Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'secondaries'.



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
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro
  • External testing groups
    • Supertest Academy
    • Supertest
    • Clantest

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Discord


Twitter


Website URL


Instagram


YouTube


Twitch


Skype


Location


Interests

Found 26 results

  1. LittleWhiteMouse

    Secondary Dispersion List

    I've been combing through data-mine resources for my Agincourt review, specifically looking at secondary accuracy (secondaries are an important feature on Agincourt). While doing so, I started cataloguing and doing the math for secondary horizontal dispersion. It was pretty eye opening. To date, I've found seven distinct dispersion types. This is by no means an exhaustive list but it should provide players with an idea of how "good" their secondary guns are on any given ship in the game. See below for an explanation on each category. Standard FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 57 ] + 30 } Includes most secondaries in the game barring the ones listed below. Soviet 130mm BL109A FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 49 ] + 30 } The secondaries on the tier X Soviet battleships and cruisers have slightly reduced dispersion. This includes Moskva, Petropavlovsk, Stalingrad, Kremlin and Slava German Battleships FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 45 ] + 30 } German battleships received a buff with the commander skill rework. It includes the following ships: German tech tree battleships at tier VII+ The premiums Prinz Eitel Friedrich, Scharnhorst, Scharnhorst B, Tirpitz, Tirpitz B, Odin and Pommern Accurate FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 33 ] + 30 } Long associated with Massachusetts, this dispersion type has existed for a while and is present on a long list of ships. German tech tree aircraft carriers. The premium & reward ships: Oklahoma, Massachusetts, Massachusetts B, Georgia, Ohio, Agincourt and Max Immelmann The casemate mounts (only!) of Iron Duke, Warspite, Mutsu, Nagato, Ashitaka, Hyuga, Amagi, Kii, Ignis Purgatio and Ragnarok Exceptions There are a handful of exceptions out there. In increasing order of accuracy they are: FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 27 ] + 30 } - Wichita's and Florida's 127mm/38 Mod 30 mounts specifically, not any of the others. FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 12 ] + 30 } - Pensacola FORMULA: { [ (Range in km) x 8.4 ] + 48 } - Graf Zeppelin & Arkansas Beta. Note this is the same horizontal dispersion calculation for "battlecruiser" main battery guns, like Graf Spee, Thunderer and Georgia. Depending on how much of a keener I'm being, I may add to this list as I find more. If there's a specific ship you think should be on here, give me a shout. I'll take a look.
  2. 6fingeredman

    Secondaries and AA

    Perhaps a bias opinion, but I think they should leave secondaries and aa unbreakable. I have been loving my secondary ships again and I'm going to miss them all over again. If I may provide some rational (by no means exhaustive just my experience): The best way to play secondary ships is to play mid to long range at the beginning of a match or close to an island. Once the dust starts to settle you can strategically push in and send your secondaries ablaze. Having the secondaries unbreakable rewarded this. You didn't have to worry about them breaking at the beginning of the match and knew they'd be ready later. Just sucks knowing secondary builds are going to be weaker again. I know it's not going to happen but I felt that I should at least say my peace...
  3. Cpt_JM_Nascimento

    Como jogar a curta distância

    Vejo muitos jogadores reclamando que batalhas a curta distância está morto. Por causa o spam de PE é muito opressivo, porta-aviões acabam com a brincadeira e etc. São pontos válidos, mas também os jogadores que usam navios brawlers na maioria das vezes não sabem o que estão fazendo e tentam fazer isso nas piores horas possíveis ou pensam que se não tiver um alvo no alcance das secundárias do seu BB a todo instante é uma partida sem sentido e brawls é irrelevante. Por isso que vim aqui no fórum para postar um guia de algumas coisas que devem ser levadas em consideração antes de se aproximar do oponente. O difícil não é a batalha a curta distância, mas sim a tentativa de se aproximar, por isso ciclones favorecem navios brawlers, porque o perigo de se aproximar é quase inexistente, com exceção do número de navios envolvidos, então vamos ao guia em si. ANTES de se aproximar: Não force batalha a curta distância nos primeiros cinco minutos, exceto em situações muito específicas, ainda tem muitos navios flutuando e alguns que não foram detectados nenhuma vez, poupe o seu HP pra ter vantagem na metade e no final da partida. Observe e interprete o minimapa. Veja se o seu time tem vantagem numérica no flanco; se tem a vantagem numérica, observe quais tipos de navios cada um tem de cada time ali e o HP de cada; procure pelas últimas posições conhecidas dos DDs inimigos (principalmente aqueles com torpedos fortes); observe se o time inimigo não consegue fugir, em outras palavras, teriam que fazer alguma curva de 180 graus e eventualmente expondo a lateral vulnerável do navio ou algum terreno que bloqueia a rota de fuga deles; preste atenção onde o CV inimigo está mais ativo se tiver algum na partida. Não precisa ter todos esses elementos a favor, no entanto, quanto mais deles estiverem, mais seguro. Sobre o seu navio: garanta que todos os seus consumíveis estejam disponíveis caso ainda tenha cargas deles ou, caso o tempo esteja curto, ao menos os consumíveis relacionados a sobrevivência prontos para o uso; planeje uma rota com antecedência que evite que fique em algum tipo foco cruzado, caso tenha, faça questão de devastar algum dos lados na forma de concentração de disparo do time ou torpedos para lidar com um dos lados da forma mais rápida possível, de preferência o mais fraco que cai mais rápido. Se tiver escolta ou algum consumível a bordo com radar ou hidro para evitar emboscadas é um bônus, mas isso não será problema se interpretou bem a situação. Durante a aproximação: Use a cobertura das ilhas para se aproximar sem ser detectado ou para limitar o número de navios que podem atirar contra a sua embarcação, logo, é mais perigoso fazer isso em águas abertas, mas ainda pode ser fácil dependendo das circunstâncias. Lembre que uma vez que está cometido ao push, só tem duas formas que isso vai terminar: o time inimigo será aniquilado ou você será... tentar fugir do nada provavelmente vai resultar no segundo caso, rotas de fugas viáveis num brawl são raras (geralmente envolve um ilhas com formatos específicos). Mantenha a rota que tinha em mente e também seja flexível para se adaptar a situação, mas evite ficar longe dos objetivos do mapa, principalmente com navio lento. Foque o alvo que tem o maior potencial de drenar o seu HP, não necessariamente o navio mais fácil de afundar, se ele tiver te ignorando melhor ainda, claro que isso pode não ser válido em outras situações, como o seu time precisando desesperadamente de pontos; Se posicione lado a lado com o seu time, assim um alvo não fica exposto na frente sozinho sendo focado pelo time inimigo, entretanto verifique se os outros navios tem HP o suficiente ou se o cruzador tem algum tipo de blindagem, por outro lado não se acanhe caso eles fiquem receosos de irem em frente, apesar de ajudar com eles juntos com o seu navio não dependa de jogadores do modo aleatório. Curta distância Essa é a parte mais fácil, então não vou entrar em muitos detalhes, com exceção de um: como evitar colisões ou como causá-las em última instância. Para evitar uma colisão, se o seu navio for mais manobrável que o oponente tente usar a sua habilidade para emparelhar com o navio inimigo, bônus: mire os canhões com antecedência na sua broadside para acertar o inimigo assim que os navios estejam lado a lado, assim as suas torres não precisam acompanhar o movimento do alvo no driveby; caso a sua citadela for invulnerável a curta distância (turtleback ou hitbox submarina), não hesite em expor a lateral pra evitar a colisão, é melhor tomar 20k de dano do que o navio inteiro e na situação, bônus: tente nocautear as torres do oponente antes disso; e o mais difícil seria se o seu navio for menos manobrável que o oponente, vc terá que afundar ele antes que colida ou usar a habilidade pessoal com o navio. Para causar uma colisão, nunca exponha a sua lateral e terá que prever a movimentação do alvo; não atire cedo demais, isso dará tempo para o alvo lançar torpedos e/ou expor a lateral para evitar a colisão e usar todo o seu poder de fogo contra o seu navio com HP baixo, use os seus canhões carregados como intimidação para forçar o alvo numa trajetória mais previsível. Caso planeje colidir contra o navio 'X', se o HP atual dele for mais baixo que 80% do seu HP base máximo (bandeira de colisão em consideração), não gaste as suas salvas contra alvo 'X', caso queira fazer mais dano, foque outro navio. Tem mais coisas para levar em consideração, mas deixaria o texto mais carregado que já está. Possivelmente você vai pensar que isso tudo é muito difícil, mas ficaria surpreso a quantidade de oportunidades que os times de aleatórias permitem que você faça tudo isso que eu falei sem grandes problemas. Edição extra: se o inimigo estiver vindo até você, basta esperar
  4. Alright, full disclosure: I'm a massive fan of these two ships. Combined I have 450+ games between the two of them. They are responsible for some of my best memories of WOWS since Open Beta. Despite the awful things WG has done to powercreep these two ships into oblivion, I refuse to not take them out from time to time. Do these ships perform like this all the time? Of course not. Neither of these games were easy, and the Bismarck game was a top-tier game that thanks to potato teammates was a HARD carry in order to win (Tirpitz was T9), but damn when these ships work they're still some of the most fun I can have, and remind me why I've been playing this game all these years. In any case, I guess my point is that if you enjoy certain ships, just play them. You might just have a good time. The build I'm running is a 21 point maximum meme secondary build, for anyone curious.
  5. One of the most frustrating issues when attempting to make use of secondary builds is the fact that a dd can smoke up and sit there for minutes firing, torping etc and as a BB your options are limited to charging in or blindly firing your main guns. blind firing wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the fact that its literally the purpose of secondary guns. I propose a consumable that would let you target an area for your secondary guns to blast away at for 30 seconds or so, maybe with an increased rate of fire or something.
  6. MeesaSithLordJarJar

    Secondary Alsace Builds?

    Am currently grinding the French BB line, am at tier 7 at the moment, Jean Bart is one of my favorite ships in the game. I'm hyped to get to the Alsace. What's the best secondary build for her? I was thinking something like: PT, PM, AR, BoS/SI, AFT, CE and MFCSA and then secondary range upgrade in slot 3. Should I run BFT over BoS or SI? Or swap out Main Battery Reload in slot 6 for the 20% reload decrease on the secondaries? Should I ignore MFCSA entirely and go for fire prevention instead? Auxiliary Armaments upgrade? LMK what you guys think! Any advice on the best combos would be greatly appreciated. Looking forward to playing Alsace in the near future.
  7. I have been using the IMPROVED SECONDARY BATTERY AIMING SKILL for nearly all my games. I play for 2 to 3 hours a day. The skill does not work. I've played games activating and deactivating this skill and can see NO change in my secondary aim whatsoever. I think it is broken.
  8. In this rework, it was known that Siegfried was one of the ships that got hit the most on her performance. Not only losing Fire mitigation skills but also the famed secondaries build, leaving her with only her absurd accuracy to still be relevant. But now that I enter, I find out all cruisers' secondaries range was raised. Just in case, I demounted the Aiming System Mod1 (+5% to secondaries range) and the ship had no captain. 4.3 km for T5 (4.0 km previously) 5.0 km for T6 (4.5 km previously) 5.6 km for T7 (5.0 km previously) 6.6 km for T8 (5.0 km previously) 7.0 km for T9 (5.0 km previously) 7.3 km for T10 (5.0 km previously) There are some exceptions, as Agir and Siegfried have 8.3 km base range, same as Kurfurst (Agir had 5.3 km stock, Siegfried had 7.6km) and 10.0 km with a full secondaries build now. And Graf Spee have 5.6 km base range, same as Bayern. Was this intended? Or was it mentioned anywhere? Because I only remember WG mentioning Battleship secondaries when modifying their range. PD: digging around and comparing, those are the same range as the BBs of the respective tier. Let´s see if this was intended or (most likely) a bug, but that doesn't explain the exceptions
  9. To buff Graf Zeppelin. Although, they are only 2 very specific buffs. 1) Increase Secondaries Range . Why? because now we have the main german CV tree, where the tier 8 (A. Parseval), features secondaries base range of 7 km. So Indeed, Zeppelin's sec. range must be buffed now to 7 km. and 2) Increase its base concealment: Same case, A. Parseval features a base concealment of 13.5 km. ; Zeppelin's current base concealment is 16.2km. therefore, it should be buffed to 14 km (or even 13.8 km). I know that there would be some "naysayers": So, dont forget, that Tirptiz secondaries where buffed after german BB's debut. Tnx for your attention.
  10. All I can really say is that the guns do work but they visually don't rotate client side. I have done all the normal things such as a general repair, system check followed by going to support, and going as far as to re-download the game and the issue persists. While I do have mods installed as of a few months ago the issue started when Azuma was released, and it has been grating on my sanity when I don't manage to ignore it.
  11. https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/85 By my calculations you can now get the range of the secondary batteries to 8.3 km with SBM1, AFT, and the flag consumable. That is pretty respectable for T5. Given her main battery limitations, It looks like the best way to equip this ship will be similar to the MA/GA/OH. This is convenient if you already have a high skill captain for one of these ships.
  12. The continuation from the topic thread here In today's feature, I am not the star of the replay... Its the red fleet's DD. You the viewer, as you watch, just keep an eye on our CV... That is it.. Also, like the last post.. This is not a discussion on spotting. This is not a rant against CVs or the drivers who play them. This is meant to show how power creep adds to the toxicity to the in-game experience.Its also meant for us to think, should this meta be allowed in the game? IMO, The disproportional DMG dealt by CVs ( or any other ship class for that matter), creates a lot of the toxicity in a match. Enjoy! 20200826_223115_PASC707-Flint_46_Estuary.wowsreplay *REMEMBER* You can speed up the replay by pressing the INS button.
  13. I recently got Erich Loewenhardt and I've played a few games with it. So far it is a fun CV to play, I don't have enough battles with her to give an overall impression. At any rate, I was curious & decided to test E. Loewenhardt's secondaries vs. her tech-tree counterpart, the Weser. Both have 5 x 2 105mm guns, but E. Loewenhardt has additional 8 x 2 150's in the hull, 4 turrets on each side. The test is as follows: both ships are taken into a training battle vs. a stationary Fuso bot. Both Weser & Loewenhardt have the secondary battery ship module, with a secondary signal mounted. I used my Graf Zeppelin captain, who has BFT, & AFT. Both ships secondaries reach 7.6 km fully spec'd. The carrier was approx. 7km away from the Fuso for each test & all secondary guns were able to fire on target. A timer was started when the secondaries began firing & stopped when the Fuso was sank. Each test was repeated 3 times for both Weser & Loewenhardt (6 tests total), to get an average of three. Here are the results: WESER vs. FUSO (Averages): Secondary Battery: Hits - 223.6 Shots fired - 1,037.3 Damage - 16,641.3 Fires: 4.3 Damage Caused by Fire: 40,458.6 Time to Sink: 5 min. 11.3 sec. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ERICH LOEWENHARDT vs. FUSO (Averages): Secondary Battery: Hits - 147.3 Shots fired - 1,082.6 Damage - 14,517.3 Fires: 4.6 Damage Caused by Fire: 42,582.6 Time to Sink: 4 min. 2.6 sec. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For every 4-5 shots fired by Weser, 1 would hit the target. (4.63) For every 7-8 shots fired by E. Loewenhardt, 1 would hit the target. (7.35) Based on the data & observations from the testing, E. Loewenhardt does not have the improved secondary dispersion & accuracy that Weser & the tech tree German CVs have. It seems to have standard secondary dispersion patterns, like other nation's CVs have. However, Loewenhardt was able to sink the Fuso quicker than Weser. Weser relies on her 5 x 2 105's, which pen 26mm by default. Loewenhardt's additional 150's can pen 38mm of armor. Fuso's central deck armor is 36mm, while her bow, stern & side plating are all 26mm (not including her side casemate armor, which is 152mm). Weser could only pen Fuso's superstructure, side plating, bow & stern, whereas Loewenhardt's additional 150's could pen all that plus the deck armor. So, in conclusion, E. Loewenhardt doesn't have the improved secondary dispersion the tech-tree German CVs get, but having the additional 150's makes up for the accuracy difference. I believe this test would go a lot differently vs. a smaller cruiser or destroyer instead of a Fuso, Weser might win in those cases. Any comments or questions are welcome! - FairWindsFollowingSeas [NA]
  14. Kokomi_Sangonomiya

    Close Quarters Cinematic

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rq7HHcaeKao Another short cinematic I made. For some reason, the free camera in the replays doesn't allow zooming in, so have fun viewing this fully zoomed out footages lmbo
  15. Just started (2+ weeks ago) playing WoWs, and I'm doing coop games to learn the basics. On a specific load screen (after queue screen; the map screen) the WoWs designers give this advice: "Maneuver by changing your speed and course to throw off the enemy's aim." Now, I can understand this advice when playing against a human opponent, but against a bot? Especially bots secondaries... I'd think it much more likely that "chance to hit" would rely on some simple mathematical formula using maybe distance away, speeds and size of ship being fired upon, but maneuvering? Would a certain "basic amount" of maneuvering (over time) affect the bot's aim a certain amount? Would "more maneuvering" during a specific amount of time throw off the bot's aim more than "less maneuvering?" Is maneuvering BOTH to the right and left better than only to one side? Does changing SPEED throw off the bot's aim MORE than changing COURSE? Or do they affect it equally? So, how does the computer compare the two? Does changing your speed A LOT have the equivalent effect of changing your course A LOT? Who decides the parameters on what A LOT is? And if you changed BOTH speed AND course would you throw off the bot's aim the most of all? And would you have to do this maneuvering between the time EACH secondary fired? And since the secondaries fire individually, rather than in salvoes, you'd simply do best by maneuvering constantly? I just think it unlikely that all this got considered in some mathematical formula that then got programmed into the game just for the bots, especially for their individual secondaries. Why any of this matters... It's a fact that maneuvering by changing course affects your speed. It dips just a bit, going from FULL and dropping into the 3/4 range, depending on how violent the maneuvers are. And, of course, changing speed up and down would also drop your overall speed down some, too. In both cases this means that it would take MORE TIME to reach your target (say, to launch torpedoes at medium/close range), and MORE TIME would then translates into MORE SHOTS that the enemy bot could take at you, potentially causing MORE DAMAGE. Or sinking you. So have the programmers at WoWs said they've got some fancy formula programmed in for the bots that includes all types of maneuvering and their combos, or is it actually smarter to rush bots as fast as you possibly can (in a straight line; no maneuvering)? Just wondering.... PS Sorry if this question has already been asked and answered. I tried going through the archived pages, but there's just so many of them! A search of "maneuvering" + "bots" didn't yield anything.
  16. In the current game, with the commander skill Manual Fire Control for Secondaries, you can only select one target at a time. I think it would be cool if you could select one target on the port side and one on the starboard side of the ship. If one ship crosses from one side to another, the ship the farthest away will be deselected. If you wanted the deselected ship targeted, just switch it manually. This would give secondaries a needed buff. I have found myself in many situations playing my German battleships where I was fighting two enemy ships at close range and had to decide which one to put my secondaries on. It just seems like it is a waste for half the secondaries on your ship to not be firing on one target while the other half is firing on another. We all know that this skill is a necessity on any secondary build.
  17. Tommycooker_1

    IFHE and the Kurfurst

    I must be missing something because I see tons of coments about using the IFHE for Kurfurst secondaries. The option to take IFHE does is X'd out for my captain. What are people talking about?
  18. I don’t know, I could be wrong, but I’m curious- had anyone achieved 10.1 km concealment build with a double strike and inside of the weather mode (which decreases concealment for increased dispersion)? And with 11.3 km secondary range, would it be possible to not be seen if it was just the secondary guns firing, based on the criteria? Or was there an update that prevented that from happening?
  19. All I got to say is, if a torp ship or a Hakuyru did what the this BB final battle results did... The forums would be asking for Torp/CV torp nerfs tonight... Instead, its a BB with OP brainless secondaries... So its ok...
  20. I have been researching the effect of IFHE captain skill. This topic is what I find to be the most informative, and this guy summarized it the best: "IFHE is useful on guns 155mm and smaller only." So for Yamato and Musashi, IFHE isn't worth it. For French and German battleships it will make a material difference.
  21. Hello everyone I m an active player and I currently own most of the high tier battleships and cruisers in the game and I m a big fan of secondary armament. However, as everyone knows already, the secondaries are terribly underpowered, even if you invest a huge amount of resources, time and experiences ( module, flag, and 14-18points captain ), they still feel underwhelming to use. Personally, I would like to see a global, across the board secondary buff to all ships in the game, such as giving the effect of secondary mod 1 to all ship, and a change to the dispersion formula for secondary armaments. Of course, we need the buff their range. These are just my personal opinions and I would like to know what you guys all think of the current state of secondaries in World of Warships. . Edit: I think that there is one easy way to improve secondaries and make them feel a lot better to use: Simple make the secondaries shoot other targets when using Manual secondary, but the target not selected manual won't have the accuracy buff from the captain skill.
  22. Yeah, unpopular opinion alert. I've found that the Freddie's guns are a lot punchier and I've recently finally gotten Manual Secondaries on the captain to complete my secondary build. As you can see, it's paying off.
  23. Yes, yes, I know it's a CV, but the other day I was burning one down in a DD from about 8km when it suddenly deleted me not with planes, but with guns. It got me wondering how it could do that, so I wen't looking up it's stats in the wiki and discovered it had a better secondary battery than the Scharnhorst. Coincidentally, I got a GZ from a premium Air Supply container yesterday (thanx RNGesus) so I thought I'd test out my theory by slapping a Secondary Battery Modification 1 and my 17-point Manual-Secondary/AFT spec'ed Bismarck captain and took it for a spin in Co-Op on the Neighbours map in a TierVIII-IX match. Now, I don't play CVs, so I was trying to learn on the fly. I auto-plotted a course into Cap A (following a Hipper) and started flying around. At one point I noticed a Chapeyev was heading for my position so I clicked on it as my manual secondary target and took off again. I was maneuvering to drop my torps when I was informed I got a Close Quarters Expert on the Chappy, which was about the only damage I did all game. I was honestly impressed with the 9km secondary range on the ship and the 80% reduction in dispersion. The ship's secondary range and throw weight seems to make it ideal for holding caps with lots of cover. I'm going to play around a little more in Co-op and see what happens when I ignore that it has planes and instead try to play it like a light cruiser. I'm debating fitting the ship with survivability upgrades and only some aircraft upgrades. Is this a crazy idea, or do you think it could work?
  24. Essentially, the title. I've been thinking about going back to using Aiming Systems Mod 1, but I'm not sure if it's the right call. On one hand, I've found that Aiming Systems Mod 1 makes my main guns substantially more accurate at ranges beyond my secondaries, and my highest damage game in the Bismarck to date came with it equipped. On the other hand, the German BBs are all about those secondaries: If the Space Battles taught me anything, it's that the GK's secondaries are literally perfect. I'm just not sure if it's the right move. Thanks in advance to anyone who responds.
  25. Suggestion: Please allow players the choice to blind fire their secondary guns into enemy smoke. This was done in WWII as my dad was in it. At close range they would open up and look for hits to locate the target. We do this now with main guns in the game. Secondaries would allow us a tactic to locate the firing ship and begin more accurate attempts to hit them in the smoke. We must be able to aim and click a point with our mouse under manual secondaries control (or even better w/o the skill chosen) just point and click as much as you want moving the fire around in the smoke. As it is now i have to send my men operating my secondaries below deck for discipline when they fail to fire. Not doing much for ship morale. Seriousness implored, please allow this. Love your game!
×