Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'graf zeppelin'.



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
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Contests and Competitions
    • Events
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Contributor Corner
    • Support
  • Off Topic
    • Off-Topic
  • Historical Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
  • Player's Section
    • Team Play
    • Player Modifications
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • Contest Entries
  • Contest Entries
  • New Captains
  • Guías y Estrategias
  • Árboles Tecnológicos
  • Fan Art and Community Creations
  • Community Created Events and Contests

Calendars

  • World of Warships Event Calendar

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 12 results

  1. WG, It has been some time now since you have "buffed" Graf Zeppelin and it still does not feel like a fun ship. Statistically it is not a good ship. It is still the worse premium CV with a NA winrate around 49% and a 48% winrate on EU. It briefly dipped into the 48% range on NA also. Since the 8.5 AA buff (which was a good thing btw) the Graf Zeppelin has become the three legged dog of the T8 premium CV group. The AP bombs are still useless and the speed nerf boost nerf to this ship coupled with the 8.5 AA buff has made things much worse. Further AA buffs in 8.6 and 8.7 don't look good for this ship at all. I would not recommend this CV to anyone right now. What specifically are you doing to bring this CV inline with the other premium CVs as far as fun and effectiveness? The AP bomber 5 degree normalization made things even worse than before and that is saying a lot. You cannot even plan to use them in a fight because they are that unreliable. Frequent misses, over-pens and ricochets make these some of the worse weapons I have ever seen in this game. This ship has the worse embarked carrier air wing of any T8 CV--- premium or silver. The torpedo bombers continue to be the only viable weapons but the hit points on those planes is not enough to overcome the speed boost nerf. If this is the end of buffs or tweaks for this ship please allow those of us who remain disappointed to get some kind of refund. Even if it is just doubloons I would like to salvage something from this. Thanks. @Sub_Octavian @Femennenly
  2. @Sub_Octavian is there a chance we just call it good and “un-buff” the AP bombs? We appreciate the effort to compensate Graf after the speed changes but it’s not working out. I don’t know if a buff has ever been asked to be reverted but the new bomb mechanics seem worse than they were before. The bombs bounce, overpen or completely miss the target most of the time. Coupled with the speed boost “standardization” this CV feels worse in 8.4 overall. Thanks.
  3. I think something is very wrong with the Graf Zeppelin's AP bombs. No citadels in two matches WHEN they hit. How did you guys managed to make already situational AP bombs on GZ worse?
  4. As it stands, it just....feels pathetic playing it, I honestly feel better in my Furious or Hoshou. Looking at stats and in game performance, it doesn't seem to work at all, and I'm fairly okay with my other CVs. I love CVs after all. And like all other classes, they should get buffed WHEN APPROPRIATE.
  5. So I got the Graf Zeppelin from a container earlier today and I've taken it out for a spin a few times. It's not as good as the Enterprise, but I enjoy it regardless. That, however, is beside the point. Something I've noticed about the Zeppelin's dive bombers is that when you start an attack run, you can hear the infamous 'Jericho Trumpet' siren blaring as they dive. The thing is, though, I always figured that the only plane to ever have that device installed was the Ju 87 Stuka, and the dive bombers on the Zeppelin are Ta-152s, a plane that was originally designed as a high-altitude interceptor and as such didn't dive-bomb anything during its actual service period. Because of this, I now ask those of you who know more about history and WG's methods this question: Is there any historical precedent for German dive bombers outside of the Ju 87 being equipped with the Jericho Trumpet? Or is WG pulling a Waffentrager E-100 and making this up entirely? Thank you in advance to whomever responds. Sincerely, 1Sherman.
  6. Granted, I also opened it alongside two event containers I got from beating missions, but I'm not complaining. Cue the hammer of the gods!!!!!!!
  7. ShizuoYimato

    Elige tu equipo.. (CVs)

    Soy el unico de aqui que al ver un mensaje asi: se imagina cosas asi? xD Mi orgullo como animador no me dejaba tranquilo.. me decia "Debes hacerlo!!" asi que.. Quizas les haga una linda animacion despues xd....
  8. Welcome to part three of my review of Saipan, Enterprise, Kaga and Graf Zeppelin. Since patch 0.8.2, Wargaming considers these ships finalized (barring the occasional bug fix). There's a lot of redundancy in reviewing four carriers one after the other, so to mitigate this, I've decided to evaluate them all at the same time. Rather than a single monumental article, I have broken this up into sections, releasing one a new part every week or so. After an introduction, I covered the torpedo bombers from these four carriers. This week, I'll be looking at their attack aircraft. Here's the series so far. Part One: Introduction Part Two: Torpedo Bombers Part Three: Attack Aircraft (this article!) Basic Parameters So let's start by covering the essentials. Unlike with torpedo bombers, all attack aircraft are spotted at 10km by aircraft or ships. This can be modified as low as 8.1km with all bonuses stacked. Their durability is more varied, however: I'm still trying to reconcile that Seafires are considered more durable than Hellcats, Corsairs or Bearcats. On the whole, attack aircraft are much more fragile than torpedo or dive bombers. They don't benefit very much on their own from the 7.5% health bonus provided by the Attack Aircraft Modification 2 upgrade, with only Implacable and Saipan gaining more than base 120hp provided by the Survivability Expert skill. Still, the two abilities do stack for a more tidy sum, but I couldn't recommend choosing the upgrade over improving Dive Bombers or Torpedo Bombers, depending on the ship in question. Speed Initial aircraft speeds. These can be modified with the Improved Engines and Adrenaline Rush commander skills. These values are important as they form the basis of the speeds of the ship's respective fighter consumables. Summoned fighters travel at the same speed as a boosted attack aircraft. So Graf Zeppelin and Implacable's fighters move at 183kts, for example. From these values you can figure out if your aircraft can outrun pursuing planes. Attack aircraft are generally faster than their dive bomber and torpedo bomber counterparts, but there is a notable exception. Graf Zeppelin's Me-155As are appallingly slow compared to her Ta-152s which manage 181 knots base. Attack aircraft do lack a long-lasting boost. While dive bombers and torpedo bombers enjoy up to 20s worth of extra power to slow or accelerate, attack aircraft only have 5 seconds initially (this can be improved to 6.05s with the Improved Engine Boost commander skill in combination with the Aircraft Engines Modification 1 upgrade). Furthermore, the engine boost on attack aircraft isn't as efficient, providing less speed and slow effects than those on dive bombers and torpedo bombers. However, this is countered by a much faster recharge time and far more responsive acceleration and braking power when this is used. Lastly, while engaging on attack runs, an attack aircraft's boost works at full efficiency. Speed matters so much for an aircraft carrier's planes, moreso than durability. If a plane is fast enough and they have a long enough attack-run time, they can outright negate the threat of flak bursts. In addition, speed also reduces exposure to sustained damage from AA mounts. Finally, speed means there's less travel time both to and from the target, allowing a carrier player to deliver more attacks over time. A given aircraft (and squadron) needs only be "durable enough" to reduce casualties. Anything beyond that is merely wasted window dressing. Contrarily, more speed is always useful. Agility Like with torpedo bombers, a given aircraft's agility is not linked directly to their given speed and is set based upon internal, hidden parameters. Thus while Graf Zeppelin and Implacable's attack aircraft share the same speed, they have different turning radii and thus different rates of rotation. Like torpedo bombers if you want your aircraft to turn faster, slow down. This (greatly!) increases their rate of turn. Measured in degrees per second. The boosted rates of turn had to be estimated because the boost for attack aircraft doesn't last long enough for a complete 360º rotation. Estimations were made by extrapolating the ratio of Enterprise and Graf Zeppelin's attack aircraft turn time data and those of bomber and torpedo bombers. Standard turning radii for tier 8 attack aircraft. When slowed, their radii shrink down to roughly 70% of the values listed here. When boosted, they appeared to balloon up to approximately 180% of these values. Individual Plane Summary Enterprise's Hellcats are, hands down, the most agile of the tier VIII attack aircraft ,combining good speed with a tight turning radius and a ridiculously fast rate of turn. They have modest durability. Graf Zeppelin's Me-155As, while agile, are painfully slow and very fragile. Kaga's Zeroes has a modest rate of turn and turning radius but struggles where her top speed is concerned. They are also very fragile. Saipan's Bearcats have an excellent top speed, a modest rate of turn but an enormous turning radius. They are very tough. If I had to pick a "best individual plane", speed and durability wins the day here with Saipan's F8F Bearcats taking first prize. I don't think particularly high on turning radius and agility -- they're nice to have, but aircraft survivability and travel time mean so much more. Unless the aircraft handled like a there was a hole in their right wing, agility doesn't mean much. Ranking all of the attack planes on their base stats alone at tier VIII we get the following: Saipan's F8F Bearcats Lexington's F4U1 Corsairs Enterprise's F6F Hellcats Shokaku's N1K2 Shiden Kai Implacable's Seafires Kaga's A6M5 Zeroes Graf Zeppelin's Me-155As Our premium ships have some of the best and worst individual aircraft. Ordnance The rockets of the tier VIII carriers are a diverse lot. This is the first time we see larger rockets, including the infamous Tiny Tims. Rockets are effectively a form of HE shell, fired in a massed salvo over a (relatively) small area. The shape of this area and the number of rockets fired change from aircraft to aircraft. Kaga fires a small number of light rockets at a tiny, round target marker. Enterprise fires half again as many at a marker that's wider than it is tall. Graf Zeppelin flips this shape 90º with a very long, yet narrow marker. Her rockets are enormous and much harder hitting. Saipan shares the heavier damage output of Graf Zeppelin and fires fewer rockets still. Her marker is longer than it is wide, but it isn't as narrow as Graf Zeppelin's. One of the key factors dictating what attack aircraft can successfully engage is the penetration value of their rockets. To this end, it's important to keep the following structural armour thresholds in mind: 25mm or less - All superstructures, all destroyers, all light cruisers, any non-American or non-German heavy cruisers, all battleships below tier VIII+. 27mm - As above but now including German and American tier VIII+ heavy cruisers. 32mm - As above but now including all tier VIII+ battleships. 35mm to 60mm - As above but now including many reinforced areas of deck and upper hull of many ships but excluding extended belts which can be as much as 100mm or more. Note this list does not include areas such as belt armour, conning towers or turrets which are often in excess of 100mm. Aircraft carriers are also excluded because they're weird and should be looked at on a case by case basis (I'll get into this more when I cover the CV hulls in a later article). To this end we can thus separate rockets into two distinct categories: Low Penetration Rockets - These have less than 32mm of penetration and are only really effective against lightly armoured ships. They can be used to directly damage superstructures of most ships they face in a pinch, however. High Penetration Rockets - These have 32mm of penetration or greater and can safely engage almost any target they face. The penetration values of rockets largely dictates how effective they can be -- even above and beyond the number of rockets fired, their fire chance or damage per hit. If there's a range of targets they simply cannot engage, their utility drops considerably. Summary Saipan's Bearcats have excellent damage, penetration and fire settings per hit. They carry only three rockets and their aiming marker isn't especially precise and favours attacks running down the length of the ship. Enterprise's Hellcats have poor damage, penetration and abysmal fire setting per hit. Individually, they don't carry a lot of rockets Her aim marker facilitates side-on attacks. Kaga's Zeroes have the worst potential damage output per plane. Their penetration is low and so is their fire chance. They fire a very small number of rockets but their aiming marker is precise and isn't as penalized from launching at odd angles. Graf Zeppelin's Me-155As have excellent damage, penetration and fire setting per hit. She fires a small number of rockets and she needs to attack along the length of a ship to have a chance for her long aim market to land hits. The tech-tree attack aircraft share a similar variety of targeting markers. Shokaku andKaga's markers are comparable, as are Lexington's HVAR and Tiny Tims to Enterprise and Saipan respectively. Implacable's Seafires have a longer reticule than it is wide but not to the same exaggerated degree as Graf Zeppelin. Squadron & Attack Flight Details Once again, it's nomenclature time! Squadron: The group of aircraft that flies together. The player spends most of their time controlling squadrons. Attack Flight: The portion of the squadron which separates to attack an enemy target. Hangar Capacity: The maximum number of aircraft that can be stored on the carrier’s flight deck. Attack Flights Let's hop up from individual aircraft to the next largest functional unit: the Attack Flight. This varies per carrier and dictates the size of their strike package. Shokaku - 3 aircraft for 18 rockets per attack. Kaga - 2 aircraft for 8 rockets per attack. Lexington (HVAR) - 3 aircraft for 24 rockets (!) per attack. Lexington (Tiny Tim) - 3 aircraft for 6 rockets per attack. Saipan - 2 aircraft for 6 rockets per attack. Enterprise - 3 aircraft for 18 rockets per attack. Graf Zeppelin - 2 aircraft for 6 rockets per attack. Implacable - 2 aircraft for 20 rockets per attack. As you can see, this creates wildly different strike potentials between the carriers. The raw damage potential per attack run works out to the following (in order): 48,000 damage - Lexington (HVAR) 47,000 damage - Implacable 39,600 damage - Shokaku 35,600 damage - Graf Zeppelin 34,200 damage - Enterprise 32,400 damage - Saipan, Lexington (Tiny Tim) 17,600 damage - Kaga While all four premium carriers are in the bottom half of this spread, keep their penetration values also in mind. Saipan and Graf Zeppelin's rockets can damage even large targets while Implacable and Shokaku cannot. Lexington's HVARs set the bar really high, admittedly. Potential damage is curbed not only by penetration but by accuracy as well. Depending on target size, the angle at which you engage a target can change results enormously. For example, when engaging a stationary Reference Mahan™ in the Training Rooms, the Tiny Tim rockets off Saipan and Lexington generated contrasting results from one another despite launching the same ordnance with identical (or near enough) target markers. Saipan landed more parallel hits but Lexington landed more perpendicular. This is largely owing to small sample sizes (only 10 attack runs per carrier, per aspect) but it shows the kind of RNG trolling that can and will happen when firing rockets, especially against small targets. The only rockets I would call reasonably accurate are the HVAR off Lexington's Corsairs and Enterprise's own Hellcats. Both CVs can land an alarming number of hits provided they attack broadside on. However they have the worst aim time and they don't respond well to constant adjustments during aiming. The aim time of the various attack aircraft varies considerably, with the large Tiny Tim rockets ironically being easiest to lock onto a small, fast moving target. The swarms of rockets off of Enterprise, Implacable or Lexington when she uses HVAR that are oh-so devastating against destroyers are the most difficult to aim at twitchy, stealthy lolibotes.[ This brings up the issue of trying to attack agile and stealthy targets with rockets. For all of their apparent design to engage destroyers, attack aircraft are some of the least suited to sniffing them out and engaging them at close ranges. There isn't enough attack time on attack aircraft to make significant course adjustments against a destroyer that is stealthed with its AA disabled. This will necessitate making a second or even a third pass to line up on the target and it's not likely that the aim marker will be perfectly settled if the destroyer is attempting to go evasive. In this regard, dive bombers are much better. Attack Runs and Flak Generally speaking, attack aircraft are immune to flak explosions while performing their attack runs. There's no need to wiggle and dodge flak bursts while on your final approach. Now I say generally because in testing, very occasionally I would get clipped by a flak cloud but it was so rare that I could never predict why and how it was occurring without any discerned pattern. Do note you are not safe from flak when coming out of an attack run. This is why it's so often preferable to drop any excess planes from your squadron before entering high flak-volume areas. Squadrons Squadron sizes vary enormously. These are arguably more important on rocket aircraft given the attrition rate of these planes over the more durable torpedo and dive bombers. Shokaku - 9 aircraft (3 attack flights) Kaga - 8 aircraft (4 attack flights) Lexington - 9 aircraft (3 attack flights) Saipan - 6 aircraft (3 attack flights) Enterprise - 12 aircraft (!) (4 attack flights) Graf Zeppelin - 8 aircraft (4 attack flights) Implacable - 6 aircraft (3 attack flights) Enterprise really stands out here in the same way Kaga did with torpedo bombers: she simply has so many. Unlike the fragility of the Japanese planes, Enterprise's attack planes are doubling up with not only a lot of aircraft but a fair chunk of health too, having more than half again as many effective hit points within the squadron as the other premium carriers. The size of Enterprise's squadrons come with the same disadvatange it did for Kaga: it makes it harder to avoid flak bursts. For Enterprise (and indeed, for all carriers), it's advised to send unneeded portions of the squadron back to the carrier pre-emptively by having them drop ordnance just after launching. This will save on casualties later. Carrier Capacity Finally before we get to my overall feels for these aircraft, let's touch base on the "unlimited" number of planes each of these carriers can deploy. Enterprise is the hands-down winner here. Though she starts with fewer than Kaga, she regenerates aircraft almost at a 2:1 rate to her Japanese premium counterpart and almost 5:2 compared to Saipan. If you spammed nothing but attack aircraft on Enterprise (because you don't like winning), you could throw away as many as 47 Hellcats over a 20 minute game, not including her deployed fighters (which are also Hellcats). Seriously, spam the blighters -- you're going to have to try in order to lose them all. This is Enterprise's theme -- her fighters are meant to be her strength after all. Flight Control Modification 1 from the 5th upgrade slot is all but a must-have on all carriers for the increased carrier capacity. Summary Kaga's Zeroes surprisingly do not come in the same large squadrons and attack flights as her bombers and torpedo planes. They are very fragile with poor hitting power. She starts with a fair number of them but not-so many that you could confidently throw them away. Saipan's Bearcats come in small, nimble flights and squadrons, perfect for evading flak. The number of attacks per aircraft more than make up for this deficiency. Despite the lack of numbers, her flights and squadrons are comparable in durability to most of the other CVs. Furthermore, they have excellent reaction time for attacking targets suddenly, with quick aim and prep time, but properly setup, they will generate a lot of hits. Enterprise's Hellcats come in monster-sized squadrons. She has deep reserves and can recover aircraft losses quickly. Not only that, but her aircraft (and thus her squadrons) are reasonably tough too. On the downside, it takes them a long time to setup for an attack run and for their aim to settle. Their accuracy is questionable, though. Graf Zeppelin's Me-155As share Kaga's fragility but with improved striking power. The small number of rockets and elongated aim marker limits the number of hits she can land against wary targets. Overall Impressions Attack Aircraft take a back seat to Torpedo Bombers and Dive Bombers in the current meta. Among the premiums, even with "good" Attack Aircraft like those on Saipan and Enterprise, they're often idle until a preferred plane type is depleted. This is a shame in Enterprise's case as she's definitely built to specialize in her fighters, but they just don't have the punch needed to be a universal plane type. The other problem, really, is that for most carriers, dive bombers perform better in the anti-destroyer role than attack aircraft do. Individual hits are meatier. Aiming them is often easier, especially for destroyers that have their AA guns disabled which are trying to hide from the CV. The short attack window and long aim time of some of the rocket types just makes this worse. For the amount of time spent trying to repeatedly line up a rocket attack, you could have a follow up dive bomber strike already on the way. Still, when there's a proper target available, rockets can be a reasonable choice, especially for finishing off low-health targets in a hurry, or just being handy for having a reserve of fighter consumables still to deploy on your own carrier when someone's trying to snipe you. Kaga - A6M5 Zeroes Fragile individual aircraft and fragile flights and squadrons too. Her Zeroes are exceedingly squishy. She doesn't have the exhaustive reserves here either, though they are deeper than normal. Not all that impressive agility wise either with a meh top speed, turning radius and rate of turn. Her striking power is poor with a tiny number of rockets fired and unimpressive damage, penetration and fire chance. Failing marks all around. Kaga's Zeroes suck monkey-butt. They are, hands down, the worst attack aircraft tier VIII and by not a small margin either. Pick a trait and they are average at best and more often than not towards the bottom half (if not at THE bottom). You don't want to have to resort to these if you can help it. Saipan - F8F Bearcats Tough planes. They're surprisingly not operating at a tremendous deficit, durability wise, in terms of their squadrons and attack flights. She lacks reserves, though, and her regeneration is painfully slow. Great top speed and surprisingly agile despite that. Excellent prep and aim time on her rockets. Her rockets are individually excellent but she doesn't fire many of them to guarantee hits against small targets. Still, any hit you do land are going to be pretty meaty and are worth lobbing at destroyers just because. Excellent weapons to finish off low-health targets or to try and tax their Damage Control Party. The only thing that could have made Saipan's Bearcats any better would be the option to swap between Tiny Tims and HVAR rockets the way Lexington can. This lack of versatility doesn't hurt much overall, though. Saipan has arguably some of the best attack aircraft at tier VIII, combining durability, speed and striking power. The only draw back is that you don't get enough and when you start taking losses, you can find yourself quickly deplaned. Beware of fighters. Enterprise - F6F Hellcats Reasonable durability per plane for an attack aircraft. Her enormous attack flights and squadrons exaggerate their apparent durability. Large squadrons are more vulnerable to flak, however, but Enterprise has the reserves to muscle through losses like it was a non-issue. Still, the squads are ridiculously agile with a decent top speed. Shed a few aircraft with by dumping ordnance early and you can correct that squadron size issue. Side on attacks are a must to guarantee hits. You will get a lot of them if you do this. Make sure you attack from a long way out -- it takes a long time for her aim marker to settle. Unfortunately her rockets don't do a lot of damage, start many fires or have much in the way of penetration either. If you can't land a large number of hits, the attack isn't worth it. Enterprise is ostensibly the premium carrier meant to specialize with her Hellcats. They are good attack aircraft. It's just a shame attack aircraft aren't all they're cracked up to be. Their interactions versus destroyers was nerfed heavily and this feels readily apparent when sailing this CV. These should be a selling feature for Enterprise. But how can you get excited over a selling feature that's been nerfed to the point of near irrelevance? Graf Zeppelin - Me-155A Fragile planes, fragile flight, fragile squadron and not a whole lot of reserves. Her planes are painfully slow but they handle nicely at least. Their striking power is pretty good though. It's unfortunate that their aim marker and the small number of rockets they fire makes hitting destroyers so difficult. Oh well. When you do land hits, your targets are going to feel it. I'm not going to lie -- I find Graf Zeppelin's rocket aircraft to be pretty crappy, to be honest. They're not Kaga-bad, at least. For a ship that lacks HE bombs, I would have preferred to see a swarm of a small number of destroyer killers but I'll take baby Tiny Tims. At least they're not Japanese. Summary The big question is this: "Should attack aircraft form up part of my regular plane rotation?" The answer isn't simple but it largely boils down to this: How good are you with your dive bombers and torpedo planes? The better you are with these two types of aircraft, the less you'll ever need to take out attack aircraft. Attack aircraft were meant to counter destroyers but they haven't performed as well in this task since early on in the CV-rework. This task has largely been taken over by dive bombers. Still, there are some attack aircraft with some merits. Saipan has arguably the best rocket aircraft of the tier VIII carriers with Lexington coming in second and Enterprise third. I wish that was something to get excited over, but it's at the point now that a carrier could have crap attack aircraft and I wouldn't count that as much of a flaw. This simply speaks to how much better dive bombers and torpedo bombers are at the moment in the current meta Mouse's Ranking of the Tier VIII Attack Aircraft Saipan Lexington Enterprise Implacable Graf Zeppelin Shokaku Kaga Winner, winner. Conclusion I am so glad I decided to split these reviews up in parts. Now, I should be doing dive bombers next, but with the bug(?) that's affecting dive bomber accuracy still kinda being up in the air, I'm not sure when this next part will be out. I'll have to speak to the devs before I commit to publishing an article like this if everything's simply going to be changed when patch 0.8.3 rolls around. This may necessitate skipping dive bombers for now and covering the hulls of the four carriers next article instead. This article ran longer than I wanted (there was a lot of testing which slowed me down) and it's being published a few days later than promised. I'd expect the next part late next week or early the week after. Hopefully this whole project will be done by early May. Thanks for reading!
  9. my graf zeppelin will come before the new directive starting wednesday...right? WG will not "postpone" her again right? after a hundred years,we will finally be able to buy her RIGHT?
  10. BloodDragon41

    Y el Graf Zeppelin cuando?

    Buenas.... A pesar de que lo veo poco, en algunas partidas logro ver el mitico cv aleman Graf Zeppelin, se que en el pasado tuvo sus problemas y fue retirado de la tienda premium y que ha estado en proceso de rework constante. Mi consulta es con la nueva actualización ¿pondran el Graf Zeppelin? Y de no ser asi ¿alguien tiene noticias sobre los avances o de cuando volvera? Gracias.
  11. 2000 battles in a Graf Zeppelin Something many players will think quite disgusting, some will hate me for this. Both are quite reasonable reactions. But I have explored every conceivable strategy in every conceivable random battle setup, with every one of the 2 pre revision loadout combinations and all post revision 6 different loadout combinations with every imaginable captain skill setup that can possibly work (i.e win battles) and many that can't. No other warship in World of Warships comes close to the diversity of gameplay potential as the Graf. It is this cornucopia of endless variations on ways to sink enemy ships, and to win battles, that has made, 2000 battles possible. To @Femennenly WG's resident Air Ace, @Pigeon_of_War WOWS NA producer, and @Gneisenau013 whose topics I have probably mentioned the Zeppelin far too often (everyday?) this is worth remembering, because how many premium warships, on average, are ever played more than a couple of score times by their owners? What happens after 20, 40 or 100 battles? They get bored. I have never had this issue with Graf, or at least, I will admit, not until I hit the home straight and final score of battles for the zweitausend. I accept the CV 2019 rework, I deserve no less than the CV rework, (I still detest the CV rework.) But Graf Zeppelin, has been so much fun, for me. I will miss it. For those that ask, no kittens or puppies were injured during my gameplay. But a lot of players, were very (sometimes rightly) annoyed with me! 95% of my Graf Zeppelin battles, were played solo. My most employed loadout, has been 121AP (1 fighter squadron, 2 normal torpedo squadrons, 1 AP dive bomb squadron). 300/2000 battles were fought with 203HE/AP pre March 2018 revision. But all 6 (8 counting pre March 2018 revision) loadouts are viable. My favourite game strategy has become to launch a blitz strike attack as soon as the battle starts, relying on luck to present me with an ill defended or slow to act target. Because of the nature of random battles and team psychology, this is unsurprisingly, effective for deciding battle outcomes. shoutout to fellow zeppeliners, there are only about 200 of us on the NA server, but still too many to list here, I know you must share similar feelings about this very exclusive bote. https://na.wows-numbers.com/ship/3762272048,Graf-Zeppelin/
  12. Reaver97

    When a cv grows balls

    this has to be on of the few times rushing B works.
×