Mesrith

Verified Tanker [NA]
  • Content count

    709
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Mesrith

  1. I still love mine and play it the same way that I always have (essentially Fletcher Lite), but what do I know, I basically never solo anymore.
  2. It hasn't. Warships.Today is still the best WoWS stats site, but the reliability has been very poor lately.
  3. To be blunt, there's a sizable faction of regular forum members that have been around for quite awhile, and believe there's some moral superiority of the WoWS forums vs the WoT forums. These people are typically bad or mediocre players, they're stat-haters and stat-deniers, and insist that any discussion of stats (or even the possibility of being good at the game) is "toxic" and bad for "the community", whatever that may be in their minds. I suspect that they were equally bad at WoT, and fled to a different game hoping that they could create some anti-stat utopia where nobody would ever point out that they're A) not amazing players and B) don't know what they're talking about in regards to gameplay.
  4. It's working for me at the moment, but to give you an idea: I'll often (perhaps 30% of the time in recent weeks) search for a player and get the blank loading screen, and after 10-15 seconds the loading text will go away as if it's finished, but it will remain otherwise the same blank screen with only the player's name. I can refresh multiple times and still get nothing. Signatures have been crashing fairly regularly, giving just a white image with text along the lines of "the website was unresponsive". Last week I did not have any daily stats; instead, I had a streak where it would simply add my day to the previous ones, so that I had a 2-day, then a 3-day, all the way up to a 6-day stat line as my lowest interval, despite playing games each day. I still get an error about once a week where my WTR will drop from its current ~1645 down to the 1620s, on both the website and signature, as if it loaded some older expected values. My battle count will be correct, so it's not temporarily missing games played. As always, thanks for the timely response and the work that you do.
  5. Still no French ships; ship images are broken and have been for a few weeks; the website seems to be under heavy load recently and often refuses to work even after refreshing. Is Warships.Today doing alright? EDIT: French ships are finally showing up for me.
  6. LittleWhiteMouses's ship reviews are usually very good. Since she doesn't do videos, she doesn't seem to get caught up in how much attention she can get, so she never feels the need to go pants-on-fire-screaming mode. She's also very detailed and thorough, covering a ship from multiple different viewpoints, as long as you're ok with the wall of text.
  7. Firstly, Shima is fine, and it's still the best torp-spammer among them. I prefer Gearing torpedoes due to the speed with TA, but having 15 of them at over 20k damage each is unique. It's gotten multiple buffs in the past few weeks; torpedo detection reduction, gun range, and turret rotation. It's terribleness was vastly overrated before the recent two patches, but now it's definitely in good shape. Secondly, in any competitive environment like ranked battles, Shima would have even more of a role than it does in randoms. Just like the Shiratsuyu was an excellent choice for clearing out smoke piles n the previous season, Shimakaze would be an excellent deterrent to smoke-camping and a valuable area denial tool.
  8. I'm pretty tired of the cycle of: Ship is leaked, everyone claims amazeballs status based on paper stats. Ship goes into early testing, it's inevitably awesome. Ship makes it out the Community Contributors, and the ship is suddenly hot garbage, because outrage over hot garbage drives more clicks and views. Forum community goes into uproar about how this iconic ship (they're all iconic, apparently) should never be anything less than top of the line. All prior SuperTesting is apparently disregarded, Wargaming appears to bow before community sentiment, and the ship gets buffed before it sets sail. Community Contributors fawn over how awesome the ships is now, and by the way, everybody should absolutely buy this ship right away. I'd be ok with a few premiums coming out that aren't immediately at the top of their peer list for damage and win rate, otherwise known as "properly balanced". Even if that means I occasionally pass on a premium like Hood.
  9. Assuming equal skill levels, I'm confident the Saipan with 2/2 still wins most of the time. The speed advantage and monster strafing power against planes 3 tiers below yours is going to mean that the Kaga has to play a much better game. Having said that, I agree that most carrier players are pretty bad, especially at tier 7 with two premiums to account for. Kaga will probably be in pretty good shape.
  10. Fighter-heavy loadouts don't win games; sinking ships does. The problem is that because of the way Wargaming has "balanced" the carriers with various squadron sizes, the IJN ships get a usable amount of fighters even in their best damage-dealing strike packages. The USN is penalized for having a 6-plane base fighter squadron by being pigeon-holed into either damage or fighters, rarely both. I will say that the current Kaga setup seems better than the previous arrangements they were testing.
  11. Basically. The Khab lives in a twilight zone of no fear. It doesn't suffer from the citadel-based deletion fears that other classes have, but it also has the error-correction tool that Repair Party brings. Basically, the Khab can just run around willy-nilly and shrug off whatever damage is dealt to it in the early game, while its peer tier-10 destroyers all have to ration their hit-point usage with an eye for being healthy enough to still contribute in the late game. It's a ridiculously powerful tool.
  12. I use rudder shift on all of my battleships, as being able to dodge extra torpedoes and wiggle after firing is more valuable to me than fire/flood duration. I have Concealment mod on my Tirpitz, but either choice is fine.
  13. I've been using double rudder mod since the commander skill changes earlier this year. Concealment is pointless on this ship, since I'm always firing, nothing can ever hit me, and I don't particularly care if I get hit anyway, since I've got 4 charges of Repair Party to laugh at them with. Stupid ship is stupid. Destroyers shouldn't have Repair Party.
  14. You've played zero tier 9 or 10 battles. There's nothing wrong with high tiers, aside from some players not wanting to be punished for their mistakes as quickly as high tiers will punish you. Tiers 9 and 10 are exceptionally well balanced, aside from the abomination that is Khabarovsk. These tiers have the widest variety of usable cruisers, have pretty good destroyer balance across the board (Germans are relevant, IJN have roles), and the battleships are all in pretty good shape, except for 1v1 Yamato vs Montana matchups, which shouldn't matter as much in ranked. But yes, I doubt they'll ever go that high for ranked battles, because they want as many people participating as possible. It's a chicken vs egg argument. They don't want to exclude people who own tier 10s, but they've given no tier-10 exclusive content to compel people to own tier 10s.
  15. Tirpitz had its rear turret angles buffed last spring before Bismarck existed. When Bismarck was released last fall, it still had the old turret angles that Tirpitz initially had. Perhaps Bismarck has since had its rear turret angles buffed for forward-firing, but when I played it, the angles were several degrees worse.
  16. AFT will be useful at all tiers, assuming you're pushing to the top of the line. IMO it's the only 4-pointer that's usually worth it for Russian destroyers.
  17. Fuck high-tier Standard Battle, and Tears of the Desert and Islands of Ice on any mode.
  18. Concealment Expert is the only 4-pointer I take on my US destroyer captains. I triple up on SE, BFT, and SI, along with having both AR and Last Stand.
  19. I guess I'm just going to go ahead and disagree with pretty much everything destroyer-related that you post today. Farragut torps can be described as situational due to their medium range. The Mahan torps are slow-ish and only hit for 12k, but they have a fast reload. Benson torps are the same speed but hit for much more. They both have excellent spotting distances of 1.1km. Mahan is somewhat limited by the tier 7 detection penalty that they all suffer from, namely that they can't equip Concealment Systems Mod 1 but routinely sees ships that can. It also putters around a bit slowly for my taste, but being tier 7, it gets to beat up tier 5s pretty often. Benson is one of the most versatile destroyers in the game, only overshadowed by the Fletcher, which is a Benson on steroids. Both Mahan and Benson are plenty capable of having monster damage games regularly, and have the capabilities needed to do pretty much whatever the situation calls for during a game.
  20. Nooooooooooooope. There are other ways to play a ship than to knife-fight at point-blank range within the cap. Push into cap, angle outward, turn away the moment you're spotted, and gain some range so that you're hammering them with accurate fire at 7-12km while most players begin to struggle with US gun arcs at 7-8km. Using your rudder (and obviously Expert Marksman) is enough to compensate for the slower turret traverse even in close-range engagements. Most low-tier destroyers are one-trick ponies with either good guns or good torps but not both. Gremy is a complete package.
  21. Tirpitz had its rear turret angles buffed around a year ago also; to my knowledge, Bismarck still has the old, worse turret angles that the Tirpitz had initially.
  22. I have no idea then. I've never been aware of anything other than ramming flags affecting the damage total, so this is new to me.
  23. Don't get me wrong; the game mechanics are still pretty poorly explained for a game that's been out for nearly two years, so while I'd be surprised if this is true, I wouldn't be shocked to find there's something like this that is still a question mark.