage enemy destroyers in the first place. Gallant has two saving graces where her guns are concerned. She has a decent (but not great) rate of fire. With a 5.0 second reload, she can put out twelve rounds per gun. So while she may not be able to compete with any of her peers on a per-volley basis, she can out-muscle Japanese destroyers in a protracted gunnery duel through sheer volume of fire. On paper, she should also be able to compete with Ernst Gaede, the German tier VI, however in practice this often proves to be a fool's errand. Gaede's guns have better ballistic arcs and, more importantly, a lot more health. The second saving grace is more memorable. Gallant has a very high chance to set fires per shell. At 8% per hit, when coupled with her four guns and rate of fire, Gallant becomes the best potential fire starter at tier VI. While this will not help her against enemy destroyers, it does speak to a specialization which favours making the lives of enemy Battleships quite miserable. Overall, Gallant is only a better overall gun platform than Fubuki and Hatsuharu which is pretty poor marks. She edges out Shinonome too, but only just. She needs to force a slug fest to out perform the IJN premium. The reliable 6-gun alpha strikes are quite valuable as they can often decide a duel against a mid to low health enemy destroyer, forcing them to back off even if they have a DPM advantage. It's Gallant's ability to set fires which really redeems these guns. Without it, her main battery would be utterly lamentable. The worst part is that Gallant's guns feel very comfortable to use -- so much so that you might grossly over estimate how well they perform. They turn decently. Their rate of fire is nice. They cause lots of fires. This got me into a lot of trouble when it came to dueling with other destroyers. I'd feel I had the advantage only to see just how uneven a contest it actually was when I got myself butchered. Do not make this mistake. Gallant's guns aren't good. They're not terrible, but they can cause you more problems than they'll solve. Gallant largely redeems the poor qualities of her guns with her torpedo armament. They aren't without their (oh-so minor) faults. For a torpedo specialist, her range of 8.0km is decent but not enough to make captains of the Japanese destroyers sit up and take notice. Their 1.3km detection range gives opponents nearly eight seconds to react which is alright, but not great. The same could be said of their 61 knot top speed which is perfectly adequate but, again, nothing special or worth celebrating. But here's where things get exciting: Gallant has the same launch options as British cruisers. To be clear, the two fire options for Gallant are a narrow spread or to fire off her torpedoes individually. She does not have the wide-spread option found on other destroyers. It's this single fire option which is so desirable. This greatly increases the flexibility of Gallant's torpedo armament, whether this be dropping more complex patterns for opponents to dodge or holding fish in reserve when a target may think themselves safe from harm. On paper, the advantages of Gallant's single fire torpedoes are many. In practice? Many of these advantages are locked behind an admittedly difficult set of player skills, acquired only from experience and the lessons learned from lots of mistakes. Veterans of British cruisers will have a leg up on the competition here. Gallant's torpedoes are individually hard hitting at 15,433 damage and with eight tubes, Gallant's potential damage for a full launch exceeds all ships with the exception of Shinonome and Fubuki which launch nine. Even so, Gallant's torpedoes hit harder individually than Shinonome, so she's not far behind these Japanese torpedo specialists. The are a couple of serious flaws with her torpedoes. They have a punitively long reload of 96s for one, even for a quad launcher. This is common to launchers with more tubes, and Gallant loses out so significantly to the other torpedo-specialists with shorter reloads on their triple launchers with Shinonome having only a 73s reload while Fubuki and Hatsuharu make due with 76s. The second drawback are the awful firing arcs of Gallant's launchers. They only have a 55º launch arc with a rearward bias. The furthest forward they can target is nearly 70º which is appalling and can really hurt Gallant in close quarter brawls or when navigating through islands. This limited fire sector also means she can't use her torpedoes defensively very well, as she has to present her broadside to dump them into the water. So for all of their good hitting power, Gallant cannot launch her fish often and when she can, you may find yourself fighting the fire arcs of her launchers in order to do so. Summary: Her torpedoes are powerful. Single fire torpedoes are awesome, but it's going to take some practice to make them work. The limited fire arcs of her torpedoes can be immensely frustrating. The only thing saving Gallant's guns from being a complete write off is their good rate of fire and high fire chance. Manoeuvrability Top Speed: 36.0knotsTurning Radius: 540mRudder Shift: 3.0s Maximum Turn Rate: 8.6º per second. Gallant is rather average for a tier VI destroyer when it comes to her top speed, though all of the destroyers with the exception of the Gnevny-class (including Anshan) slot in and around 35.5 to 36.5 knots. What she does have is great handling, however. She answers her rudder very quickly and can throw herself about in the water like no one's business. She's only held back by he modest top speed. She keeps over 30 knots in a turn, though just barely, and this limits her maximum rate of turn to 8.6º per second. DurabilityHit Points: 12,000Maximum Protection: 16mm Gallant's 12,000 hit points sits on the low side of average at her tier. She has more hit points than Farragut or Hatsuharu but less than the Gnenvy-class and Fubuki-class ships which make up more than half the destroyer population at tier VI. Gallant is tiny as far as ship length goes, but sadly she's also rather tall. This combines to make her a comfortable target to shoot at, unfortunately. Gallant does not have the DPM or accuracy over range to afford trading fire with other gunships. This is a risky venture even when she's top tier against tier V gunships like Podvoisky, Nicholas and Okhotnik. Only do so from a position of extreme advantage if you have to at all. Concealment & Camouflage Base Surface Detection Range: 6.84km Air Detection Range: 3.36 km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 5.97km Main Battery Firing Range: 10.18km Surface Detection Rank within Tier: 2nd Surface Detection Rank within Matchmaking: 16th of 34. Gallant has a decent concealment rating. Properly specialized with a 10pt Captain and with her Premium Camouflage, Gallant will get her surface detection range down to just a hair beneath 6.0km. The only ship at her tier that bests her here is Hatsuharu with a 5.8km surface detection range. This is good news for an under-gunned destroyer that struggles to trade blows with any of her contemporaries. Perhaps most impressive is her small aerial detection range which is better than any of the other destroyers at her tier. As a tier VI destroyer, Gallant sits in that unfortunate 'sweet spot' shared with tier VII destroyers where their concealment seems decent until measured up against the ships she faces. She's larger than most of the tier V destroyers she faces, and while she's much more stealthy than tier VII DDs, she finds herself out done by tier VIII gunships like Lo Yang, Benson and Akizuki -- all of which can make her life miserable in short order. It's a rare game where she'll ever be the stealthiest thing out on the water. Gallant is really built for this short-ranged attack. Her torpedoes give her a 2.0km stealth firing window which is enough room to comfortably manoeuvre. Sadly, this does fall within the range of radar equipped ships that begin appearing at tier VII. Skirting too close to the edge of her launch window also puts her dangerously close to the 5.58km range of Hydroacoustic Search on tier VIII German Cruisers It pays to take a moment to study team rosters and identify problem ships lest you trip over them at inopportune moments. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Battery Calibers: 12.7mmAA Umbrella Ranges: 1.2kmAA DPS per Aura: 4 No. That small cloud of smoke is about to get really crowded with air dropped torpedoes in a moment. Pageantry and Gallantry Thanks to the Dunkirk scenario, there are going to be another build to consider for HMS Gallant, optimizing for achieving 5 stars in the scenario. For now, let me cover the basics for Random and Ranked Battles. As ever, we start with a core build of 10 skill points. Begin with Priority Target to increase your situational awareness when you no longer have concealment. Next, take the destroyer standby, Last Stand to give you passable engine power and rudder shift when these modules get damaged. You have a choice at the next tier. Torpedo Armament Expertise should be taken if you want to emphasize your torpedo rate of fire. Alternatively, take Demolition Expert to supplement your already excellent fire starting qualities on your guns. Do not double up on these at this stage. Finally, take Concealment Expert to get your surface detection down to 5.97km with camouflage installed. Here are the next skills to consider: Tier 1, Preventative Maintenance. For those who hate Priority Target, this can be taken as an alternative. This reduces the likelihood of critical damage occurring to any of your modules (except the Magazine). Tier 2, Jack of All Trades. This is handy for those players that like dropping smoke for their allies. Tier 2, Expert Marksman. This will increase your gun rotation rate from 10º per second up to 12.5º. Tier 2, Smoke Screen Expert. Are you a bro that drops smoke for your big friends in Ranked? Be an even bigger bro with bigger smoke! Tier 2, Adrenaline Rush. This is a long running favourite of many players. It increases your rate of fire of guns and torpedoes as you take damage. At 50% health, this shaves off almost 10s from your torpedo reload and increases your rate of fire from 12.0rpm to 13.2rpm. Always handy. Tier 3, Survivability Expert. This will increase Gallant's hit points from 12,000 to 14,100hp. Note that this won't give you advantage enough to reliably outgun other gunships that are at the same health you are, but it does provide more of a buffer. This can be especially handy in Ranked Battles. Tier 3, Basic Fire Training. Bump up that rate of fire from 12rpm to 13.2rpm. Don't worry about what it does to your AA power. It's not relevant in these game modes. Tier 3, Vigilance. Spot those torpedoes early for your big friends. Tier 4, Inertial Fuse for HE Shells. You can bump up her effective HE penetration from 19mm up to 25mm with this skill. This is enough to stack direct damage against any capital ship you face in Ranked Battles, provided you don't hit the armoured belt, as opposed to being stuck trying to hit the superstructure. Tier 4, Advanced Fire Training. I would recommend against taking this one, but it does have it's uses. This bumps up your maximum range from 10.2km up to 12.2km. Keep in mind your shell flight time is almost 1s per kilometer at those ranges. Tier 4, Radio Location. Like high tier IJN Destroyers, sometimes it's nice to know where the things you don't want to face in a gunfight are likely to be. I personally would recommend the following builds: Random Battles: Core skills (Demolition Expert and Torpedo Armament Expertise both for a total of 13pts). Then take Inertial Fuse for HE Shells and Adrenaline Rush. Ranked Battles: Core skills (Torpedo Armament Expertise or Demolition Expert, not both to start). Then take Survivability Expert. Spend the last six points where you will based on your play style. For cap control, take Basic Fire Training and Adrenaline Rush. For support, lean closer to Vigilance and Smoke Screen Expert. Finally we come to the scenarios. For Dunkirk, you want to emphasize your AA power (silly, I know, but you'll need it). Your core skills look like this: Take Preventative Maintenance first. No surface ships will be targeting you with their main batteries. Next, take Last Stand. The artillery will knock out your engines and steering gears on occasion. After that, take Basic Fire Training to buff your AA power. Then take Advanced Fire Training to buff your AA range up to a "massive" 1.44km. This build is pretty useless for outside of the scenario, but what are you going to do? This "AA Build" only works because of the funny low-health values of planes in this specific scenario, so don't hold any illusions this has any worth outside of it. Some other useful skills include: Tier 2, Jack of All Trades, to help bring your smoke generator off cool down faster. Tier 2, Smoke Screen Expert, to give your allied ships more cover when you drop your smoke. Tier 3, Vigilance, to spot those torpedoes sooner. That's it. This is such a specialized build, I really doubt anyone will have the spare Captain to do it, but maybe you have more doubloons available than sense? When in doubt, you can always suicide-torp battleships at close range. Overall Impressions Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / Challenging / Difficult Gallant is very much like IJN Destroyers where she requires just a little more understanding of destroyer game play to make her perform. She isn't utterly dependent upon her torpedoes for doing damage, but without a good grasp of how best to optimize them, inexperienced players will find this ship frustrating. The good news is that her guns are quite comfortable to play with. The bad news is that her guns will get her into more trouble than not which is a formula for disappointing many consumers. Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / High / Extreme Gallant will challenge players to really master aiming their torpedoes manually without the use of the leading marker. This is a new skill for some players to learn and it will only improve their overall game play. This bumps up her carry potential somewhat in the hands of a true expert. Her guns are also quite serviceable in the right circumstances, but knowing when to fight and when to cut your losses is something that comes only with experience (or spider sense). The Sharktank HMS Gallant can be a thorn in the side of the enemy team throughout a match if played properly. My overall impression is that she is very good at one thing—launching torpedoes from concealment. Her single-fire torpedo launchers enable her to achieve more hits than the wide-spread setting. This is exceptionally useful in launching torpedoes at ships that are bow-on, such as those charging a smoke screen. However, this may also result in missing all torpedoes if they are improperly aimed. Gallant benefits from excellent maneuverability and a tight turning circle, which enables her to weave and dodge incoming fire if spotted. Much like the British cruisers, Gallant is most effective when maintaining her concealment, whether it be in a smoke-screen or skirting her detection range. Her mediocre HP pool and poor gun performance mean that direct engagements with cruisers and other destroyers are not recommended unless in self-defense. Her abysmal anti-aircraft armament rating means that an enemy carrier may freely fly squadrons of planes over the Gallant, keeping her spotted. To have a great battle, it is imperative to pick-and-choose engagements wisely. Because of this, Gallant truly excels when she has a commander that is specialized with Concealment Expert. This provides Gallant with a 2-kilometer stealth-firing window for torpedoes, and ample range for maneuvering and repositioning while avoiding detection. Gallant’s playstyle is very appealing, but it is important that players have a solid understanding of spotting and detection mechanics in-order to utilize Gallant to her maximum potential. She is not the type of ship that can outgun an enemy destroyer in the beginning of the game after charging into the objective. Instead, patience and smart tactics will result in players being rewarded with opportunities to take advantage of Gallant’s primary strength, her torpedo armament. In summary, I feel that Gallant is a strong torpedo boat, but suffers from being situational, especially in matches with aircraft carriers. It requires a patient and vigilant captain who takes note of the positions where enemy ships were last spotted to predict their movements. These predictions are essential in maintaining concealment and succeeding in carrying out ambush style attacks on enemy ships, a tactic that Gallant excels at. Mouse's Summary: Gallant plays closer to an IJN DD than a Soviet or USN Destroyer Single fire torpedoes are nice .. but only if you can aim. They'll be a detriment otherwise. Her guns feel more comfortable to use than her torpedoes, but her torpedoes are more powerful than her guns. Like IJN Destroyers, she becomes more deadly the longer she can survive into the match. If you die early, you're not getting the most out of this ship. Stay alive. Then she'll shine. HMS Gallant is a pretty uninspiring premium. Her gimmick resides solely in her ability to drop single-fire torpedoes. Should the future British Destroyer line have this ability too, short of them having some flaw (like no HE shells), Gallant isn't going to age well. Her guns are okay, but she doesn't have enough of them and they don't hit hard enough. Her torpedoes are really good, but they didn't blow me away. Specializing a ship around their torpedo armament really makes their performance flirt with feast or famine -- either you have jaw dropping, amazing games or you strike out and muddle through with a pittance of rewards. It frustrated me to no end that her guns are comfortable to use and (generally) suck while her torpedoes are not comfortable to use and (generally) rock. If only I could bring the latter to bear more often without finding myself beached or making myself a bigger target for guns / torpedoes / airplanes. If only the former wouldn't let me down when I find myself going toe to toe with anything more shooty than a Fubuki. For all of the average components that make up HMS Gallant, she's not without her charms. The sum of her parts creates a versatile ship that, while vulnerable to enemy destroyer gunships (and aircraft -- but all destroyers suffer equally there), can still manage to be a thorn in the side of the enemy fleet. Success with this ship hinges on how well a player can make her torpedoes perform. And she's got most of the right tools for facilitating that. She's not slow. She's pretty stealthy. She handles like a dream. She's got enough guns to defend herself. In theory, Gallant should work for most players. I wasn't inspired, however. Gallant didn't romance me the same way some other premiums have -- even the lackluster ones. Is that a flaw of the ship? I think so. I couldn't get excited for this ship. Time will tell if I'm proven wrong and the community embraces this one as one of their own. Would I Recommend? PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? Mouse: The big question is how will she do in the Dunkirk scenario? Well, she combines elements of both freely available destroyers. Gallant has the fast gunnery of Anthony and the Smoke Generator of Cyclone, so she'll do alright against the Schnellboots but she'll really struggle to shoot down aircraft unless you've built her with AA pew pews in mind. In regular PVE play, treat her like an IJN Destroyer and you'll do alright. Sharkbait_416: Yes; I would recommend Gallant for PVE battles. At Tier VI, Gallant has minimal service costs. She maintains a fair margin of profitability in well-played PVE battles, but premium consumables should be avoided to maximize income. Gallant fares well against bots due to her concealment. She can provide support to teammates, such as a smoke screen, while also engaging enemy ships with her single-firing torpedo launchers. However, her main battery guns are of a small caliber and suffer from long shell flight times, which makes hitting small and agile targets, such as PT boats, difficult. Random Battle Grinding:This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. Mouse: It all comes down to how well you think you can perform with your torpedoes. Personally, I would give Gallant a pass here. While she's perfectly adequate when top tier, she's really going to struggle when bottom tier in the same manner as Fubuki and Shinonome. If that's your cup of tea or you can stomach being the (severe) underdog, then go nuts, my friend. Sharkbait_416: Yes; I highly recommend Gallant for random battle grinding. She truly shines with a 10-point commander that is specialized with Concealment Expert. With this skill, Gallant has a 2-kilometer stealth-firing window for her torpedoes. Those who are familiar with single-firing torpedo launchers may be able to hit a target with every torpedo in the salvo. Good concealment and high-damage potential equate to a ship which is highly rewarding for those grinding for XP and rewards. For Competitive Gaming:Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. Mouse: Is Gallant better than the other tier VI destroyers for Ranked Battles? She's not better than Anshan or Shinonome, but I would say she's better than Gaede or Farragut in this environment. I'll give her a green-light here, but you'd be much better off with Shinonome or Anshan if you can your hands on them. Sharkbait_416: No; although Gallant is very powerful due to her torpedoes, she is easily countered by aircraft. Additionally, she is not very competitive in a fair fight with other destroyers of the same-tier, due to a smaller pool of hit points and poor gun performance. As much as I like her, Gallant is situational in competitive gaming scenarios. Generally, I would advise players to choose another ship for competitive gaming unless they are extremely competent in maintaining concealment, dodging incoming gunfire, and avoiding overextension on the map. Still, an aircraft carrier can easily ruin Gallant’s match by keeping her spotted with squadrons of aircraft. For Collectors:If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. Mouse: Eh. HMS Gallant has some story to her, but my initial reaction when I heard this ship was coming was "why not Glowworm?". I suppose if you want to own a little piece of Dunkirk memorabilia then snag her up. Sharkbait_416: Yes; Gallant served the Royal Navy honorably. Throughout the course of her service history, she saved the lives of nearly 1,500 personnel and sailors. Though she may not have the fame of other ships in the Royal Navy, Gallant served in numerous operations and escorted multiple convoys before being mined in the Mediterranean Sea. With her addition to the game coinciding with the Dunkirk Scenario, players can recreate her heroic actions in saving over 1,466 personnel from the beaches of Dunkirk in May 1940. For Fun Factor: Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? Mouse: Nope, I did not enjoy my time with Gallant. Her torpedoes are frustrating to use. Her guns aren't. Her guns suck though and her torpedoes don't. How to frustrate Mouse 101. Sharkbait_416: Yes; Gallant is very fun to play. As mentioned above, a captain specialized with Concealment Expert provides Gallant with a 2-kilometer stealth firing window for her torpedoes. Her single-fire launchers allow for the possibility of hitting every torpedo in a salvo. Gallant does best in battles with a high number of battleships and no aircraft carriers. In such games, Gallant can inflict serious casualties on the enemy team. It’s very satisfying to watch a single-file line of 8 torpedoes swim toward a battleship, knowing the unsuspecting battleship is in for a world of hurt! 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.
  3. rafael_azuaje

    LONDON NEED BUFF!

    Great analysis! I just want to know why London is premium and Devonshire not. It seems than both are similar, but DEvon is better in many aspects: - Better torps and main battery reload time - Better torps speed and distance - Better antitorp protection - Better main battery range - Better AA - Better DPM - Better HP recovery - Better concealment Better Hydro - better etc.... The london it seems better in speed (+1 knot) Those without significant captain skills and upgrades. (The skill selecte for both ships are Priority taget and Expert Marksman) my Devonshire has Demolition Expert activated.
  4. I noticed the new high tier British CAs have 114 mm secondary batteries, as do the UK carriers. Are they good for anything except causing the occasional fire? Can they penetrate tier 8 - 10 destroyer hulls? Do the 114s on the new UK CAs get the increased HE penetration like the main batteries? Thanks!
  5. Ok, 9.0 is nigh and this is the low down on the event. Once again, WG is not giving out sufficient info before the patch drops, so some info will have to wait until the patch drops. Index Start and stop times Earning British Tokens (Directives, Daily Chains, & Daily Shipments) Spending British Tokens (Early access bundles and maybe other stuff) UK CAs (heavy cruisers) early access and how they work PA New Year Server Outage compensation (Jan 11th-15th) Start and stop times. Patch 9.0 is scheduled to drop at 8am EST on Wed, Jan 15th. The maintenance window starts at 5am EST. Patch 9.0 is expected to end at 5am EST on Wed, Feb 12th when the maintenance window for 9.1 starts. A new Directive starts each week and ALL Directives end at 2am PST Mon, Feb 10th, so plan on being done by end of day on Sun, Feb 9th. Directive I starts with the patch drop, likely 8am EST, Wed Jan 15th. Directive II likely starts 5am EST, Mon Jan 20th. Directive III likely starts 5am EST, Mon Jan 27th. Directive IV likely starts 5am EST, Mon Feb 3rd. You must complete Dir I, before you can start on Dir II, even if Dir II has started. Daily Chains will have British Tokens starting 5am EST, Fri, Jan 17th and will likely end at 2am PST Thu, Feb 6th. So 20 days from Jan 17th to Feb 5th likely means 10 per day between the two Daily Chains. Daily Shipments will start at 8am Wed, Jan 15th and end at 2am PST Wed, Jan 29th. So the last day to collect a Daily Shipment is Tue, Jan 28th. To collect all 10 rewards, you have to start collecting by Sun, Jan 19th. PA Lunar New Year starts Fri, Jan 24th at 2am PST and ends Mon, Feb 10th at 2am PST, so plan on being done by end of the day Sun, Feb 9th. Earning British Tokens (600 total available) You will be able to earn British Tokens in the Directives, Daily Chains and Daily Shipments only during 9.0. You will be able to spend the Tokens in Armory from 9.0 through 9.1. When 9.2 drops they will be converted to credits. So 9.2 is scheduled for Wed, Mar 11th currently and Brit Tokens will be converted at the rate of 1 for 4,500 credits when that patch drops. Directives (360 total) There will be 4 Directives with one coming out each week. Each Directive will likely have 8-10 Missions (36 total) and you will likely need to complete 5-7 Missions to complete a Directive. There will be 360 British Tokens in the Directives and the British Tokens are apparently the reward for completing the Directives. The Brit Token rewards will average 90 per Directive, but will likely be between 50 and 200 per Directive (starting low to high) to add up to the 360 total. A new Directive starts each week and ALL Directives end at 2am PST Mon, Feb 10th. Directive I starts with the patch drop, likely 8am EST, Wed Jan 15th. Complete 5 of the 9 Missions to complete the Directive and the reward is 80 British Tokens. Directive II likely starts 5am EST, Mon Jan 20th. Complete 5 of the 9 Missions to complete the Directive and the reward is 80 British Tokens. Directive III likely starts 5am EST, Mon Jan 27th. Complete 5 of the 9 Missions to complete the Directive and the reward is 100 British Tokens. Directive IV likely starts 5am EST, Mon Feb 3rd. Complete 5 of the 9 Missions to complete the Directive and the reward is 100 British Tokens. You must complete Dir I, before you can start on Dir II, even if Dir II has started. Daily Chains (200 total) The Daily Chains from Fri, Jan 17th through Wed, Feb 5th will have a TOTAL of 200 Brit Tokens. That is 20 days of Daily Chains, so expect there to be 10 Brit Tokens per day which would be 5 per Daily Chain that day. You get 5 Brit Tokens for completing each Daily Chain. Daily Shipments (40 total) The Daily shipments run from Wed, Jan 15th through Tue, Jan 28th. If you want to collect all the Daily Shipment, you have to start by Sun, Jan 19th at the latest. To collect a Daily Shipment, you need to log into the game and go to the Daily Shipments tab to click and collect your Shipment for that day. You can set the Shipments tab to come up automatically when you log into the game in the Shipment tab. Shipments Rewards are below. 1st - 3x Union Jack one-use camouflages 2nd - 10 British Tokens 3rd - 50,000 credits 4th - 10 British Tokens 5th - 3x Union Jack one-use camouflages 6th - 10 British Tokens 7th - 50,000 credits 8th - 10 British Tokens 9th - 50 doubloons 10th - 1 day of Warships Premium Account Spending British Tokens NOTE: Per WG, If you get an early access ship from one of the bundle types, you can STILL GET THE SAME ship from the other type of bundle. You get credit compensation for duplicates. So for example, if you get an early access Hawkins CA from the Token bundles, you can still get the Hawkins CA from the Doubloon bundles and you will credit compensation. You can spend British Tokens in patches 9.0 and 9.1. That is scheduled to be from Wed, Jan 15th to Wed, Mar 11th. When patch 9.2 drops, on what is scheduled to be Wed, Mar 11th, any left over Brit Tokens will be converted to credits at the rate of 1 to 4,500 credits. The big item to spend Brit Tokens on is the Token bundles. Currently we do not know the amount of Token bundles that will be available when the patch drops, but we found out it is INFINITE likely between 20 and 30 bundles. Four of the bundles will be the four early access T5 to T8 UK CAs that will include the perma-camos this patch which is new. Token Bundles You will have one bundle, randomly determined, for purchase for 20 British Tokens in the Armory. Once you buy that bundle, a new randomly determined bundle will be offered. There will be 11 variants of bundles with likely an infinite number of bundles that are not the ships. You can only get an early access ship once, but you can get the other 7 bundle options infinite times. The other bundles you will be able to get a certain number of times, listed in the Armory. If this is like past events of this type, there should be enough British Tokens available (600) to buy all the Token bundles. So if you buy all the Token bundles, you may or may not end up with the 4 early access UK CAs. If RNG is bad for you, you may not get a ship at all. There may or may are not other things to spend the British Tokens on in the Armory.. NOTE: The ships are the rarest of the bundles, so it may take many bundles to get a ship. IF RNG is bad for you, you may not get a ship. Since there is nothing else to spend the British Tokens on, go ahead and buy the bundles with Tokens and see what you get. NOTE: The T5 to T8 UK CA early access ships WILL BE available in the tech tree to grind for in 9.1, which is scheduled for Wed, Feb 12th. NOTE: Per WG, If you get an early access ship from one of the bundle types, you can STILL GET THE SAME ship from the other type of bundle. You get credit compensation for duplicates. So for example, if you get an early access Hawkins CA from the Token bundles, you can still get the Hawkins CA from the Doubloon bundles and you will credit compensation. Doubloon Bundles You can possibly get the same early access UK CAs in the Brit Token bundles, so you DO NOT NEED to buy the dub bundles to get ships. There will be doubloon bundles you can buy in the Armory for 1,000 dubs each. They will have the same four early access UK CAs as the Token bundles and other items as well. There may be as many as 65(!) dub bundles in the Armory. The more dub bundles there are, the less likely you are to get an early access ship as a random offering. You will have one bundle, randomly determined, for purchase for 1,000 doubloons in the Armory. Once you buy that bundle, a new randomly determined bundle will be offered. There will be 13 variants of bundles with as many as 65(!) bundles total. You can only get an early access ship once. The other bundles you will be able to get a certain number of times, listed in the Armory. If you do not value the other items in the bundles, I highly, highly suggest not buying the doubloon bundles. Since there will be 4 ship bundles among 65 dub bundles, ships will appear rarely. If you are not happy with possibly spending tens of thousands of doubloons, I highly, highly suggest not buying the doubloon bundles. The dub bundles are likely there for the whales with money to burn to whom spending LOTS of money to get something they want now, is not a concern for them. NOTE: The T5 to T8 UK CA early access ships WILL BE available in the tech tree to grind for in 9.1, which is scheduled for Wed, Feb 12th. NOTE: Per WG, If you get an early access ship from one of the bundle types, you can STILL GET THE SAME ship from the other type of bundle. You get credit compensation for duplicates. So for example, if you get an early access Hawkins CA from the Token bundles, you can still get the Hawkins CA from the Doubloon bundles and you will credit compensation. UK heavy cruisers (CAs) The T5 Hawkins, T6 Devonshire, T7 Surrey and T8 Ablemarle will be in early access. These are still WIP ships and these stats may still change before the line goes live in 9.1 which is scheduled for Wed, Feb 12th. Pics and stats in the spoiler. - They will be semi-premium ships in that you can put any Cmdr into the ship. - You can grind XP on the ships, but can not use that XP to research the next ship until the line goes live in 9.1 which is scheduled for Wed, Feb 12th. - Any Cmdrs placed on the early access ship, that are not already trained for that ship, will need re-training when the ship goes live, if they want to stay on that ship. - NOTE, all the early access ships will be fully researched but will have stock modules mounted. So make sure to mount the upgraded modules if you get an early access ship. Contrary to past events of this type, the early access ships will come with perma-camos which are worth 1,000 to 3,000 doubloons depending on tier. The T5 Hawkins starts the line and may branch off of the T5 Emerald instead of the usual tier before the split. The T9 Drake and T10 Goliath are scheduled for 9.1 when the line goes live which is scheduled for Wed, Feb 12th. NOTE: These early access ships will be tech tree ships when the line goes live which is scheduled for Wed, Feb 12th. PA Lunar New Year Starts Fri, Jan 24th at 2am PST and ends Mon, Feb 10th at 2am PST, so plan on being done by end of the day Sun, Feb 9th. During the PA Lunar New Year Event, you can earn up to 8 Lunar New Year containers for completing a Big Fireworks mission chain. The container contents are listed below, but include chances (very small) at PA premium ships. If you get a ship/perma-camo you already have, you are almost certainly going to be compensated in credits for the duplicate. Here are the requirements of the mission chain. You must complete one Part of the chain, before you can move on to the next Part. Using T5+ ships in Random, Co-op, and/or Scenario battles; Part 1 - Win six battles and get one Lunar New Year container. Part 2 - In battles, earn 15 "Hits to citadel" ribbons and get one Lunar New Year container. Part 3 - In battles, sink 10 enemy ships and get one Lunar New Year container. Part 4 - In battles, earn 30 "Set on fire" ribbons and get one Lunar New Year container. Part 5 - In battles, earn 15 "Captured", "Assisted in capture", and/or "Defended" ribbons and get one Lunar New Year container. Part 6 - In battles, earn 60,000 XP and get one Lunar New Year container. Once you complete all 6 Parts of the Mission Chain, you will get two Lunar New Year containers and two Asian Lantern one-use camos. Lunar New Year containers The Lunar New Year containers will have Pan-Asian premium ships, alternate perma-camos, FXP, doubloons, premium days, and one-use camos. The perma-camos have the standard bonuses based on the tier of the permium ships they are set for. While not explictly stated, it appears that each container will contain ONE of the following per the Premium shop (the graphic is misleading); either a perma-camo OR a ship OR one of 5,000 FXP OR 250 doubloons OR one WoWs premium day OR 3 Lunar New Year one-use camos OR one of 1 Asian Lantern OR 1 Spring Sky OR 1 Mosaic OR 1 Type 59 one-use camos. During the event, there are other rewards you can get. Festive Discounts and Gift Starts Fri, Jan 24th at 2am PST and ends Fri, Jan 31st at 2am PST, so plan on being done by end of the day Thu, Jan 30th. +200% XP first win bonus for each ship each day -50% to the cost of Port slots in doubloons in game -50% to the cost of upgrades in credits -50% to the cost of demounting upgrades in doubloons Starts Fri, Jan 24th at 2am PST and ends Mon, Jan 27th at 2am PST, so plan on being done by end of the day Sun, Jan 26th. Convert Elite Commander XP (ECXP) into Free XP (FXP) at the rate of 1 doubloon for 35 FXP Warships Premium Account for Victory (can only be done once per account) Starts Fri, Jan 24th at 2am PST and ends Mon, Feb 10th at 2am PST, so plan on being done by end of the day Sun, Feb 9th. Win a battle with a T5+ ship and get a commemorative flag and 3 Wargaming containers. The Wargaming containers each contain 1 day of WoWs premium time, 3 Papa Papa signals and 3 Juliet Charlie signals. The flag is honoring the Year of the White Metal Rat. The premium ship is selling premium Lunar New Year boxes for $3 each. The prizes are similar to above, but 3-5 times more items depending on what drops. https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/sales-and-events/missions-090-weekly-1/ PA Lunar New Year missions Article Server Outage compensation Jan 11th to Jan 15th, times in thread Notes: Articles referenced: https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/game-updates/british-cruisers/ came out on Jan 13th Edits: First post: 2100 Mon, Jan 13th Edit 1400 Wed, Jan 15th Directives, bundles in the Armory and PA Lunar New Year Edit 1415 Wed, Jan 15th credit compensation for duplicates and you can get the SAME early access ship from the Token bundles AND the Doubloon bundles. Edit 1841 Wed, Jan 15th made the Missions in the spoilers easier to read Edit: Server Outage compensation Fri, Jan 17th 1515 Edit: Fri, Jan 17th Daily Chains Edit: Thu, Jan 23rd 0930 PA missions article Edit: Thu, Jan 23rd 1050 Expanded on the PA Lunar New Year event Edit: Fri, Jan 24th 0724 Lunar New Year containers are random drops per the premium ship, the graphic was misleading
  6. The following is a review of Indomitable, the tier VIII British Aircraft Carrier. This ship was provided to me for free by Wargaming for review purposes. To the best of my knowledge, the statistics discussed in this review are current as of patch 0.9.0. Please be aware that her performance may change in the future. Well, this won't be popular. Seriously, what a way to tank my readership numbers -- reviewing an aircraft carrier of all things. I can already hear the furious keyboard mashing of the rework-haters preparing to repeat oft-rehearsed mantras and soundbites. Well, whether social media likes it or not, Indomitable is a premium that Wargaming is charging money for and it should be reviewed. Players should have access to as much accurate information about her as possible. So here I am. Don't hate the facts. Hate the feels. Welcome to 2020, everyone! Quick Summary: A carpet-bombing nightmare. Her planes are super fast and super tough but she gets so few of them. The game play is quick, monotonous and heavily RNG based. PROS Armoured flight deck. Her aircraft are very fast. Enormous aircraft health pools. Her bombers are very easy to use. Bombers are good at starting fires. Accelerated reset timers after attack runs, allowing for faster repeat-strikes. Very fast patrol fighters, excellent at intercepting enemy air groups. CONS Enormous, high-water citadel. No torpedo planes whatsoever. Tiny hangar capacity and slow regeneration of aircraft. Strike groups are very small and easily wiped out when caught by flak or fighters. Low agility on aircraft. They're only fast in a straight line. Her bombers have very poor energy retention. Low penetration on bombs and rockets limits their ability to stack direct damage. Success is heavily RNG based, banking on fires to burn down targets or a good drop pattern to pulverize destroyers. You can setup everything correctly and still fail. Overview Skill Floor: Simple / CASUAL / Challenging/ Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low/ MODERATE/ High/ Extreme Indomitable isn't terribly complex -- she's arguably one of the easiest aircraft carriers in the game to learn. If she could automatically avoid flak, fighters and negate the effects of AA, I'd give her a "simple" rating but she's not quite there. There's not much else to Indomitable beyond proper target selection. Few of the high-skill CV tricks work here. Indomitable has a shorter immunity window than other carriers so sling-shotting provides less returns that it would for other carriers. Fast recall doesn't work either. This limits "high skill play" to pre-dropping planes and knowing which ships you can damage directly with her low-penetration attacks. Options Ship Consumables Aircraft carrier consumables are fixed and activate automatically. Indomitable's Damage Control Party is activated anytime she takes critical damage. This includes taking floods, being set on fire, taking critical damage to her steering gears or engines. This is active for 60 seconds with a 90 second reset timer. It has unlimited charges. Her CAP Fighters (combat air patrol fighters) are activated anytime Indomitable is spotted. Once launched, these will patrol for TEN MINUTES (600s) if they're not destroyed or they aren't required to intercept. The four fighters (five with the Direction Center for Fighters commander skill) orbit Indomitable at a range of 1km and engage enemy aircraft that slip within 3km of their current position. Each aircraft is capable of shooting down a single plane. This consumable has four charges and a 40s reset timer. Aircraft Consumables Indomitable's two squadrons each have consumables with her fighters being slightly improved to compensate for the lack of torpedo bombers. The Engine Cooling consumable restores the carrier's boost meter to full over the course of five seconds. In addition, while it's active, boosting will not drain the meter. Each squadron has two charges and they reset over 80 seconds. Indomitable's Patrol Fighters come with an extra charge compared to most of the other tier VIII carriers. She starts with four charges instead of three. This gives Indomitable a total of eight charges compared to the nine the other carriers enjoy. These fighters fight on station for 60 seconds with a five second reset timer after the planes depart. Upgrades Take Air Groups Modification 1 in your first slot to accelerate aircraft return & recovery time. Next, take Aircraft Engines Modification 1 to give you more boost time. You have a choice in slot three. Attack Aircraft Modification 1 will give you an additional 2 seconds of time to fire your rockets in an attack run. If you patently hate your rockets (or don't see an additional 2 seconds as useful), then AA Guns Modification 1 should be your fallback. You have the choice between increasing the hit points of your attack aircraft or bombers here. Pick whichever one you're more reliant upon. I personally prefer Bombers Modification 2 over Attack Aircraft Modification 2. Let's not kid ourselves: Flight Control Modification 1 is hella important for a carrier with such limited hangar capacity as Indomitable. Concealment System Modification 1 will help keep your carrier alive (somewhat), but Indomitable's surface detection isn't so appalling that she needs much help. Commander Skills I'd like to be able to tell you that you should take a unique, Indomitable-only commander build but it's really not necessary. Focus on aircraft survivability skills primarily, increasing boost time, regeneration time, health and protection versus AA power. After that, do whatever. Demolition Expert is probably the only must-have that you might otherwise skip on some carriers. Camouflage Indomitable comes with Type 10 Camouflage providing the standard bonuses for a tier VIII premium: 3% reduction to surface detection. 4% increase to enemy dispersion. 10% reduction to post-battle service costs. 50% increase to experience earned. Provided you've completed the necessary collections, you have two palette options for Indomitable. This is the alternate camouflage colours. Both are nice. The Planes Indomitable's most telling trait isn't what she can do, but rather what she can't. She does not have access to any torpedo bombers and is thus entirely reliant upon her attack aircraft and bombers to carry the day. The former are pretty forgettable, leaving most of the heavy lifting to Indomitable's bombers. For a ship with already pared down game play options, having success largely stacked onto the shoulders of a single aircraft type makes for hella-dull game play. Like more than a few recent ships, Indomitable's fortunes are tied directly to her matchmaking. I cannot stress this enough: She lacks penetration. The more well armoured her opponents, the more reliant she is upon RNG to stack hits on the few squishy areas that remain or to start fires. This has the potential to severely limits her damage output. There's a world of difference between nearly every hit causing damage and only a choice few. At her core, Indomitable is little different than an HE-spamming heavy cruiser or British battleship. Her preferred means of damage comes from landing penetrating hits, but in a pinch, fires will do. She manages this by fast-cycling her aircraft. Indomitable greatly reduces travel times compared to her contemporaries, taxing Damage Control Parties and repeat-striking exposed ships until they are burned or bombed to death. Her preferred targets are the squishy and the battleships. The former she can hurt directly, the latter she can burn. However, she is deathly allergic to strong, combined AA auras. Thus, most cruisers are off the menu, making Indomitable's already limited gameplay incredibly myopic. Burning battleships leads to three things: big numbers, Witherer medals and lots of raging in chat. This kind of triple-stacked positive reinforcement will all but guarantee that most Indomitable players will ignore objectives, dismiss targets of importance and focus instead upon farming battleship tears. What else did you expect from a demented Sky-Conqueror? Hangar Capacity Attack Aircraft Capacity: 12 Aircraft Attack Aircraft Regeneration: 115s per Bomber Capacity: 8 Aircraft Bomber Regeneration: 117s per Indomitable's hangar is ... well, crappy to say the least. The only positive here is that she holds more aircraft than she otherwise should. With her squadrons a mere four bombers and six attack aircraft in size, I would expect her to house six bombers and nine attack aircraft in her hangar if she conformed to CV norms. However, Wargaming "balanced" her by letting her carry double the size of her squadrons instead. Indomitable's aircraft regeneration is painfully slow to boot. This isn't a terribly forgiving aircraft when it comes to mistakes. At best, she can regenerate a maximum of 11 of each aircraft type over the course of a twenty-minute match and that's only the theoretical maximum. In practice count assume you're getting one aircraft of each type back every two minutes provided you're using both types regularly. There's no way in Hell any of these carriers will reach their theoretical maximum capacity. Regeneration of aircraft only occurs when there's empty room in the hangar. The moment the hangar is full, typically from returning aircraft, regeneration stops and any remaining progress is lost. Bombers Aircraft Type: de Havilland Sea Hornet Ordnance: Six 250lb general purpose bomb Group Size: Four aircraft per squadron with two aircraft per attack flight Hit Points: 2,590hp per Aircraft Min/Cruising/Boosted Speed: 157kts/182kts/217kts Easy to Use, Easy to Praise Indomitable's bombers are amazing. They are fast. They are tough. Her bomb aiming reticule isn't punitive with a short and forgiving aim-time. She dumps a ton of ordnance allowing her to land big alpha strikes or ensure a hit on even a small target. She's capable of starting multiple fires per run. It doesn't take five years for her bombs to drop either. British carpet-bombers are little more than over-glorified rocket aircraft in terms of their ease of use. Indomitable may not have torpedoes, but her bombers pretty much make up for this lack -- they truly are excellent. Let's start with the basics. This is what she uses to aim: Photoshop composite showing the size and shape of Indomitable's fully aimed bomb reticule. Aircraft are moving from the bottom of the screen to the top. Reference-Mahan™ for scale. Indomitable drops twelve bombs over this small area and it takes no time at all for this marker to settle to the narrowest aim. Bomb drop times are about 3.5 seconds, so this necessitates quite a bit of lead. However, if you can predict ship movements properly, it's possible to score multiple hits even on a Just-Dodging™ lolibote or cruiser. They've a very gentle learning curve which makes it easy to score some big numbers provided you pick the right targets. All of Indomitable's bombers have a reduced recovery period. This allows her to launch repeat strikes faster than most of her contemporaries, however it makes her remaining planes more vulnerable to AA fire after the drop. It should be noted that Indomitable, like Implacable, cannot fast-recall her bombers immediately after an attack. The ease of use continues with the aircraft's survivability. These things are fast and they're tough. With full upgrades, it's possible to get their hit points just shy of 3,000hp (and exceed it with the new legendary commander). These aircraft can literally outrun some of the fighters they come up against, making them capable of leading them on merry chases forever and a day. Similarly, their high speed and durability trivializes modest AA defenses and get through with few (if any) casualties. Indomitable's bombers are tough as nails, but it pays to invest in every health upgrade you can afford to give them. These aircraft will be your mainstay damage dealers, so do everything you can to keep them intact. Complications I only have two general areas of complaint with Indomitable's bombers -- penetration and their agility. I'll start with the latter mostly because it was a Hell of a lot of work to isolate. Agility wise, Idomitable's bombers are great in a straight line. However, they're as awkward and uncoordinated as Wargaming's PR and marketing departments. Indomitable's bombers require a RIDICULOUS amount of room to come about. While boosted, their turning circle radius is a whopping 1,700m! Even at normal speed, it isn't much better requiring 1,200m. The aircraft are slow to respond to commands and feel sluggish compared to the American or Implacable's bombers. These are not winning any agility prizes. No, I don't know why so many aircraft had similar agility. Lexington and Enterprise make sense (they're the same aircraft, after all) but the others? No clue. Happy coincidence, I guess. If you elect to make follow up attack runs with Indomitable's bombers, don't try and turn about immediately. Power through the ship's AA bubble before you begin coming about. It's ridiculously easy to overshoot targets with Indomitable's bombers. Her agility woes continue, though. While it looks like she shares parity with Graf Zeppelin's Ta-152s, this isn't the case. The German bombers are faster, having both a higher boosted speed (+40kts vs the +35kts of Indomitable's bombers) and better energy preservation besides. Graf Zeppelin (and most, if not all other carriers) can ride and flutter their throttle to extend the use of their plane's boost consumable. When Indomitable let's go of the W-key, her planes bleed all of the extra speed like they hit a brick wall. What energy preservation? Deceleration from boosted speed is a linear-loss. The longer aircraft can preserve speed, the better. The consumable has 20 seconds of active time and a 40 second reset timer. These both can be increased by 10% with an upgrade. Players may flutter the boost-power, stretching out its duration. Indomitable can't do this at all, losing everything almost instantly. Even her Attack Aircraft preserve speed better. Lert recklessly took his finger off the boost button while playtesting Indomitable's bombers. I wish I could take credit for this one, but this is all Chobittsu. As for Indomitable's HE bomb penetration, it's not terrible. It's simply not high enough to make it a universal threat against all targets. When she's top tier, the monstrous potential of what could have been is unleashed -- there are few ships at tiers VI and VII that have protection schemes to defend against 32mm of penetration. Indomitable wrecks all comers with her fast-cycling planes. Against tier VIII+ battleships and carrier, Indomitable's HE penetration starts feeling sub-standard. Shatters abound and her alpha-strike potential plummets. Neither of these two issues damns Indomitable's bombers. They're merely minor complications. 32mm of penetration is PRETTY good, but it's not good enough to hurt everything she comes across. I've left the AP bomb comparison out of this as their damage output is hella wonky, with impressive citadel hits, the occasional penetration or horrible over-penetration damage. HE bombs by contrast are pretty reliable in terms of their binary -- either a penetrating hit or the bomb shatters for zero damage until saturation kicks in. The Genuine Problem So let's recap: Indomitable has fast, tough planes. They're not especially agile and they don't preserve speed very well. Furthermore, Indomitable can't afford to take many losses -- she doesn't have the regeneration to recoup from mistakes being made. Screw up against flak, fighters or misjudge the potency of an AA-wall and you're in trouble. Finally, they do good direct damage against tier VI and VII targets, but struggle against tier VIII+ battleships and some aircraft carriers. In short, Indomitable's bombers over-perform against lower-tiered targets but they fall back into an unhealthy behaviour against higher tiered enemies. With AA power increasing, higher-tiered cruisers are generally off the menu. She can't afford running the gauntlet of taking even one or two casualties per attack run. Thus, Indomitable's design encourages players to focus on stacking fires against isolated, modest-AA defended battleships -- namely Japanese and German designs though any will do if there's a lack of available targets. Fire resistance cuts these values in half against tier X targets and by roughly 1/4 against tier VI targets. Indomitable tends to average 1-2 fires per attack-flight drop against most battleships. This game play is infuriating to suffer. Her bombers can outrun many fighters and outlast modest AA fire coming from a single battleship. A target 25km away will face repeat strikes from even a single flight every 50 seconds -- those fires will begin to stack and there's little to nothing they can do to stop it. They can't hide. They can't run. Their only hope is to be rescued by fighters fast enough to catch Indomitable's bombers and this isn't guaranteed or to find themselves under the combined AA umbrella of several allies. To the Indomitable player, the damage numbers this generates are incredibly rewarding. Big numbers. Lots of medals. All but guaranteed kills. Fun and Engaging 101. Why hunt cruisers and destroyers when battleships are such easy farms? Yes, Indomitable's bombers are capable of wrecking cruisers. Yes, they're perfectly suitable for nuking lolibotes, but why bother when you can Sky-Conqueror your way to the top of the experience pile? Sure, you might win more if you actually helped out your team and took out targets that mattered, but that's not going to help you average over 100k to 200k damage every match, now will it? Summary: Indomitable's bombers are powerful, versatile, fast and deadly. It's too bad all you're going to use them for is farming fire damage off battleships. Attack Aircraft Aircraft Type: de Havilland Sea Hornet Ordnance: Eight RP-3 60lb HE No1 Mk1 per aircraft Group Size: Six aircraft per squadron with two aircraft per attack flight Hit Points: 2,100hp per Aircraft Min/Cruising/Boosted Speed: 158kts/188kts/228kts I don't like Indomitable's attack aircraft. Well, I don't like attack aircraft in general and while I'm sure that bias carries over here, Indomitable's aircraft feel of poor quality compared to her bombers. They're fast, sure -- and that's probably the best thing about them. They have other positive traits, such as a good health pool, faster reset-timer between attacks and a decent fire-chance per rocket hit. However, we still need to be aware of Indomitable's lack of torpedo planes. Unlike her bombers, Indomitable's attack aircraft don't take up any of the slack. They don't exactly need to given the general cancerous awesomeness of her bombers. ("I'm sorry, son, you have cancer. The awesome kind of cancer.") And that's really the problem: most of the jobs you would delegate to attack aircraft are performed better by Indomitable's bombers. Thus Indomitable's rockets lack purpose. The only reason to take them out is when you're running low on bombers. Let's look at these aircraft in more detail: Survivability I'm not going to lie -- the survivability of Indomitable's Attack Aircraft is pretty damn good. This shouldn't be any surprise after her bombers. She hasless exposure time to damaging effects and more health to tank through it. While this doesn't make her aircraft invincible by any means, it does all but guarantee that her planes will survive long enough to deliver an attack provided you don't drive into a flak explosion or fighter swarm. It's the speed of her aircraft that are the real superstars. At 188kts cruising speed, she covers 5km every 10 seconds. This accelerates not only her ability to deliver strikes but also to return the limited number of aircraft to which she has access. Indomitable's Sea Hornets have the same hit point pool as Implacable's Seafires which doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, but whatever. Indomitable has not only the fastest attack aircraft at tier VIII, but some of the fastest attack aircraft in the whole game. The same problems that plagued her bombers are repeated here. She doesn't have the reserves to tough-out taking sustained casualties. As resilient as her individual aircraft are, every loss hurts. Indomitable has an absolute maximum of twenty-five (25) attack aircraft to play with over the course of the game with more realistic numbers sitting closer around sixteen to twenty depending on frequency of use and game duration. Losing a mere eight aircraft in quick succession severely limits her ability to deliver-repeat strikes without a pronounced wait on aircraft return times. Her attack aircraft agility sucks too but it isn't as much of a disparity gap as it was with her bombers: Unlike ships, if you want to improve both the rate of turn and turning radius for aircraft, hit the brakes. With her airbrakes, Indomitable's Attack Aircraft have a 30.6º/s rotation rate and 790m turning radius. Don't boost -- that just makes everything worse. The horrible agility and twitchy aim marker makes lining up shots with Indomitable's rockets difficult unless you start VERY far out. Any kind of manoeuvring will throw off your lead Indomitable's attack aircraft have a very short recovery timer after a run. This allows Indomitable to make repeat-attacks faster than her contemporaries, however it limits the range of her sling-shot immunity from AA fire. In addition, her Sea Hornets cannot make a fast-recall like other attack aircraft. Ordnance As controversial as rockets are, Indomitable's are pretty forgettable. Their individual damage values are decent and their fire chance per hit is good. However, their flight fires only a modest 16 per salvo limiting their effectiveness. It's not that these weapons are terrible, they're simply average while those of many other aircraft carriers are much better or at least more interesting. On paper, the stats of Indomitable's individual rockets are pretty good. Comparison of the tech-tree carrier rocket-ordnance including the shape of their attack reticle. Comparison of the premium carrier rocket-ordnance and the shape of their attack reticles. Protecting the Lolibotes Indomitable's rockets were nerfed repeatedly over the course of her development to limit their effectiveness against destroyers. They had their damage reduced and dispersion worsened. Only half of Indomitable's rockets will ever land towards the center of the target marker, greatly limiting the maximum amount of damage possible in a single run unless hitting a chunktacular-sized vessel. Photoshop composite showing the size and shape of Indomitable's fully aimed rocket reticle. Aircraft are moving from the bottom of the screen to the top. Reference-Mahan™ for scale. The orientation of this aiming reticle makes it harder to land hits against small targets like destroyers compared to the perpendicular drop pattern of American FFAR and HVAR rockets. The 27mm of penetration on Indomitable's rockets repeats her improved performance parameters against tier VI and tier VII targets of all types. When Indomitable is top tier, there isn't anything her rockets are incapable of preying upon, delivering reliable damage against cruisers and battleships and supplementing her bombers well. When facing tier VIII+ ships, the number of targets reduces. In theory, she should still be quite effective against cruisers and some carriers, however, the level of anti-aircraft firepower from most of these ships at tier VIII+ precludes them from being viable targets until the very end of a match. If these ships absolutely must die, then certain her rockets are preferable to use over her more valuable bombers -- the larger effective health pool of six rocket planes versus four bombers will tough out AA better, but the casualties will cost Indomitable dear. While not essential for putting down the hurt on most vessels, higher penetration allows for more damage to a greater range of targets. With Indomitable's rocket penetration being kinda meh, it puts more of a burden on her bombers to carry her performance when dealing with high-tier battleships. Against ideal, soft targets, her damage caps out at 11,088hp per attack assuming they all hit and penetrate... which they won't. Effective fire resistance of most target ships will reduce the odds of stacking blazes. Indomitable's rockets are a poor choice for starting fires unless you can make repeat strikes. It's only against targets with very weak AA power where this is even remotely feasible. These are yet even more reasons that Indomitable's rockets should generally be relegated to pounding soft targets. Summary: Indomitable's rockets are okay. They feel pretty good when she's top tier. Make sure to use and abuse them when tier VI and VII targets are present as this takes some much needed strain off her bombers. Just remember: Her bombers are better and will do the same job more effectively. Fighters It's not uncommon for ships to use different types of aircraft for Combat Air Patrol (carrier defense) and Patrol fighters (summoned by squadrons). All of the tier VIII American carriers use Corsairs for CAP while they use a mix of Corsairs, Hellcats and Bearcats for patrol summons between Lexington, Enterprise and Saipan respectively. Indomitable is no different, making use of the same Seafires as Implacable for CAP and recruiting a wave of Sea Hornets for patrol duties. The latter are MUCH faster -- some of the fastest fighters in the game while the former are some of the slowest CAP fighters at tier VIII. Thankfully you can all but guarantee that whatever planes are coming towards your carrier will fly right into your Seafires so their speed is less of an issue. Indomitable uses Implacable's Seafires for her combat air patrol defense around the carrier. These orbit at a range of 1km around the ship and engage enemy aircraft that slip within 3km of their position. The flight size can be modified by taking the Direction Center for Fighters skill. Indomitable starts with four charges of CAP fighters but you may increase this to five if you take Superintendent (but why would you?). Nothing can outrun Indomitable's summoned Patrol Fighters. Once they lock on, casualties are all but guaranteed. Praying to RNGesus Indomitable is the great equalizer. Forget skill -- it will only take you so far with this ship. The layers of RNG are stacked pretty high with her performance. While timing and target selection matter, you can do everything right and still do poorly because your rockets scattered oddly or you didn't set that fire when it was optimal to do so. Fires and dispersion make all of the difference in Indomitable -- it's what separates a good game from a poor showing. You'll need between five and eight permanent fires to score a Witherer's medal -- that's five to eight fires pushed past an enemy battleship's Damage Control Party. If the numbers aren't coming up, there's not much you can do to stack damage quickly against higher tiered battleships. Similarly, bad bomb or rocket scattering can make even a perfectly lined shot fall flat. Conversely, a well timed triple (or quadruple!) fire and suddenly you're a rockstar. This is why I rag on Indomitable's low penetration and also why I say this ship patently over-performs when facing a glut of tier VI and VII targets. Lower-tier AA power largely doesn't matter, but more importantly she can partially bypass RNGesus. She's no longer reliant upon fires for her damage totals and can stack the hurt directly. I would have gladly traded some of Indomitable's alpha-strike and fire setting potential for better penetration or more accurate drops. It would have taken some of the lottery-feels out of her successes. This is what's so infuriating about playing with and against Indomitable. You're forever hoping RNG screws over your opponent. You don't need to get good in Indomitable, you just need to get lucky. The Ship Carrier hulls aren't worth noting until they're being shot at. There's really only one carrier currently in the game that rewards you for taking control of the hull and that's Graf Zeppelin. For every other CV in the game, the hull is just where your planes are stored. It's a box of hit points you try to keep as close to the action as possible while remaining hidden. Durability Hit Points: 51,400hp Maximum Citadel Protection: 114mm belt Minimum Hull Armour: 19mm to 21mm Flight Deck Armour: 25mm to 76mm Torpedo Damage Reduction: 28% Aircraft carriers are not known for their durability. British carriers have an marked flaw with their high-water citadels. Indomitable's citadel pokes up well over the waterline with a noticeable 'hump' beneath her conning tower. Taking hits to her machine spaces is tragically commonplace, even from incidental pot-shots. It's not all doom and gloom, however. Indomitable has good anti-torpedo defense for a carrier. She also boasts an armoured flight deck. The latter element provides some immunity to HE attacks and can ricochet poorly aimed (or poorly dispersed) long range AP fire. This only applies to the central part of the deck, however. Her bow and stern are still highly vulnerable to both HE and large caliber AP shell over-matching. Still, it's nice to see this historical element do it's job versus HE bomb attacks, allowing Indomitable to shrug off sniping attempts from dive bombers. Except AP bombs. Oh lordy, does she hate AP bombs. Damage over time (DoT) effects have very little impact on aircraft carriers and Indomitable is no exception. This is in part due to their long-duration, automatically deploying Damage Control Party which activates the moment critical damage is done and provides a 60 second immunity window. In addition, fires and floods simply don't last as long as they do on other types of ships and deal less damage. Maximum Fire Damage per Ship Type: Destroyers & Cruisers: 9% over 30 seconds. Graf Spee: 13.5% over 45 seconds. Battleships & Large Cruisers: 18% over 60 seconds. Aircraft Carriers: 2% over 5 seconds. Maximum Flood Damage per Ship Type: Destroyers & Cruisers: 10% over 40 seconds. Graf Spee: 15% over 40 seconds. Battleships & Large Cruisers: 20% over 40 seconds. Aircraft Carriers: 7.5% over 30 seconds. Thus attempting to stack DoTs to bring down a carrier is a fool's errand, really. Even if you do get past their Damage Control Party, the returns just really aren't worthwhile. This was ostensibly designed to mitigate the effectiveness of aircraft carriers sniping one another. The result of this is to make direct damage the only effective way of sinking the ship itself. Indomitable is super squishy. The best thing about her protection scheme is her armoured deck which can shrug off HE hits that avoid striking its extremities. However, her enormous, high-water citadel means that it's always (ALWAYS) worth a battleship's time to fire Hail Mary shots from across the map at her if she's spotted. Heavy cruisers should do the same. Citadel hits from the extremes of range are painfully commonplace. Agility Top Speed: 30.5kts Listed Turning Radius: 970m Rudder Shift Time: 13.0s 4/4 Engine Speed Rotation Rate: 3.2º/s Well, this section's going to be hella brief. Aircraft carrier agility is a cruel joke. They can barely manage to maintain 2/3s of their forward momentum when you touch their rudder. The only thing that's ever considered good about their agility is their top speed. Indomitable is downright mediocre in this regard, barely managing to exceed 30 knots. Running away means sailing straight lines or risk being overtaken by even the pedestrian velocities of some of the tier VIII battleships. It's not like her autopilot is going to do her any favours either. They're all pretty terrible but Kaga gets the special loser-points for being so slow. I do get a laugh that Indomitable can turn inside her own aircraft. Refrigerator Base Surface Detection: 13.5km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 10.61km Air Detection Range: 10.58km Indomitable's surface detection range is decidedly average for a tier VIII carrier though her aerial detection is a bit on the high side. That "Minimum Surface Detection Range" is a pipe dream -- you're not going to use Concealment System Modification 1 so Indomitable's surface concealment tends to cap out at around 11.79km Secondaries Secondary Battery: Sixteen 113mm/45 rifles in 8x2 turrets with four on each side of the ship. Her turrets are not superfiring and arranged on platform-wings jutting out from the front and rear of the flight deck. Graf Zeppelin, this carrier is not. Indomitable's secondaries are a mere afterthought. These dual purpose weapons work better as anti-aircraft mounts than anti-surface weapons and they don't win any prizes for the former. I took her out and tried to have her sink a stationary Reference-Mahan™ at a range of 4km with secondary fire only. It took over 230 shells fired (that's two and a half minutes worth of shooting) to sink the darned thing and that's largely owing to some lucky fires. Don't waste your time with these. If you squint, you can make out the secondaries fore and aft on their isolated platforms. Unless a target is completely broadside, you're not bringing all four turrets onto a target. Indomitable has an 8° blindspot directly forward and an 18º blindspot to the rear where an enemy ship can sit with impunity. Anti-Aircraft Defense Flak Bursts: Four for 1,330 damage per blast. Long Ranged AA: ~88dps at 5.8km Medium Ranged AA: ~228dps at 3.5km Short Ranged AA: ~366dps at 2.0km I kinda wanted to rag on Indomitable for her AA not being up to scratch, but looking at the numbers, she's alright'. Indomitable's AA firepower is based around point defense, with the majority of her AA limited to engaging aircraft just before or during an ordnance launch. This isn't ideal -- I'd prefer to see a lot more teeth in her 3.5km batteries as per Implacable but whatever. Ranking wise, I'd put her tied with Graf Zeppelin overall which is just ahead of Saipan, Shokaku and Kaga. Most of Indomitable's AA defense comes from her multitude of 20mm Oerlikon mounts. Seriously, those things are scattered everywhere. It's pretty impressive. Aircraft Carrier Summary I've got to give Indomitable's hull failing marks. The carrier's purpose is to keep out of harm's way and cycle aircraft. Indomitable isn't terrible at the former -- she doesn't win any prizes, though. She's pretty darned awful at the latter. Unremarkable AA power, agility and concealment. Below average durability due to high vulnerability to AP citadel hits. Her armoured deck is nice but it rarely comes into play short of being attacked by other carriers or long-range HE spam. Hangar capacity is stupid-small with very long aircraft recovery times. Laughable secondaries. Final Evaluation I was expecting this ship to be released with patch 0.8.2. The early rework was Hell for me. Not only was I trying to familiarize myself with the new CV systems, I was trying to make myself expert on Indomitable on a short time frame. I put in over 100 games in this ship between patches 0.8.0 and 0.8.0.3. This was when the changes to AA power and aircraft performance were almost constant. I fully expected Indomitable to be released with the British Aircraft Carrier tech-tree; if not with Hermes, Glorious and Implacable in patch 0.8.1, then surely with Audacious in patch 0.8.2. There was never enough time. But those deadlines came and went. More changes occurred and the data I had collected faded to frustrating obsolescence. Indomitable was hit with a few small evolutionary changes for patch 0.8.3 and I put in almost another 100 games, updating my notes. This was especially hard to do with my health struggles at the time, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't behind the curve with the carrier rework. And then nothing happened. Indomitable disappeared. She went back into the vault even as the rework continued. What followed was a series of dramatic changes to her performance but with no follow-up testing. Indomitable lost one of her most defining features -- the ability to have her aircraft exceed 250 knots. I didn't get to play test her through this. Anti-aircraft firepower became ridiculously powerful only to see-saw back towards a much more modest state we have currently. I didn't get to play test her through these changes either. Indomitable was placed upon the back burner. Ark Royal ended up being released instead -- a much better and more interesting premium carrier in my opinion. Indomitable made a reappearance late in 2019, hidden among all the fuss and fluff of the then upcoming (and highly anticipated with much positivity!) Puerto Rico build. I still didn't get to play test her during this time and expressed some pretty firm concerns that she might have lost her pizazz. Y'see, with all of the games I had played with her previously, I had actually found some enjoyment in the rampant fire-setting sadism that Indomitable provided. Looking back, I think this might have been some abusive transference. I was in pain. Keeping track of the CV rework was similarly a pain. So, sharing the hurt around seems entirely in character and reasonable. The kinder, gentler and more fluffy Mouse of today doesn't do that. I don't need to farm Witherer medals in Indomitable anymore -- the hurt has gone away. I don't need to terrorize poor destroyers and battleships with her planes to spread hate for the CV rework. I have Ark Royal for that. Whatever charms Indomitable once held have long since faded. She's pretty boring to play. Don't get me wrong -- she can generate the numbers so long as you're okay with farming useless damage off battleships. Getting those big numbers, farming Witherer medals and hoovering up the hate in chat is amusing too. But she's definitely not a great performer. I think Wargaming is understandably gun-shy about releasing a carrier premium that's anywhere close to "good" these days. Graf Zeppelin is never allowed to be good ever again and Indomitable stands proudly beside that train wreck as a whole bucket-load of meh. At least both of them are interesting design concepts, I'll give 'em that much. There's always a chance that if Indomitable under-performs that she'll get buffed in the future, but I don't honestly see that coming in any significant way. Here we are almost a year after my testing of Indomitable began, near unto the one year anniversary of the CV-rework. I wish I could go back and tell myself to go lie down and take a few months off. The final product that Indomitable became isn't worth the attention. I'm not sure the rework is either. Would I Recommend? Generally speaking? No, if only because Ark Royal is a thing. Not only does the tier VI premium come at a lower price point, she's much more interesting and fun to play. It's a shame because Indomitable looks gorgeous. The potential is also there but in practice her game play is so repetitive and infuriating. Indomitable is arguably the weakest (or at least, the most inconsistent) of the tier VIII premium carriers. As a co-op boat, she's an especially poor choice. It takes time to stack fires -- time is at a premium in such encounters. Conclusion Thank you all so much for reading. The next reviews will be short and sweet, each covering the new Pan Asian clones Wukong, Bajie and Siliwangi. Look for them soon!
  7. HMS Vanguard is the ghost of the Royal Navy battleship tech tree everyone wanted to see. Ostensibly, HMS Vanguard was designed to be a tier VIII version of HMS Warspite. However, Vanguard falls short of this aspiration. For a high-tier Royal Navy battleship, she's surprisingly not idiot-proof, with a vulnerable citadel that needs to be protected with angling and manoeuvres. What's most exciting: Her AP shells are wonderful. Wargaming has offered some concessions to both of the fans of the current Royal Navy battleship line. They included HMS Monarch's excellent high explosive shells to Vanguard's arsenal, ensuring that these two players can continue spamming HE without a guilty conscience while everyone else rolls their eyes. I want to thank Wargaming for providing me access to this ship. This is the release version of the vessel and all of the statistics discussed here are current as of November 15th, 2018. PROS Large hit point pool of 71,700hp. Main battery has a quick 25s reload and excellent gun handling. Has the same dispersion pattern as Warspite, Hood and Queen Elizabeth and boasts 2.0 sigma, making her one of the most precise battleships in the game. Excellent AP and HE performance for a 381mm shell, including good penetration and damage values, rewarding versatile ammunition choice. Very fast rudder shift time for a battleship of 9.7 seconds. Improved Repair Party, queuing and healing back more than standard and with fast reset timer. CONS Exposed, above-water citadel. Absolutely appalling firing angles on her main battery. Main battery is only eight 381mm rifles creating issues with overmatching and DPM. AA defense is for self defense only and is concentrated in 3.5km range, medium caliber mounts that are easily knocked out. Large turning radius of 850m and slow rate of turn exacerbates the issues with her fire angles. Overview The maximum rotation positions of X and Y turret (her rear guns). They are not new-player friendly. They're not even veteran-player friendly. Vanguard's terrible fire angles so utterly dominate her game play, I felt the tremendous compulsion to wear white-lace and beg her to be gentle. These fire angles screwed me over more times than I can count. Skill Floor: Simple / Casual / CHALLENGING / Difficult Skill Ceiling: Low / Moderate / HIGH / Extreme Vanguard encourages players to sail with their broadsides exposed. With her above-water citadel, you can imagine how well she's going to go over with novice players. You know what? Never mind the novices. The veterans are going to find this frustrating too as it limits the amount of firepower she can dish out when trading. She's a battleship that reward cautious, opportunistic play -- which is review-speak for "hide in the back, shoot when you can and don't brawl". – One of, if not the worst at its tier. This is a pronounced weakness. – Middle of the pack at its tier. Not terrible, but not terribly good either. – Has a significant advantage over her tier mates. A solid, competitive performer. – No other ship at its tier does this as well as this ship. Vanguard has strengths and weaknesses across the board, giving her a rating in Offense, Agility, Anti-Air and Vision Control. It's only in Defense where she stands out with a rating. Her citadel is very vulnerable for a battleship, however she counters this with a the largest hit point pool at her tier and an amazing Repair Party consumable. Options Aside from Vanguard's Repair Party, there's nothing out of the ordinary to be found here. Consumables Vanguard's Damage Control Party is standard for a British battleship. She has unlimited charges. It has a 15 second action time and a 120s / 80s reset timer. Her Repair Party is improved. See the DEFENSE section below. There's a lot to go over. This starts with 3 charges base. Upgrades Optimization of Vanguard's upgrades will see the usual suspects rear their tired old heads. Start with Main Armaments Modification 1. Next take Damage Control Systems Modification 1. You've got a choice in your third slot. As ever, emphasizing gunnery is best so your first pick here should be Aiming Systems Modification 1. However, if you're salty about CVs, taking AA Guns Modification 2 is an okay choice. It's not great, but it's okay. Damage Control Modification 2 is arguably the best choice for most players in slot 4. You can elect to take Steering Gears Modification 2 to emphasize the strengths of her already quick rudder shift time. Be aware this is harder to make use of optimally even if it can yield higher results -- it's easier to tank damage than it is to dodge it, after all. Finally, take everyone's favourite no-brainer: Concealment Modification 1. Camouflage Vanguard comes with Type 10 Camouflage. This provides: 50% bonus experience gains 10% reduction to maintenance costs 3% reduction in surface detection 4% reduction in enemy accuracy. Firepower Main Battery: Eight 381mm guns in 4x2 turrets in an A-B-X-Y superfiring configuration. Secondary Battery: Sixteen 134mm guns in 8x2 turrets. These are superfiring with two forward facing and two rear facing per side. Secondaries Let's start with the small guns. You can largely forget that Vanguard has secondaries. These 134mm guns lack the range, reload time and volume of fire needed to present a credible threat to opponents. This is really unfortunate given their nice shell weight and fire chance. If they had the range or they had the rate of fire, maybe a secondary build would be fun to play around with. Lamentably, it's a mistake to invest anything in upgrading these weapons -- they simply can't do what you need them to. At best they might be able to start a fire on an enemy capital ship that strays too close. However, with Vanguard's high citadel, getting into a brawl is a death sentence, so stay out of secondary range. Main Battery Precision There's so much to like about Vanguard's main battery. First of, there's her precision. Vanguard is a blast from the past, sharing same horizontal dispersion value of the older British premium battleships, including Hood and Warspite. Inside of 12km, she overtakes even the vaunted Japanese battleship accuracy, making her much more adept at picking off close range targets like destroyers. Combined with her 2.0 sigma value, landing hits feels very comfortable, even at long ranges. Standard dispersion test for my reviews -- 180 shells fired at 15km locked onto a stationary target Fuso without camouflage. She was equipped with Aiming Systems Modification 1. Vanguard doesn't quite enjoy the same level of precision as Warspite owing to her faster shell velocity and energy preservation. This gives her a larger vertical dispersion area at all ranges. However, this does lead to improved shell lead times making gunnery easier. Note that Vanguard suffers from a lot of "downward drift" which adds a margin of error to these shell maps as I had to readjust aim with every volley fired. Thus the dispersion area maybe slightly smaller than shown. Shell Performance Vanguard's HE shells don't share the same performance anachronism as her dispersion. They're modern, almost (but not quite) matching HMS Monarch's HE, including her shell damage and penetration. Monarch's have a 1% higher chance to set blazes over Vanguard, though -- don't ask me why. Vanguard doesn't quite match up to the tech tree Royal Navy battleships for fire setting ability. This is good news to me -- it removes some of the brainless quality of HE spam. When you do reach over for her AP shells, you're rewarded with a welcome change from other Royal Navy battleship AP. Like Warspite before her, Vanguard has a longer fuse timer with her AP. This has a few effects. The downside is that she's more likely to overpenetrate soft targets, including broadside cruisers and battleship extremities. The upside is that it provides her AP with increased bite for reaching machine spaces and magazines buried deeper within the core of enemy warships -- especially those with spaced armour protecting their citadels. Vanguard is especially good at punishing broadside battleships at range. Approximate penetration values for Vanguard's AP shells. Vanguard's HE shells are fixed with 95mm of penetration -- not quite enough to punish the few exposed citadels found on high tier cruisers. Inertial Fuse for HE Shells will add a few more ships to the roster that her HE can punish, but it's not worth the points investment. Data pulled from World of Warships AP Calculator. Site linked in the appendix. Penetration wise, her AP shells are well setup, having comparable bite to Tirpitz and Bismarck. It pays to keep their caliber in mind, however. Her 381mm shells cannot overmatch the 27mm bows of American and German heavy cruisers. As good as Vanguard's AP shells are, spamming nothing but won't do you any more favours than if you used HE shells exclusively. Switch shells often in Vanguard and she'll reward you. Vanguard's fast 25 second reload facilitates swapping between ammunition while also padding her damage output when it comes time to cycle her guns. Damage output among the tier VIII battleships is very close. Vanguard keeps pace with her fast rate of fire, compensating for her smaller armament. As ever, take these numbers with a pinch of salt -- they do not represent the challenges of getting shells on target or penetrating when they get there. For whatever reason, Vanguard's HE shells only have a 34% base fire chance as opposed to Monarch's 35%. This creates an increased gap in their fire setting potential and makes Vanguard no better of a fire starter than American battleships. Still the increased damage she dispenses makes this more than worthwhile. Before any of you get yourself all hot and bothered about Monarch's fire setting, Cleveland (the gold-standard of tier VIII burnination) can spit out 9.97 fires per minute with the IFHE penalty and no other buffs. The same disclaimers apply for this chart as the others -- this is merely an indicator of performance and does not represent actual in game results. A myriad of factors will always conspire to mitigate a ship's ability to set fires including (but not limited to), target selection, opportunity, shell dispersion, fire resistance, etc. The Deal Breaker All of these strengths are present to pad for one massive weakness: Vanguard's appalling fire angles. Vanguard has a fast rate of fire, great HE shells, fast turret traverse and excellent precision because her fire angles are so bad. It's all meant to be compensation because Vanguard must present a near perfect broadside in order to fire all eight of her guns at a target. This leaves her incredibly vulnerable to reprisals. She is functionally incapable of autobouncing enemy shells while firing her full armament and instead she must rely on her armour thickness to repel shells. At anything but the longest of ranges, this is a fool's errand. Thus, Vanguard often has to sacrifice firepower in order to properly angle against her enemies. This is why her gun performance is so good: she's often forced to fight with only half of her weapons. Wargaming have done everything they can to make it easier to bring the other half to bear when possible. Her gun traverse is quick. Her reload is fast. She answers her rudder quickly too to help swing her butt out to unmask her guns. I'm not going to lie: These bad fire angles are enough to put me off this ship entirely, which is saying a lot given all of the wonderful perks her guns otherwise enjoy. Vanguard has the same (terrible) forward firing angles as the King George V-class battleships. However, her rearward firing angles are worse than the tier VII battleship. No matter how you choose to engage an enemy, when you use all eight of Vanguard's guns, you open yourself up to return-fire and potential citadel damage. Bad firing angles are one of my personal pet-peeves. I can stomach a lot of things, up to and including sluggish gun traverse, but not bad fire angles. This has greatly soured my opinion of this ship. Summary Secondaries are bad. Her main guns perform beautifully provided you can use all of them. Her fire angles will get you killed. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : I almost gave her a rating here -- that's how bad her fire angles are. However, there's just too many perks glued onto her weapons to make that a fair assessment. She'd need a much faster rate of fire before I would consider bumping this up. Or, you know, completely redesign the ship to give her better fire angles. That would work too. Defense Hit Points: 71,700 Min Bow & Deck Armour: 32mm Maximum Citadel Protection: 356mm Torpedo Damage Reduction: 25% Armour Protection The 356mm/343mm armour is replicated again around her rear magazine. Her turret faces are 343mm front, 228mm side, 178mm rear, and 152mm on top with 305mm barbettes. Let's start with the elephant in the room: Vanguard's citadel sits over the waterline. Much fuss will be made over this and rightly so. Only Roma shares this high-water vulnerability and the Italian ship is much better equipped to angle and bounce incoming fire. The net effect is that Vanguard is more likely to take citadel damage than other battleships when someone catches her side. This isn't to say that citadel damage is an exclusive weakness to Vanguard. However, it pays to keep her vulnerability in mind. Her aforementioned firing angles on her main battery guns exacerbates this problem. When Vanguard is firing all eight of her weapons, whatever she's shooting at has an easy target from which to farm damage. What makes Vanguard's fire angles such a liability compared to other battleships has to do with autobounce mechanics. Let's get technical for a moment to explain why. If AP shells cannot overmatch armour, there's an autobounce check. This occurs before any penetration attempts are made. The angle of the shell is compared to the angle of the surface it strikes. Normally, battleship AP shells that hit with an acute angle of 30º or less will auto-ricochet. This is why bow-tanking is so prevalent -- shells simply slide off the ship's bow and deck, unable to bite into the armour. No matter how much penetration a shell has, if it strikes at too shallow of an angle, your ship can avoid damage. Normally, battleship AP shells that hit with an angle of 45º or more cannot autoricochet. Any shells that strike between 45º and 90º to the hull will follow normal penetration mechanics. In between these two values, the auto-ricochet chance scales linearly. For Vanguard, when she fires her all eight guns forward at a 43º angle, any return fire from her target has only a 13% chance of suffering a ricochet. When she fires all eight guns to the rear at a 40º angle, this improves to a 33% chance. Most battleships are capable of firing all of their guns 35º off their bow, allowing them to ricochet shells automatically 2/3s of the time. The steeper they angle themselves, the better this defense. This mechanic is absolutely essential for keeping battleships safe from the monstrous levels of penetration found at higher tiers. Not only does it provide a better chance of automatically deflecting shells, it adds relative thickness to their armour belts. The steeper you angle, the greater the effective thickness. Vanguard's belt has between 503mm and 522mm worth of protection at 43º. However, if she could fire at 35º off her bow, this would increase to 598mm to 621mm. Data pulled from proships.ru (link in the Appendix). Values are approximate, usually with about 5% higher estimates than Wargaming's values published in their Armada series of videos. You can see by these values that at range, Vanguard makes an excellent bully when top tier -- with rare exceptions, she can unmask her X and Y turrets and fire, confident that her belt will be proof against return fire. This falls away when dueling with tier VIII+ opponents. With few exceptions, they all have the raw penetration needed to best her belt while she fires a broadside. Her citadel protection isn't all bad, though. First off, AP bombs can't citadel you. Hooray! Second, shots that land high that attempt to bi-pass her belt and drop down into her citadel have to contend with a 32mm citadel roof. Only Yamato and Musashi's 460mm guns can overmatch this, meaning that any other shell will skip off the top of her machine spaces for only penetration damage. Thus it's only shots fired directly at her waterline which can damage her citadel. The use of Priority Target is almost a must to alert you when enemies are looking your way to give you time to angle in and protect yourself. Vanguard needs time to stack damage -- to find those moments where she can sit broadside and make excellent use of her precision and rate of fire but don't push your luck when you're taking hits. There's one last little point of contention with Vanguard's protection scheme: With the entirety of her deck and extremities boasting no more than 32mm of armour, Vanguard is a juicy target for light cruisers. Expect to burn a lot if they catch you out in the open. Provided you can protect Vanguard's citadel (and that's a pretty big if), she has the largest effective hit point pool of any of the tier VIII battleships. With optimal use of her consumable, her theoretical maximum (less Survivability Expert) effectively doubles her hit point pool. In practice, you're never going to see that kind of number. Repair Party If Vanguard appears a little squishy, she all but makes up for it with her excellent Repair Party consumable. While she doesn't boast the same portable dry-dock found on HMS Lion, Nelson and Conqueror, she has the next best thing. Here's the bonuses she has baked in: Her Repair Party resets quickly. The reset timer on consumable is 90 seconds / 60 seconds for standard / premium. Compare this to the usual 120 seconds / 80 seconds of the normal Repair Party. She queues up 60% of penetration damage. This is admittedly standard for Royal Navy battleships, so Vanguard doesn't stand apart from the rest of the ships in her line. For most other battleships it's 50%. Vanguard queues up 33% of citadel damage. This is huge. While it would best to avoid taking citadel damage of any kind, Vanguard heals up more than the 10% of other battleships. Keep in mind, this also applies to torpedo damage which is the most common form of citadel damage battleships receive. This is especially good in Vanguard's case given her poor anti-torpedo protection. She heals up to 16.8% of her hit points per charge. Normal Repair Party mechanics heal up only 14% over 28 seconds -- or 0.5% per second. Vanguard enjoys a 20% boost over this like Warspite, healing 0.6% per second over the same time period. With up to five charges at her disposal through the use of premium and skills, Vanguard's faster reset timer ensures that she's able to make full use of her health regeneration. Her enormous hit point pool also guarantees big returns as Repair Party scales with a ship's starting hit point total. Summary For all of Vanguard's potential vulnerability with her high citadel, she's well equipped to mitigate and manage said damage. When she's top tier, the vulnerability of her citadel drops down considerably, making her very powerful. Light cruisers are always going to be pain in the butt, though, and beware HE spam from battleships too. Vanguard isn't done yet with her tricks, though, as you'll see in the AGILITY section below. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : Can a battleship with an exposed citadel even be considered ? It feels a bit of a stretch to me, but if you can keep her citadel protected, Vanguard is hella tough. That's a pretty big 'if' though when she's not top tier. She may lose her current rating when the North Carolina Repair Party buff goes through. Agility Top Speed: 30.0 knots Port Turning Radius: 850m Rudder Shift Time: 9.7 seconds (!) 4/4 Engine Speed Turning Rate: 4.1º/s The big thing to talk about here is Vanguard's rudder shift time. Now I've harped on rudder shift before -- it's a mean to an end, not an end of itself. Boasting that a ship has a great rudder shift time is like boasting that a ship has great range on its main battery guns -- it's nice to have but it's not a good indicator of a ship's performance. The same applies here. Vanguard answers her rudder quickly and her movements are much more precise as a result, but it would be a mistake to call this ship agile. Vanguard's rate of turn holds her back. 4.1º/s is painfully average for a high tier battleship. She sits well behind ships like the Richelieu-class sisters and the South Dakota-class sisters. This is caused by two things. One, her turning radius is big. Two, she doesn't have any baked in bonuses to help her preserve speed in the turn. The upside to her modest handling (and it's a stretch to call this a benefit) is that she can't out turn her turrets. She starts with a 5.0º/s rotation on her main battery guns and Expert Marksman only widens the gap, making adjusting her fire very comfortable if it weren't for those damned firing arcs. Vanguard's fast rudder shift time is almost good enough to allow her to fire her guns and angle back quickly enough to avoid reprisals. Almost. The simple fact of the matter, going from a 30º aspect to a 43º and back again takes too long. I never managed better than 15 seconds during trials. You might be able to pull this off against an inexperienced opponent but this is owing more to their mistakes rather than the merits of the ship itself. If you want to be able to fire all eight of Vanguard's guns while not getting your citadel blown out, you're going to have to play clever. Now just because Vanguard can't wiggle-wiggle-shoot doesn't preclude her from being able to dodge. This is something she's quite good at and where her rudder shift time makes her deliciously unpredictable. You'll still need range in order to pull this off, but you can pretend to begin unmasking your guns in order to bait shots and then double back on your course to bounce their shells. Similarly, the amount of bounce and twirl in her badonkadonk makes her a real nuisance for destroyers to land torpedoes. Vanguard is all about frustrating gunnery -- both yours and your opponents. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : She's not a speed demon like the French botes nor wiggling like the SoDaks. She's also not a thunderbutt like Kii, so there's that. I was personally hoping to see her preserve a little more speed in the turn to get her rotation rate up -- that would have done it, but it didn't pan out during testing. Anti-Aircraft Defense AA Gun Calibers: 134mm / 40mm AA Umbrella Ranges: 5.2km / 3.5km AA DPS per Aura: 68 / 413.1 For personal defense, Vanguard's anti-aircraft firepower is excellent -- comparable to the American battleships. However, that's about as far as it extends. Vanguard lacks the weight of fire with her dual purpose guns to be a credible threat to aircraft further out. This precludes any claims of efficiency with Manual Fire Control for AA Guns -- too much of her flak is focused upon her 3.5km 40mm batteries. This adds a second weakness: her medium caliber weapons don't stand up to punishment very well. If you've taken even a light dusting of HE shells, odds are your anti-aircraft firepower is nowhere near as formidable as it once was. So, while you're pristine and perfect, you'll shred planes. It's worth investing in Advanced Fire Training to help boost this further, but that's about as far as improving her anti-aircraft firepower should go. Hey look, I made it through a section without mentioning her awful fire ang -- aw, damn it. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : She's very close. Were it not for FOUR American battleships all having very similar AA firepower (and Kii besides), she might be able to muscle in and make her presence felt. As it is, she sits in their shadow. Refrigerator Base Surface Detection: 16.04km Air Detection Range: 13.7km Minimum Surface Detection Range: 12.04km Detection Range When Firing in Smoke: 14.73km Main Battery Firing Range: 20.0km There's not much to go over here. Vanguard's concealment is "sufficient unto the task" and nothing more. She sits in the middle of the pack for surface detection behind Monarch (14.6km), Roma (14.9km) and North Carolina (15.7km) and just ahead of the Alabama-twins (16.2km) and Bismarck-sisters (16.4km). Vision Control consumables are rare at this tier, being limited to Bismarck's Hydroacoustic Search and various spotter and float plane fighters found on select ships. Vanguard doesn't have access to any of them and she ends up feeling blind without them. Evaluation: What it would have needed to be : More stealth or a spotting consumable other than an aircraft. Alpha and Omega There's not much to say in regards to the skill choices for Vanguard. You can buff up her anti-aircraft firepower if you're super salty about CVs, but on the whole a generic battleship captain build emphasizing fire resistance would serve you better. Start with Priority Target. Take Adrenaline Rush as your second skill. Follow this up with Basics of Survivability at the third tier. For your 10th point-skill, choose between Concealment Expert and Fire Prevention with your 14th point-skill, take the alternative. With your remaining 5 points to spend, customize as you will. Advanced Fire Training will serve you well if you want a little more teeth to your AA guns -- especially when paired with AA Guns Modification 2 from your upgrades. For your remaining 1pt, take either Preventative Maintenance or Expert Loader. Alternatively, you can mix and match between Superintendent, Expert Marksman, Jack of All Trades and High Alert. Keep those tier 1 skills in mind as filler. Final Evaluation She has two main flaws and only two: Her citadel sits high over the water and her fire arcs suck. If you can mitigate these two weaknesses, this boat is amazing. She's been padded with all of the perks possible to compensate for these challenges. If you can't mitigate them, or you find it frustrating, Vanguard is a steaming pile of doo. "The second coming of Warspite" has such a nice ring to it. So many of us were hoping that the Royal Navy battleship line would have borrowed heavily from Warspite's game design -- namely her gun's precision, sluggish gun handling, good agility and improved heals. Instead we got a pack of flame throwers with cloaking devices and portable dry-docks. Complaining about what became of the Royal Navy battleships is so 2017, though. I had pinned my new hopes that Vanguard would be my baebote #2, echoing a lot of what made Warspite great. She almost got there which is pretty surprising. But let's not sugarcoat things -- Vanguard fell short of the mark. This isn't a tier VIII Warspite. So is Vanguard "good"? Well, yes. Yes, she is. However, there's a big ol' butt attached. She's good but she's also potentially frustrating as all get out. I've grumbled enough about her fire arcs. This is a personal pet peeve of mine, if you can't tell. This right here is what would relegated Vanguard to a port-queen for me. For others, her exposed citadel is going to be a big no-no. Why play a battleship that can get her machine spaces easily blown out when you could play something similar that doesn't have to put up with that nonsense? Her inability to overmatch select heavy cruisers will be a turn-off for others. It will keep her from being a contender in competitive play because of it. Finally, her longer AP fuse timer gives her an increased chance of overpenetrations. There's few things as heart breaking as lining up that perfect shot on a cruiser only to watch your shells sail clean through, inflicting minimal damage. One of the ways a premium ship can get in my bad books is by forcing a player to take extra steps to accomplish the same task as other vessels. Vanguard ticks this box. If Famous and HIstorical Monarch can do what Vanguard does and with less frustration, why bother picking up Vanguard? If the comparison to Monarch is bringing you pause, good. The two ships have very similar play styles with the tech tree ship being idiot-proof. I think this is perhaps the most damning thing that could be said about Vanguard: like Monarch, she's a little dull. Thankfully, Vanguard does borrow just enough from Warspite to spare her being called the second coming of the King George V that never was. I'm just not sure it's enough to redeem the ship in my eyes. Her perks are compelling, but it keeps coming back to those frustrating elements for me. I suppose that says it all right there. Know thyself. If those elements seem like turn-offs to you, then stay away. Otherwise, she'll do you no wrong. Would I Recommend? Vanguard acted as the gatekeeper to the initial offering of HMS Dreadnought. If you wanted the latter you had to also buy the former. Make sure you weigh the merits of both ships before pulling the trigger on a purchase like that. PVE Battles How well does the ship maintain profitability in Co-Op modes and how does she fare against bots? Yes. Bots are dumb. Battleships vs bots is always a good fit. Random Battle Grinding: This includes training captains, collecting free experience, earning credits and collecting signal flags from achievements. No. You are absolutely spoiled rotten for choice when it comes to Royal Navy premium battleships. Warspite, Hood, Nelson, Duke of York and Dreadnought are all on offer. Vanguard does have the advantage of being the highest tier, and thus potentially making the most bank, but you could do almost as well for yourself in most of the others. (I can't believe I'm recommending Duke of York as a reasonable alternative...) For Competitive Gaming: Competitive Gaming includes Ranked Battles and other skill-based tournaments. This also includes stat-padding. No. Get yourself Massachusetts or Alabama instead. For Collectors: If you enjoy ship history or possessing rare ships, this section is for you. Yes. She's the last Royal Navy battleship ever -- built in steel and she's drop dead gorgeous. For Fun Factor: Bottom line: Is the ship fun to play? No. I didn't find her fun to play. However, that's because I'm a whiner when it comes to firing arcs. Maybe your own mileage will be different. What’s the Final Verdict? How would the ship rate on oh-so scientific, not-sarcastic at all, Angry YouTuber scale of Garbage – Meh – Gud – Overpowered? GARBAGE– I hate it! Mehbote – An average ship. Probably forgettable. Gudbote – The best thing ever. Totally not overpowered because I like padding my stats in it. OVERPOWERED – I hate playing against it! In Conclusion It's only a week late. That's unfortunately going to be the status quo going forward as I perpetually play catch-up with releases. Since Dreadnought and Vanguard were ninja-announced last week, Bourgogne has been finalized. In addition Charleston was released without any warning, so there are three new reviews in the queue. What's more, the Black Friday ships, Massachusetts, Tirpitz, Atago and Asashio are on their way out. While Tirpitz and Massachusetts' reviews are still reasonably up to date, the changes to the latter two could warrant a revisit. Given the limited access I'm going to have with Bourgogne, I'll probably be prioritizing that one as my next review unless something else comes up. Thank you all for reading. Thank you very much to everyone that supports me on Patreon for helping me produce this content. Appendix Armour penetration data was pulled from two sites: http://proships.ru/stat/ships/ https://mustanghx.github.io/ship_ap_calculator/
  8. NippleSnipplez

    Tips for UK Cruiser Line

    Any tips/strategies for a beginner playing the UK Cruiser line? I'm currently at the Tier V Emerald and I honestly feel like I just get instadeleted when running into anyone on the enemy team, BB blow me up from far away before I can gap close, DD come out of nowhere and blow me up, my AA seems really inefficient against CV's but I honestly die before having trouble with them most of the time, I've only really had success against other British Cruisers. I never sail in a stright line when I am detected, I change up my speed and which direction I am going constantly but it seems to really only postpone death. I know I'm supposed to stick to my team's BB but it's pretty difficult when I start way ahead of them and am faster than all of them even when at half speed. I do not want to say that the Emerald just sucks because I know the fault lies in my gameplay somewhere but it really feels like it does.
  9. You guys can cry all you want about CV's... we're getting Ark Royal soon The biggest question is at what tier... T6 almost makes more sense than T8 for Ark Royal given what planes she carried (no Swordfish will = a major crapstorm) and her lighter hanger space compared to the other T8's (especially Kaga's almost 2.5 times sized wing).
  10. Had this on the backburner for a while... what better time to finish than when new CVs are out! Enjoy or don't enjoy Other mehbote reviews: Myogi Monarch
  11. hello, sailors I saw we got some free Florins with air supplies and with Daily missions but... ....Without buy any crates in the premium shop, is possible farm 2500 florins to get the bundle Nº3 only with missions inside game? Thx you guys
  12. So a chat in the Warships Discussion / aircraft carriers section of the forums appears to have revealed that the new British tree of aircraft carriers are not getting their one defining feature: armoured hangars. I know this is an arcade game, not a simulator. But this kind of guts the entire character of ships such as HMS Indomitable, Implacable and Audacious. They were built to primarily operate under the air umbrella of enemy land airfields as neither Germany or Italy had advanced carrier programs. These theatres of war also exposed all shipping to rapid raids from destroyers and light cruisers. So the 1930s pre-radar solution to this was to turn the entire hangar into a magazine. In the case of HMS Illustrious, it was surrounded by 4.5 in armour on the sides, and 4.5in armoured roller doors on the front and back. The top was capped by a 3in deck. Later ships cut this hangar side armour down to 2.5 and 1.5in in order to free up weight for an extra hangar deck. The point was to protect the volatile hangar (as so amply demonstrated by USS Bunker Hill and Franklin) from destroyer and light cruiser gunfire, as well as 250kg (and to a lesser extent 500kg) bombs. It was also to prevent damage to the rest of the ship spreading into the deadly hangar. All these scenarios were born out by their actual WW2 combat experience. In a World of Warships setting, this would cause destroyers and cruisers to have a harder time of sneaking behind the lines for a quick carrier kill, as would the 16x 4.5in guns that could shoot across the deck for full broadsides.(But, yes, it would also make these ships citadel pinatas to heavier shells) Even so, such resistance to lighter ships would give Illustrious, and to a lesser extend Indomitable and Implacable, something of an advantage in the 'World of Tanks on a Lake' maps, especially when combined with 'unlimited' air groups. I guess this could explain why Wargaming may have chosen not to armour the British carrier hangars, if these models supplied kindly by Mofton, tell the whole tale. But it makes me think ... I may as well play a carrier design that gets the benefit of the weight dedicated to its armour (USN, IJN, Germany) instead of one that only gets the negatives (lower speed, smaller size and hp pool etc).
  13. Durante un largo tiempo me he dedicado a recolectar información sobre ciertos buques construidos durante, entre, y después de las guerras mundiales y que podrían destacar como candidatos al juego que actualmente nos presenta WG. Traté de meterme en la cabeza de los desarrolladores deduciendo las ecuaciones a partir de las cuales se determina los puntos de vida de cada buque basándose en el deslazamiento de este, aunque como se darán cuenta algunos no concuerdan con los presentados en el juego. Algunas ramas también presentan problemas relacionados con la ubicación de sus buques en el tier adecuado, como es el caso de los destructores franceses e italianos, otros como los cruceros japoneses presentan problemas por la información poco clara respecto a sus desplazamientos en tonelaje, y para el caso de algunos portaaviones, sus valores de HP están calculados basándose en su desplazamiento estándar y no su desplazamiento a plena carga, como en el caso de Kaga. Algunos buques no están situados en el mismo tier en el archivo que en el juego, eso se debe a una diferencia de opiniones personal contra WG. También hay buques que no están dentro de las ramas pero se indican en las tablas o debajo de las ramas mismas, esto se debe a que su ubicación es difícil de decidir. Las ramas están ordenadas por colores y estas incluyen; portaaviones, conversiones a portaaviones, acorazados, cruceros de batalla, grandes cruceros, cruceros, cruceros antiaéreos y destructores. Los asteriscos representan navíos que fueron inventados por el equipo de desarrollo de WG. Las fechas indicadas entre paréntesis indican que el buque es un diseño que nunca se construyó o terminó su construcción y el año indica su fecha de diseño. No se incluyen barcos que pertenezcan a clases ya mencionadas en naciones mas grandes, un ejemplo claro sería el crucero argentino General Belgrano que ya está representado por la clase Brooklyn. Los cuadros de distinto color dentro de las tablas de HP representan tonelajes modificados por WG o por mí haciendo referencia a un incremento del tonelaje original debido a una modernización ficticia del buque. Los nombres de los buques dentro de las tablas de HP que están centrados no obedecen la ecuación principal para la clase, como es el caso de los grandes cruceros que no siguen la ecuación general de los cruceros y por eso tienen una ecuación propia. Lo mismo ocurre con algunas de las naves convertidas a portaaviones, que por su excesivo desplazamiento, tienen una ecuación diferente a la del resto de los portaaviones. Espero sus comentarios y sus críticas. Compartan si lo consideran oportuno o interesante. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wckrRPErjwJ46erYOaJ1Cx3ycs8AClPx
  14. Today I am going to showcase my experience in the Tier 8 Royal Navy Destroyer, the Lightning. Overall a decent ship, but my experience in it was "something different" compaired to other ships I have played.
  15. I love my gunboat DDs. I'm an average at best cruiser player, and only good in some BBs, but my happy place is filled with names like Clemson, Farragut, Z-52, Akizuki/Haragumo, Vampire, Fletcher, etc. I enjoy hunting DDs, controlling caps, spotting and vision control, and such, and I find it's my best way to contribute to wins. I like playing fast and aggressive but still having to be thoughtful about movement and positioning. I'm an average player overall, but in a gunboat DD I can carry games that I am not capable of carrying in other ships. So when it became evident that the RN line would be optimized for the fleet DD role, I was excited. So far....the results are mixed, but I am optimistic for the rest of the line. I won't unlock Lightning until Wednesday as I've completed all the container missions and didn't unlock her, but I've gotten some time with Acasta, Icarus, and Jervis. (Valkyrie looks like it will play similarly to Vampire with a bit more torp flexibility and emphasis, so I'll try her and Wakeful after launch as well.) Here's my impressions of Acasta, with Icarus and Jervis coming later tonight or tomorrow and the rest coming soon (I probably wont have much time to play next weekend so it will be a bit of time before I cover Lightning, Jutland, and Daring.) 'The Acasta Doing Business - Mid-Tier Meh "A lot like T-22, except even more boring and ineffectual" It was evident even before playing them that a lot of the British DDs would have reasonably high skill floors and would be 'better than sum of its parts' boats given the 'fleet DD' niche. Acasta is clearly a step in that evolutionary line, but in her case, sh's likely a 'grindwall' boat that most players will be glad to get out of. Even as someone with realistic expectations and who enjoys that playstyle, I didn't enjoy her. Full disclosure: I played 2 games in her and then sidelined her after unlocking Icarus mission. So maybe others make her work better after some more time, but I have played enough Gallant and enough other gunboat DDs to know Acasta wasn't for me. She's just aggressively meh. She doesn't excel in anything, but neither does T-61 and that's one of my favorite boats; she's just not good enough at enough things to make her fun. Her guns are meh, with a slow traverse and low dpm output making her vulnerable to USN DDs, and aside from the flexibility of her singlefire torps, her torps aren't anything to write home about. You can't launch from stealth except in ambush or at an approaching target. When the cards fall right, you can still devstrike anything easily with 8 torps on the same vector, or easily design your own spreads to improve odds of getting at least one hit. I have used this skill to great effect with my Gallant, but with 6km torps (and 6km stealth even at full-stealth build) I struggled to do so with Acasta. Good players will get some fantastic results out of these torps on occasion when they use single-fire perfectly, but it's going to be rare-ish and you're going to have to work harder to get good torp results than other DDs. Her guns are also a weakness. Like USN DDs, RN DDs have high shell arcs that necessitate engagements at closer ranges than Russian or (to a lesser extent) German DDs. But USN DDs just spank this boat 1v1 in a gunfight. She isn't even competitive with Clemson for cap control, much less Nicholas or Farragut. Her nimbleness helps her avoid torps but you wont dodge much gunfire at that range, and her RN smoke is even shorter because tier 5. Plus, the hydro later tiers get isnt present here. I've played a lot of Farragut and Clemson and know every trick in the book to use torps when you can't *quite* stealthtorp in most conditions, but the singlefire capability doesnt make up for the fairly weak torpedoes here, and her guns just aren't good enough to deal damage when you can't pull off ambushes, unlike the USN boats. This is a boat in which even experienced gunboaters will struggle to do damage on a consistent basis. She's nimble and accelerates quickly, she can use singlefire torps to torp entire smokescreens to flush or kill red DDs or to devstrike a BB from ambush, and she can spot and help kill DDs, but she doesn't beat ANYTHING 1v1 in a stand-up fight except a badly played IJN torpboat, and even then she doesn't have hydro for the extra cushion so her nimbleness is key to not eating torps. I think very good players can make her work very well, and I wouldn't be surprised to see her do well in the t5 ranked season in the hands of a good player. But she's going to uptier even more poorly than most tier 5 boats. She'll never be a popular boat; for one, the most OP dd for its tier is Kamikaze at tier 5, and although tier 5 is a fairly weak tier for gunboat DDs anyway, Acasta is just not equipped to excel in randoms with her toolkit. PROS: *Single-fire torps. Great for island ambushes of ships coming around a corner, strait/gap control, or torping smoke clouds when you're pretty sure a red DD is in there due to flexibility of torp spread design (can drop them all in a row or spread them out as you see fit. *Good acceleration and handling: RN DDs don't get speed boost, but they accelerate quick and hold speed in a turn. These aren't huge advantages, but they help you knife-fight other DDs and still avoid torps, and help get you out of trouble. *Decent stealth: You'll outspot Clemson and Farragut (Nicholas noses you out), outspot Gaede and Maass, and all Russian DDs. You get outspotted by IJN DDs but not by too much. And your smoke is great for breaking contact and vision control even though it sucks for offensive use. CONS: *Meh guns: the improved AP ricochet angles RN ships get doesn't seem to help much (although small sample size as I didn't play too much of her) and the low effective range (due to firing arcs), meh traverse, meh reload speed, and meh DPM mean you get your [edited]kicked by any other gunboat 1v1 assuming equally skilled players. *Situational torps: I'm used to not being able to stealthtorp; as I said, I play Clemson and Farragut often. But these torps are slowish, meh damage, and your torp range is identical to your concealment. Use them to torp smoke clouds, but don't count on racking up BB kills when they're not dumb enough to come around the corner of an island predictably enough for you to launch your torps in a line right at him. *No speed boost + low hp = low survivability: She's nimble, and her quick-reload smoke can help break contact, but if you overextend you're not going to find it easy to get back out. Her stealth is ok but she can still be outspotted by several common DDs at that tier, and she can't just boost out of trouble, so she can find herself getting focused down and her smoke is really the only thing that can buy time to bail. And once she is getting focused, she doesn't have the HP pool to last long. You've got to play smart; lone wolf deep-penetration tactics are a death wish in Acasta. *Tier 5 matchmaking: I personally enjoy the challenge of being bottom tier in most boats. However, aside from her stealth advantage over many tier 6 and 7 DDs, this is a boat that gets murdered at bottom tier. I think she'll surprise people in tier 5 ranked, but this boat is going to be terribad in randoms because she'll be bottom tier 40-50% of the time and she just doesnt have the toolkit to be effective at all. This is literally the worst t5 DD to be in a tier 7 match with. When you're uptiered, you'll jhave to work hard and play out of your mind doing all the little things to get your xp and contribute meaningfully, because you can't effectively engage anything but isolated and wounded targets and you will get pushed off caps easily. TL;DR: she fits perfectly in the niche Wargaming wanted RN DDs to fill, but in this tier, that niche just doesn't work. She's right up there with T-22 as an incredibly boring boat, and even when you find ways to win and contribute, you won't feel like you've done all that much even though you worked hard all game to do what little you did. But don't worry, Icarus is an improvement and Jervis is a strong boat, so just keep grinding. It'll be over soon. (My other reviews - British BBs: Conqueror/Lion Monarch KGV Queen Elizabeth French BBs: Overall Line Review German DDs: Flottentorpedoboot My Waifu)
  16. SayWhatAgainMF

    Please help me Identify this ship

    Good day all, I have recently found a pile of old negative pictures from my great grand-father and after submitting them to the Historical Society of my hometown due to the significance of a lot of them, they came along a picture of a warship, unidentified. The location on the picture is on the St-Lawrence river in between Quebec City (across the river). The picture was taken from the southern shore (city of Lévis). So anyway, judging by the picture we can almost clearly see the British naval ensign at the stern. The picture was taken in August 1919 so right after the Great War. Judging by the smoke stacks and the number of portholes and turrets and the masts, it seems to me like it is the HMS Renown 1918 refit version. So the first picture is my great grand-father's one, the second picture is from Wikipedia so basically the Renown circa 1918, the third image is the Renown blueprints 1918 version and the last picture is the Sister ship HMS Repulse. I would like to know your opinion if you think I am wrong to suspect it is one of the two ships, HMS Renown or HMS Repulse and why. Of course I will most definitely end up looking at the city's Archive to try and find the port's logs from that era and have a definitive answer to give the historical society. In the meantime, your help would be most appreciated. The picture is compressed on the forum and is only 197kb so if you would like to see the original picture please leave me a message in private and I will send it to you. Thank you
×