Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«994 »
  • Post
  • Reply
James Garfield
May 5, 2012

Paleontologists must have looked into it before. Maybe they had, but never ran with it. Or maybe the thought simply never occurred to them. Maybe the stand hunting from a tree strategy had never been applied to T. rex.


AA rewards are very, very low. I'm not sure there's a reward at all.
edit: One of the daily missions rewards you for killing planes though.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BadLlama
Jan 13, 2006


Spiting sky cancer is reward onto itself.

MoraleHazard
Aug 21, 2012

It's Zoidberg, John Fucking Zoidberg!


rex rabidorum vires posted:

Limited by throw weight and reload. No ammunition considerations. Also in tier 4/5 and maybe t6 games seemed to mostly hinge on who had more carriers due to the lack of AA weaponry and the awfulness of pubbies. If memory serves the US t5 cruiser gets a very good compliment of AA however not a lot of people played it because no torps and not some Japanese super undefeated battleship leading to very very little AA even in groups.

This was actually my favorite role since pubbies didn't seem to want to do it. I got up to the Tier VI US cruiser (Cleveland class) which had only 6-inch guns, but tons of AA that would devastate enemy planes.

Adventure Pigeon
Nov 8, 2005

I am a master storyteller.

Cruisers, at least Japanese cruisers, do surprisingly well against battleships. Cruiser gunnery can do decent damage, especially against battlecruisers, which can have their armor penetrated even by 6" shells. In addition, they get shitloads of torpedoes, usually even more than the equivalent destroyer. The tier 10 Japanese cruiser can dump up to 20 torpedoes from each side, which means you can instantly kill a battleship that gets close or just dump a ton of torpedoes where you know the enemy is coming and watch the mayhem. American cruisers lack the torpedoes, but have better AA. They don't really have more hp or much better firepower until the tier 10 US cruiser, which has nearly twice as many hps as its Japanese counterpart.

I'll probably go both Japanese and US cruisers come tomorrow. They have a lot of versatility and play similarly to fast medium tanks in WoT. You zip around, catch enemies off guard, and do a ton of damage to them before they realize something is wrong.

Insert name here
Nov 10, 2009

Oh.
Oh Dear.



I played the gently caress out of WoT when it came out so I'm totally excited to fart around being a piece of poo poo in my crappy jeep carrier

rex rabidorum vires
Mar 26, 2007



MoraleHazard posted:

This was actually my favorite role since pubbies didn't seem to want to do it. I got up to the Tier VI US cruiser (Cleveland class) which had only 6-inch guns, but tons of AA that would devastate enemy planes.

See I did that a few times except then you have the issue of not concentrating on dealing damage to ships and then out of no where a DD appears and has enough HP to torp everything. In a platoon I would definitely run as the AA guy and fling AP everywhere, but in solo games I found the DD to do a decent enough job chasing planes away and having the bonus of being able to deliver huge alpha torps. Though the range of the torps is garbage until either t7 or 8.

Zhanism
Apr 1, 2005
Death by Zhanism. So Judged.

Whats the right time and situation to use AP vs HE shells on the various classes of botes?

rex rabidorum vires
Mar 26, 2007



Zhanism posted:

Whats the right time and situation to use AP vs HE shells on the various classes of botes?

Basic is AP super long range, HE for the middle ranges, and AP for short...however if you are good at gunnery you can use both effectively. AP can be extremely deadly in DDs and cruisers against up tiered targets if you know where to shoot...hitting machinery and turrets will lead to massive damage in short amount of time. The higher caliber BB guns reload slow so it was usually 2 volleys of AP then HE. I would fling HE out of cruisers at BBs to set them on fire then starting hitting them with AP once the fire was out trying to catch an engine or rudder which could completely disable a BB and usually they get pounded dead in the water.

Edit: to add a little more to this with HE you want to basically hit the leading edge of the hull so that it sets fires, disables guns, and takes out torpedo tubes. With the AP you want to shoot at/or around turrets, and very aft for steering gear and engines. Sometimes lobbing HE from range can knock AA out and set fires or hurt turrets and knock tubes out. But for big damage learning to lead and plunge AP is invaluable.

rex rabidorum vires fucked around with this message at Mar 11, 2015 around 20:20

demonR6
Sep 4, 2012

There are too many stupid people in the world. I'm not saying we should kill them all or anything. Just take the warning labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself.



Lipstick Apathy

also accuracy at long ranges while you are in the middle of battle going full speed and in a turn will be tough because your firing arc has changed and all those neat things you learned in artillery school when you were in the military now apply..

srb
Jul 24, 2007


Seems I missed out on the reward ship, not enough battles played in the alpha. I did play mostly during the second beta weekend after I was already in the alpha, since you could get more than 3 2v2 battles an hour.

Prav
Oct 29, 2011


What was the cutoff? I didn't get all that many battles in because fuuuuuuck tier 2 2v2s.

srb
Jul 24, 2007


100 battles total in alpha stage; old info said 50.

James Garfield
May 5, 2012

Paleontologists must have looked into it before. Maybe they had, but never ran with it. Or maybe the thought simply never occurred to them. Maybe the stand hunting from a tree strategy had never been applied to T. rex.


quote:

torpedoes

I have to mention that if you get hit by torpedoes from a destroyer that isn't close enough to get spotted it's your own fault. Surface ship torpedoes get spotted from very far out.
I don't know how much this thread has played in the latest alpha patch but the one destroyer that has hit me with torpedoes was two kilometers away. Hitting someone with destroyer torpedoes similarly depends on finding a target too dumb to steer their ship.

Also half the alpha testers end every sentence with "poi" for some loving reason. An option to block those testers would be nice because they talk way too much.

I said come in!
Jun 22, 2004



MoraleHazard posted:

What made warplanes a disaster?

The flight model was terrible, you couldn't do even the most basic airplane maneuvers. It was so weird. It's not even that it was hard, it's that it was not implemented at all.

Kesper North
Nov 3, 2011

EMERGENCY POWER TO PARTY

James Garfield posted:

Also half the alpha testers end every sentence with "poi" for some loving reason. An option to block those testers would be nice because they talk way too much.

Maybe they're eager to get back to Pearl Harbor for a bowl of taro root stew and rice?

srb
Jul 24, 2007


I said come in! posted:

The flight model was terrible, you couldn't do even the most basic airplane maneuvers. It was so weird. It's not even that it was hard, it's that it was not implemented at all.

Aiming and shooting mechanics were complete poo poo too, and in the beta you would get the most ridiculous "ENGINE ON FIRE!" voice over several seconds after your plane was already destroyed. Nothing in the game worked, except blitzing ground objectives.

Pimpmust
Oct 1, 2008



On the positive side, World of Warships will have a completely implemented flight model for all warships.

BadLlama
Jan 13, 2006


Would torpedoes even travel 2KM in real life? I know absolutely nothing about naval warfare that just seems like a far distance for a tube to plow through the water.

WayAbvPar
Mar 11, 2009

Ah- Smug Mode.



Looking forward to getting a clownshoe boat as a beta reward. Also, kudos on the thread title

Someone create a Pennywise smilie.

Lord Koth
Jan 8, 2012



BadLlama posted:

Would torpedoes even travel 2KM in real life? I know absolutely nothing about naval warfare that just seems like a far distance for a tube to plow through the water.

2 km is point-blank in naval warfare. For reference, the Long Lance torpedo the IJN carried had a maximum range of over 40 km, and an effective range of slightly over 20. The ones the US carried was not as good, but still hit at significant ranges.

Naval gunfire is similar, and in general battleships were perfectly capable at ranging out to around 20 km easily.

Incidentally, count me as interested in this, and I may try to sign up tomorrow. Or just wait and get into it once it goes gold, we'll see.

Vengarr
Jun 17, 2010

Smashed before noon


James Garfield posted:

Also half the alpha testers end every sentence with "poi" for some loving reason. An option to block those testers would be nice because they talk way too much.

Like many annoying things, it's a Kancolle thing.

BadLlama posted:

Would torpedoes even travel 2KM in real life? I know absolutely nothing about naval warfare that just seems like a far distance for a tube to plow through the water.

The Long Lance could travel 40km max. And it didn't leave behind a wake, so they were hard to see coming.

Do Long Lances not have a wake in-game? Because that would broken as gently caress.

Prav
Oct 29, 2011


srb posted:

100 battles total in alpha stage; old info said 50.

I should make it then, I think I played 120ish.

BadLlama posted:

Would torpedoes even travel 2KM in real life? I know absolutely nothing about naval warfare that just seems like a far distance for a tube to plow through the water.

They have engines and fuel supplies, so the fancier ones could reach some ten-twenty km, or even upwards of 40 in extreme configurations. e:f;b twice over.

BadLlama
Jan 13, 2006


Yeah I knew they their cannons would shoot pretty drat far just surprised about torpedos.

Torps OP WG plz nerf etc etc

James Garfield
May 5, 2012

Paleontologists must have looked into it before. Maybe they had, but never ran with it. Or maybe the thought simply never occurred to them. Maybe the stand hunting from a tree strategy had never been applied to T. rex.


Vengarr posted:

The Long Lance could travel 40km max. And it didn't leave behind a wake, so they were hard to see coming.

Do Long Lances not have a wake in-game? Because that would broken as gently caress.

All torpedoes have a wake. There are torpedo indicators that pop up when the torpedoes are close enough, "close enough" in this case meaning "still pretty far away". You can't see the wake until the torpedo indicator shows up.
I don't think the oxygen torpedoes are any harder to spot than other torpedoes.

Lord Koth
Jan 8, 2012



James Garfield posted:

All torpedoes have a wake. There are torpedo indicators that pop up when the torpedoes are close enough, "close enough" in this case meaning "still pretty far away". You can't see the wake until the torpedo indicator shows up.
I don't think the oxygen torpedoes are any harder to spot than other torpedoes.

While all torpedoes cause some wake due to simply moving through the water, a significant chunk of their wake comes from the bubble trail left by their propulsion. The Long Lance, which used compressed oxygen, left virtually no bubbles behind, which almost eliminated that part and made them extremely difficult to spot.

Of course, the tradeoff is that compressed oxygen is also highly explosive, and it's highly debatable if the IJN should have been sticking Long Lances on their heavy cruisers to begin with, because there were multiple lost due to their torpedoes getting hit in their launchers by an errant shell. Destroyers by their very nature are eminently disposable, and rely on the principle of "don't get hit" to survive in the first place. Heavy cruisers are supposed to be able to actually take a hit, so putting a component that volatile on their ships may not have been the best idea.

Of course, from the videos it doesn't really seem that they've modeled that "extreme danger to the ship they're on" aspect, so removing them being almost impossible to spot is probably fair too.

Prav
Oct 29, 2011


Lord Koth posted:

Of course, from the videos it doesn't really seem that they've modeled that "extreme danger to the ship they're on" aspect

Oh boy, you should try shooting a Kitakami.

Vengarr
Jun 17, 2010

Smashed before noon


Lord Koth posted:

While all torpedoes cause some wake due to simply moving through the water, a significant chunk of their wake comes from the bubble trail left by their propulsion. The Long Lance, which used compressed oxygen, left virtually no bubbles behind, which almost eliminated that part and made them extremely difficult to spot.

Of course, the tradeoff is that compressed oxygen is also highly explosive, and it's highly debatable if the IJN should have been sticking Long Lances on their heavy cruisers to begin with, because there were multiple lost due to their torpedoes getting hit in their launchers by an errant shell. Destroyers by their very nature are eminently disposable, and rely on the principle of "don't get hit" to survive in the first place. Heavy cruisers are supposed to be able to actually take a hit, so putting a component that volatile on their ships may not have been the best idea.

Of course, from the videos it doesn't really seem that they've modeled that "extreme danger to the ship they're on" aspect, so removing them being almost impossible to spot is probably fair too.

At least one heavy cruiser (Suzuya) was sunk because a near-miss set off the Long Lances in their tubes. Another heavy cruiser (Chikuma) was sunk by an escort carriers' 5-inch gun when they managed to hit a torpedo tube.

Samar was really not the IJN's finest hour.

xthetenth
Dec 30, 2012

Mario wasn't sure if this Jeb guy was a good influence on Yoshi.



Prav posted:

They kept loving with the flight model and the control model and I think they were on their worst iteration when they launched? Balance was screwy too but I'll let someone who actually played the game cover that part.

Literally their worst.

Basically energy fighters were a bit weak in large part because guns were accurate at long range and they got strafed as they tried to pull away. So they decided to make them a bit better. So they made them more able to do boomy zoomy stuff by adding a boost that let them get up to high altitude faster, and heavy fighters got a real long boost so they could get the highest. Then they made them a bunch better by making planes perform like suck outside their preferred altitude band. Then they made planes literally incapable of dealing meaningful damage against targets when they were going slowly or pointing upwards.

This meant that in all, going up against a higher tier plane or a boomier zoomier plane you were dead with no chance of success.

They released the game in this state. Remember the grind a tier ten contest? A bunch of tryhards all platooned and flew nothing but the boomiest zoomiest and spent the whole time getting like 95% win rates.

Thus died WoWP.

Also the mouse controls sucked, and unlike WT, which made joystick suck, everyone has a mouse and not everyone has a joystick, so a lot of people couldn't fly right for a loooong time.

I'll do an armor and shells post tomorrow.

Lord Koth posted:

Of course, from the videos it doesn't really seem that they've modeled that "extreme danger to the ship they're on" aspect, so removing them being almost impossible to spot is probably fair too.

They're on Japanese cruisers, which are incredibly fragile.

xthetenth fucked around with this message at Mar 11, 2015 around 22:33

demonR6
Sep 4, 2012

There are too many stupid people in the world. I'm not saying we should kill them all or anything. Just take the warning labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself.



Lipstick Apathy

xthetenth posted:


I'll do an armor and shells post tomorrow.


cool, I'll add it to OP.

Also if one more person in general chat asks

- when does closed beta start?
- do I have to download a new client?
- do I get more credits and piasters?
- will there be a wipe tomorrow?
- why did I not get a free ship in my port?

I might lose it..

BadLlama
Jan 13, 2006


Did the first come first served closed beta sign up thing already happen and I am hosed or is that thing going to happen tomorrow when it officially starts?

demonR6
Sep 4, 2012

There are too many stupid people in the world. I'm not saying we should kill them all or anything. Just take the warning labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself.



Lipstick Apathy

tomorrow.. limited number of people and they said if the server gets bogged down with applications they will cut if off then.

Vengarr
Jun 17, 2010

Smashed before noon


What was the gift alpha ship anyway?

Agrajag
Jan 21, 2006

"HATERS GONNA HATE!"

STAR CITIZEN
will be the GREATEST GAME EVER!!!



I'm already a

REAR ADMIRAL what are you?


I'm here to post about Armored Warfare. gently caress your botes, bros.

So, how about them arty and MBT's?

Vengarr
Jun 17, 2010

Smashed before noon


I, too, am sad that the World of Tanks thread is gone for good.

Prav
Oct 29, 2011


It will be missed.

Polikarpov
Jun 1, 2013

STICK TO BUILDING TRACTORS, KHARKOVITE SCUM

Vengarr posted:

What was the gift alpha ship anyway?

The references I can find to "Iwaki" all point to the B-64 design.

B64 Type Heavy Cruiser (Japan)

Displacement: 32,000 tonnes, 34,800 tonnes deep load

Dimensions: 787ft 5in pp, 802ft 6in oa long, 89ft 3in wide

Machinery: 4 shaft single reduction geared turbines, 8 boilers, probably around 160,000 shp = 33 knots

Armour: Belt 7.5in, bulkheads, decks 5in,

Armament: 9 12.2/50 (3x3), 16 3.9in/65 AA, 12 25mm AA, 8 13.2mm AA, 8 24 inch torpedo tubes

Complement: Unknown

Design was started in 1939 and test carried out on the 12.2 in gun. The design was completed in 1941, but as more intelligence was learned about the USS Alaska class it was proposed to change their armament to 14.2in guns. The design was approved for construction in 1942, but no ship was ordered or laid down due to other priorities in the war.

demonR6
Sep 4, 2012

There are too many stupid people in the world. I'm not saying we should kill them all or anything. Just take the warning labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself.



Lipstick Apathy

You are correct, it is the Iwaki.. a camo version too. Sweeeet.

James Garfield
May 5, 2012

Paleontologists must have looked into it before. Maybe they had, but never ran with it. Or maybe the thought simply never occurred to them. Maybe the stand hunting from a tree strategy had never been applied to T. rex.


Polikarpov posted:

The references I can find to "Iwaki" all point to the B-64 design.

B64 Type Heavy Cruiser (Japan)

Displacement: 32,000 tonnes, 34,800 tonnes deep load

Dimensions: 787ft 5in pp, 802ft 6in oa long, 89ft 3in wide

Machinery: 4 shaft single reduction geared turbines, 8 boilers, probably around 160,000 shp = 33 knots

Armour: Belt 7.5in, bulkheads, decks 5in,

Armament: 9 12.2/50 (3x3), 16 3.9in/65 AA, 12 25mm AA, 8 13.2mm AA, 8 24 inch torpedo tubes

Complement: Unknown

Design was started in 1939 and test carried out on the 12.2 in gun. The design was completed in 1941, but as more intelligence was learned about the USS Alaska class it was proposed to change their armament to 14.2in guns. The design was approved for construction in 1942, but no ship was ordered or laid down due to other priorities in the war.

Iwaki is some kind of intermediate between the Tenryu and Kuma classes. It apparently has an extra gun over Tenryu. I imagine wargaming made up the name.

Polikarpov
Jun 1, 2013

STICK TO BUILDING TRACTORS, KHARKOVITE SCUM

James Garfield posted:

Iwaki is some kind of intermediate between the Tenryu and Kuma classes. It apparently has an extra gun over Tenryu. I imagine wargaming made up the name.

Trying to guess what paper ships are can be hard. The World of Warships forum was useless, the signal/noise ratio is off the charts. It makes you appreciate this forum for sure.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

financially racist
Aug 13, 2008

Yes...Ha ha ha...YES!



How is combat in this? I've played a lot of World of Tanks on 360 (yeah, I know) and liked it a lot, and I've always been a giant naval warfare geek so this is intriguing, but I'm having trouble conceptualizing how they'd make a game that's actually fun out of this. It seems like it'd be a 3D version of Scorched Earth without any terrain.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«994 »