Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'gz'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Update Notes
    • Public Test
    • Surveys
  • General WoWS Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Team Play
    • Support
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Player Modifications
  • Support
  • 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
  • Support


  • World of Warships Event Calendar

Found 11 results

  1. Introduction This topic is entered in the game play section of the forum because it not only concerns Aircraft Carrier game play but overall game play in WOWS. The vaunted WOWS "Carrier rework" has been mentioned on and off over the past two years. During that time the current state of affairs of Aircraft Carriers in WOWS has not been significantly altered by meaningful changes let alone improvements. The only two noteworthy changes with regard to Carriers that have been implemented are (1) the new Flight Modes of the USA Carriers that was introduced at the end of 2017 and (2) the vastly increased number of new ships with very powerful Anti-Aircraft setups and/or Defensive Fire AA (for example ALABAMA, MASSACHUSETTS and the five new USA light cruisers). As a result there remains a virtual absence of meaningful WOWS Carrier changes to address some of the major Carrier related issues. The vaunted WOWS "Carrier rework" will in all probability not be implemented until somewhere around late 2019 at best, in other words it is a long term event. In order to improve the Carrier game play that currently exists in the short and medium term, that is in 2018-2019, some plausible solutions can be proposed and implemented to address the most serious issues for the benefit of both the opponents and proponents of Carriers in WOWS. This topic therefore aims to offers such possible and plausible solutions for the 2018-2019 short to medium term to improve Carrier game play from the perspective of both the opponents and proponents of Carriers. The solutions proposed are intended to be ones that can/should be fairly easily implemented by WOWS Developers with a minimum of effort and all need to lie within the framework of the current Carrier and general WOWS game play and game play mechanisms. In other words, the solutions proposed in this topic are NOT intended as radical solutions which are a full departure of the current WOWS Carrier game play and current overall WOWS game play. Instead the solutions proposed want to build on the strengths and possibilities of the current WOWS Carrier game play and current overall WOWS game play. The Current Carrier Related Major Issues Proposed Short and Medium Term Carrier related Solutions The individual solutions proposed in this section are to be regarded as possible solutions for the short to medium term to improve Carrier game play from the perspective of both the opponents and proponents of Carriers. The idea is to offer solutions that should be fairly easily to implement by WOWS Developers with a minimum of effort and that lie within the overall framework of the current Carrier and general WOWS game play and game play mechanisms. As such these solutions are intended to build on the existing strengths and possibilities of the current WOWS Carrier game play and current overall WOWS game play. SPOTTING SOLUTION (Alternative A) SPOTTING SOLUTION (Alternative B) FIGHTER SOLUTION (Alternative A) FIGHTER SOLUTION (Alternative B) FIGHTER SOLUTION (Alternative C) INVISIBLE SHIP AA FIRE SOLUTION DEFENSIVE AA FIRE SOLUTION DESTROYER PROTECTION SOLUTION CRUISER AND BATTLESHIP PROTECTION SOLUTION UNIQUE AND LEGENDARY COMMANDER CARRIER SKILL SOLUTION COMMANDER CARRIER SKILL LEVEL 1 SOLUTION COMMANDER CARRIER SKILL LEVEL 2 SOLUTION PLAYER BASE EDUCATION SOLUTION TIER 5 CARRIER SOLUTION CARRIER-AA DIVISION SOLUTION NON-USA BATTLESHIP AP BOMB VULNERABILITY SOLUTION
  2. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/281773707 I have the full video on my stream, if you want to watch it. Enjoy the stream highlight, and the balance. Twitch Link - https://www.twitch.tv/mr_balance
  3. So today I figured I'd man up and take Lexington into Randoms. Personal performance the first few games was okay. Nothing really special. Struggled a bit against more experienced Lex captains and a Shokaku, but he DC'ed midway thru. Most of the games were losses, mostly due to over-conservative team play. Then I ran into Graf Zeppelin. Oh God... Probably one of my worst performances ever. Pretty much nothing done. There was literally nothing I could have done to salvage that game. I'm not exaggerating. Nothing. 2-0-3 will stomp 1-1-2 every time. NOW I understand why people said the Big E was the only Carrier in the game that could actually challenge Graf Zeppelin's air supremacy. I just felt so helpless... I felt awful afterwards. You can look for yourselves. Something you should know about how I treat playing CV. I take it pretty seriously. I see it as a massive mantle of responsibility. I have the only CV on my team, and I my actions or inaction can cost my team a lot, much more so than a Battleship or Destroyer. I don't take that responsibility lightly. I want nothing more than to do everything I can to help my team, to not let them down. Which makes games like this devastating for me morally. It crushes me to know I was more of a detriment to my team than an asset, to know I didn't pull my weight. I feel like in those scenario's a lot of the blame for the loss is on me. I hate it. Which makes me ask this one question: Why is Lexington the only Tier VIII with only one fighter squadron? Shokaku gets 2x5, at best. Enterprise can theoretically get 2x8. GZ gets 2x6. Lex gets 1x7, at best. Meaning every one of these other carriers has an edge in Air Superiority that a CV like me just doesn't have. It also really doesn't help that Graf Zeppelin's are never driven by normies. They are almost exclusively driven by top-tier CV captains. Pro's, if you will. Which makes me want to either: A) Get Lexington over with and get Essex with 2-1-2 ASAP, or B) Get Enterprise. I also ask, if I run into another GZ, is there ANYTHING I can do? Does Lexington possess anything to actually contribute to the fight? Or am I just screwed? I am legitimately asking, because I am at a complete loss, and if I want to have any dreams of one day being a Midway captain, I need to get used to Random Battles and leave the Coop nest. Which means I'm liable to see much more of them before I get there. Sorry for the long post. I just needed to put my grief somewhere where I might get something out of it.
  4. Graf Zeppelin Appreciation Society

    I have created a discord server for players who own the Graf Zeppelin to have a place to share their clips, screenshot, or just to chat and share with the community. The discord is open to everyone feel free to join and enjoy the clips and screenshots. Here's the link https://discord.gg/PZ47db8
  5. Graf Zeppelin

    So I logged in to look at my Graf Zeppelin and for some reason I had to spend XP and credits on the second loadout any reason why, and I don't have my perma camo for not returning the boat.
  6. Two weeks later

    I was just curious why the Graf Zeppelin facebook was made at all, it was supposed to be used to include the owners and inform us of any new information, in reality it has never done any of that. I am glad that the ship testing finished two weeks ago and we still don't have an update or the ship. Thanks for creating another place to ignore players. Keep it Phun and Engaging
  7. Graf Zeppelin upcoming test

    So it was posted in the Facebook that the test will be delayed. Dear commanders! We would like to inform you, that the next stage of Graf Zeppelin testing is moving to the beginning of February. We did not want the testing to coincide with the New Year activities and the 8th season of Ranked battles. Many of you are participating in "Battle of the North Cape" and "New Year Raid", moreover a lot of people are fighting tooth and nail for the 1st rank. The test ship would not be eligible for either of those activities and we didn't want to rob you of the experiences. We will share some concrete info regarding the next stage of testing in the early February. Stay tuned.
  8. Graf Zeppelin Vanilla

    I just wanted to make this post to see where other Graf Zeppelin owners stand and get your thoughts about the interest in keeping the original GZ Loadout (2-0-3) with the unique drop reticle and HE SC-500's. I am not saying the original was perfect, it wasn't by far I just know a handful of players who enjoy using the HE Bombs in game. I am unsure how the GZ will end up due to all the different loadouts we have had during the testing, or if we will have another set of tests in the future. I have enjoyed most of the different versions they have sent us so far, but I still really enjoy taking my original out of the harbor and burning players into the ground with it. I understand I am new to the game, forums, and that I'm an average player at best but I would really appreciate if the posts are kept on topic and not turned into a place to vent about how much you hate the GZ or the CV rework. If you have some amazing screenshots or clips of you playing the Graf Zeppelin I would love to see them. Wargaming, if the post gets the attention of players who are like minded I would like to know if this is possible. Have a great day
  9. GZ fighters...

    I'm pretty sure WG is going to end up making them tier 7 so they can take advantage of the Captain skill. Currently a lot of people are calling for an HP or DPS buff to make them competitive. What about making them able to go 180kts instead of 175kts? I feel that would be a sufficient buff to make them competitive, but unique. What do you guys think?
  10. On the Nature of AP Bombs

    Hello, I do not think that I have seen this discussion anywhere before so I figured I should start it. I think that we can agree that AP bombs are WG's attempt to make DB's just as viable as TB's. Personally, I think that theya re on the right path except that AP DBs become the only option without a DOT chance. I am not saying that this would be balanced which is why I am trying to get the community's opinion, but how would you feel if there was a possibility for flooding? What if, for example, a DB had a 3% chance to cause flooding if all 6 bombs hit a target ship. This condition would decrease the chance of smaller targets from recieving flooding, but would open up damage oportunities against larger targets and would add advantage to the cv player who waits to send in all of his squadrons. Furthermore I think it would make the bomb drop delay more reasonable where HE gives lower damage but almost gaurantees the hit, AP gives higher damage but demands perfect to near perfect play and timing. Just a few thoughts and I would love to hear yours
  11. ADLA - Graf Zeppelin

    Figured I try my hand at one of these and, baring Dseehafer having covered it in his mega ADLA/Versus thread, no ones done it (or seemingly any carrier) and well, I know more about CV's and the aircraft they did, would, or for game purposes could, field then other ship types. And while this is a ship that has more or less been confirmed for this year, well, this is my take on it (and shows some of why I think it as a premium is a bad idea) The Graf Zeppelin (Sorry, can't find decent pictures without a certain forbidden symbol) So, brief history - The design for the Graf Zeppelin and class of the same name started design and construction in the mid-30's, becoming part of the "Plan-Z" rearmament program for the German Kriegsmarine. While Germany did study Japanese carrier designs when looking into their own, the GZ's design ended up more reminiscent of the earliest designs of CV's converted from Battlecruisers/heavy cruisers, etc such as Lexington class CV's. Meant to operate in the North Sea, the GZ was intended to be armed with 8x 15 cm guns of the same type used on Bismarck-Class ships as secondaries for defense against British Destroyers and Cruisers as well as commerce raiding. However, the design was misinterpreted, and instead given 16x 15 cm guns, leading to a need to increase ammo storage. The ship was 85% complete when word came down in 1940 to halt work on it. After the success of the attack on Pearl Harbor and other carrier operations, Hitler was convinced into resuming construction in May 1942, but again halted it in January 1943 over the perceived failings of the KM surface fleet, and this time was for good. She was scuttled where she sat in 1945 to avoid the USSR from making use of her. She was initially re-floated about a year later by the Russians and was sunk in testing, remaining hidden till the wreck was stumbled upon in 2006. Size and Weight (HP) - Weight - 33,500 tons Length - 262.5 m (861 ft 2.6 in) Beam - 36.2 m (118 ft 9.2 in) Draft - 8.5 m (27 ft 10.6 in) Depending on carrier, the general range is weight (long tons) +10000-20000. Given similarities to a more battlecruiser based design, like Lexington, as well as potential tiers based on other factors, would go with the safer +10000, for a total of 43,500 hit points or around that. However, it could max out around 53,500. At 43,500 It's solid enough to be the tier 7 CV with the least hitpoints (barring created upgrades) or the most durable tier 6 CV. With the ability to expand that HP pool though, it could be in tier 8, between Shokaku and Lexington. Armour Belt - 100 mm (3.9 in) Flight Deck - 45 mm (1.8 in) Main Deck 60 mm (2.4 in) Easily enough armour for tier 7, while still in some regards being short to Ranger and Hiryu's, but could also be at tier 8, albeit the weakest armoured carrier of the tier (note here that I say that based on history, as I'm uncertain looking at Lexington's armour model as to what it's true in game armour is, to me it appears to be significantly lower than what it should be with the belt having been 5-7 inches). Overall, armour is surprisingly average and for the often supposed tier of the ship, actually kind of weak. Though armour only means so much to a carrier given the idea is to not take a hit in the first place. If your that close, somethings gone wrong somewhere. Weaponry (Guns, guns, guns) Primary Armament - 16x 15 cm SK C/28 guns (8x2 casemates) Secondary - 12x 10.5 cm SK C/33 Dual-Purpose guns (6x2) AA - 22x 3.7 cm SK C/30 (11x2) and 28x 2 cm "Flakvierling" (7x4) guns. In regards to secondary and AA guns, nothing particularly special. depending on the damage numbers it's really about the same or even low for tier 7. Though possibly high for 6. the 2 cm is the standard 2 cm we see appear at tier 5, Konig Actually has all of these weapons, in the various correct mounts as well, at tier 5, just fewer of them. Or in the case of the 10.5 cm, what Wargaming uses for it, labeling them on all ships C/31 instead of C/33. Closest match is tier 7 in that Hiryu has a similar count of slightly larger 127 mm (12.7 cm) guns and 53 total 25 mm guns and Ranger a similar count of again, slightly larger medium auto cannons 40 mm/4 cm vs 3,7 cm), albeit fewer (8x1) 127 mm guns. Though ranger blows it away with 47 additional 20 mm guns. Even Ryujo is competitive in number of guns at tier 6 (dozen less autocannons overall), with Independence behind only because it has half the 20 mm guns and no long range AA. Reason I say competitive is that Ryujo has the larger DP guns, with a bunch of 25 mm guns, while GZ has a mix of larger 3.7 and smaller 2 cm guns, which averages in caliber to 27.5 mm. But the first part where the fit hits the shan is those 15 cm guns. It has more of these then Bismarck. Subtract a barrel or make it a 4x2 layout, it's like strapping a Konigsberg or Nurnberg to each side of your ship. Even Lex doesn't quite match it given yes, same number of guns but those are 12.7 cm guns vs 15 cm (127 vs 150 mm). That's a cruiser vs a normal DD. And even if Wargaming tried to pull an "original intended design" and make it 8x1 - that's still a Gaede with the upgraded guns on each side. Combined with the DP guns, that is a lot of firepower for a CV. That's 20 guns per side that can fire on an enemy ship, unless Wargaming disables the 10.5's from firing across the deck. No other CV in the game can match that firepower. Hakuryu is arguably the closest outside maybe Lex and even then it's only 12x 100 mm guns. And so far in game, the shortest range on the 10.5 down at tier 5 is 4.5 km and the 15 cm, unless you count Graf Spee's sort of "wth" range, is 5 km. Part of why in my concept of a German CV line they were basically a DD's worst nightmare. This amount of firepower definitely pushes it more toward tier 8 or possibly higher. The combination of somewhat lack luster AA compared to it's insane anti-ship battery makes it hard to place. As it is most German CV designs had a dozen or so 10.5 cm guns for AA and anti-ship but the 15 cm guns put this on another level. The one reason I can see it as a premium, if they can find other designs to fill the gap (not sure the thought up but not even sure if designed Deutschland class conversion would fill that slot). Either her AA suite would need to be given very good numbers compared to basically all other German ships with the same guns or some sort of nerfs on her 15 cm guns. Speed Speed (proposed) 33.8 kn This would make it that the only CV's faster than it are IJN from Hiryu on. And even then, not by much. So in that regard, not unreasonable for tier 7. Concealment Based off what photo's they have and what appears to be an Office of Naval Intelligence drawing based on the intel they had for recognition purposes, I'd say it'd likely be around 15 km, 16 by sea if not closer to Lexington's. It's a big ship, and not particularly low when factoring the actual hull and tower. Aviation Aircraft carried - 42 Original aircraft: Bf 109 "T", Ju-87C, Fi 167 Second proposal: Me 155 (development went almost nowhere, designation reused), Ju-87D Personal: Fw 190 A-8, Fw 190 G-2 This is the other area of balance the fit hits the shan. The 109 "T" is best approximated as a Bf 109E-4/N, a variant in use during the "Battle of Britain" and while the E model lasted till -7 of August 1940, was replaced with the F variant a few months later. The Stuka was already beginning to show it's age and issues, and the Fi 167 was dated by the time it was made as the age of Biplanes was passing. The 109"T" is a tier 5 aircraft, tier 6 is kinda pushing it a bit but not unreasonable, not quite on par with the A6M2, definitely lagging behind the much newer F6F (I think Wargaming may need to look over which aircraft are where, possibly introduce the A6M3 or the like against the F6F). The Ju-87C by Wargaming's standards would likely be tier 6 (since they put the D3A1 there) but is more likely a tier 5, the D3A at least having the mobility to act as a fighter and dodge bullets. And the 167 is a tier 4, maybe tier 5 aircraft. The second set proposed later down the line was a development at the time called the Me 155 (a name associated with 3-4 failed projects) that would have been roughly the same as taking a Bf-109G and removing the nose cannon for two wing mounted 20 mm cannons. A better aircraft, but topping out at about tier 7 before it gets out classed, particularly in firepower. 2 20 mm and two synced 13.2 mm against a similar, un-synced armament in the A6M5c and 6. 50 cals in the Hellcat. Speed ends up about the same as the Hellcat at tier 7 at best, but lacks it's durability, or the Zeke's mobility. And the Ju-87D is more solidly a tier 6 aircraft, but still what was an aging and decrepit airframe that was beyond obsolete. Now filling both the DB and TB role. My personal pick, non historical as it is (but if put in a tech tree is irrelevant because history is more of a guideline for the tech tree's) would be the Fw 190A-8 - one of the earlier fighter variants, and the Fw 190G-2 a ground attack variant. The A-8 has firepower that can be used in tier 8 (2x 20 mm cannon in the wing, 2x 20 mm and 2x 13.2 mm synced), durability and speed. Some what similar with the G-2 other than it's geared toward ground attack and supplanted the Stuka in that role, and while lacking a tail gunner, could still fight a bit as a fighter. However, regardless of planes used, sticking with historical amount she'd carry, 42 planes is tier 6 numbers and would not last against tier 7-8 CV's that have almost double the planes. Ratings by tier (overall) HP: 6-8 Armour: 7-8 AA: 7 Artillery: 8+ Speed: 7+ Concealment: 7-8+ Aviation (plane type):5-6, 6-7 Aviation (plane count): 6 Overall: 7-8 The pro's and cons of this ship highly depend on tier it gets put at. As a tier 8, it'd have unparalleled secondaries other than maybe the BB's. Decent HP and armour, and good speed. However it's AA would be a bit lacking, it's concealment not exactly great, while it's aircraft range from badly to hilariously out-tiered even as the top tier, let alone against tier 10, and does not have the numbers to really support any real losses. At tier 7, it'd again have unparalleled secondaries depending on given range, AA wouldn't be as underwhelming but likely not quite as good as the other nations, good speed, decent HP and armour, with the biggest drawbacks being concealment (more smaller maps with a large detection radius) and depending on aircraft either your still out done by the enemy planes, or your fighters are a match but attack aircraft are still out tiered and highly vulnerable. And still short on planes to actually use. At tier 6, lowest it could go, Good AA, secondaries would either be amazing or nerfed to oblivion in all likelihood, good HP and unlike the other two CV's at the tier, have armour protection that means something. Enough planes to get the job done, and only attack planes may end up out tiered. And it'd beat Independence in speed. That said the lower tiered possibly attack planes against monsters like Cleveland or tier 8 ships can be an issue, and terrible concealment. Secondaries could be a drawback if they get nerfed to oblivion so they are next to unusable. But other than possibly lighting on fire as easily as all German ships seem to, way more pro then con at this tier. This of course goes under it being a premium, therefore historical. A tech tree you could put the newer, better planes on and factor in both the addition of folding wings and some upgrades to GZ to increase hanger space to carry enough to be placed more solidly at tier 7 or tier 8. Conclusions As a premium, at tier 8 it'd be under powered since it still lacks armour to brawl like a BB and planes would be near useless, Tier 7, still pretty under powered because of it's aircraft, but not nearly as bad. Tier 6 - most likely OP having the planes to actually fight enemy CV's with only sort of lacking attack ability depending on aircraft, secondaries that could give DD players fits as well as actual armour at that tier, good AA and plenty of speed. With it's biggest downfall being it's likely spending most of the match spotted. Some would argue that the DFE skill solves the issue of fighters however, creates a new issue as the skill tends to flip it (now that most/all tier 7 CV's have it, and AS to boot, in a fair fight with no strafing Saipan now has way more problems with fighters, so you'd end up giving it OP fighters too) and doesn't solve the issue of attack aircraft and actual number it has to use. It's a poor choice for being made a premium unless you throw history out the window basically. Too many things that make it very strong, or very weak, with no combination that's really "just right". Tier 7 is the closest, but that still has issues. As part of a tech tree (which is doable) it'd make a great tier 8 as at that point you can give it the improved aircraft, more space, and slightly better AA, the main things that drag it down from being a solid tier 8 ship, namely the aircraft. Much as I hate the idea, I'd almost rather see it be a bit OP at tier 6 then constantly wrecked by Ranger, Hiryu and Saipan at tier 7. Anyway, that's my first attempt at one of these. If people like this (or the following Idea's) I'll do some more for CV's, namely already ideas for USS Hornet (Doolittle Raid configuration), Enterprise, Yorktown, Wasp or some of the other German CV's. Or much as they were talked about this year as well, but have no idea which ones, UK CV's.