Madner Kami

Verified Tanker [EU]
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Madner Kami

  • Rank
    Tests New Guns on Allies

Profile Information

  • Server

Recent Profile Visitors

2,423 profile views
  1. You can safely forget about Jingles in terms of teaching the "How to's". He's a great entertainer and commenter (when he actually does put some effort into investigating the details of the subject matter; I really miss his history-videos where he talks about the ships and tanks histories and developments), but he's horrible when it comes to actually observing or conveying why things happen as they do. He frequently misses out on small but important details, but yet I still recommend him simply for the fact, that he puts out a lot of content and people flock to be featured on his videos. Consequentially he has a large pool of good replays to draw from and he does so, usually. As for actually telling you why things happen as they do, I highly recommend Flamu and Aerron. Personally, I have a preference for the former, but they both are really good at what they do. Their Twitch-channels are more important than their YouTube-channels though. When it comes to carriers and understanding why good carrier-pilots choose to do what they do (and thus you understanding what to avoid doing when a carrier stalks it's prey), then there's no second to Farrazeleth.
  2. You've barely played any destroyers yourself (27 matches, 44% winrate, max tier 4) and you've not yet come to the level where torpedo reloads take over a minute, hydros are everywhere, the first battlecruisers and fast BBs appear and ships become more accurate against ever increasing-in-size DDs. Naturally your point of view is skewed, so I'd suggest not to be too judgemental in your choice of words. DDs are great in the lower tiers, but their capabilities do not increase that much beyond their basic parameters when they tier up. Unlike with cruisers and BBs, most DDs are stuck with 10 km firing and torpedo range, detection just doesn't go down much at all either and whether you have 12000 HP or 16000 HP, doesn't matter when the enemy battleship get ever more accurate and deal one third to half your HP worth of damage on a single penetrating hit.
  3. You mean because pretty much every single gunboat-destroyer and even torpedo-destroyer needs to be closer than that, to do their job? Nah, totally legit, rock always has beaten both scissors and paper.
  4. Except that all DDs face this issue, thanks to a combination of overmatch and consequential penetration of multiple sections at many angles. As is, going broadside to battleships shooting AP at your DD, is the best case scenario to avoid such damage, which in turn only opens you up for a higher potential to be hit in the first place.
  5. Bismarck and Iowa were not traditional battleships anymore though, they were "fast battleships", a "sort of hybrid" between battleships and battlecruisers (though battlecruiser is a rather non-all-composing word in the first place, just look at the differences in building-philosophy between german and english battlecruisers). "Sort of hybrid" is mostly down to technological advance though, which allowed the battleship-concept to be just about as fast as a battlecruiser would be. And while the technical differentiation between BC and BB is really watered down at that point, it stands to reason to differentiate by occupation. Bismarck was not a ship designed to fight in a fleet battle. It was an oversized commerce raider (something very symptomatic of german building at the time in general: "Why build three Hippers, when you can have a Bismarck instead?") intended to outtank and outgun what it can't outrun and outrun what can outtank and outgun it. The Dunkerques and the Richelieus were similarly focused designs (although Treaty-limitations played a role there as well, otherwise Richelieu in particular would be a much more clearer fleet battleship). They were designed to hunt Graf Spees and Bismarcks and thus needed speed and survivability, rather than needing the largest guns.
  6. New Test round for Graf Zepplin. This time around, it can choose between a 1-2-1 loadout with 8/5/9 planes per squad or a 2-0-3 loadout with 5/0/5 planes per squad. It also can choose between utilizing 500kg AP or HE bombs and either regular torpedoes or deep water torpedoes (which can hit only BBs and CVs), though why you should choose the later is completely beyond me, as the squads and torp stats are 100% identical whether you choose DW or regular torps. Whether there's a different drop-pattern involved, I can't say yet (hooray for having to go to work and seeing that too late). Also, a complete novelty: It has the hydro consumable now! I'm not sure what exactly they are trying to test this time around
  7. But you are meant to fit optics, vents and binocs on your light, whereas you'd never fit any of that gear on your medium, thus the same base view range can be both befitting an excellent scout and a blind brawler. Viewrange and camo are the Schrödinger`s Cat of WoT.
  8. That the 14cm is not a viable choice is not a hint at how powerful the 15cm is. The 14cm's shittyness is solely down to how utterly garbage the handling, penetration and DPM of that gun is. Just look back to the days, when the O-I didn't have the shit that is the current nerfed 100mm gun. Using the derp was the lol-choice, not the only sane option.
  9. So, most of my system is upgraded and it seems that the one part that is missing, is also the one responsible for most of the performance in this new version of WoT: God damnit, I wish my 1080 Ti would already be here -.-
  10. The T69 is a bad comparison for many reasons. One is, that 27 seconds for that burst is way too long. A tank that can burst 1 shell less for less total damage and longer drum reload and longer single shell reload time, is worthless.
  11. You try, whereupon you hit his gun, do almost no damage because you hit the external module so far up ahead, that it only splashes into the upper frontal plate. He finishes his reload and proceeds to facerape you, while you enjoy your 3 minute reload.
  12. You run BIA mostly because of the boost to literally everything. It's a skill that not only enhances the basic crew skills, but also synergizes with actual crew skills. It enhances Repair, it enhances Camouflage, it beats Recon in terms of view range bonus (Situational Awareness in and of itself is superior to BIA in regard to absolute view range bonus, but I'd still advice BIA over Situational, due to the bonus to Camouflage you get). BIA is not really worth a whole lot, before you get either Camouflage or Repairs (depending on the vehicle in question).
  13. Mission setups and limited availability in terms of time lead to terrible results for matchmaking and player behaviour. I'm hardly surprised.
  14. You get about 28% better horsepower per ton from the engine (plus the module health, plus lower fire chance), which also improves your turret traverse by proxy, beyond all the obvious implications regarding mobility. You technically could skip it, but I wouldn't suggest doing so. That is assuming you actually play the tank and not just skip it via FreeXP.