Search the Community

I have recently obtained enough coal to purchase either the Forrest Sherman, Tromp, or Alvaro de Bazan and I can't decide which one to get. I like fast gun boat dds, which would be the best to get? (I don't grinding commanders with prems or play competitively)

For fun, my son and I recently were in a debate about what nation has the the best overall T10 ships, all lines/types included. So my question is simple... If you were in a competition, assuming everybody's skill was equal, which nation's T10 ships would you take, which includes all variables of the T10 ships: Tech Tree, Premium, Steel, Coal, Research Bureau, Free XP I don't know if this should or should not include CVs and submarines. I would say probably not, because then obviously the nation's with CVs and submarines would have an unfair advantage. But if someone who wants to rate those in also, well then... why not? I think my pick would be the RN (British) until I'm convinced otherwise 🙂 We are interested in hearing other people's take on this as well! Thanks 👍

I cannot seem to get Confederate to save my life, trying to get Campaign Science of Victory Tier 4-10 what ship would make Confederate achievable? it seems the lower the tier, the less ships to shoot at... anyone?

The past 5 years I have been primarily playing BB's. It may be time to expand my horizons. I do have the Hindenburg and De Moines, but will appreciate your in put as to which cruiser lines to grind to tier 9 and 10. Which are the best ships and why? Any input on your De moines experience is welcome too! Thank you.

I'm honestly getting genuinely sick of playing World of Warships because of just how insanity fire is at tier ten. If I put forth the time to get to tier ten my reward shouldn't be getting buried in HE. Fix your game, Wargaming.

Well, my status update regulars seem to be busy today, so I'll put this more out in the open; It's been a 'tradition,' as much as such a thing might be, of mine to get at least one more Tier 10 every time the game's anniversary rolls around; This year, those I'm closest to are; Shimakaze, Worchester, Khabarovsk, GKf, Z-52, Daring, and Henri IV. Many of you know my feelings about the carrier rework, so even though I've all the relevant T8s, those don't rate consideration. Anyone out there have a favorite from the above list? WoWs Standard Stats. NA WoWs Numbers Stats. Stats only if interested. Otherwise just a responce with your favorite is fine.

Tiers XI & XII were mentioned in the birthday livestream as a question - and the dev being interviewed answered that it won't happen now or in 2020. Depending on how you interpret his answer, he also implied, but didn't out right say, that it would never happen... or he implied that they might look into it a few years down the road. Or maybe I'm just being paranoid? who knows.... (*puts tinfoil conspiracy theory hat on*) The thing is, I heard people on the forums say that the devs said subs were 'not going to happen', and, as the dev kept on talking he sort of made me nervous because he mentioned things like most players having higher tier ships now and :"never say never" and maybe they "want to go further". He never mentioned the obvious reason why people play in T10 ships: not to "go further" but to stay at the top of the tech tree because there are no T12 ships around to pwn them. This is probably why most people don't play mid tier as much - because if you unlocked all ships in, say, a BB line, why play a T6 BB and face off against a T8 BB when you can play your T10 BB and totally pwn the same T8? Even if they put T11-12s in their special matchmaking where T10s are still top tier in every match - which might fix the problem and allow them to put in more Cold War ships - there's also the problem of players who bought premium T10 camos thinking T10 was the maximum, who will not have the benefit of those camos on their T12s (and will presumably lose even more silver on them, unless they rebalance the service costs so T9/10 ships don't bleed out silver all the time and T11/12 become the new credit losers - but the problem with that is a lot of people paid real money to get permacamo on their T10s exactly to counter the silver loss, so doing this will nerf T10 permacamos). SOURCE: twitch birthday livestream at around the 33 minute mark: I am assuming everyone will agree with me that tier XII is a bad idea, but are there people out there who think this is a good idea? I'm interested to know why...

Anybody who plays with me in game knows that I am without question, a BB main. I do play DDs, and CAs too, but I never get anywhere near as much consistent fun and enjoyment out of either of those ship types as I do my BBs. That being said, I currently have every t10 tech tree BB in game. Montana is my favorite and Kremlin isn't too far behind. However, I'm starting to get rather bored with the BBs that I have and I'm starting to get desperate for something new. I'm not really open to spending steel on the Bourgogne, as to me she's just an Alsace at tier 10 with a reload boost and from what I've seen, she has to make use of HE to get damage a lot more often than I really like from a BB," I'm a strong believer that BBs are meant to be shooting AP 99% of the time." The only other tier 10s I've heard of that are somewhere in the works would be the Ohio, Thunderer, and Slava. I think the Ohio is going to be an NTC reward, but unless I'll just be able to use my free xp to research the required amount of tech trees right away and be able to get the ship immediately, I don't consider that "on the horizon" so to speak. Not really sure what the acquisition method will be for the Thunderer? If she is going to be a 457mm conqueror that has good AP, that's something I can get behind. However, I've really not heard anything about her recently. Lastly, the Slava, which was out of these 3, the one I was looking forward to the most, was supposed to be an alternate to the Kremlin. However, she has been in the testing phase a lot longer than average, "at least seemingly." I'm starting to wonder if WG maybe scrapped her all together? Maybe too many sub 50%ers were whining and crying about her having accurate guns," you know, those guys that go full broadside in front of a BB in a CA, get dev struck, and then go on a tirade in chat about how the BB needs its accuracy nerfed." God forbid we get a new BB that hits thing at range, you know that thing battleships were designed to do? Anyway, I'm just wondering if any of those will be coming around soon, or if there is something in the works I've missed? Maybe since I shouldn't be spending every game getting chased around the map by rocket planes anymore, maybe I could start playing my DDs more again. Honestly though I'm just dying for a new BB right now!

Yamato (Japan) Pros 18.1 inch main caliber guns that can overmatch up to 32mm bows (Republique, etc) Quite sturdy when bow on Great torpedo protection Cons Cheeky citadel (lewd) Very very sluggish, ship itself and turret traverse Not the top AA Montana (USA) Pros Very accurate guns Heavy hitting 'murica freedom SHS shells : great for citadeling and hitting deck armors for bow on targets. Great AA Good maneuverability Waterline citadel makes it trolly to hit. Can opt to slot secondaries or AA without forsaking accuracy. Cons Very slow shells, bad for sniping Vulnerable to IFHE spam Grosser Kurfurst (German) Pros Very tanky, great health pool Good secondaries that pen 31(128mm), 34(150mm), with IFHE all can pen 32mm (most bows of battleships) German hydro 6k Turtleback armor scheme, making it hard to citadel at close distances Fast turret traverse Cons Gets a lot of pens everywhere Very big and sluggish, easy to hit German gun dispersion BAD BAD concealment Republique (French) Pros Very accurate guns, good pen even at distances Great HE rivaling Conq fire chance Engine boost for flanking and kiting Good maneuverability High fire chance secondaries with long-range French turtleback, not as sturdy, but still usable Cons 32mm everywhere (vulnerable to IFHE spam and nose cits) Guns in A-X position + 8 guns (need to show a lot of broadside for a full salvo) Secondaries are made of glass Conquerer (British) Kremlin (Russian) Well, that was my impression of the 5 ships of the tech tree as an average player. I haven't got the Conq or Kremlin yet, so not much to put on here :)

So the Shima's legendary upgrade is garbage unless you're firing at max range or you lock your tubes and aim with your boat. I have two proposals to make this more usable or change it entirely. Current stats of the legendary upgrade: –25% to torpedo tube reload time. +50% to risk of torpedo tubes becoming incapacitated. –80% to torpedo tube traverse speed. Proposal 1: Simple fix you gain damage output at the cost of durability and some aiming speed. –25% to torpedo tube reload time. +65% to risk of torpedo tubes becoming incapacitated. +70% to risk of torpedo tubes becoming incapacitated. –10% to torpedo tube traverse speed. Proposal 2: Redesign. Makes the shima both more stealthy and slightly more durable at the cost of torp reload –10% to torpedo tube reload time. +30% to risk of torpedo tubes becoming incapacitated. –10% to ship detection by sea –5% to ship detection by sea The shima is a specialized boat doing two things very well, being sneaky and torping, the legendary upgrade should frankly upgrade those parameters on the Shimakaze rather than endorse passive play on an already passive ship. Thoughts? Opinions?

-The NA release name is Kremlin - Credit making appears to be on the low side. - NO RADAR - The WIP Ship had a Radar that would pick up BB and CV. Last for 1 min. Range 15 KM. No Radar!!! - Turning Circle - Not as bad as I expected. - Flamu and other CC's will have to do new video's - Ship appears to me to have had Buffs after removal of Radar. Significantly different from Flamu's video. - Scary in the right hands... My First Game - Highest damage ever for me in any BB. I am an average or below average BB player - 196K - Only flew Economic flags. - Did not encounter Yamato or 18 inch Conquerer. - Do not show broadsides to this ship. Many of you have to change the way you begin the game. Not angled at the start is not going to work. - Only 3 sunk. - Sunk by getting multiple hits broadside at close range by angry losing team waving pitchforks and complaining about "Russian Bias"'

I haven't reached any Tier 10 ships, yet, so my wisdom is pure; not tainted by the bias of experience or the illusion of knowledge. 😇 The "Swiss army knife" description of the Hindy only brings to mind the sage admonishment, "never bring a knife to a gun fight." (Swiss or otherwise.) So, I'm heading to the "Motherland" of Russia rather than the "Fatherland" of the Reich. Methinks, after many many seconds of dedicated research, that the Moskva has been modified, for the better and is, as the kids today say, better... than the Hindenbubble. The "yuge" hit point value, rate of fire down to 9.1, range of up to 22km, giving her an 8 km spread over detection, powerful guns, good secondary range, and improved dispersion, make her a [edited]. The gigantic turning radius can be mitigated by not turning so much. (See the stunning elegance of pure, Platonic wisdom?) Angling in, like promiscuity, is its own reward anyway. And, within a certain margin of error, one pretty much just needs to beware battleships. (Who shouldn't?) All this against the Hindenburg, which as best I could research, has 12 guys with shotguns standing at her rails. Hmmph! So, you can see I have fairly described both vessels with scientific precision and peer-review awareness. So, have at it boys. Proves me rong. Critique me at will. (Before I make a dreadful mistake.)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Incomparable I think this would be a good fit at tier 10 as a fast glass cannon and that the armor alone would make it balanced enough for the tier without being overpowered due to the 3x2 508mm gun load out. Obviously as a battleship class this would be good, but it would need to have accuracy of Graf Spee to work well and not have superheal or super he shells. Good Ap shells and average he shells would be good for this ship. The anti aircraft systems would need to be very good of course. I am thinking base charges of damage Control party, 3 normal repair party charges, defensive as 2 charges or hydro 2 charges, and 2 charges of speed boost at +10-15% speed. This would be a coal ship ideally at the price of 400,000- to 500,000 coal and not an exclusive steel ship. The higher coal price would be to offset less experienced players getting their hands on this ships while keeping somewhat exclusive without being behind a steel wall. I would like Wargaming to Head in this direction rather than steel gating more ships. Thank you for all of your opinions they are all helpful in showing those from Wargaming how the playerbase feels on this topic. All are welcome here. discuss

RNJesus smiled on me and my Div mate last night.

Today's Replay Breakdown is brought to you by the letter "C", for the huge Carry you are about to watch. Enjoy!

I have been playing T8-10 and I think the players in the weekends are casual and squishy, while those during the weekdays (even weekday evenings) are significantly stronger. Is this my confirmation bias or do you also observe it this way?

I got back into this game some time back in December of 2017, can't remember exact date. I say "got back into" because I played the game once before, and had to give it up a short while. When I came back I had to start a new account, because I completely forgot the password to my other account, and I know for a fact that I lost access to the e-mail used for that account too... So I had to start over from scratch. Which wasn't a big deal, didn't have very many ships, 0 premium ships that's for sure. Anyway, Now is only September, so I have been playing on this new account for less than 1 year. In that time, I have received the following: Rokuro Kinjo - My First 19-Point Commander Akeno Misaki - My Second 19-Point Commander Harugumo - My First Tier 10 Ship Shimakaze - Just today September 17th, my second tier 10 ship. The Grind was long, But has been most enjoyable. I've got an even longer grind, for Shima's Legendary Upgrade (even if I am not going to use it, I still want it). Though I am still waiting for Harugumo's Legendary Upgrade... seriously, where is it? The people of the forums have been wonderful, especially those who have been extremely generous with gifts (you know who you are, and I most certainly thank you). I have gotten salty my fair share of times, and honestly, I think this game helped reveal to me just how deep my anger issues truly are... I still have my problems with getting salty (very hard habit to break), but I think the people of the forum, and the game, is helping me control that anger of mine... which is weird right? This has been one heck of a ride. My next objective, which I do not think will happen before the 1 year mark (if it does, then sweet), will be to complete the USN Cruiser Lines (both of them) to tier 10, while getting all other tech-tree lines to tier 5 minimum. HAPPY HUNTING!

After over 4k games and slogging through the likes of Ranger, Lexington, and Essex (lord knows how I somehow went from a 55% WR in strike Lex to a 43% WR in the new Essex) and a nicely timed discount from WG due to the event, I finally managed to get my first tier 10! But now, after getting all the upgrades on her (the above picture was taken before I bought all her upgrades), I'm poor again... Ah well! Welcome, you big girl!

Hello everyone, recently I produced a YouTube video featuring replays of the USS Montana at tier 10. If you are bored and can use a distraction today, feel free to check it out. But rather than a typical ship review video, I've kind of noticed that the footage in the video showcases various issues and things that can be improved with game play at tier 10. Among the things I noticed (and suggestions for improvement): #1 Most maps features a Littoral environment with close by shorelines, islands, shallow water, and straits. I think although ships did fight in environments that fall into this category in history, it did not happen nearly as frequently as it has in game. Arguably it's probably not a good idea to sail capital ships in such confined waters in real life due to various asymmetrical threats that they cannot sufficiently defend against. Mines, attacks from much smaller units like torpedo boats that thrive in the environment, shore batteries, air attacks, arguably even sabotage largely renders heavy ships vulnerable in a littoral environment. For example, in the Battle of Surigao strait, the IJN Fuso and Yamashiro fought a futile suicidal action in such confined and unsuitable environment. Meanwhile, the attack on Pearl Harbor, the British raid on Taranto, and the Italian raid of Alexandria were extreme examples of what happened to capital ships when they can't maneuver while attacked. Obviously the game cannot be completely realistic or faithful to history, but maybe it wouldn't be a bad thing to look into this and come up with maps that features different types of environment. #2 The roles caps play in game aren't always good nor are they always conducive of good game play action. I think winning a fight in terms of damages, kills, and spots while losing because the enemy has more points is not an ideal situation. When there are more than two caps (i.e. WOT style set up) in game, the presence of the caps alone often promotes passive game play. It takes away the focus of the fight from engaging and annihilating the enemy. Rather camo, capping, spotting, and area denial become important. I think it is rare to have a situation in the history of modern naval warfare where it was key to control or contain a small patch of the ocean like a cap on WOWS. Sure if there's an amphibious or combined arms operation at play, it could happen. But then that's not a factor in WOWS. When a team's stealthier ships are not up to par or incidentally get taken out early, the team will watch victory slipping away due to having a major disadvantage to contest the caps. At this point, the team with the points lead often farm damage and/or hide and milk the caps, while the losing team becomes either passive or reckless: either way it often ends badly. What if we try to set up games that has no caps at all? Not even 2? This will bring the focus of the fight back onto engaging the enemy. The points count could be determined by the number and types of surviving ships, like the way historians look at the tonnage sunk and human casualty after the Battle of Jutland? What if as an alternative to having caps, the game offer an option for damaged ships to withdraw by offering them a chance to limp away to a designated part of the map's edge? I think this is also a game play mechanic faithful to history as the withdrawing of damaged ships often have strategic implications. For example, the USS Enterprise was seriously damaged in the Pacific multiple times but its survival proven crucial. Meanwhile the survival and withdraw of the German High Sea's fleet's capital ships after the Battle of Jutland was key to the strategic situation then. I think it would be good to make people fight eagerly and then withdraw. It's a better situation than the passiveness or recklessness found in game now. #3 Some maps by design forces a team to split up into multiple sub fleets to contest different areas of the map. This seems like a forced gamble, and it often was in history. Sometimes a smaller or weaker subfleet's demise in the hands of a stronger opponent often snowballs quickly and makes the team's success elsewhere irrelevant. Some maps also kind of isolate the subfleets by the design of their geography so that once the team has been split, it's hard to once again combined forces for cooperative play: distance is too far for effective engagement or timely relocation and line of sight is blocked... This often means doing your part isn't enough for a win just cause the team kind of went the wrong way or ran into the wrong enemies. #4 Ships, battleships in particular tend to not move much but rather try to function as bow tanking artillery barges. I would say that usually the Yamatos are probably the worse offenders of this. In a sense I don't blame them cause they have the guns that can go through bow plating, their citadels are exposed on the side, they aren't particularly fast, nor do their turrets turn quickly enough for shooting while turning. But ultimately this situation is kind of odd and not fun. It penalizes ships that don't have most of its firepower concentrated in the front and devolves games into a strange naval version of trench warfare where ships try to hide while bow on behind islands and mountains and take pot shots at each other like soldiers in neighboring trenches tossing grenades over the top. Although nobody likes to eat citadels, I still think this situation is not good for the game. #5 Destroyers' playerbase seems to have the highest skill floor and ceiling in game at tier 10. As a BB player, it seems that sometimes the cap situation is already a done deal due to the DDs even before I get to engage anyone. A good DD player can take out a not so good DD player extremely quickly. How good your DD is often puts a hard limit on how the rest of your team will fare. If the friendly DDs die early or are less skilled, the BBs often suffer tremendously due to not being able to anticipate enemy intention or have sufficient situational awareness. #6 I in particular dislike having torpedo boat style Japanese DDs (Shimakaze line) on either teams. As enemies they often come in divisions and can torp spam and/or snipe in ways that's almost impossible to counter in a BB. Ever been targeted by 45 torps at once? I have. It was not pretty. As allies, the Japanese DDs often do not counter enemy DDs. They might spot and cap. But when they run into the enemy DDs they will often run away while dumping their torps which aren't always good for attacking DDs. I've noticed that many of them almost never fire their guns. An enemy's on 500hp at 6km? They fire torps but their guns stay silent. They are also often so obsessed and tunnel-visioned that they will try to saturate an area where friendly BBs are engaged in a brawl with the enemy with torps. I've lost count how many times I've been torpedoed by friendly DDs while brawling. (my video shows this happening 3 times...) #7 Ironically, at tier 10 cruisers seem to play very differently versus at mid tiers, especially from a BB player's perspective. Maybe due to their vulnerabilities to big guns, they'll often play 2nd line at most. This often means they aren't close enough to the action to counter DDs or close enough to the BBs to provide AA. So much so that DDs and BBs often fight their own fight without help. The cruiser at tier 10 seem to focus on farming damage and opportunistic moves, on a good day they usually chime in and engage enemies that are already being engaged, distracted, or has overextended. But them as a defensive screen and support against enemies BBs can't see or maneuver against, often don't exist... Just some of my observations thus far. I'm obviously a fan of the game and I want it to improve and fulfill its potential. Feel free to discuss share your thoughts on the points I brought up and how things could be improved.

I know, it's a dead horse but I'm going to beat it some more The uptiering of T8 boats into T10 matches seems the norm now, and it's really not fair to the players that are grinding out T8's to get T9's. Why can't T10's battle with 9 or 10 boats? Or give an option to be uptiered if the player wishes too otherwise they can just wait to fill a T8 battle. Both my kids have stopped playing because after T5 they felt like the game was against them, they stopped having fun and we're killed so fast that they learned nothing. There has to be a way to keep the game fun for new players, uptiered in a new boat with limited experience isn't good for the player base. The "old" player base doesn't want potatoes in the higher tiers, then why does the game uptier them into tiers they don't even have boats for?