Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'cl'.



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 8 results

  1. HeavenlyWind_

    Spanish Cruiser Line?

    I think it can be done. Though, WG would need to think of an exclusive gimmick. Thoughts?
  2. I would like to commend Yuzorah for posted the article of the new Soviet VMF light & heavy cruisers recently: https://thedailybounce.net/world-of-warships/world-of-warships-the-russian-cruisers-line-split/ I thank him for sparing me the trouble from making a long article, which I'll save it for my other articles in the future. Still, I would like to help making an introspective to complete the circle. Tier V - Kotovsky appears to be, from my knowledge, is possibly an overhauled light cruiser Admiral Butakov of the Svetlana-class (which was incomplete prior to the Russian Civil War). Largely based on Project 78 training cruiser modernization & refit plan, in addition to the Project MK-4 prior to Project 94 Budyonny development & postwar Project MLK-series design studies, particularly the 4 x 2 -152mm MK-4 twin guns. Данные Проект МК-3 МК-4 МК-5 МК-6 Проект 94 по ОТЗ июня 1940 Проект 94 по ОТЗ декабря 1940 Дата — 2 апреля 1940 — 20 марта 1941 Июнь 1940 Декабрь 1940 Водоизмещение 7760 8000 8130 7800 7500 8200 Главный калибр 3х2 152 мм 3х2 152 мм 3х2 152 мм 5х2 130 мм 3х2 152 мм 3х3 152 мм So instead of the 130mm B-2LM turrets, the 152mm MK-4 turrets are selected in place of them. Alexander Nevsky is indeed the Project 84 air defence cruiser. The namesake is befitting for Tier X, given Alexander Nevsky was made a saint in Russian history & is considered as one of the most respectable men among the Russian people with high esteem. Besides, I like how WG devs opted for two SM-48 twin DP gun turrets on the aft of Borodino in place of the nonexistent single quad DP gun turret as shown in the draft blueprint (sensible choice). Just in case if anyone has yet to know what is Borodino & which project she came from, Borodino is, in actuality, the Project TsNII-45 small battleship - Variant III+III-3 Tallinn is indeed an ex-German Hipper-class heavy cruiser Lutzow, and she was formerly Petropavlovsk before renamed to Tallinn after raised from sinking. This Tallinn was, in actuality, to be officially retrofitted under Project 83-K. But it seems like Tallinn is given Kirov's MK-3-180 main gun turrets instead of the supposedly Chapayev's 152mm MK-5 triple gun turrets as originally planned for Pr. 83-K. 4 x 3 – 152mm/57 MK-5 triple gun turrets 6 x 2 – 100mm/70 SM-5-1 twin DP gun turrets 3 x 4 – 45mm/78 SM-20-ZIF quad heavy AA gun mounts 6 x 4 – 25mm/79 4M-120 quad light AA gun mounts I'm not entirely clear about both Riga & Petropavlovsk. But the one thing is certain to me, is that both Riga & Petropavlovsk are supposedly representing a direct parallel to Project 69 - Kronshtadt & Project 82 - Stalingrad. Whilst Petropavlovsk is possibly the Variant III of the Pr. 82 development before it officially laid down as Stalingrad with more modern 305mm main guns, Riga could likely be Project 22 heavy cruiser/battlecruiser that was later cancelled & carried forward to the development of Pr. 69 - Kronshtadt. Other source suggested that Pr. 22 was later picked up for studies to develop Pr. 66 - Moskva. (I sense a slight discrepancy in regards to the fate of Pr. 22) In addition, with Nevsky announced to be the top tier AACL, I got the feeling that Dimitri Donskoy could as well receive a 152mm BL-118 triple DP gun turrets upgrade to keep in the line with the general trend of Tier IX & X being an AACLs like USN's Seattle & Worcester, as well as RN's Neptune & Minotaur.
  3. Hello everyone. I occasionally write some ship proposals of ships i'd love to see in the game, and today i'm going to do over HSMS Tre Kronor, a late-war Swedish Light Cruiser. HP: 27,300 Armor: 20-25mm belt+70mm vitals (citadel) Turrets 125/30/80/50 F/S/B/R 130mm total deck (30mm outer) 127mm conning tower 16mm plating 13mm superstructure Source: Conway's fighting ships 1922-1948 27,300 is very low for T7 cruisers and isn’t great even against T6 cruisers either. The citadel does stick a fair bit above the waterline, according to this blueprint (7819x2906, had to photoshop 2 pages together), so you’ll have to use your rudder shift and to try and avoid incoming fire. The turrets themselves are quite well protected as well. Length 182m Beam 16.45m SHP 90,000 Speed 33kts Rudder Shift: 4.9s Turning Circle: est 670m With a maneuverable rudder, you should be able to bob and weave between enemy shells pretty well, considering you have a high effective range. Still, be wary of overmatch. WEAPONRY 1x3 152mm/53 Bofors model 1942 2x2 152mm/53 Bofors model 1942 10 rpm (70rpm from all guns) MV: 900mps TT: 20 deg/s IN GAME RANGE: 16.3 km (~10.5s shell travel) Firing Angles: 30 degrees front and rear, 360 degree traverse These guns are comfy. 360 degree traverse, and a very fast traverse speed, AND gun angles that allow you to stay in autobounce range should make a very comfortable experience. The 6s reload is also quite nice at this tier. AP 3200 AP Alpha Shell weight: 45.8kg AP Krupp: 2280 Drag: .348 224,000 (336,000) AP DPM Fuzes: Standard AP flight time and pen would be comparable to Duca Delgi Abruzzi (pen difference <15mm at nearly all distances, time to target within ~.7s to max range *note: couldn’t find an AP shell for this gun, so I played create-a-shell with supercontroller9 using the noted HE and AA muzzle velocities, and the similar characteristics to Italian cruisers, but Krupp and drag are values that are often used for balancing, rather than for historical performance. As you can see, the performance is very similar to the Italian 152mm guns currently in game. HE 2200 HE Alpha HE: 45.8kg *Similar weight to USN 152/47 HE shell* Fire Chance: 11% HE flight time would be better than USN at all ranges (11.3s to 16km compared to 14.1 for USN 152mm/47) 154,000 (231,000) HE DPM Krupp: 1100 Drag: .348 154,000 is on the low side for T7 cruisers- this is, after all, the tier with Boise and Helena. However, this is workable for one reason……. Well, I won’t spoil the surprise just yet. It’s coming though. This is the parabolic table for this gun (in Swedish). While these arcs aren't exactly what will be seen in game, they give a pretty good idea of the performance. 2x3 Torpedo Launchers Torped 14 12km range 62 knots 12,800 alpha Detect: 1.4km Flood Chance: 215% Reload: 69s Sweden really only used one torpedo throughout WWII, the Torped 14. The torpedo itself was quite nice, though it did have a small charge (248kg), which is similar to the Mahan’s Mk 15 mod 0 torpedo, which has a 224kg charge. Therefore, the torpedo would have just under 13k alpha, which is make up for by the competitive speed and quick reload. While I’m not certain of the exact angles the tubes would have, they should be quite good forward, but a bit lacking to the rear, due to the design having cranes on it. AA Weaponry 1x3 152mm/53 Bofors model 1942 30.9 dps @6km 2x2 152mm/53 Bofors model 1942 50.4 dps @6km 10x2 40mm/70 Bofors Model 1948 270 dps @4.2km 7x1 25 mm L/64 Bofors Model 1932 ~29.9 dps@2.0km I almost considered not doing this section considering it will be pointless before this ship will ever be in game, but i figured that I should add it in just so you could get an idea of how insane the AA is. The Bofors that litter most ships above tier 6 are the 40mm/60 caliber bofors, but the mounts on the Tre Kronor are the 40mm/70 cal model 1948. Well, so what? They’re a few years newer, sure, but that doesn’t explain the insane range and DPS boost compared to the standard. Well, the rate of fire of the 40mm/70 was double that of the standard 40mm/60 Bofors gun currently found in game (240 as opposed to 120rpm)-AND the range was also better than the predecessor. I estimated a bit for the 25mm gun, as the gun was said to be more effective than the 20mm oerlikon, so i estimated about 1.2x the dps of a single mount of that, but info about this specific gun is hard to find-not that it realistically matters, considering the insanity of the 40mms. Just be glad I’m not proposing the refitted version which saw those 25mm guns replaced with 7 more 40mm Bofors. Either way, you’re going to BULLY T6 Carriers, and you should be able to at least hurt the T8s. CONSUMABLES Slot 1: Damage Control (standard Slot 2: Hydro (standard Slot 3: Radar (25s, 8.49km) OR MBRB (-33% to reload speed, 45s duration, 180/120s cooldown, 1/2 charges) No DFAA. CVs are going to suffer enough trying to touch this thing. I’m not that evil. >T7 Premium CL >Late War I-think-we-all-know-where-this-is-going.jpg I know, I know, another T7 premium CL with Radar. But realistically, if Tre Kronor is going to survive at T7, she certainly needs the radar…..or does she? I’m also proposing that Tre Kronor have the option to fit a unique MBRB. Now, the 152mm gun that Tre Kronor has could fire 10 RPM at surface targets and 15 RPM in an AA function. What this unique MBRB does is allow Tre Kronor to have a 45 second period in which she has a 4 second reload against surface ships. In case you’re wondering why I had a second DPM number in parenthesis when discussing those numbers earlier, that’s why. Why does Tre Kronor need these powerful consumables? Well, you’ve probably noticed that I drew a lot of comparisons to Duca Delgi Abruzzi, another T7 cruiser. The issue with that is that the Duca is pretty underwhelming at T7, and is generally regarded as one of the worst T7 cruisers. However, Tre Kronor fixes major issues that the Duca has (mainly, range). The problem is that Tre Kronor is a perfect T6.5- it would need nerfs to fit into T6, and needs some help fitting into T7. I chose the latter option. The door is always open to giving it a heal. I didn’t want to make it more gimmicky than it already is, though. Thanks for reading. I look forward to and appreciate your feedback! ccccccc https://imgur.com/a/ZMN54AR https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/424389257818275843/534135447136239641/Tre_Kronor_Blueprint.jpg
  4. So I'm sure most, if not everyone, saw that Wargaming was looking to make some changes to IFHE, HE and plating. This has been an issue for a long time - BB's, HE, and IFHE. So this one is going to be part history lesson, part explainer, and part "how can we fix it". There's a lot of text, basically a wall, you have been warned. I: HE vs BB's back in the day - When the game first launched and sometime after - there was no IFHE, just HE. The point of HE was really for thin skinned targets like DD's, maybe some cruisers, and setting a BB on fire. Though at low tiers some HE could pen more than the BB superstructure. And while there was frustration at low tiers with fires being set, high tier had a very different problem - inconsistency of fires and how outmatched anything but a 203 mm cruiser was against a BB other than another BB, and even then 203's had some issues. Pen on a 5 inch gun HE round is 21.1 mm, 152 is 25.3. This meant bow on, high tier BB's and some cruisers were heavily immune to damage - AP would richochet or shatter, HE unless you caught the superstructure would shatter, and you had to hope on fires. Part of why fire damage was so high. This created an issue in that BB's and some heavy cruisers were likely a bit tougher than they should be to take down because fires were so horribly inconsistent for damage. So something had to be done to redress this right? II: IFHE and the rise of 152 mm cruisers - Damage was inconsistent, so the solution to Wargaming seemed simple - make it more consistent. Thus was IFHE born. And while it has seen tweaks to fire chance, early on it overly punished DD's that took it, and barely punished cruisers by comparison. DD's or any ship with 127 mm guns gained the ability to punch through 27 mm of armour - basically anything but the layer that covered tier 8+ BB's. 152-155mm guns however - they reached the magic number to pen 32 mm armour - what covers the bulk of BB's. Combined with the fire chances they maintained, especially with DE and flags - it was a perfect storm. DD's while potentially strong in low tiers now still lacked punch and had limits on what they penned, what had kept 203 mm cruisers in check, save the likes of Des, was Rof - but the light cruisers had the perfect combination of Alpha, Rate of Fire, and penetration to become monsters eating ships alive. Ships putting out 108 rounds a minute that were straight pass/fail, usually pass, vs most of a ships protection with 726 damage per hit. even if 3 of 12 is all that penetrated, that's 19,602 damage in 1 minute without setting a fire. Any better accuracy, or more Rate of Fire, and numbers really start to add up. Add in the arcs some have that allow them to fire from behind an island 100% safe, it now swung the other way. BB's, meant to be tanks and soak damage, were now ripped to shreds especially if more than one focused on them. Knowing the worst offenders had short range caused BB's to start playing further back, and helped start the "camp meta" of BB's terrified to go forward because even if a DD couldn't get them, they may have 2-3k or more stripped salvo after salvo that they couldn't return fire against and couldn't get away from fast enough. DD's, Cruisers, and now even CV's have had fire duration and damage lowered - BB's have not. Which leads us to - III: The Problem - The problem is really simple, math and timing. Now, most defenders would by now be saying "But Ghost, fires are 100% repairable". Yes well - what does that mean. What this actually means is that - if you have the means to repair all the fire damage you took - you can in fact repair it all. And that's part of the rub - there's a good chance you don't, and heres where the math comes in, as well as timing and other mechanics. With no modifiers at all - 1 fire on a BB does 18% hp damage, as well as large cruisers - a normal repair party (not UK style zombie heal) repairs 14% HP. Now - lets take another WG idea which is to just make premium consumables the default, and assume that it will keep the same CD and number of charges. On an NC as an example that's 4 charges, that last 28 seconds on an 80 second cooldown. 4 fires will do 72% hp damage if allowed to burn, or forced to, whereas the repair parties will only make up 56% of the hp - even with a 5th, you don't quite make it up. Now remember that the repair party takes time, and doesn't start to reset till after it's finished. So that's 28 seconds up, 80 down, 28, 80, 28, 80, 28. To use all 4 on that NC would take almost 6 minutes of taking 0 damage to get back all you can with no issues, a lot when your average match is likely 10-15 minutes. "Buuuut Ghost - there are things to change fire damage and all" - true. There are of course signal flags that reduce burn time and increase amount repaired, these two alone make it closer to 1 fire = 1 repair. But that still takes time and there is a key issue - you have to have those flags. 1 requires that you take 120% HP damage from 4 ships and survive, the other lose 40% HP to fires and survive the battle. Especially for a new player easier said then done. Only other way to get them is as rewards from directives, missions, etc or crates. Well, then you have modernization's - everyone can get them, right? DCSM 2 - the one that reduces fire time, is the 4th slot. Only tier 6 and higher ships have that option if they have a million credits to spend. So a tier 3-5 BB doesn't have that option, with tier 5 being a tier that can be shredded by 127 mm IFHE rounds, let alone 152 mm. Which then leaves skills which sure over time a player can build up to take a 3 point skill to reduce the fire time. If the player knows to get that and sacrifice in other areas that could be just as useful, well, by the time they hit tier 5 they will have only achieved in all likelihood 27-30k of the 37k xp they need to hit 6 points. So newbie in New York is likely going to have a bad day I start raining fire on him with my 14 point Cleveland captain put in my Atlanta. "Your forgetting DCP" - this, once again, comes down to timing. That firerate I pulled numbers for earlier is the current Cleveland. It has a base fire chance of 12%, knocked down to 9% by IFHE. And while I get it's part of the weird equation WG has for fire chance, lets assume that when that's factored in, the average for starting a fire is 6% or 6/100 hits starts a fire. Cleveland fires 108 shots in 60 seconds - Premium DCP coolsdown in 80 seconds. Even holding out till 2-3 fires are started odds are 3-4 get left to burn - up to 72% of the ships HP. And it'll take 6 minutes to repair that damage. And that's the potential of 1 ship let alone 2-3. a nightmare scenario of 100% accuracy yes, but cruisers can be quite accurate. But then comes the part everyone forgets about - the penetration damage. It's not just the fire damage, but the fact that if we round up that figure from above to 20000 - most repair parties only repair half of that. Lets say these numbers are against a New Mexico. The damage is 20k plus 2 fires that had to burn at max for whatever reason. That's 39,080/53,200 gone in 60 seconds. Repair party can repair all but 10k of that technically speaking. However at the unmodified 14% - it would take all 4 repairs to fix both the damage from both fires AND the damage from the penetrations. And that still means 6 minutes untouched to get back to 80% health. Good luck in a BB that slow. And 25% of rounds penning a target causing 2 fires that burn out all the way - not exactly outlandish numbers to achieve. The nearly automatic penetrations are as deadly, if not more so, then the fires. IV: Wargaming's last suggested solution - So, before IFHE the issue is the inconsistency of fires being started in higher tiers where HE can't pen, and post IFHE the issue is that the penetrations alone are as deadly as the fires due to volume, let alone if they do start fires with no actual way to lessen the damage by angling or any other means. So - what does Wargaing's solution posted up on July 3rd look like? Tier 5 and below BB's a 152 mm gun still punches trough unaided, Tier 6 and 7 ships with 152 mm guns can pen tier 6 and 7 BB's/8-10 cruisers with IFHE, but cannot pen tier 8+ BB's at all, while tier 8+ 152 mm ships still punch through same tier BB's. Basically - little to no change on penetration other than Tier 8-10 BB's being immune to lower tier CL. Which brings us back to both the past and current issue with IFHE and HE vs BB's. The new IFHE would cut fire chance 50%. That means while tier 8-10 CL are fine just because they can autopen BB's still are fine - but tier 6 and 7 cruisers that take it to deal with the same tier BB's and higher tier cruisers are screwed against BB's they can see pretty often. So, obviously they can not take it, and keep the fire chance, but basically then anything not a same tier CA on the list is immune and are 100% relying on fires and superstructure hits. No real change in one tier range, the other stays broken or goes back to the way it used to be broken. Not to mention potential ramifications on DD's that use it or a ship like Atlanta. Best case scenario here you maybe fix things at high tier while causing issues in lower tiers, worst case, something on par with the wreck that was the launch, and mostly still is, the CV rework. V: How else to address the problem? - So - IFHE as it is is kind of a problem. Removing it to the old way, also a problem. The proposed changes a month ago - the potential to at the same time change too much and not enough at the same time. So - what can be done to fix it? The funny thing here is for a good while, and to some degree still do, go after Wargaming on CV changes because instead of nerfing an issue directly, like the fact Hak's torp alpha is too high, they nerf around it like changing the way the planes aim, or removing the 4x plane option. This time they go to nerf it directly - when the best option is actually changing things around it. I can't say for certain any one of these alone would be the solution, likely, it would be a combination of things, but all would go a ways to help it. Reduce fire damage of BB's - DD's, CA/L and BB's once all had 18% fire damage, and CV 24%. CV's are down to 2%, almost immediately after IFHE was added cruisers and DD's were dropped to 9%, yet BB's remained 18% - even as cruisers and DD's started getting heals, the one loose justification for the difference. And I'm not even saying nerf them that much - maybe just bring it that BB's and large cruisers are in the same range as Graf Spee. This would allow IFHE to stay unchanged, while reducing the damage just a bit from the fires started - they keep the consistency to pen targets and BB's regain some durability due to less fire damage. Changes to DCP - Having played Gascogne, I do believe lowering the base premium (or possibly if they do the 1 consumable thing just base) cooldown to 40 seconds could go a good way toward helping, maybe lower Gas and Mass's to say 30 seconds to keep the uniqueness? Tweaks to Repair Party - There are multiple teaks that can be done here. Faster cooldown like Gas and Mass, change the pen damage repair percent, repair percent in general, how fast it repairs the damage or some combination of those. Reducing/removing the modifiers - putting aside that I've long felt the "different tiers have more slots" bit should have faded away long ago, it would in general be easier to balance if we don't have to worry about if someone has a no bonuses yo repair party or reduction in fire damage, or all of them. If we use the example from the first suggestion here BB's and 'super cruisers' burn for 13.5% health, DD's and normal cruisers 9%, CV's for 2% - no more, no less per fire. We could always leave one thing, but aside from easier to know and balance around the damage dealt/taken by fires this would open up in combination with possibly the other changes here the option of new Mods and a new skill and more ability to have some choice and variety not pretty much defaulting to DCMS 2 in slot 4 or likely taking BoS just to fight fires. Changing how fire works - maybe fires need to be a little more like detonations. By that I mean once the HP of the magazine hits 0, it starts rolling for a detonation. Perhaps to make fires more consistent, and reduce the need for it, would be if as sections take damage, the fire resistance is reduced making it easier to set that part of the ship on fire at least. Possibly others I forgot or haven't thought of yet. Other than maybe number 5 (it would likely see either the IFHE change Wargming proposed or it'd removal) these would allow the 30% buff to stay, allowing the consistency to stay, if we don't just change the formula overall so that it's not needed, while leaving the ability to set fires intact but cut down somewhat on the ability of mainly 152 mm guns to simply overwhelm all forms of damage control and bring some durability back to BB's if the RNG damage is a bit lower. I think a bit more reasonable and equitable for all parties.
  5. Admiral_Bingo

    RN CL Dido Premium Proposal

    Hello everyone, This is my first post. :) I would like to suggest this ship as a new premium and like to discuss what would it be like if it was actually added to the game. HMS Dido The reason why I chose this ship is because I would like to entertain the thought of having a RN Atlanta. Having similar armament, it would have a reload time around 5 seconds and just like the Atlanta, have unlimited charges of the DFAA consumable because of its AA build. Some difference would be the shell type. Being a RN cruiser, it can only fire AP shells with the special RN ballistics while Atlanta could fire both types. While the Atlanta has HE and Radar, Dido trades these off for heal and smoke, making it different in terms of handling from Atlanta and Flint. However, because of its armament, it would have similar range like the Atlanta requiring the player to adapt to a similar game play of Atlanta. So what specs, consumables, or other stuff should the ship have while keeping it relatively balanced?
  6. The need to hump islands always irks me as a requirement to play USN light cruisers. So while I was grinding down the cruiser lines an experiment was conducted on a different play style. The result shows that the alternative play style is viable. The alternative play style suggest is simply, not hump islands. Using the great concealment of USN cruisers to its fullest advantage. Using Seattle as an example, at full concealment the detection range of the ship is a mere 9.37 km. Not only the detection range is lower than any ship that can pose serious threats to Seattle. The range is also lower than the radar rage (9.45 km). This means that Seattle can always spot any ship that can kill her with artillery first and also can react to unspotted underage botes with proper radar usage. This is a powerful combination open to exploitation, especially open to exploitation in OPEN WATER (scary I know). In comparison, cruisers such as Zao or Hindenburg have at least 1 km more in detection range and thus can be easily avoided by the stealthy USN Cruisers if required. The low detection range allows the ships to closely support friendly DDs fighting for objective at the start the match. It also allows the ships not to be restricted to map features and be very unpredictable during the match and can surprise opponents. This alternative play style requires constant vigilance in regard to all the enemies's LoS and track any potential spotter at all time. It is not as easy as just sit behind a rock bow on and holding down the mouse button, but it sure is hella more fun. The Build for Seattle is here (ship and cpt): http://bit.ly/2K1r1y4 The flow of the battle is generally the following: 1. match starts, move with your friendly DD into key areas (obj or choke), stay close with the forward DD but not so close that you are the one being spotted first by red DDs. To achieve this, it is important to know the camo values of your own DD as well as any potential red DDs coming your way. You also should keep in mind enemy fast ship's camo ratings, such as cruisers, so you can deduce if the enemy DDs are being supported or is alone. 2. Once friendly DD spots enemy DDs, turn, mid turn, open fire on enemy DDs, do as much damage as you can while the turn is on going, then once the 180's complete, stop firing and go back to stealth. If you are a good marks man, you should have completely surprise against red DDs, 2 or 3 salvos is enough to cripple any DDs within 9.5 km of you and your friendly DDs and other ships can do the rest. - if the enemy DD is unsupported or supported by light ships, press on with your friendly DD even closer, use your radar and hydro to kill the enemy DDs outright. - you will take damage doing this, but your HP really doesn't matter in fact lower HP helps to boost your DPM with AR, find out why below. 3. if enemy capital ships are spotted, re-stealth, and move back to a position that's at least 15km away, with plotting room module the ship can achieve 18.22km firing range. A very comfortable range to harrass all BBs and camping cruisers with very little risk to yourself. At more than 15 km range, incoming shell travel time will be > than your rudder turn and with engine module equipped > your acceleration time. It means that you can comfortably dodge incoming AP shells, even if you are broadside on. The chance to get hit in the citadel, one shotted or even hitting you at all is EXTREMELY low, if you are vigilant enough to keep track of incoming shells and potential capital ships with LoS. Tried using both engine module and rudder shift, the better acceleration provided by engine module is far better than decrease in rudder shift time in this context. 4. Set everything on fire. This is where the fun begins. You should have longer range than almost all other island humpers, and at long range your shells will drop straight down, and enemy campers will have no where to hide, no rock can protect them from your sky shells. Even the ones that can match your range (like Worcester), since they are humping islands and thus stationary, you will land more hits on them than they do to you. That is if they can see you in the first place, because you've routed or killed their DD in step 1 & 2. If there are enemy BBs in key positions, such as a Yamato bow on holding down a flank, harass them and force them to move. If there are cruisers holding down a position behind an island, force them to move with your sky shells. The beauty with 18.22 km range is that you can support other key areas on the map more easily. - keep an eye out on random smokes around the map, you can put them between you and potential enemy spotters and you can remain stealthed while still firing in open water. This is easier said than done, and really requires eyes to be fixated on the minimap. But once if you master it, WoWS in its entirety is your oyster. My DD experience helps greatly in this regard. - also calculate where you can sail and put potential map features to their fullest LoS blocking potential. It doesn't mean hump an island, but simply put it between you and any potential spotters. - keep scanning all enemy ships, especially capital ships. The reason is to find opportunities to fire without getting any retaliation. For example, a Yamato needs almost a min to turn their turrets, so if you surprise one from opposite direction of their guns, you can just sit there for a min and do whatever without any risk of retaliation. 18 in guns can't do nothing if they are not aiming at you. - the general idea in this phase is to force enemies out of favorable positions. If they choose to stay, with IFHE and great rate of fire and fire chance. You can easily help to destroy even a Yamato or Kurfurst. - you are NOT kiting. Kiting is firing while running away, if you do that in light cruisers you will have a bad time, because you'll still be constantly detected and even from your stern BBs can punch clean through into your citadel. It is "hit and run", once you scanned enemies with LoS to you and determined the chance of being focused is low, let it rip. Once enemies start to target you, re-stealth and relocate. While relocation move to a direction opposite of where the enemies are pointing their guns. Then fire again. If no one bothers you, just keep firing. If you are firing from 15-18 km range, chances are you will be ignored because no one likes to miss their salvos on a dodging cruisers that far away. So you weave in and out of enemy LoS as well as weaving between several positions. 5. Mop up, all remaining enemies near the end of a match should all have vastly inferior camo values. You can pick your targets at will, hit and run, or sneak up and open with a broadside of AP at 9 km against other cruisers. The few, if at all, surviving DDs can only spot you if they enter your radar range. So if you are stealthed, but they suddenly spotted and can't see anything, that means a DD is within your radar range. Your hydro will also make torpedo attacks pointless and is a great alternative to detect enemies doing going around the rosy near islands. This means by yourself alone you can zone out and pick apart any surviving enemy ships. People should try some alternative ways to play light cruisers, especially the more experienced among you. Since this strategy really requires the player to have good knowledge of potential enemies as well as maps. As the pictures above suggest, this play style is tried on Baltimore, Seattle, and the new Cleveland.
  7. When you initial plan no longer works what do you do? You reposition and find another location to win the game. Those of you struggling with the Seattle may find this useful. Or you can Free Exp past it, but at least watch this video first.
  8. The DD and cruiser legendary upgrades are all beyond god like. In comparison, BB's upgrades are just suck. No BB in their right mind would take the new rudder shift and fire control buff to get in closer. Because that's not the main reason BBs die quickly. The improvements in rudder shift time is pointless, just... in what situation currently people playing BBs think to themselves "geeeez 1 sec faster rudder shift would've so carry the game there" - almost never. WG should stop inflating T10 performances with "upgrade" modules. People don't like to play T8 or above because the economy suck, not because they don't like powerful ships.
×