RE: OT : World of Warships

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: OT : World of Warships

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: OT : World of Warships

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 6 [7]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: OT : World of Warships - 1/29/2016 4:01:06 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CyrusSpitama

For those just signing up, be sure to join the Project R on the main page to get some free stuff. WoT often ran campaigns like this and glad to see WoWS is doing the same. Recently obtained my Kuma and Myogi but I am struggling to do well with the Kuma. I am also having issues with my Watakaze. Seems it will be a long time before I earn my Isokaze. Honestly, the torp game escapes me a little still... This includes both aiming and evading them :P

Torps take practice. There's a reason the reloads are very fast on the early ships with them. Later, it's measured in minutes. You need to be able to use them efficiently (I can't; my hit rate is ~7-8%, although there's something to be said for "area denial" with them also).

The Kuma is a bit of a funny ship. It's great, I love it and kept mine instead of selling it when I had upgraded out of it. But it's like the Tenryu at Tier 3 as well - fast and sleek with torpedoes, but its health just does not stand up to its USN (and now German) counterparts. The Kuma has great guns, too. Essentially, use your guns to kill DDs. Save your torpedoes for cruisers and battleships. Use AP rounds against the Phoenix and Karlsruhe (and Tenryu/Kuma) when within range to consistently land penetrating hits (probably under 7km), but stick to HE rounds for the Kolberg and St Louis - their armor is too thick for your AP to do any good.

You need to play the Kuma like it's a bigger DD. You can't brawl with it. It's a skirmisher. But it's really good at it.

(in reply to CyrusSpitama)

Post #: 181

RE: OT : World of Warships - 1/29/2016 4:04:38 PM

Panther Bait

Posts: 654
Joined: 8/30/2006
Status: offline

It took me quite a while to catch on to this, but one of the keys to using torps on DDs is your visibility range vs. your torpedo range. If your torps have a long range than you can be spotted, you will do well. Just don't fire your guns as they will spot you then.

_____________________________

When you shoot at a destroyer and miss, it's like hit'in a wildcat in the ass with a banjo.

Nathan Dogan, USS Gurnard

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 182

RE: OT : World of Warships - 1/29/2016 4:05:16 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Barb

Well I am at Tier III ... It is quite funny game, but I feel it is more like "shooter" than everything other.

However there are few things that seems to be really insane so far
- Torpedo reloads on low tier ships - Hell you can fire full torpedo broadside every 20 seconds unlimited number of times! Yes the Russian Torpedoes have range of only 3km (US - 5km), which is awfully small, so you are usually almost dead at that range. Yet few times I got into the melee against three or more ships sinking 3 of them within 3 torpedo salvoes - the last one usually after I got sunk :D
IRL - only the Japanese had the quick torpedo reload system allowing them to reload tubes in about 10-15 minutes (based on number of tubes). Other nations were not so quick. Another thing is that Ships usually carried enough torpedoes for only 2 salvos (one in tubes and one spare)

- Detection system - with the way it works currently, destroyers are "not able" to fire their guns unless already detected - and that is usually the close to the torpedo range... So to deliver torpedoes they are not using their guns - IRL... every possible barrel would be firing with maximum effort to pump whatever at the enemy at that range...

- I had read somewhere the "detection ranges of torpedoes" based on hydrophone equipment. IRL you can hardly hear something running full speed ahead - and did battleships carry hydrophones? And use them while shooting? Also later Japanese torpedoes were using oxygen for propuslion making them much harder to detect on surface.

- I also find strange that they merged light and heavy cruisers into the single line (Like Cleveland preceding Portland etc..) - They had each their specific role and number of classes is more then sufficient for the nations included.

- Decision to include Soviet Navy (destroyer line so far) was probably based on huge Russian market... but wouldn't it be more logical to include Royal Navy (one ship only), Kriegsmarine (cruiser line) and Regia Marina (nothing) before the Russians?

However one can find me there from time to time as "BarbSVK" doing some silly things around :D

I agree with your assessment of flaws. Mostly, this was for playability, I imagine.

There are rumors that eventually they will split the light/heavy cruisers into separate lines. I know the proposed Royal Navy line has both Battlecruisers and Battleships listed (although again, rumors, so take with salt). I also have questions about why they chose certain ships for certain tiers (and why the Cleveland has that ridiculous rainbow arc to its shells), but it does leave them openings for premium ships (such as the Tone or Agano). Or Brooklyn, for that matter - I'd buy a Brooklyn.

(in reply to Barb)

Post #: 183

RE: OT : World of Warships - 1/29/2016 4:07:31 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Apollo11

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

And then there are dirty kill-stealing scrub-lords like me:

World of Warships: DD Isokaze Kraken Gameplay

Nice!

BTW, I didn't know that you have your own YouTube channel - I bookmarked it as well...

Leo "Apollo11"

Thanks! I just started it a few months ago. It can be time consuming to do the videos the way that I want.

I'm almost tempted to create a chronicle of the astonishingly disastrous AE game play that I'm in right now. Hint: China has been totally subjugated by my Japanese opponent.

After doing my supporting videos for the CV reaction bug, I debated doing some kind of video AAR. It would take forever to splice together, though. But in a way, I think it's about the same level of effort as doing daily (or semi-daily) updates with good screenshots, just spread out more. Reminds me to check in on Baloogan's thing...

Also, my name in Warships is JesusOnIceSkates. The buddy I play with a lot is SweetFancyMoses. We mostly play T5-T8.

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)

Post #: 184

RE: OT : World of Warships - 1/31/2016 5:56:15 AM

CyrusSpitama

Posts: 213
Joined: 2/21/2011
From: Naw'lins, Luzianna
Status: offline

Kuma, Myogi, and now the Isokaze. Still no t5 ships for me yet. Not sure which I will hit/get first. Hopefully this time spent with Isokaze and Kuma will greatly improve my torpedo work. One drawback to this WoWS time is I have not been able to open AE at all since just before last weekend... lol! Maybe once I win the lottery I won't have to worry so much about work and can game all I need to/want to. Of course, the gaming would take place between my round the world touring.

P.S. I could research and buy the first Jap CV but, avoiding this part of the game at present. Of course, if someone here recommends it highly I might give it a go.

< Message edited by CyrusSpitama -- 1/31/2016 7:14:44 AM >

_____________________________

"I'm sure the universe is full of intelligent life. It's just been too intelligent to come here." - Arthur C. Clarke

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 185

RE: OT : World of Warships - 1/31/2016 4:58:39 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CyrusSpitama

Kuma, Myogi, and now the Isokaze. Still no t5 ships for me yet. Not sure which I will hit/get first. Hopefully this time spent with Isokaze and Kuma will greatly improve my torpedo work. One drawback to this WoWS time is I have not been able to open AE at all since just before last weekend... lol! Maybe once I win the lottery I won't have to worry so much about work and can game all I need to/want to. Of course, the gaming would take place between my round the world touring.

P.S. I could research and buy the first Jap CV but, avoiding this part of the game at present. Of course, if someone here recommends it highly I might give it a go.

I don't like them.

(in reply to CyrusSpitama)

Post #: 186

RE: OT : World of Warships - 1/31/2016 7:18:41 PM

Denniss

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline

Jap CV are nice but bomber-heavy, they always lack sufficient fighters. Not nice to see your 4-fighter group eliminated by US 6-fighter group. If playing wise you may gain a lot of money/experience per battle though.

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 187

RE: OT : World of Warships - 1/31/2016 8:51:13 PM

Anachro

Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline

Taking down 2 battleships with 2 straight torp salvos in a row from my Wakatake is satisfying. I took them down and then the destroyer that was with them fled at the sight.

(in reply to Denniss)

Post #: 188

RE: OT : World of Warships - 1/31/2016 9:15:58 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Denniss

Jap CV are nice but bomber-heavy, they always lack sufficient fighters. Not nice to see your 4-fighter group eliminated by US 6-fighter group. If playing wise you may gain a lot of money/experience per battle though.

Not to mention you can't really run an effective setup as Japan until Hiryu, when you can get 3 fighter, 2 bomber, and 2 torpedo bomber groups (all of 4). I have the Zuiho now and dislike it. I have to play really conservatively with my planes if I am facing a Bogue - they get 2 fighter groups, and I don't even have the option to change mine around to 2 groups. I don't like what they did with that. I should have the option to go fighter heavy at each tier if I want to.

Ryujo can go 3 fighter groups, but at the expense of bombers. Again, I don't like how they put in the air wing options. It would be far better if you could simply remove one type to add another instead of just getting 2 alternate setups to pick from, some of which just straight up increase your number of groups by 1 (which is dumb IMO). This would mean 4 alternate setups:

-1F, +1DB
-1F, +1TB
-1DB, +1F
-1TB, +1F

(in reply to Denniss)

Post #: 189

RE: OT : World of Warships - 2/1/2016 12:37:58 AM

Anachro

Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline

Is it normal to have a 99% win ratio and 3.35 KD Ratio with 100 battles fought...I feel like I've been getting lucky with my battles. Most tend to be one-sided.

< Message edited by Anachro -- 2/1/2016 1:39:14 AM >

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 190

RE: OT : World of Warships - 2/1/2016 4:12:57 AM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro

Is it normal to have a 99% win ratio and 3.35 KD Ratio with 100 battles fought...I feel like I've been getting lucky with my battles. Most tend to be one-sided.

Are you playing against bots?

My win rate against humans is just over 54%.

(in reply to Anachro)

Post #: 191

RE: OT : World of Warships - 2/1/2016 11:30:35 AM

Anachro

Posts: 2506
Joined: 11/23/2015
From: The Coastal Elite
Status: offline

I have no idea. Do I have to change something in my settings to not be playing bots?

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 192

RE: OT : World of Warships - 2/1/2016 1:22:33 PM

JocMeister

Posts: 8262
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro

I have no idea. Do I have to change something in my settings to not be playing bots?

You are probably playing CO-OP. You need to switch to "random battle" to play humans.

(in reply to Anachro)

Post #: 193

RE: OT : World of Warships - 2/1/2016 4:33:04 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anachro

I have no idea. Do I have to change something in my settings to not be playing bots?

You are probably playing CO-OP. You need to switch to "random battle" to play humans.

The major difference is that you'll now have games with 12 ships per side instead of 8. The bots are actually pretty good individually, but rarely surprise you and don't work together all that well.

(in reply to JocMeister)

Post #: 194

RE: OT : World of Warships - 2/7/2016 5:58:18 AM

CyrusSpitama

Posts: 213
Joined: 2/21/2011
From: Naw'lins, Luzianna
Status: offline

Funny thing is I finally got my first t5, the Furataka. I am not so far away from another t5, the Kongo. End result of all this WoWS playing? I just restarted my JPN GC scenario 2. My last attempt at a GC saw me just about to break into '43 but, my supplies and HI reserves were woefully under par. I do believe this is due to my recurring problem with taking Singapore and Palembang early enough. Time for another go at it! I do hope to see myself at least knocking down some forts to both of these places no later than early March. Ideally, I can see from many AARs, taking Singapore early as possible is the gateway to good times in the DEI.

_____________________________

"I'm sure the universe is full of intelligent life. It's just been too intelligent to come here." - Arthur C. Clarke

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 195

RE: OT : World of Warships - 2/7/2016 11:32:53 AM

fulcrum28

Posts: 660
Joined: 2/28/2010
Status: offline

I have been tempted to buy it too, but in spite of the fact the graphics are superb -and I'm pretty sure it can be quite fun to manage the ships- it might not have strategy and/or tactical solid grounds, if compared with something like witp ae. I think it is something like world of tanks and in modern scale like wargame airland battle. RT games are difficult to control and do not allow you too much reaction time or considerations. But yes, all graphics shown in youtube are quite impressive.

_____________________________

The most comprehensive website on the IJN Imperial Japanese Navy Y:"Let us enjoy the beauty of the moon (sinking aboard Hiryu)

(in reply to CyrusSpitama)

Post #: 196

RE: OT : World of Warships - 2/7/2016 12:27:01 PM

fulcrum28

Posts: 660
Joined: 2/28/2010
Status: offline

I just checked it out and i was surprised to learn it is a free game

_____________________________

The most comprehensive website on the IJN Imperial Japanese Navy Y:"Let us enjoy the beauty of the moon (sinking aboard Hiryu)

(in reply to fulcrum28)

Post #: 197

RE: OT : World of Warships - 2/8/2016 6:03:49 AM

Barb

Posts: 2503
Joined: 2/27/2007
From: Bratislava, Slovakia
Status: offline

Well actually it is not free... just "freemium" - that is most content is free, but if you want bonuses (experience gain, etc) and some special equipment, you will have to invest real money!

_____________________________

(in reply to fulcrum28)

Post #: 198

RE: OT : World of Warships - 2/8/2016 1:34:11 PM

stretch

Posts: 636
Joined: 12/17/2001
Status: offline

It's Free-mium. the "mium" is Latin for "not really"

(South Park, S18E06)

(in reply to Barb)

Post #: 199

RE: OT : World of Warships - 2/8/2016 8:10:36 PM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

I look at freemium games, if done correctly, as "pay what you want." The much-maligned "freemium" games are actually Pay To Win, not freemium.

With true freemium games, you can pay a little bit here and there, and as long as you are OK with spending your money in such a fashion, it's no big deal. For context, I've spent somewhere around $60 US on Warships since July. I probably won't spend much more on it. But $60 is about what I'd spend at full price for any big ticket game, so is that unreasonable? I don't think so. Same thing with the other freemium I play, League of Legends. Since May 2009, I've probably spent $150 US on it, but the amount of time I've spent mostly-enjoying that game compared to the amount of gaming time I'd get out of a similar amount of money spent on other titles... it still compares favorably to me. It's just all about how you want to spend your money. If it isn't worth it to you to spend money on the game, then don't - you don't need to in this case.

The real-money items that you can get in Warships are marginal upgrades to the existing free versions. They won't win or lose you the game in most circumstances.

(in reply to stretch)

Post #: 200

RE: OT : World of Warships - 2/8/2016 10:58:50 PM

BBfanboy

Posts: 18046
Joined: 8/4/2010
From: Winnipeg, MB
Status: offline

And then there is simply the realization that some people worked a lot of hours to design and build the game and they need to be paid for their efforts. This was a full-time job for them, not a hobby. I know the programmers were paid up front by the investors but there has to be a money flow to offset later or no one will build such games.
One reason I do not use Spotify and other "free" sites that do not reward the people who did the creative work.

_____________________________

No matter how bad a situation is, you can always make it worse. - Chris Hadfield : An Astronaut's Guide To Life On Earth

(in reply to Lokasenna)

Post #: 201

RE: OT : World of Warships - 5/26/2016 9:06:23 PM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

Sorry to dig up an old thread

But I have been playing the hell out of this. I am up to tier IV-V for most of my ships now

I could have tier VII or VIII if I played as one nation, one class but I like to mix it up. The updates are steadily getting better.
Russian cruisers were added and I expect the next update will add the RN or Russian battleships/battlecruisers
If they go the Russian route I expect they will have to use some paper designs since the Russians never got anything off the drawing board battleship wise in the Soviet era.
They laid some keels but never completed a ship.

After these two I expect perhaps Italy or the French Navy would be the next logical step. Both of those have all three lines of ships except maybe carriers but those could be shoehorned in using paper designs and borrowed British/American lend lease, purchased ships
I don't mind 'fantasy' ships to flesh out lines of ships. Ships are balanced for gameplay reasons.
i.e. the Yamato can fire about 26 KM in game but around 48 KM in real life.

It's a really fun game and I have broke down and spent real money.
The game truly is free to play. You don't gave an advantage by spending real money. Do you progress faster? Yes
But if you use a better ship you simply are matched against stronger ships. If you outright buy a high tier ship then you may lack the skills and game time to use the ship that well.
I purchased the USS Atlanta and got matched up against players with lots of played matches and got slaughtered.
Spending money was no advantage. It just gave me a 'unique' ship.

And the games you can play are not limited by cooldown bars or 'energy' like some truly terrible mobile games.
You can never spend anything on the game and play as much as you want and progress just as high as those who pay.
It is a grind and you will need to play a lot of games but it is possible.

All in all I am really liking the game. They continue to balance things and there is a lot of player complaints but what do you expect?
I am not hardcore into it and by diversifying my ship collection if a ship is nerfed I can move past it or to something else.

I really miss my St. Louis class cruiser (insane ROF, you could spit 6" shells like a hail storm) but I just fully upgraded my Wyoming and I really enjoy it. Fire a broadside and then turn to angle your armor while you reload and repeat.
Until a DD sneaks up on you and you have a quick end your gunnery duel.

I also like my Clemson class. The 4" guns can take on enemy DDs if you need to duel them or you can sneak in and with your 5.5 KM range torpedo's make an attack run. Or you can scout for the BB's/cruisers and lay smoke screens.

The Russian DD line have weak torpedo's but are more like destroyed leader/gunboat classes.
The Premium ship Molotov is really fun. 7" guns in 3 triple turrets. Mediocre torpedo's but great speed.
Not a lot of protection but it is a light cruiser with better than light cruiser guns.

_____________________________

(in reply to BBfanboy)

Post #: 202

RE: OT : World of Warships - 5/27/2016 1:04:48 AM

Admiral DadMan

Posts: 3627
Joined: 2/22/2002
From: A Lion uses all its might to catch a Rabbit
Status: offline

Atlanta was good before they messed with stuff and broke it. Mine makes me cry tears of disappointent. Same thing to Cleveland.

But then again, I really do suck.

_____________________________

Scenario 127: "Scraps of Paper"
(\../)
(O.o)
(> <)

CVB Langley:

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)

Post #: 203

RE: OT : World of Warships - 5/27/2016 3:48:31 AM

Lokasenna

Posts: 9297
Joined: 3/3/2012
From: Iowan in MD/DC
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

Atlanta was good before they messed with stuff and broke it. Mine makes me cry tears of disappointent. Same thing to Cleveland.

But then again, I really do suck.

The Cleveland is amazing, but mostly because it's a bully. It used to be way too good with the range skill that no longer applies to its guns... now it's an absolute murderer or cruisers at 9km or so (load AP and try it), and if a DD shows its face it kills those too. And the planes... it's a great ship. It shouldn't be T6, it should be T8. Clevelands were amazing. Basically just a Baltimore with smaller guns, right?

(in reply to Admiral DadMan)

Post #: 204