Jump to content

Moggytwo

Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

    940
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    8861
  • Clan

    [AUSNZ]

Community Reputation

626 Celebrated

About Moggytwo

  • Rank
    Commander
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1,458 profile views
  1. Moggytwo

    Multiple CVs vs Tier 3 ships

    This is the exact opposite of what the game needs. This is one of the things that the CV rework fixed - previously CV's could counter each other with the strafe mechanic (plus much easier CV sniping), and that led to one CV shutting down the other quite often, having free reign over the map, and having an influence in the game far greater than any other single ship. The game is significantly improved due to the removal of this type of play. No you aren't. The best CV captains won't come hunting your DD until they see you have put yourself in a compromised position, although many DD captains do not realise when they've made themselves an attractive target. Even if the CV does come hunting your DD, you have plenty of options to make that CV captain's life very difficult. Do this well, and the CV will leave you alone very quickly if they are good. If they aren't so great they might continue to tunnel you, but then your team gets the advantage.
  2. Power creeped? Borg is still one of the best BB's in the game!
  3. Moggytwo

    A useful method for dodging Rocket Fighters

    Still the same, but it is less effective due to the extra time the CV has to line the shot up, plus the angle of the fall of the rockets coming from behind the ship rather than in front means the rockets tend to angle into the front of the ship rather than the rear. The second dodge in the video I linked is from the rear, you'll notice the rockets land exactly where my ship was at the moment they were released. I was engaged in a firefight at the time, but it's extremely important to maintain your awareness of the RF position so you can angle properly and shift the rudder at exactly the right time. Unfortunately due to the vagaries of the replay system you can't actually see the rudder position changes in the video, apologies for that.
  4. Hello all, I thought I'd put up a hopefully helpful post about a technique I use to avoid Rocket Fighters in my DD's. I have seen a lot of people complain about RF's being too effective against DD's, but I personally think they're a very balanced tool with lots of counter play for the DD. The initial part of that counter play involves not being found, but if the CV knows where you are and is attacking you with RF's this technique is one of the options you have to help you minimise the damage you take. I'm sure there are plenty of the more experienced players out there who have worked this out for themselves, but I'm equally confident there are many more out there that haven't. You want to approach the RF's at full speed at a 20-30° angle, then a few seconds before launch kick the rudder hard over into the RF approach direction. Since ships in WoWS have a tendency to rotate around the bow and drift the rear of the ship to the outside of the turn, when the CV captain releases the rockets perfectly on your expected path of travel, the rear of the ship will drift outside the rockets as they fly through the air, and miss the ship to the inside. If you're the CV captain, you need to aim outside the turn to hit. It's an extremely consistent method of avoiding rockets. Here's me in a Kleber dodging RF attacks from a Haku. The CV didn't land a single rocket on me this battle. You'll note it also works (although slightly less effectively) while traveling away from the RF approach direction, although traveling towards them is preferable if possible. This technique doesn't really work from the side due to the rocket fall angle and shape of the dispersion pattern. Turning is always a good thing rather than going in a straight line of course, but this technique basically puts the ship in a different spot than the CV thinks it's going to be in, and you ideally want to time your turn to be passing directly perpendicular to the RF attack path as the rockets are released. Hopefully this tool will help some of you with your DD play in the future!
  5. It's only T4 that has this problem, and the reason for it that when WG released the AA rework of 0.8.7 they buffed the plane health of many CV's to compensate for the increased AA due to long/mid/short range auras now stacking. At T4 these buffs were far too excessive (70-80% on average) and that meant that the poor AA at these tiers now is not sufficient to prevent second and third wave plane attacks. This means that the T4 CV's are significantly OP now, which is obviously causing a population spike, hence you're seeing a lot of 3 CV per team games. This is only a problem at T4, the rest of the tiers are quite well balanced. Hopefully WG fixes this sooner rather than later. No. The match maker has to find spots for every ship queuing. If there was an MM limit of one CV per team, but there are enough people queuing to make 2-3 CV's per team each battle, then the CV queue at that tier would continue going up faster than battles could be found, and the queue wait time for CV's would stretch to infinity. To stop this happening in times like this, the match maker will do an MM dump, which basically throws the rules out the window and just cobbles together what's left in the queue. With the sort of queue numbers we're talking about here, every second or third battle would be a 3 CV per team battle with unmatched other ships for tier and class, and that would be fun for nobody. This is not a problem you can solve with the match maker - it requires a balance change to make playing against T4 CV's more reasonable, which will then reduce queue numbers as well, thus solving all the problems at once. A simple across the board T4 CV plane health nerf of 30% would fix all these issues in one change.
  6. Moggytwo

    Test ship Odin - Potential

    I agree that it's not simple. I don't think having a whole new 'super cruiser' class is a good idea, because there are very limited numbers of viable ships in this category, and to make a new class you need multiple full lines as well as quite a few premium options. This means you are restricted to either cruiser or BB categories. So it comes down to which you put them in. I personally think super cruiser types are closer to BB's than cruisers, and should be mostly put into the BB category. We weren't looking at gun size alone. I said above that the only difference between Siegfried and a BB was the lower main belt armour. If you took an Iowa and then made the lower main belt 200mm, is that suddenly a cruiser?
  7. Moggytwo

    Test ship Odin - Potential

    I think Graf Spee may have started the rot when it came to the 'large cruiser' issue. They obviously thought "we can't make this ship a BB", so they set it up as cruiser, but that then led to other ships that probably should have been BB's being called cruisers (Kronshtadt, Stalingrad were the first of these), and we've gone from there. Graf Spee has enough cruiser attributes to be called a cruiser overall even with the 11" guns. Kronshtadt, Stalingrad etc should have been set up as BB's though, since they have mainly BB attributes.
  8. I honestly don't get the OP's opinion. The game has some individual ship balance problems, but so does basically every game ever made - it's very difficult to balance a huge number of individual units in a highly complex game, and there will inevitably be levels of imbalance. The criticism I'd give WG here is that they tend to be a bit slow to rebalance ships that seem clearly unbalanced, but I also understand the reasoning behind that - they would rather be slow to make a change and give themselves the data to get it more correct than they otherwise would, and minimise the chance of having to do multiple buffs and nerfs to a single ship over the course of a number of patches. As for the classes overall, they are extremely well balanced. The class interplay is great, CV's as a whole mesh really well with the rest of the game, and add some really great extra dimensions to the play that weren't there pre-rework. The game is so much more interesting and engaging post rework. I had my doubts about the AA rework of 0.8.7, but I really feel they've nailed that as well. In my surface ships, I feel my AA is effective, and that I get some nice input that gives an appreciable result with the new sector system. In my CV's, I feel AA is very dangerous and threatening so that I have to pick my targets and ingress and egress directions very carefully, but I can still get attacks off successfully and consistently if I make good decisions and execute them well. As of the last few patches, the game is the best it has ever been.
  9. Statistically DD's have the greatest effect on winning or losing battles. CV's are on par with cruisers, while BB's have the least effect. You may notice what a CV is doing more, and therefore may perceive it differently, but these are the statistical facts of the effects of these ships on the battle. No it doesn't. If you think CV's don't take as much or more skill than other classes, then you have a very limited appreciation of the class. Like most things in this game, the mechanics look simple, but the depth of play is significant. I couldn't disagree more, I think the CV rework went really well, and what we have now is a fantastic improvement on what the game was pre-rework.
  10. "Plays poorly" is purely for making you feel better. It's mildly effective, so it does its job okay. I had 180 or so karma before the CV rework, since then I've played equal amounts of CV and DD, so now my karma is 15, and no doubt will be zero before too long. This is the inevitable result of playing CV's, it is what it is. Some people it seems still don't like CV's.
  11. Moggytwo

    Test ship Odin - Potential

    I am at a loss as to how they define a cruiser now. It seems the main distinction between a cruiser and BB is the lower main belt armour. That seems like it makes for a very narrow definition of cruiser. Siegfried is the size of a BB, handles like a BB, has the main gun setup of a BB, has armour like a BB, has the concealment of a BB, except it has a 200mm or so lower main belt. Everything else is pure BB. I personally think that most ships that are now 'large cruisers' should be classed as BB's. They are closer to BB's than cruisers, and they do the job of a BB. It's a tough one though, because many of these ships do blur the lines between the classes. The main defining feature of a BB as I see it are the guns. Anything 11 inches and up should be a BB as far as I am concerned.
  12. Moggytwo

    AIRCRAFT Carriers

    I disagree with pretty much everything you say here. RTS CV's didn't conform to the most important part of WoWS game play - being intuitive to play initially, while having a great depth of game play for advanced players. They were absolutely horrific for new players to use. Post rework CV's do conform to that design formula however, making them fit the game design philosophy infinitely better than RTS CV's. MM is not the issue. You can't enforce the match maker to a limit that is well below the number of people queuing that ship class. If enough T4 CV's are queuing to give 2-3 CV's per team on average, then enforcing a 1 CV per team limit will simply mean that two out of every three battles will be an MM dump, where the MM rules go out the window and the teams are much less balanced. That is bad for everybody, and quite simply not something that WG could ever possibly entertain as an option. The only way to get less CV's per team at T4 is to have less people queuing. Luckily the reason why so many people are queuing T4 CV's are because they are poorly balanced, making this a simple issue to fix. T4 planes were massively overbuffed in the 0.8.7 AA rework (70-80% health buffs on average), and this is why people feel like their AA now does nothing, which wasn't an issue post CV rework and pre AA rework. Nerfing plane health to a point where the AA damage to plane health balance is much more like the higher tiers will give a better feel to surface ships who are fighting a CV at T4, while also making less people play T4 CV's and this fixing the problem of high numbers of CV's per team. Unfortunately we're up to 0.8.10 and WG have not made any significant impact on T4 CV balancing. Either they are happy with this (they shouldn't be), or they are doing the WG thing and waiting for more data, three patches later...
  13. Moggytwo

    AIRCRAFT Carriers

    I disagree, he definitely has a point. Cruisers are generally a counter to DD's of course, but SAP hits far harder than HE on a DD. A Venezia can do 25k to a DD in a single salvo in a ship who's arcs are only better by Moskva/Stalingrad, the next best T10 cruiser is half that much. Whether it's unbalanced or not I'm not sure, but it certainly seems like an issue to me. It depends what you mean by reward. DD's get the biggest reward, which is a higher effect on the success of the battle. They also get very good xp rewards, because they are the main capping ships, and caps give extremely good xp returns. It's really only credits that they give less of, since this is tied to damage, and gives the same reward win or lose - but hopefully we don't play the game for credits, which are merely a tool. Many of us never have to worry about credits again (I have 620m atm), but I do know they are an issue for quite a few players. Overall I think DD's are not disadvantaged in terms of reward. I don't know about a revamp of the entire class, but I'm definitely in agreement that DD intra-class balance is not good. RU DD's are all over the place, and significantly power crept by MN DD's. IJN torp boats don't have enough torp power to justify their being food for most ships in the game. US and KM DD's have been power crept past mediocrity. Then there are some of the individual ship balance issues - I don't even like to think about what they did to Yue Yang, which was a great ship with smoke in randoms, but was destroyed due to radar in CB's. Khaba is awful - it doesn't have enough range, the torps have been nerfed into uselessness, it takes BB AP pens for some bizarre reason, and it's sheer awfulness is not only highlighted by it being straight up worse than it's T9 in Tashkent, but also by how good Kleber is at doing a similar job.
  14. Moggytwo

    PSA) Gun Range (Solved) , Shell Tracers display Issue

    That tracer issue is a pretty serious balance problem for WG. Functionally it means that ships firing AP in smoke (ie RN CL's mostly) are much easier to hit that anything firing HE (DD's, and of course Smolensk, Kutuzov). I'm sure they don't want to nerf DD's given their current fragility, so straight up fixing it is a problem, but then again the difficulty in blind firing Smolensk is a pretty serious issue too, since that ship should be much more vulnerable to blind fire into smoke. Enjoy solving this one WG!
  15. Moggytwo

    CV experts

    Well plane management is what Saipan is all about, more so than other CV's. You make one mistake and your alpha potential can be ruined for the rest of the battle. So long as you're smart about plane use though, you can keep using your TB's for the majority of the battle and really get some good alpha out. I definitely think it's the best T8 CV overall, but there's no doubt it is comparatively difficult to play.
×