These days, only airfield AAA defences are counted as ground kills.
Back in the day, we also had naval bases that counted as ground targets, but they were removed from the game fairly quickly.
BTW, I made some more tables on top-tier battleship performance for July. Maybe someone will be interested in them:
Remember, AI ships count. Only way it happens.
AA guns on airfields that are particularly close to the battle area, if a plane is landing/taking off your own AA might try to kill them but hit the AA guns protecting the airfield instead
had it happen once or twice myself when i got all the way up amidst the convoy on Norway and i killed an AA
So the premium that people buy to try to rush-grind top tier plays significantly worse than the tech tree version that people had to have the skill and time in to grind out themselves? I don’t know if we’ve ever seen that before in War Thunder, have we?
Kind of irrelevant in comparing between high-tier tech tree vehicles, tho, tbh.
Also its really wierd Marlborough being mentioned at all. Ive one shot the Marlborough so many times Ive never been bothered to do the stock grind for her. With the new BRs that might actually change as a lineup somewhere around 6.0-7.0 might actually be fun, but prior to the decompress, I considered her one of the weakest rank VI ships Britain had up until maybe Repulse was added
That, but also there’s still a lot more human players at the “food” level relative to the number of top tier. July was a transitional month post-decompression, as we see that top tier bow wave (with nobody staying at 7.7 if they can help it for long) solidify again, Yamato’s performance will likely worsen further.
Updated the battleship survivability-lethality graph with July data: https://forum.warthunder.com/t/data-analysis-4-pushing-past-a-simple-kd-using-statshark-data/250503/49
Also proof there’s not currently a “bow wave” in naval due to decompression: https://forum.warthunder.com/t/data-analysis-3-the-arrival-of-statshark-answers-some-old-questions/238314/160
That wasn’t he point I was arguing against - the statement was that the USSR had NO navy.
Sure it was not very effective - but there’s no need to make up the rubbish that guy was posting to make that point.
Also FYI the Soviet Navy was actually “meaningful” in many circumstances - for example they did about 1500 amphibious landing throughout the war, including into Crimea in December 1941 and again in November 1943.
The 1943 Kerch-Eltigen operation was 1 of the scenario’s for World War -
https://old-wiki.warthunder.com/Kerch-Eltigen_operation
It wasn’t a blue water navy like the “more meaningful” ones, but it did a job in it’s circumstances.
This is also true - but again not the point I was replying to.
1/ Soviet, not Russian
2/ not fantasy - the constant repetition of this is willfull nonsense.
In order for it to not be fantasy it would be in the 20% completed state it achieved IRL.
THere was no real way for Russia to complete the ship. They lacked basically all the infrastructure needed to complete the ship as designed. It would be IMPOSSIBLE for the Soyuz to exist in real life as it does in game.
Impossible = fantasy.
wdym? as it was about 20% completed in 3 years I’m sure if they continued building for another 12 years they would have finished it in (1941 + 12) 1953. Ha! Easy. And only if they wouldnt have encountered any problems delaying it even further (which Im fairly certain any other ship of that size of other nations with far more advanced shipbuilding industry also had, so youd have to go to quite some lengths assuming and believing the russian shipbuilding industry with their vast experience in building up to date battleships/cruisers wouldn’t).
And then, in 1953, she would have certainly been as amazing as it is in game (/s). No drawbacks through financial or construction problems, just all in all perfect. (like my blueprints would have been too, if i could make blueprints for ships, because why plan something thats not at least absolutely amazing in all aspects) Well, only at a time were battleships were long outdated and everyone else had already scrapped theirs (but the crazy americans). That would have been a bummer ngl. 15 years of building such an ambitious project just to see it basically useless because any cruiser (or plane?) with big missli can sink it from way out its effective range.
Not denying that maybe, possibly they could/would have finished it. Couldnt care less. Maybe they would have. Just a tad bit late. And most certainly not as the mothership of all bbs ever constructed.
To be clear here. Obviously people love to discuss the historical aspect of the project. I myself at max am interested in that but thats it. For the game itself it doesnt matter since gaijin has clearly stated their stance on which ships can be added and it is good that russia can also play in top tier naval. Now if top tier naval would actually be fun, worth playing and somewhat balanced that would be cool and is my only concern. If no one or even less people play it because the gamemode just isnt good how does that help anyone? Won’t be good for the players, won’t be good for the snail and also not good for soyuz players, which can basically play pve forever since everyone thats not in a soyuz or iowa can just leave pointless 15 min waste-of-time matches won by invincible ships.
According to what you’re saying, the Tiger King 105, Panther 2, and flak341 should also have been produced, even including the E-25, E-50, and E-75.
hdym produced? If you wanna sit in the turret of a king tiger 105 getting absolutely smashed by a breech with every shot that then rams into the back of the turret you can (or actually can’t, but maybe wouldn’t want to, i imagine that being a quite unpleasant experience). panther 2 (same small turret problem tho) and flak 341 possibly. But I’m not gonna repeat gaijins statments on introduction of tanks vs different stance on ships for you. They are around somewhere. And that was their decision. They develop the game they have the last say. You, me and no one here can change that they decided for this (which at least in case for ships somewhat makes sense otherwise there really would be only iowa and maybe yamato in 8.7)
Just a reminder that, statistically, the Soyuz is the best top tier battleship in the game and it isn’t even close. It is head and shoulders better than the Iowa (the next best ship statistically) and is overwhelmingly better than every other ship.
That’s right. A fake RUSSIAN ship is the best in game, by a lot.
Just played it for the first time tonight, as a had a ton of small boosters from that stupid loot crate thing that were about to expire. Even though I survived all my matches, there are many matches I have a hard time killing anything. Few matches ok, then gajoobles turns off the spigot and I get 1 or 2 kills. The matches are very lame and there are usually 4-5 players max. Each match is either decided by stupid torpedo boats that cap zones or bot… depending on what side game decides to have more aggressive ones. Players sit back and most don’t want to get in that big circle on death circle maps.
My last match resulted in big fat ZERO kills and enemy having something like 95% tickets left. Nothing worked and I was scratching paint half of the time. This stupid game stealth nerfs one side and or specific players.
Sooo much for the influx of new players. Naval is dead in the water. Fighting tanky bots gets lame and old really fast. Why not just rename it to Naval Assault already? gg gajoobles
One more thing, after 2 weeks of total gaming suck and constant losing streaks with constant 0.7-1.0 uptiers and with most matches ending with the enemy having 90%+ tickets left, I decided to try Sov. Soyuz (no uptiers there). Even with that ship that has a very high win rate overall, I got 3 wins out of 10 matches… that’s 30% win rate. This means the suck I’m in right now is deliberate. This stupid game has BUILT IN SUCK. 2 weeks ago I activated 10 days of premium I got from the last BP (plus 3 days from Twitch drops) and after the first day there was this non-stop suck (read: income nerf). It took me 6 days to do this one 8-win special task.
Right now I’m sitting at 43% win rate for the month… and that’s after a previous losing streak got knocked off for being older than a month old. I checked stats for other people in similar score range and I have the lowest win rate out of hundreds of players at that range. There are 2 with lower, but they have 8 or less matches, as they probably stopped playing few weeks back.
It saddens me that a game can have such shady ways and this gets tolerated for this long. Do we really play the game or are we being played?
Holy mackerel, statshark is showing you have exorbitant good k/d in a lot of ships, for example 0 deaths 50 kills in IJN Kongo, 1 death 52 kills in IJN Haruna (with 35% win rate???), 2 deaths 74 kills in amagi, 1 death 83 kills in mutsu (30% win rate how???) 3 deaths 85 kills in kronshtadt, 8 deaths to 130 kills in Parizhskaya Kommuna, 15 to 176 in Scharnhorst (55% win rate there), 26 deaths to 855 kills (!!!) in prinz eugen and a unholy 549 deaths to insane 7975 kills in your most played the moffett (with 59% win rate).
So i really dont see where the big problem lies. I don’t know your playstyle and theres no judgement in bringing this up. But in some of the high tier Battleships/cruisers you got almost 100 kills without ever being killed yourself with quite bad win rates by (wild guess: shooting bots from too save but passive positions?) I mean theres probably 100000 players barely scratching the 1 death to 1 kill mark by just sailing around brainlessly and/or trying to get to caps and putting themselves in danger?
Other than that, you win some you lose some but you seem to be a quite good player? It unfortunately is the naval game design that you basically need to suicide onto the caps in naval high/top tier, to win, which is basically just a gamble whether you will be targetted or not, nothing you can do about it? Or do you just want to get 1000s of kills without ever sinking yourself? If its that, then the soyuz really is your ship of choice
Worth a try:
Really rooting for you on this one, but that will produce exorbitant queue times for 8.7 naval rb and/or even less actual players per match. Other solution would be to finally fix and/or buff the underperforming ships which for 8.7 is only the yamato which has numerous bug reports beign accepted now for about a month and the roma (maybe others too didnt check all ships stats in detail) for the lower BRs. I mean they claim reload rate is there to soft buff/nerf ships…ok then, go ahead. Might wanna use it someday?? Oh sure i forgor…slaps 60 seconds on Roma, already worst performing 8.3 ship. And the fastest reload rate (albeit not by much) on the by far best performing 8.7 ship, the sojuz (which handily would also be the or one of the ships where it would be the easiest to justify adjusting at least this number since its guns were never used in a three gun per turret modification on the actual ship while at sea). Pretty laughable soft nerf stats ngl. Balancing the game really does seem like a top priority for gaijin. And it will probably remain an absolute mystery to them why theres not more players that want to play naval until the point where they are basically running the naval servers for bot teams to fight vs bot teams.
Whats most hilarious for me is that now, even after having a full months stats for 8.7 naval and as expected the discrepancy between top tier ships didnt change but got even worse, they all still share the same repair costs. Way to go Snail!
Lmao so Yamato cant have its historical 400 kg torpedo protection beause “its class based all battleships have 250 kg”
Me after I dumping 7 long lances with 630 kg TNT and then 2 450 kg tnt “short lances” each into single soyuz and does absolutely nothing not even yellow section.
Sovetsky soyuz is just built differently, i guess.
Lmao “built” and “Syouz” in same sentence ahahahahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
You are killing me XDDDDDDDDDDD
