Jump to content


Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


Community Reputation

1,103 Illustrious


About Moggytwo

  • Rank
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

2,154 profile views
  1. Moggytwo

    What is the trick to lighting fires

    Well hitting the ship is the first key. There are two skills required to play BB's - aiming and positioning. With long reloads you get punished for poor aim. You want the centre of your dispersion ellipse to be hitting the centre of the enemy ship when you're firing HE using a BB from long range. Pretty straightforward, but don't accept poor aim as adequate if RNG gives you a few hits due to dispersion - focus on getting your aim right. There are guides on youtube to help, ichase has a pretty good one as I recall. The second thing is that you won't be lighting a fire on a part of a ship that's already burning. What that means is focus on the ships that aren't burning. Particularly if a ship is burning amidships, your chance of setting fires drops considerably. So aim for a ship not burning, then when you get a fire switch to another ship that isn't burning, then when you get a fire on that switch ships again (back to the first ship if it has stopped burning, otherwise onto a third ship). Thirdly, look for DCP's. If you see a fire or flood start, then it goes away shortly after, that ship has DCP'd. You need to always be watching for it. That is your opportunity to get full duration fires - focus it and try to get at least a couple burning. Sometimes RNG will troll you, but often you can really hurt the enemy ship here. Pinging the enemy ship at this point is always a good idea, to let others know to focus them. I often play in divs, and we always call DCP's over voice chat and focus those ships. Having said all that, all of this should be second nature, and happening automatically in your brain while you focus on the higher level tactical stuff. This obviously comes with experience so long as you keep doing the right things. If an enemy ship is vulnerable, focus it even if you'd get more damage using the tips above. If you let a ship survive that you could have killed because you were maximising your damage farming, you could easily lose the game. You should always be looking for individual enemy ships who do something stupid, and then you should be showing them the consequences of their actions. You should also always position to have maximum impact on the battle, and normally that means a pretty central position, although there are a few maps that don't allow this (Two Brothers is the classic example). From the latest RU stream (translated): "One of the common requests [for a change] from the community is Dead Eye. Dead Eye will be changed, from scratch. Most likely there will be a new skill, probably. In the next three to four weeks we'll have more details, and this time frame is conservative. There is a lot of data we have, and we don't want to do this in a haste. We'll do a separate article in the dev blog in which we'll cover a lot of nuances about new skills, where we'll say how it went, how it changed [game/meta], what we'll change, what will be the direction we'll take. Think by 0.10.2 we'll share more details. So, in two three weeks at the most we'll make the information available" I'm looking forward to reading that dev blog, but they are saying we won't get it till early next patch. That means the Dead Eye replacement likely won't be till 0.10.3, so April. I certainly hope we get some more free respecs at that point (we most likely will), because I doubt many players will be overly happy at having to pay to respec every single one of their BB captains...
  2. I don't mind at all when inexperienced or low skilled players play ranked - the ranked system is somewhat designed for this. In fact, one of the best places to learn WoWS tactical play is in ranked. Having said that, I absolutely agree that players with only 100 battles shouldn't be in ranked. At that stage, it's not just inexperience or lack of skill - you literally don't know how to play the game at that point. You're still learning basic controls and systems. Ranked is about tactics, which means you need to be able to have at least a basic understanding of each class and roughly how the game works.
  3. Moggytwo

    Would you pull the trigger?

    I got FDR the day it came out, and have enjoyed it to some degree. It's main party trick of not losing torp accuracy on the turn is hilariously fun, and starting your torp attack over an island that an enemy ship is hiding behind then doing a 180 in the attack to land eight torps into their broadside will never ever get old. However, in terms of both overall effectiveness and enjoyment, the Midway is simply a better ship, and I find I take out the Midway pretty often while almost never taking out the FDR because of this.
  4. Moggytwo

    Italian BBs: What to know?

    Haha, clearly there's an issue here somewhere! Quick, someone start a thread complaining about meta issues or WG design philosophy so the world can right itself again!
  5. Moggytwo

    Italian BBs: What to know?

    Note that BB calibre SAP is damage capped at 10% against DD's. This means that they functionally do roughly the same damage to a DD as a salvo of AP shells. Also, in terms of saturation, a decent salvo will likely saturate an area, as you say. SAP functions no differently with regard to saturation than any other shell however, and the amount of damage against a locally saturated area is 50% of what the shell would otherwise do (citadels and overpens excepted, although note that SAP can't overpen). Once a ship is fully saturated, all shell damage will be capped at 10% damage against it (excepting citadels once again). SAP rewards knowledge of mechanics just as much as AP does. A few facts about the shell type: SAP never overpens, and always deals full pen damage if it pens. It is able to overmatch using the same 14.3 rule as AP and thus ignore the ricochet check (381mm SAP will overmatch 26mm armour). The pen works the same way as HE shells, in that the armour angle does not matter, it is just a straight check of SAP pen vs armour thickness (381mm SAP will pen 96mm or less armour). SAP explodes on contact in the same way as HE (but with no splash damage), and thus will cause zero damage if it hits a torpedo belt or spaced armour. SAP does a ricochet check on impact, where it checks overmatch, and then armour angle (BB SAP shells will pen up to 70°, then the ricochet chance will increase up to always being a ricochet at 80°). What all this means is, your aim points are different to both AP and HE. You want to be hitting the superstructure or deck of fully bow in or heavily angled BB's. If you can overmatch the bow you can aim lower. You never, ever, want to hit the main belt of a BB with SAP, or the lower main belt of a cruiser with SAP. Any sort of angle if you are close enough you can aim at the bow or stern compartments. To put it most simply though - for BB's and heavy cruisers - AIM HIGH! If you were shooting at a BB at anything over close range, you want to be aiming to hit the bottom part of the superstructure. You can be more discerning at closer ranges where you can get a reliable number of shells through the bow or stern at angles that will not cause a ricochet. The reason why RM BB's have poor range, poor accuracy, and long reload, is the reliability of SAP damage, and the concern WG had over these shells being too effective at BB calibres. Now have they overdone the mitigation, well they likely have, but the reason for that is because a SAP armed BB with the same range, reload, and accuracy of a normal BB would be absolutely OP, so they are being particularly cautious with the power level. This also means that, just like in RM CA's, you should fire SAP on almost all occasions in your RM BB's. The exception being when you are highly likely to get citadels from an AP salvo. If you're mainly firing AP in your RM BB's, then all you are doing is sailing a BB that has worse reload, accuracy, range, AP penetration, and overmatch than all the other BB's you are fighting - in which case why are you even bothering? The only reason to play RM BB's is to shoot SAP at stuff. RM BB dispersion (including Roma and GC) is the same as French BB's, and the pre-buff KM BB dispersion: 9.8R + 66. Sigma tends to be generally a bit lower than equivalent ships from those lines though.
  6. Moggytwo

    [edited] CVs Actually

    Halland is the most comfortable destroyer in the game, she gets everything a torp boat captain could possibly want, except for smoke. There's a reason why Halland's are everywhere. I personally don't play her much though, I much prefer Friesland and Smaland, but I like gunboats a lot more than torp boats. Having said all that, Halland is one of my favourite targets in my Midway. They often feel overconfident because of their AA, and push away from their team too much, and when that happens, it's time to make their lives miserable! There's not much more satisfying than completely ruining a Halland's game in a CV.
  7. Moggytwo

    Overall Thoughts on Rework after 1 Month?

    I never take Radio Location, and I am perfectly happy in close with DD's. You generally know they are there, and roughly where they are most of the time, meaning you're still able to choose your engagements, so then you just need to out play them with maneuvering more intelligently and shooting better. It's an unnecessary four points that could be spent on something more effective imo.
  8. Moggytwo

    Dante Alighieri bit of a rant

    Think of the first Armory bundle as a million credits, a captain, and a port slot. Considering it's all free, it's pretty tough to complain about it.
  9. Moggytwo

    Overall Thoughts on Rework after 1 Month?

    Flamu is basing that off LWM's post regarding her testing of the Dazzle skill: https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/234170-al-montpelier-demonstrating-dazzles-effects/ I think a lot of people looked at that and thought "there doesn't look to be much difference at all - dazzle is completely useless!" Flamu is always happy to jump to conclusions as well, so he was of course right on that bandwagon. The picture doesn't really tell the story though, and so others have done testing on hit rates, which we can see here: I'll quote from that reddit post: So this is showing a 12% increase in shells required be fired at a stationary DD to kill it with Dazzle active. This is a much more accurate take on the power of the skill than LWM's attempt. Note this was close range testing with DD accuracy. At longer ranges with cruisers and BB's (these ships have much higher dispersion), it's likely Dazzle will be even more effective. So is the skill worth taking? Well situationally yes, regardless of the range of the encounter. If you are in a DD that often has brief periods of intense incoming fire (so torp boats, or close range DD ambush style hunters), then Dazzle is four points well spent. On anything that is often spotted, or doesn't really have the problem of being heavily focused after being spotted, then it's likely a waste of points.
  10. I'll put my hand up for the CV rework - let me quote myself from June 2016: You're welcome. To be fair, I'm quite happy with the CV rework, think it's great for the game, and really like the game play it brings from the aspect of both playing the class and playing against the class. I'm aware there are some who disagree with me of course. Overall I'm quite happy with the game right now, and enjoy playing it very much most nights. Generally there are only two things that really annoy me in game - when I make a mistake, and when my team gives me absolutely nothing to work with. The first one of these makes me an awful lot more grumpy than the second though. I also made a lot of posts on CV hybrids, and they've been implemented pretty much as I requested: These posts are from late 2019/early 2020, and only a few months later they announced CV hybrids. I can only assume WG devs have a post alert for me at this point!
  11. Moggytwo

    Overall Thoughts on Rework after 1 Month?

    So overall I am pretty positive about the rework. I like the new system of being able to use a single commander on any ship with build specific to that class. That has completely changed the game for me to be honest, and I get to use my special captains a lot more. I really like how when I do a build I actually have an entire tree devoted to the class I am sailing as well. It makes you wonder why they didn't do this all along. The only negative with the skill rework in terms of systems/UI is that you now can't access the captain reserve, and have to do it through the ship commander selection, which is clunky and annoying. I'm hopeful they'll fix this, but we'll see. So the system itself is great, but inevitably there were going to be balance issues - and there most definitely are! This is less of an issue than if they'd got the systems wrong though, because balance of skills is just a tuning issue. BB's are the most concerning when it comes to balance in the current iteration, because they lack diversity due to some skills being a bit too powerful. Dead Eye is the worst for this of course, and that forces a concealment build as well, plus Fire Prevention is as strong as ever. There is no build diversity at all for BB's because of these skills being too good. A nerf to DE and FP, plus a buff to a few other BB skills, would make the decisions more compelling, and make for more diversity. CV's and DD's are both pretty good atm, although some skills do need some balance attention, but the changes required are pretty minor. Build diversity is excellent - far too good in fact, especially for DD's where many ships that used to share captains now use different builds. CV's and DD's are also in a really nice place in the game right now, and I've really enjoyed playing both classes a lot this patch. It seems quite clear that WG are not too perturbed with balance issues at the moment, because (surprisingly) there are no balance issues they think are enough of an issue that they require changes in the 0.10.1 patch. I honestly expected them to introduce a fair number of balance changes with this patch, but they haven't made any. Apparently they said on stream that they are still collecting data, so I guess we'll see some next patch. As for the meta, it was very static in the weeks following the release of 0.10.0, but it has started to move back to a more regular SEA meta (for better or worse on that one - we all know the meta has had issues of being too static for ages now!). As a DD main (bias alert!), I have absolutely loved the reduced number of cruisers (and radar cruisers in particular), and in general sailing DD's this patch has been an absolute delight, although I'm concerned it might be a bit too easy (DD mains aren't used to things being easy, it feels weird...). DD numbers are up noticeably! The lack of US cruisers in particular has opened up the cap fights a lot, because a well played US cruiser can completely choke cap points, which doesn't make for particularly compelling play. I've always thought US cruisers were a blight on the game when it comes to their effect on the meta (bias alert again), and cruisers designed to sit static behind islands are bad for the game, so I'm enjoying them being very sub-optimal right now, as they should be. So overall, I've been enjoying the game a lot this patch, more than I've enjoyed the game in a while. I've loved trying out new builds, and I've found a lot of success with builds that don't follow the herd. I've always really enjoyed tinkering with my ship setup to get every advantage that fits my own play style, and I'm able to do this significantly more with the patch. It's been brilliant really. Having said that, I'm looking forward to a balance pass, and I'd really like it if they changed the captain reserve so I could access all the captains at once. These quibbles are pretty minor though. I'd also probably have quite a different opinion if I was a cruiser captain, because they are the real losers with the patch - not so much because the cruiser skill tree is bad, but more because of the change in operating ranges of the BB's, and the increased threat to them from BB AP.
  12. Moggytwo

    Stop this CV madness FFS

    @S4pp3R has absolutely nailed the most objective and accurate take on CV's that I have seen. An absolute thread stopper that post. I'm not even going to add to it, suffice it to say everything he says is spot on. /end thread.
  13. Moggytwo


    Bottom tier in a BB against two CV's is pretty tough, particularly if they are top tier. You need to particularly focus on not being the most attractive target, but even then if there isn't much AA around you're still very vulnerable to the CV's. Sometimes we just get these challenges in the game, I tend to focus on making myself as difficult to kill as possible while trying to get as much output as possible. Be stubborn and make it hard for them. Take pleasure in their displeasure. Often CV's will find easier targets and leave you alone for a while if you keep moving and maneuvering while not being completely alone. Of course, some battles you have an experience that is just painfully not fun. I find the least fun battles for me are where the other flank completely capitulates, my flank runs away, and the team just generally gives you nothing you can work with. Actually even more painful to me is when I make a mistake and die. It doesn't happen too often fortunately, but nothing triggers me more! At least in the situation you describe you have agency in your positioning and maneuvering to contribute to your team's potential victory by being as annoying as possible to kill.
  14. Moggytwo

    How to cope with major reworks

    Well you're more talking about diversity of build in a single ship, and really that comes down to the ship design. You can't take, as you say, a pure torp boat like Shima for example and make a viable gunboat build out of it. Other ships do have multiple options (Z-52 comes immediately to mind, which imo is a better gunboat than torp boat, and can be build for either) for viable builds. This is absolutely fine in my opinion, and I think it would be unreasonable to expect hyper focused ships to have multiple viable builds. I think when we talk about diversity of builds, we're mainly talking about diversity of builds between different ships of the same class. If every single torp boat runs the same build, there is an issue, but if they use different builds, taking a few skills that particularly focuses on the individual ship's strengths over other torp boats, while others take a few different skills that focus on their strengths, then they have adequately achieved diversity. We are most definitely there right now with DD's and CV's. I'm not sure about cruisers because I don't play them much and haven't put much time into studying the tree. BB's are pure cookie cutter though, a dismal failure on the diversity aspect, and that's where the main focus of WG should be.
  15. Moggytwo

    Clan Brawl Concept

    This is why they've renamed them "Brawls" instead of "Clan Brawls". I think they just want to differentiate between clan battles, which are a clan focused long haul, and brawls, which are a bit of fun that only runs for a short period. I personally think that 3's and 4's brawls are the most fun I've ever had in this game. This sort of small scale team play works beautifully in this game, and there should be an awful lot more of it. I would absolutely love a 3's concept run in a similar vein to Warcraft arenas, with small teams of 3-4, match making similar to clan battles, and teams able to be formed separate to clans. That would be the ultimate expression of this game in my opinion.