Just found your channel the other day, really love the long form video of ship review of yours. I find it much better (at the least in my taste) than others reviewer, you went into depth details of a ship while going through battle and simultaneously breaking down both the actions in the match, and the ship . Subscribed, I hope many more will find you soon
As a newer player (September this year), a huge thing this ship has going for it is that it's tech tree! Early on, the grind is real for resources and such, so in your video, you compared this to Ohio and GK, but the research bureau/coal is hard to come by. Also, if Ohio is a better Preussen, you can check it out first. If it feels good, THEN invest the RB points and get yourself an Ohio ('Merica!). Great video as always, Hago. Love them.
The thing that actually speaks volume for me about the Preussen is that you can have a full secondary build on her and be perfectly fine. If you do that in a GK, you will just suffer. That's of course just my opinion, but I've done thorough testing of multiple ways to play GK and ended up with a hybrid build, where I atleast have some secondary power during late game. With Preussen I can keep the secondary build and be just fine, because the reload, overmatch and better gun angles solve the issue for me.
I’ve personally had way more success with GK as a pure secondary build. I’ve tried to make the main guns useful, but it’s just not worth spending into.
I have tried your build and commander set for the Preussen with many thanks to you. It certainly makes a difference and the range mod is uncanny in the way that it performs. I am looking forward to trying it out in a few more matches just to confirm.
I feel like the "When you don't take the 7% accuracy you feel 40% less accurate" comes down to the way the enemy ship is smaller than your dispersion ellipse - therefore any increase to the size of the ellipse makes the ship proportionately even smaller relative to it Which is to say, your dispersion circle grows 7%, but the ship you're targeting doesn't grow 7% If the ship you were targeting is, for example, 3/4 the size of the ellipse, you would expect to miss with about 25% of shells assuming perfectly random dispersion, but now you're missing 32% of shells. So the number of missed shells increases by 28% in this example That's a simplified example and sigma makes it much more complex, but I think the basic point stands that making the ellipse 7% bigger doesn't necessarily mean you only miss 7% more shells
Good morning from Germany here! First of all: Great Videos you got there. Interesting takes on the Game. Even for a player with over 1.5k hours. To the Consistency View with Range mod Preussen. Well. Even with simple Mathematical thinking it is more consistent. The Range mod Preussen with "aiming Systems" mod gets at the 20,6km from the reload-mod Version around 239,64 / 143,78m dispersion. The reload version has 247,38 / 148,43 m dispersion at the 20,6km. So it should be more consistent with this simple math. Which i can confirm from the last matches I played yesterday. So thanks a lot for this new view and idea. I never thought about it this way!
thanks and thanks for the math...it feels even more accurate than the numbers suggest, which is around 3%...but then again 3% better dispersion is almost the difference between standard 7% mod and USN 11% dispersion mod and people highly value USN dispersion mod (rightfully so).
@@hagostaeldmann i played it a few times more in the last days. With Damage Controll Party Mod in Slot 1+2, and Propulsion+Range in a build around tankiness. Up to 6 Heals if played well. and i must say. The hits are Still a little bit weird because of the internial shotgun problem of this ship. But overall it feels more consistent. More Shells hit on long-ranges than before. So yes. New playstyle with a better feel to it. :) Good Find, Dude! Keep it up! PS: Last Match: 3,2million Potential dmg and close to 200k dmg dealt. Feels amazing to play as a good old chunky ship!
Regarding the Svea and Midway from the first match, I'm of the opinion that those are just bad players. Some of them are probably decrepit old men. In no game are you BANNED for having no skill, so i dont think it should apply here. I also think its fucking cringe to conplain about terrible players in fucking RANDOMS, the least competitive pvp mode. Go to ranked if you feel the need to be segregated by skill. Just my soapbox rant, keep pumping out the god tier videos. You're easily the most skilled WOWS creator on TH-cam, love the content.
@@blackrican924 ranked is less or the same competitive than randoms in my experience. The players are not only as bad but their badness is more detrimental. In NA we even have players who are famous, like oznob, for their ranked play
@@DRienecker I'd rather have a 49 percenter who tries to win than some wannabe unicum who camps spawn to eek out his 56 winrate and gives up on the team 3 minutes in to farm damage while losing
I am A potato player with a 54% winrate. I rage all the time, but i never throw games, despite what I may call the enemy or my team. I cannot understand greifers at all. Alien thought process to me.
Have you tried range mod on Repub to see if it gets you that extra bit of consistency? Just curious since you compared the two a lot in your repub review
Hello, just in case you are wondering what to do after finishing all the t10, can you do the ships we can only buy on Black Friday? I’d be interested in a great video of yours about Jean Bart, for example… keep up the good work !
@@joedanker3267 consider this, even accounting for ships being 2x size in this game, and factoring in Preussen dispersion, in that second replay, hitting 4 shells on a Tashkent at that range should either be physically impossible or a one in hundreds luck. And yet it happens very consistently.
@@hagostaeldmann I suspect WG realized early on in development that if they going to make the proportions of the ship models recognizable to players and somewhat historically accuarate (an important early sell point for the game) and keep the rock paper scissors dynamics intact, then they had to make it easier to land shells on destroyers. Small boats at range should be very elusive targets, almost impossible to hit with any consistency. But they aren't. I can smack them. My shells almost seem to gravitate to the dds at times. But then again, it's a game. Hit frequency is wildly exaggerated to make it playable. It is what it is. Good times.
i always thought preussen would happen as a research bureau like ohio and they'd give it torps too to powercreep GK to oblivion and when preussen replaced i thought it'd be nice to have torps on GK to have big pommern. ah whatever
Thought experiment: locking on to destroyers with the manual lockon in training rooms and then shooting broadsides of cruisers battleships and carriers, and seeing how many times you would have devstruck them (Spoiler alert it’s probably ludicrously high, the dispersion bonus your gunners get is like they were looking through foggy optics and then suddenly drank a shot and wiped that thing clean) Also, kremlin when?
@@OxygenAtom-g3k it seems to me to be an issue of the turrets converge their aim more properly on smaller targets and on larger targets the shells dont seem to converge properly. In that second replay, that hit on the Tashkent at that range should be, if not outright impossible, a 1 in hundreds chance. And yet those hits happen all the time, very consistently. Even accounting for ships being double size, at that range his ship should only be occupying around 10-15% of my dispersion elipse I'll likely be getting to Kremlin in the next week or so
it is my opinion that wows like wot has a ping compensation mechanic to help players with high ping perform, which is the reason why cruisers can get cit when they shouldn't, basically a ship exist in a quantum state being at two places at the same time, one lagging slightly behind, which would explains the austin or maybe the netcode is just that trash, it's wows, a 9 years old game that has fucking 7 tps
@@xixi6253 I'm sure it does, but logically speaking my client shows I miss, it should then inform the server that I miss, which should inform the enemy players client that I miss. What's happening here is the server thinks I didnt miss despite my own client missing. And I guarantee the Austin's client says I missed because if he dodge by a couple meters according to my client then on his client he probably dodged the whole salvo...just overall weird to me
@@hagostaeldmann yeah but then you have another problem showing up with client side authority What if a cheat engine sends message that shells missed them ? What if it sends messages they hit citadels ? How do you resolve these kind of conflict happening naturally even ? There's a reason these games are server side authority, it's both simpler and safer, arguably more fair too And again, wows has fucking 7 tick per second, an update every 0.143s is so fucking demented in an action game
Breathing on the stern of the Austin for the kill then whiffing completely on a broadside Conquerer at 6 km is the perfect BB experience.
Bb mains cry about not blowing up cruisers, same players do what this conq did and take zero dmg
Do we get a Conqueror video ? I have a hard time understanding Conqueror players.. like k-pop or quantum physics
Just found your channel the other day, really love the long form video of ship review of yours. I find it much better (at the least in my taste) than others reviewer, you went into depth details of a ship while going through battle and simultaneously breaking down both the actions in the match, and the ship .
Subscribed, I hope many more will find you soon
As a newer player (September this year), a huge thing this ship has going for it is that it's tech tree! Early on, the grind is real for resources and such, so in your video, you compared this to Ohio and GK, but the research bureau/coal is hard to come by. Also, if Ohio is a better Preussen, you can check it out first. If it feels good, THEN invest the RB points and get yourself an Ohio ('Merica!). Great video as always, Hago. Love them.
The thing that actually speaks volume for me about the Preussen is that you can have a full secondary build on her and be perfectly fine. If you do that in a GK, you will just suffer. That's of course just my opinion, but I've done thorough testing of multiple ways to play GK and ended up with a hybrid build, where I atleast have some secondary power during late game. With Preussen I can keep the secondary build and be just fine, because the reload, overmatch and better gun angles solve the issue for me.
I’ve personally had way more success with GK as a pure secondary build. I’ve tried to make the main guns useful, but it’s just not worth spending into.
I have tried your build and commander set for the Preussen with many thanks to you. It certainly makes a difference and the range mod is uncanny in the way that it performs. I am looking forward to trying it out in a few more matches just to confirm.
cool deal, like i said it could be me hallucinating but the thing feels abnormally more accurate with range
Preussen also has the superior camo.
I feel like the "When you don't take the 7% accuracy you feel 40% less accurate" comes down to the way the enemy ship is smaller than your dispersion ellipse - therefore any increase to the size of the ellipse makes the ship proportionately even smaller relative to it
Which is to say, your dispersion circle grows 7%, but the ship you're targeting doesn't grow 7%
If the ship you were targeting is, for example, 3/4 the size of the ellipse, you would expect to miss with about 25% of shells assuming perfectly random dispersion, but now you're missing 32% of shells. So the number of missed shells increases by 28% in this example
That's a simplified example and sigma makes it much more complex, but I think the basic point stands that making the ellipse 7% bigger doesn't necessarily mean you only miss 7% more shells
Good morning from Germany here!
First of all: Great Videos you got there. Interesting takes on the Game. Even for a player with over 1.5k hours.
To the Consistency View with Range mod Preussen. Well. Even with simple Mathematical thinking it is more consistent.
The Range mod Preussen with "aiming Systems" mod gets at the 20,6km from the reload-mod Version around 239,64 / 143,78m dispersion.
The reload version has 247,38 / 148,43 m dispersion at the 20,6km.
So it should be more consistent with this simple math. Which i can confirm from the last matches I played yesterday.
So thanks a lot for this new view and idea. I never thought about it this way!
thanks and thanks for the math...it feels even more accurate than the numbers suggest, which is around 3%...but then again 3% better dispersion is almost the difference between standard 7% mod and USN 11% dispersion mod and people highly value USN dispersion mod (rightfully so).
@@hagostaeldmann i played it a few times more in the last days. With Damage Controll Party Mod in Slot 1+2, and Propulsion+Range in a build around tankiness. Up to 6 Heals if played well.
and i must say. The hits are Still a little bit weird because of the internial shotgun problem of this ship. But overall it feels more consistent. More Shells hit on long-ranges than before. So yes. New playstyle with a better feel to it. :)
Good Find, Dude! Keep it up!
PS: Last Match: 3,2million Potential dmg and close to 200k dmg dealt. Feels amazing to play as a good old chunky ship!
Regarding the Svea and Midway from the first match, I'm of the opinion that those are just bad players. Some of them are probably decrepit old men. In no game are you BANNED for having no skill, so i dont think it should apply here.
I also think its fucking cringe to conplain about terrible players in fucking RANDOMS, the least competitive pvp mode. Go to ranked if you feel the need to be segregated by skill.
Just my soapbox rant, keep pumping out the god tier videos. You're easily the most skilled WOWS creator on TH-cam, love the content.
@@blackrican924 ranked is less or the same competitive than randoms in my experience. The players are not only as bad but their badness is more detrimental. In NA we even have players who are famous, like oznob, for their ranked play
@@hagostaeldmannangry turtle the griefer comes to mind
Good callout in the mini rant about greifing and throwing games.
@@DRienecker I'd rather have a 49 percenter who tries to win than some wannabe unicum who camps spawn to eek out his 56 winrate and gives up on the team 3 minutes in to farm damage while losing
I am A potato player with a 54% winrate. I rage all the time, but i never throw games, despite what I may call the enemy or my team. I cannot understand greifers at all. Alien thought process to me.
Will try RangeMod after seeing your Dispersion.
Have you tried range mod on Repub to see if it gets you that extra bit of consistency? Just curious since you compared the two a lot in your repub review
The beacons of positivity continue - yippee.
you're not alone. i play the Preussen a lot, and there is some weird dispersion that happens when firing at long range, even without the range mod
Hello, just in case you are wondering what to do after finishing all the t10, can you do the ships we can only buy on Black Friday? I’d be interested in a great video of yours about Jean Bart, for example… keep up the good work !
Interesting bit about the rangemod. Wonder if I should try that on Georgia, if I have 6 guns I really want then to hit.
Georgia has the -16% dispersion module though, no?
Good to know range mod Preussen is the way to go for accuracy much like the Napoli and Petro.
Just tried it and it does seem to work! Pretty solid BB, honestly, which was a surprise!
My shells definitely don't seem to hit dds at 12 km with more consistency than a broadside BB sitting still.
I've absolutely never noticed this . . .
@@joedanker3267 consider this, even accounting for ships being 2x size in this game, and factoring in Preussen dispersion, in that second replay, hitting 4 shells on a Tashkent at that range should either be physically impossible or a one in hundreds luck. And yet it happens very consistently.
@@hagostaeldmann I suspect WG realized early on in development that if they going to make the proportions of the ship models recognizable to players and somewhat historically accuarate (an important early sell point for the game) and keep the rock paper scissors dynamics intact, then they had to make it easier to land shells on destroyers. Small boats at range should be very elusive targets, almost impossible to hit with any consistency.
But they aren't. I can smack them. My shells almost seem to gravitate to the dds at times.
But then again, it's a game. Hit frequency is wildly exaggerated to make it playable. It is what it is. Good times.
Preussen > GK Gang 💪
i always thought preussen would happen as a research bureau like ohio and they'd give it torps too to powercreep GK to oblivion
and when preussen replaced i thought it'd be nice to have torps on GK to have big pommern.
ah whatever
They totally should have done that. Then you'd have a secondary tech tree of more/smaller guns with torps. Like the American secondary premium "tree"
I was playing Bismarck the other day and I feel like people hating on the main guns way too much
@@matthewyang7893 yep, because you take accuracy in slot 3 bismarck actually has overall better accuracy than the USN bbs in its tier
Oshit, didn't even notice this was a new video.
Thought experiment: locking on to destroyers with the manual lockon in training rooms and then shooting broadsides of cruisers battleships and carriers, and seeing how many times you would have devstruck them
(Spoiler alert it’s probably ludicrously high, the dispersion bonus your gunners get is like they were looking through foggy optics and then suddenly drank a shot and wiped that thing clean)
Also, kremlin when?
@@OxygenAtom-g3k it seems to me to be an issue of the turrets converge their aim more properly on smaller targets and on larger targets the shells dont seem to converge properly. In that second replay, that hit on the Tashkent at that range should be, if not outright impossible, a 1 in hundreds chance. And yet those hits happen all the time, very consistently. Even accounting for ships being double size, at that range his ship should only be occupying around 10-15% of my dispersion elipse
I'll likely be getting to Kremlin in the next week or so
it is my opinion that wows like wot has a ping compensation mechanic to help players with high ping perform, which is the reason why cruisers can get cit when they shouldn't, basically a ship exist in a quantum state being at two places at the same time, one lagging slightly behind, which would explains the austin
or maybe the netcode is just that trash, it's wows, a 9 years old game that has fucking 7 tps
Wot is worse in that regard due to code being less spaghetti like, which allows devs to make Wot full casino, while WOWS is just trolly at times.
@@xixi6253 I'm sure it does, but logically speaking my client shows I miss, it should then inform the server that I miss, which should inform the enemy players client that I miss. What's happening here is the server thinks I didnt miss despite my own client missing. And I guarantee the Austin's client says I missed because if he dodge by a couple meters according to my client then on his client he probably dodged the whole salvo...just overall weird to me
@@hagostaeldmann yeah but then you have another problem showing up with client side authority
What if a cheat engine sends message that shells missed them ? What if it sends messages they hit citadels ? How do you resolve these kind of conflict happening naturally even ?
There's a reason these games are server side authority, it's both simpler and safer, arguably more fair too
And again, wows has fucking 7 tick per second, an update every 0.143s is so fucking demented in an action game
Im pretty sure the shells ricochet off the inside of the 32 mm cheek plate that Austin has
God damn I love your vids. Some fine tips and comments. Dont forget to ask for like and comment. It ll help your exposure.
Ohio next!!