Geek Control 2 Major Tim, World of Warships: Destroyers, The Mother in Laws of the Sea!

A short while back, I started this series of WoWs blogs to try and encourage better behaviour, and good game play habits among low tier players. One of my first points that I made was that new players should avoid torpedo-armed ships, and admittedly, on the day that I started the blog, I had just been team-killed about six times in a row by friendly torpedoes. I'm not kidding you when I say that it was a single gaming session that pushed me over the edge, and with the exception of the matches I survived, and one instance where I yolo'd into the enemy team and died, every single death that day was friendly fire. I specifically warned new players that they should avoid playing destroyers until they'd matured a little as WoWs players and come to understand the basics by playing safer ships, like the American cruisers. However, the torpedo problem wasn't just the fault of destroyers. In fact, I'd say it was just as common to see friendly cruisers sending off a salvo of torpedoes at ranges that match their gunnery range (10-14km), which is well beyond any effective torpedo range. These low tier cruiser players were arguably the worst offenders, since they were usually stationed behind friendly destroyers, who were up front doing their jobs as scouts and hunters. In fact, the final act of that day of team-killings that I mentioned was not a friendly destroyer sinking me, but a friendly Japanese cruiser. I'd been keeping my eye on the guy the whole match, as he'd been thoughtlessly derping out torpedoes from the moment the enemy was sighted 24km away. It was genuinely hard to tell if he was intentionally trying to fuck with his own team, or if he was simply that clueless as to how the weapons worked. The game was one of the best I'd ever played, with my Wicks class destroyer bagging 5 enemy kills (only 5, no MLG here), and pus
hing our team into the enemy capture zone. At that point we should have had it in the bag. As the first ship to enter the cap circle, I had the majority of our capture points, and so I ducked and weaved, and focused on not getting hit by enemy gun fire (which would reset the capture). Our enemies had ships in our capture zone, who were beating down on an "away from keyboard" (afk) battleship on our team. We had the victory at hand, and I would gain a massive bonus to experience earned, as it would be my first victory for the day in that ship. At that point, a salvo of friendly torpedoes detonated my ship. It was our friend in the cruiser, who was sitting completely still behind me, making an easy target of himself, and blind firing torpedoes at enemy ships that were well beyond his torpedo range. He quite literally snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, since all my capture points were lost, and then he proceeded to sit still and let himself get hit, losing his points in the process. Why am I telling you all of this? Because I want you to understand not only why I do what I do with these blogs, but also why it is that I am finally going to start telling you about how to not suck at playing destroyers.

I've given DDs a bad rap so far. Sure, low tier players should be banned from playing them until they've at least played a thousand games, but they aren't always to blame for a team's shitty performance. I've played games where our battleships have sat with their thumbs squarely up their asses, and blown the whole match through inactivity. I've seen cruisers completely abandon any kind of supporting role, and sail straight into the enemy fleet, before exploding in a dazzling fireball. I've seen carrier drivers drop anchor in the first second of the match and sit there even when their defenses collapse and the DDs close in with stiffies in hand. So, why do I discourage new players from DDs? The honest answer is that DDs require the most experienced captains in order to perform well, and they bear the biggest margin for error of any ship class. If you screw up in a battleship, you've got a lot of hitpoints to play with, and repair party abilities to recover. If you screw up in a cruiser, you can always improvise. DDs have to play in a pretty specific way, or they risk immediate death, or worse, they have a high chance of hurting their own team.

The biggest reason that I promote cruisers as a new player's first port of call is because they are a bit hard to screw up. As fairly versatile ships, especially in the early game, cruisers can adapt to changing circumstances. If a DD screws up, they have about 3 seconds to decide on how to fix it, and being such role-specific ships, DDs cannot simply adapt and change tactics, they must withdraw and reset the circumstances to suit them. If any of that sounds complicated, stick to cruisers.

DD gameplay can be summarized thus:

• DDs are scouts and hunters, they can always detect their opponents before they are detected in response.This means that they can always choose the terms of the engagement. It is there choice when to reveal themselves, and when to stay silent. For new players, staying silent is pretty much unthinkable. Remember, you are often providing a better service to your team by merely spotting the enemy than fighting, so keep calm and hush.
• DDs are ambush predators. They choose the exact moment of attack, and must time it to cause the maximum damage with the minimum amount of reply. They excel at killing battleships because they do so much damage in such a short amount of time that the battleship won't have time to put their repairs into effect. 
• DDs are fragile. DDs cannot stay alive long while they are spotted. Enemy ships, particularly cruisers and other DDs, will prioritize a DD for fire. While they are fast, small targets, it only takes a few lucky hits, or one well focused hit to bring them down. Not being spotted, or breaking line of sight is the DDs first priority. 
• DDs can support. While the enemy is distracted, the DD can offer gunfire and torpedo spreads in order to distract and confuse the enemy. Setting fires with HE rounds will make the enemy use their repair abilities at inopportune times, and putting wide torpedo spreads in the water will make enemies maneuver and pull their guns off target. This is adds an extra dimension to DDs that broadens their gameplay options, though they should never prioritize it, and should break contact immediately if the enemy shifts attention to the DD.
• DDs have the greatest initiative of any ship (the ability to act instantly and decisively), which is a quality built from their speed and stealth. You should always consider it your duty to react to calls for help in your fleet, but also your duty to exploit openings in the enemy lines.

They stalk you from the shadows, noting your every move. They always join in thrashing you when they have someone else to hide behind, and fade the moment things are looking bleak. They wait until the perfect moment to torpedo you and your lady, ruining your day. The destroyers are truly, mother-in-laws of the sea. But I've always been a charmer when it comes to the mature ones, so how about we discuss ways of getting you and DDs working together.

Your first decision in the game is to choose between Japanese, American, and the soon to be released Soviet DDs. More will come, but let's look at what we have to play with. The main choice currently is American or Japanese, and I mostly play the American DDs. For the longest time, people always thought that the Japanese DDs were overpowered, and put the American ships to shame. This was, as usual, due to superior torpedoes on the Japanese ships. This combined with superior stealth characteristics makes most players feel superior when playing Japanese DDs. As I said in my torpedo blog, there is a sense of impunity when you play the Japanese DDs. They are universally able to fire from stealth, launching at ranges beyond their detectability range. This allows Japanese DD captains to strike without ever risking so much as a scratch to their paintwork. Comparatively, American ships typically have to cross no less than 2km detected before they can launch their own. This makes launching torps from an American boat a little less like sniping from the bushes, and more like attacking a bunker with a grenade. This is the reason that most new players chose the Japanese line, and why they generally contribute very little to their team, and score very poorly.

Japanese destroyers are excellent when used correctly. In my torpedo discussion I said that having super long range on your torpedoes is nice, but also kind of pointless. Since torpedoes have travel time, and your enemy can't be trusted to maintain a straight course, firing torpedoes at those super long ranges is rarely a successful proposition. I recommend that you always try to fire them from as close as possible without being spotted, as it increases your likelyhood of a hit. Fortunately, the Japanese torpedoes are good in almost every respect, with high travel speed, making the likelyhood of connecting even better. The real advantage of the super long range torpedoes, especially the ridiculous high tier ones (which can strike out to 20km) is that if you aim them into a corridor, or a position where they can hit multiple ships, they can be very good at disrupting an enemy fleet's formation. Most of the really good gameplay I've seen from high tier Japanese DDs involves missing the primary target, but hitting secondaries that were within the huge range. The good stealth characteristics mean that Japanese DDs can really maximize their potential as scouts and ambushers. The Japanes DDs are the purest examples of torpedo boats, since their other armament is only useful in limited contexts. They really are ninjas, since they strike from the shadows, poison their enemies (flooding and fire), and always fade when detected. Japanese DDs are not gunboats, and are significantly less effective in their supporting roles, which is why the American DD line attracted me more.

American DDs are closer to a gunboat style of gameplay. Where they beat the Japanese hands down is in their gunnery, and toughness. Japanese DDs are handicapped by slow turret traverse times, and overall inferior guns. The Americans make me think a lot of Popeye, and I sometimes hear that tune play in my head when I spot a Japanese DD and proceed to unleash a beat down that goes something like this: first impact, "What the hell was that?", second impact, "How did this guy even see me?", third impact, "I'm almost dead!", forth impact, "fuck, fuck, fuck, please don't kill me". I've made so many Japanese DDs pop smoke and flee like a startled kitten that I actually wonder how the Japanese DDs ever got such a nasty reputation in the first place. However, the American DDs do deserve their reputation for having shitty torpedoes. Their torps have ranges of 5-7km for most of the game, with 5.5 being pretty average. With detectability ranges around 7km, they can pretty much never get a stealth kill without using terrain, or ship/captain upgrades. This general opinion on the American torps is probably about to change. The Russian DDs are scheduled to be implemented into the game shortly, and their torps are looking to have even shorter ranges (3km). This is likely to re-orient the meta of the game, and people will likely start to see that such short ranges are the norm, and that the Japanese are the exception to that norm. Meanwhile, the American DDs will continue to be just plain more versatile than the Japanese equivalents. American DDs can get such a superior performance from their guns that it means they can take on a cruiser-like role, and offer gunfire support, as long as they aren't the main target. Similarly, the American DDs eventually receive the option of using the AA defensive fire ability, which allows them to either take up an even more effective support role, or make them an unstoppable nightmare as a carrier hunter.

Your choice between the two will be more about what you value as a player. Do you like that sniping, loner style of play? As long as you appreciate the need for fire discipline and discretion in the face of danger, then maybe Japanese DDs are for you. If you like versatility, and a more knife-fighting gunboat style of play, with moments of screeching terror as you plough towards the enemy, torpedoes at the ready, then American style may be your thing.

I'm hoping by this point you've come to understand that captaining DDs is a dangerous life, and that they reward understanding of the game mechanics more than they reward twitch reflexes. Your key takeaways from this should be that you really do need to understand the game's concealment mechanics, its torpedo mechanics, and the idiosyncrasies of the different ships before you can expect to play DDs with any degree of success. They are by far the hardest ships to do well in, and hopefully you've taken my advice and earned your stripes elsewhere before attempting to go balls in on this particular lifestyle. Like mother-in-laws, you'll never win in destroyers until you've come to truly understand them. Learn their ways, master them, and sooner or later your wife will crash through the front door of your house in her car, and be furious that she didn't kill you... of course, she missed because you were upstairs with your DD, scoring like a champ... I think I got muddled on that analogy, but now you know why I like DDs, and why I warn you so vehemently to learn before you take one to your bed... port... uh, TORPEDOES AWAY! Yay :D

Geek Control 2 Major Tim, World of Warships: Bloody Omaha

Continuing on my quest to get new players safely tucked in to the American cruiser line in WoWs, I've come half way up the tech tree to the tier 5 ship, the Omaha. In my last post, some of you might remember that I made a great big apology to the t4 cruiser, the Phoenix. That was a ship that I pretty much skipped during the closed beta test of WoWs, mainly because it just looked like a crappier version of the Omaha. After learning the Phoenix's slaloming technique, I revised that view, and accepted the ship for the cool piece of floating excellence that it was. I did then go on to say that tier for tier I felt it was better than the Omaha, and having played a week's worth of games in the Omaha, I can say that I still felt the Phoenix was more fun (it's a ship you go friggin skiing in), I have finally settled in to appreciating the Omaha for the excellent ship that it is, too.

As previously discussed, the Omaha is the evolution of the Phoenix class of light scout cruiser that was theorized at the end of The First World War, and developed into the Omaha before The Second. It modernized the WW1 design ethos, and in particular it did away with its original intended purpose, that of a reconnaissance ship, and destroyer leader. It still functioned as a scout, but launched float planes to do its real recce work, and took over more of a fleet screening role. In WoWs, this role comes to life in game, and if you want to get the most out of this ship, you'll avoid treating it like a roided-up destroyer, and start to teach yourself the mid to late game cruiser role that you've been building toward since our first cruiser blog; you'll become a badass support ship; all-rounder; and guardian of truth, justice, and delicate capital ship buttocks.

The Omaha suffers a distinct loss of maneuverability from its predecessor, which it trades off for the ability to launch float fighters, and replaces some of its free-standing guns with turrets. The decline in maneuverability was a real kick in the balls, and for players that prefer a more independent gameplay style, and ability to hunt the enemy free of friendly fleets, this will mark a step down in enjoyment from the Phoenix. However, if you adjust yourself to a slightly more relaxed game style, and focus your mind on a supporting role, you'll very quickly see why this ship is utterly excellent.

The Omaha has good concealment for a cruiser, decent speed, and a good armament for its tier. Standard cruiser behavior applies when playing this bad boy: fall into a position to support your battleships in the battle line, stick close behind your destroyers to cover them during a brawl with other DDs, or stick close to your carrier and keep that tubby boy alive. Supporting may sound like a bit of a pacifist way to play, but remember, this is not a "hold back and heal" type of support, it's the "let some bigger or faster dude take the brunt, while you shoot" kind of deal. Whenever engaging ships of the same size or larger, consider holding fire until they've engaged someone bigger than you on your team. If you are alone (don't be, you are best when supporting), you should start looking for ways to increase your suitability, like angling prow towards the enemy, making a b-line for the nearest cover, or just pulling back past your detectability range and holding fire. Again, you say, why the hell would I want to play a ship that doesn't get stuck in? Well, remember this, it will still always fall to you to prioritize giving enemy destroyers the savage beating that they so richly deserve (filthy hun weasels, fighting their dirty underhanded war), all while making life easier for your own destroyers (Splendid fellows, brave heroes, risking life and limb for Blighty!). 

What the Omaha suffers for most is probably a bit of mediocrity. It's good at killing destroyers, but what cruiser isn't? It can offer better air cover than average ships of its tier, again cruiser standard. And it can fit just about any role if it needs to... yeah. Throughout the American cruiser line you'll find ships like the St Louis, which is famously beefy and vicious, the Phoenix which is sleek and punishing to those that underestimate it, and then there is the tier 6 Cleveland class cruiser, which people install the game in the first place to try out. During the closed beta, I skipped the Phoenix, and played the bare minimum number of games I could in the Omaha in order to get to that tier 6 golden boy, and with good reason. Replaying the Omaha, and giving it a proper go has taught me that simply being good for your tier and not shining like some of the other ships in the line up isn't necessarily a bad thing. As a new player, you might find that the Omaha, a lot like the Chester, is one of those ships you don't remember with overt fondness, or play your best games in, but it is certainly the ship that made you play better. After the Phoenix's unique style, I feel like the Omaha reigned me in a little. It reminded me what a cruiser was really all about, and I was surprised at how well I played when I adjusted to the style of gameplay that I would have to master for the rest of the line. 

What you should look forward to in this ship is it's simplicity, stability, and focused cruiser style. In my ongoing efforts to teach newer players better habits, and older players an appreciation for the methods of learning, I'd put the Omaha as a critical step on that path. Undoubtedly some of you will ignore it in your frenzy to hit t6, but don't be in too much of a rush. The lessons learned here will help you graduate to a better understanding of the game. 

Oh, and it has torpedoes... I swear if you fire these things at enemies over 5km away, and hit me in the back, I'm going to fucking murder you in your sleep and ##(*&$Y(#*&%TY()*YT@!!

Transmission ends...

Geek Control 2 Major Tim: Total War Attila, All Hail The Spice King

Following on from my TW: Attila blog, the one reviewing the Empires of Sand DLC, I thought I might recount a little about my primary campaign as the Aksum. I hadn't played an Attila campaign in a while, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that the EoS pack actually added factions that I had really been hanging out for, specifically ones that would challenge the Sassanians in the south-east of the campaign map. The Sassanid Empire goes pretty unchallenged throughout much of the game, and is surrounded by sycophantic tributary states that fund its rather one-sided war against the Eastern Roman Empire, all while the ERE gets violently beaten in the back of the head by marauding tribal factions. It suffices to say that the Sassanians are basically the "easy-mode" of TW: Attila. The new factions of the EoS help by putting some pressure on the Sassanians from below. I would say that the Sassanians are still the easy faction, since the EoS factions have to spend some time squabbling before turning on either the Sassanians or the ERE. Sassanian players need not despair too much, the early game will still favour them, and be pretty easy to get ahead, but if the Aksum or Hymjar manage to get over their squabbling, they could become a mid to late game problem.

The Aksum had a lot of appeal to me, mainly because I always found north-east African kingdoms to be pretty fascinating, and was always a bit disappointed that Africa as a whole seemed to be relegated to the background of most TW games. There is a rather spiky modern misconception that Africa is a homogeneous continent (almost as if it were one country), and that it is technologically backward, or inferior to other parts of the world. This misconception spreads into the general view of Africa historically, with some people thinking that Africa was always behind the rest of the world, even in the dark ages when Europe's highest level technology was wells with less than 10% feces. TW has had a bit of a sad history of ignoring Africa and China, both of which have amazing cultures and military histories, so it was gratifying to see at least one of those issues addressed.

 

Pictured: Some happy African gentlemen sharing their culture with Romans.

 

The Aksum campaign revolves around your position on the coast of Africa, and the spice trading lanes of the Indian Ocean. My nerd alarms went off within seconds as the game started making one "spice" reference after another. The missions had coy little referential names, such as: "The Spice Must Flow". I've always enjoyed having a bit of a roleplaying aspect to my gaming experiences, even if it is mostly just in my imagination, so I spent a little time trying to figure out who "I" am in this game. My first thoughts were of Xaro Xhoan Daxos from Game of Thrones, and it seemed pretty accurate to the situation.

 

 But after looking at myself in the mirror, trying to be half as cool as that guy, and making a few attempts at sucking my gut in, I decided that I was probably more like this guy:

 All hail, The Spice King!

It seemed pretty accurate, and besides, I'm basically playing this campaign with a Harkonnen level of cunning and viciousness. 

The key to getting started with an Aksum campaign is to decide off the bat who you'd like to fight, and how you'd like to theme yourself. Part of what appeals to me about CA's DLC packs, as opposed to free generic factions, is that the rosters have a lot of variety, and the campaign has a lot of missions and optional ways to play. If you choose to fight your way north and betray your neighbors, and the ERE, you'll have a tough time of it, but you can secure your first province and start pressing on towards Aegypt, and all the young Cleos therein. However, the game kind of encourages you to start out by targeting the Arabian peninsula, and with good reason: the spice routes to India are located all along the coast. You have powerful friends in India, all of whom would love to see you grow as their sole trading partner, and fill your mutual coffers through a spice monopoly (They're basically House Corrino).

Typically, you'll find yourself compelled toward the east, as the campaign is kind of going that way. Fortunately, the Hymjar and Sassanians are all kind of hostile towards you already, and capturing the spice ports will come with the kind of rewards that make the whole endeavor so worth it. Spice ports provide a ton of cash, and make you a sexy trading partner to other nations. Plus, it is pretty obvious that the game wants you to go this way, so unlike other factions, the Aksum can recruit some pretty excellent units from the spice ports, which I think most people will use as the backbone of their armies. These spice units carry unique Indian weapons that are earned as part of your deal with your eastern partners, so it makes your army stronger, and look cooler, so you can be all like:

The other major decision to make at the start of your campaign is which religion to go with. The Aksum start out as Eastern Christians, which makes it easy to buddy up with the Romans and their protectorates. Until you start pressing into the Mediterranean there won't be anyone to fight except the Sassanians or Romans, so the choice is kind of linked. If you stick with Christianity, you should almost certainly wage war on the Hymjar and Sassanians, but if you are contemplating making peace with these guys and going north into Roman territory, you might consider the alternative, Semitic Paganism. The bonuses are both pretty good, and the opposing temple forms offer pretty cool advantages (Christian churches reduce corruption or improve farming, while the Pagan temples can add moral and unit buffs). Where this is more of an issue than other factions is in the endgame unit selections. The EoS factions all have two sets of top tier units, differentiated by your faction's religious choices. The Christian path nets you access to some decent top tier spearmen, and some badass cavalry (basically African knights of St George), while the Pagan path gives you some cool stealth infantry, and more tribal-esque warriors.

 

Oh yeah, these guys look like friendly chaps

It all depends on what you really value, and I actually changed my mind about half way into the campaign. I really wanted those cool tribal warriors, but found that the neutral units, especially the Spice Warriors and Spice Guard, kind of neutralized the need for top-tier infantry. Ultimately, sticking with Christianity helped out with my relations with the ERE when I finally declared peace with the Sassanids, and access to powerful cavalry that were kind of lacking in my campaign. 

I'll tell you more of the adventures of the Spice King soon, but for now, if you are thinking of picking up the DLC, or specifically playing as the Aksum, hopefully this whetted your appetite and gave you some starter ideas. Go forth, son of the Ibex, and make the spice flow!

Geek Control 2 Major Tim: World of Warship, Hooked on Stereo-Phoenix

After last week's posts, I was contemplating a discussion of low tier American destroyers, or maybe talking a little about how to get started in battleships. In the end I figured it was best to round out the low tier cruiser discussion with one of my favourites, the Phoenix. This is a ship that I distinctly remember ignoring, free xp'ing, and only playing a few matches in during the closed beta version of World of Warships. Now that the game is in open access, the experience and credit values for progressing up the tech tree are much greater, and I decided to spend a great deal more time on each ship to help master the game. I was not looking forward to returning to the Phoenix, largely because I thought it was just an un-upgraded Omaha. Having now played both ships extensively, I can now comprehensively conclude that the Phoenix is, and I quote myself here: "hella fuck'n balls out awesome". In reference to my earlier opinion of the ship, it has truly risen from the ashes.

For those that have never looked, the Phoenix class cruiser is one of the "paper designs" of WoWs. Like it's sister game, World of Tanks, World of Warships puts vehicles into the game that never actually existed, alongside the historically accurate ones. This is one of Wargaming's (the parent company for WoWs) little quirks that they love to bring to their trilogy of two. Paper designs fill gaps in the historically accurate tech trees, and also serve as cool oddities, giving us an insight into how these non-existant vessels might have theoretically performed against real contemporaries. Think Freddy Vs. Jason Vs. Mad Jack Churchill. The Phoenix existed in paper, and was intended to be a light scout cruiser, the kind of ship that would fill the gap between destroyer and cruiser. They would lead destroyer hunting packs, acting kind of like an alpha DD, and also provide long range scouting to larger ships in the fleet. The Phoenix was never built, instead the design was reworked, and reworked until it was only just barely recognizable. The addition of a built up rear superstructure, additional anti-submarine warfare systems, and most-notably, two turrets mounting twin 6-inch guns, completely reorganized the Phoenix into practically a different ship. The result was the renamed Omaha class light cruiser (in WoWs at T5), which performed a similar role, but mostly dropped the pretenses of being a destroyer lead, or scout, and became fleet screening vessels.

Like me, you've probably looked at the T4 Phoenix, and the T5 Omaha and thought, something along these lines, "Dafuq is the point of this? It's clearly just an outright inferior Omaha, so what you're saying is that I need to grind through a crap Omaha just to get be able to grind out the Omaha." It probably also doesn't help that so many people hear such great things about the St Louis at T3, and the Cleveland at T6, both of which are outstanding gun cruisers, and purer examples of the American cruiser philosophy. All of this belies a simple point, for its tier, the Phoenix is a better ship than the Omaha, and the battles it will face will suit it to a t.

The Phoenix is a pure scout cruiser. It's advantages are its blistering speed and agility. Players of some of the low tier Japanese cruisers will know this play style: juking enemy shells and torpedoes, evading unfavourable engagements with enemy battleships and cruisers, and putting a truly legendary hurt on any destroyer unfortunate enough to be caught in a straight fight. The difference at first glance between the Phoenix and Omaha seems to just be the addition of turret mounted guns, but the Omaha, as a bulked up Phoenix loses a lot of the maneuverability of the Phoenix in the upgrade. The Phoenix can shift direction on a dime, rivaling some destroyers for DDR footwork. Combined with the ship's narrow hull, the Phoenix is nigh-impervious to torpedoes, since it can slip between even a tight spread, and pretty much ignore wide spreads as long as it is either closing or opening the distance with the enemy.

The big problem that new players (like me in the closed-beta) have with the Phoenix is the gun layout. A lot like the St Louis, the Phoenix mounts the majority of its guns in either side of the hull. Without any centreline turrets, the Phoenix appears to never be able to bring the majority of its firepower to bear. This is a similar problem to the St Louis, but most people never notice this issue. The St Louis has more guns per hull, and typically can rely on its toughness to present the broadside and commence the smackdown. Conversely, the Phoenix cannot rely on its armour or health to trade broadsides with anything but destroyers, however, the Phoenix simply doesn't need to.

The two tactics that save the Phoenix, and actually put it above and beyond the St Louis are supporting fire tactics, and my personal favourite, the "slalom shoot". Everything I've said about cruisers up until this point holds true. If you are up against enemies that are tougher than you, wait in the wings until they are firing at someone tougher than you. Battleships and armoured cruisers exist to take a beating, and unless you are facing destroyers, you are probably fighting enemies that are tougher than you. Unless you are without choice, hold your fire until you confirm your enemies guns are facing someone else, or they are simply unable to respond. Holding your fire can be difficult as a new player. It goes against most of your instincts, but believe me, if you draw fire in this game, the enemy will tunnel-vision on you until one of you is dead. Even if they have a better target, the target that they shoot at first is usually the one they will focus on until death. Once your enemy is distracted, start giving broadsides, or better yet, begin the slalom.

Slalom shooting is one of my favourite tactics for low tier ships with off-centre gun mounts. Offering your broadside to the enemy is a good way to fire all of your guns, but it places you in the single most vulnerable position you can put yourself in. If the enemy can see your ship in profile, it is the biggest target to hit, and your armour is the flattest that it will be. Turning your ship to a steeper angle will make it a narrower target, it will make them have to correct for your heading, and it will make your armour more steeply angled, increasing the chances of ricocheting AP shells. As such, you can angle yourself towards the enemy, presenting your full array of guns on one side of the ship. From this safer position, fire your volley. Now shift the ship's rudder so you turn to present the other side of the ship, and its freshly loaded guns. Fire these, and shift back to the original side. You are essentially fishtailing the ship toward the enemy, and in the Phoenix you can do this so quickly that you'll have fired, switched sides, fired, and switched back by the time the original guns have reloaded. This tactic wrecks face. It turns your seemingly minimal broadsides into machineguns of doom. It feels a lot like muskets firing volleys by rank, and it seems to have basically the same effect. Combine this with the Phoenix's superior gun range, and you'll be able to beat up St Louis's beyond their response range. With this slalom tactic, I've killed enemy destroyers within less than 3 seconds. Volley, turn, volley, boom. And all that while constantly closing the distance, thus increasing accuracy, reducing their chance to escape, and bringing me closer to torpedo range.

Oh yeah, and the Phoenix has torpedoes, too. It and the Omaha are the only two ships in the American cruiser line (other than the premium Atlanta) to pack torpedoes, and while they are pretty crap ones, they are still just the ticket for delivering the fear of Santa to enemy battleships that see a scout cruiser and get cocky.

As I said at the beginning, it is easy to overlook the Phoenix as merely the under-gunned prototype for the Omaha. However, as the Omaha geared up with guns, planes, and got its butt implants, it kind of lost sight of what it was originally supposed to be. When we talk about the Omaha, we'll cover what it does well, but shimmying, shaking, and putting the hurt on destroyers just isn't among those things, at least not like it is one tier down. It's amazing what a inversion I felt playing the Phoenix again. Where I had sneered at it, and skipped to the Omaha, I now find myself regretting the "upgrade". Tier for tier, it just feels like the Phoenix is better at what it does. Don't use free experience to skip this one, and don't get disheartened by its initial performance. Master this one, and I might just permit you to play a destroyer... one day. This is a ship that does not belong as a footnote to the Omaha, it should soar on the winds forever.

The Martian: It's good to have you back, Sir

I'm going to get this out of the way right now. It's good, go see it, pay the extra for the 3d session. Now that I've said that, here's where I go all film critic.

Ridley Scott is one of the great artists of our time. The man embodies everything that makes a great artist. He is able to find, capture, and express beauty in almost anything, his imagination seems to be limitless, and he has skill in his medium that allows him to transmit that imagination seamlessly. He has also been rather controversial in the last decade for making some pretty sub par films. The typical pattern for a while was that a Scott film would hit the cinemas, be critically panned, and then be completely rescued by a dramatically improved director's cut. This hinted at some pretty bad studio interference, which seemed odd considering Scott's status. Things declined further with Robin Hood, a re imagining of the classic, and Prometheus, Scott's return to the vaunted Alien franchise, which he helped to establish. Both films were quite poorly received, and seemed to be beyond saving, even in their post-cinema director's cut releases. Again, it was hard to say if Scott was losing his touch, or if it was all interference from film studios. Rumours brewed that Scott was being constantly forced to work with hack screen writers, or "modernize" his work by being saddled with modern film making tropes. While the films got worse, one thing that never changed was the beauty. Scott still managed to capture flawless images through his camera, and make scenes dance across the screen, stirring the imagination of anybody still alive from the hair down.

The Martian proves exactly one thing as a film: that Ridley Scott has still got it. The Martian is an adaptation of Andy Weir's novel by the same name. The book detailed the stranding of astronaut, Mark Watney, and his stubborn grasp on life, as he learns to survive alone on Mars after his mission team is forced to abandon him. If you ever want to see this movie, I am telling you right now to go and see it in the cinema. There are experiences that will move you in an indescribable way, and a Ridley Scott film, viewed on the big screen, with full cinema sound, any yes, those bloody 3d glasses, can never be matched. The Martian is an excellent pic to watch on your little laptop, obtained legally, five minutes before the film actually releases (or so I imagine), but as an experience, the film must be viewed in its native habitat. The martian landscape, and the majesty of space has not been captured in such glory before. "NASA movies", like the recent Gravity, the modern but dated Apollo 13, or the classic 2001 A Space Odyssey, each gave the viewer an experience that showcased the state-of-the-art cinematic technology of their era, and each told a story through mostly visual means. Scott is perhaps the greatest living example of a visual cinematic artist, and to watch this film in anything less than its native cinema screen would probably do it an injustice.

The film also stands up as a simple story. It tackles high-concept science fiction, giving us a realistic picture of the problems and moral dilemmas that the human race will be forced to deal with when and if it finally takes to the stars. The characters are funny, lovable, and even the supporting cast feels well rounded and real. Matt Damon, who plays Mark Watney, deserves a great deal of praise for his performance here. If effect, the character is a cast away, left to survive alone on a desert island. Only, in this case the island is years away from civilization, and there is no water, and no life of any description to help sustain him. The story then becomes about Watney's ingenious efforts to make life grow in order to sustain him, and his struggle to stay sane and not surrender to the omnipresent chance of death. Watney stubbornly clings to life, much like the plantlife that he manages to foster on Mars, and in spite of setback after setback, he finds a way to not only sustain himself, but evolve as both a character, and a human being to become the first martian.

Ridley Scott's first film, The Duelist ends with one of the single most beautiful cinematic frames ever captured. It says everything that needed to be said about the film in a single mournful, yet triumphant pan of the horizon. The Martian has no less of Scott's talent and limitless imagination sown into every scene. While his career might have waxed and waned, Scott remains an artist. If you leave the cinema not having felt something move in your chest, I suggest that you seek a cardiologist immediately.

Everyone knows that DM thousand yard stare.

Geek Control 2 Major Tim: Total War: Attila, Empires of Sand

Empires of Sand: Total War: Attila, and the return of factional DLC

A Review by Timothy Hunter

 

Today saw the release of Total War: Attila’s latest downloadable content pack (DLC), Empires of Sand, and the content is highly-polished, but also a revitalizing set of new experiences for the game, which is reaching the end of its tenure as Total War: Warhammer approaches. Total War: Attila is possibly my favourite entry in the Total War (TW) franchise, and was a vast improvement on the fiasco that was the Total War: Rome 2 launch. Attila released clean, with nowhere near the degree of bugginess as its predecessor, and from a gameplay standpoint it was more balanced, and played more smoothly. It also had its own share of controversy, with rampant DLC spamming in the month following release. As a mouth-foaming TW fanboy, but also a savvy PC gamer, I was both overjoyed to see an expansion to Attila, but also nervous about getting ripped-off by DLC. 

Total War: Attila was excellent on release, with a good spread of factions, focussing mostly on the twin Roman empires, their Sassanid rival, and the migrating hordes that rampaged westward, leading to the collapse of Rome. It is one of my favourite periods of history, and it gave the player the chance to be the bulwark of civilization as the Romans, or experience the full-blooded catharsis of burning it all to the ground and salting the earth as the migrating barbarians. Add to that the experience of revitalizing the Persian Empire in the form of the Sassanids, and you’ve got the core experience of a fantastic game. The DLC for the game has all been exceptionally high quality, with the new factions all being polished, and offering new playstyles and campaign experiences. However, Creative Assembly (CA) had profit margins to meet, and was likely under pressure from its publisher, Sega. The DLC started with the Viking Forefathers, which came free to any that chose to pre-order the game. Pre-order DLC always piqued my suspicion, as it meant that the content was being specifically extracted from the game to help push pre-orders, or as I like to call them, “pre-review orders”. I took to it hesitantly, but couldn’t resist the thought of purging the world with that sweet, sweet Nordic fury. The DLC was also available for post-release purchase, so at least it wasn’t playing the scummy “exclusive content” card that PC gamers revile. All seemed well, but within two weeks of launch CA announced the Longbeards DLC. This is where it started to go downhill. I bought the Longbeards pack, and was again satisfied with the quality and polish that had clearly gone into it, but was already getting pissed at the frequency and speed that it was coming out. Releasing a content pack for purchase only two weeks after launch says to me, “this was totally part of the original game, but Sega saw a way to choke an extra $10 out of you, so we removed it.” This was the final bit of goodwill I had left, and when CA announced the Celtic Culture Pack two weeks later, that is three DLC packs in the space of a month after release, I and virtually the whole TW player-base collectively stared down CA and said, “Up with this we will not put.” The Celtic Culture Pack received a critical drubbing from the community, in spite of the fact that it was clearly a well-designed. 

The problem with Attila’s DLC was that it was clearly all great, but released far too quickly, and too close to the game’s original release. It devalued the original purchase, by making it seem that the consumer had bought an incomplete product, and that they were instead being drip-fed the full game, paying more in total than a full game should cost. What’s worse, releasing DLC so frequently caused a spree of corrupted save files, since the game had to update to accommodate the new factions. Considering TW’s legendarily long campaign times (dozens if not hundreds of hours to complete a campaign), this meant that during the first few weeks of the game’s release that Attila’s bug-free reputation came under severe criticism. The critical backlash also comprised a near-community wide boycott of the Celtic Culture Pack. This seems to have sent CA into damage control, and no factional DLC was released for months. CA did release a campaign DLC pack for Attila, which was accepted by the community, largely on the grounds that it was not just another factional DLC, and it was given a reasonable stretch of time before being added to the game. 

All this brings us to our current situation. Empires of Sand feels like it has been timed perfectly. My biggest concern with the rampant DLC spamming in the month following Attila’s release was not that we would see too much DLC, but that we would end up seeing none at all, and end up with an incomplete game. Attila’s map felt a bit barren (even before you introduce it to Attila and his ravening hordes), and I personally felt it was still so western-centric, with most of the playable factions concentrated in Europe. The East of the map was the grudge match grounds for the Eastern Roman Empire and the Sassanids. I genuinely believed that some factions in the North African and Arabian regions would spice up the game, and with Total War: Warhammer approaching, it looked like that end of the map would go unfinished. Enter Empires of Sand, which feels like a perfect closing act for TW: Attila. The game was growing staler with its age, and Empire of Sand has added a little new flavour to the map that felt truly missing. The new Desert Kingdom factions comprise the Aksum, the Himyar, and the Tanukhids. All three factions feel well-thought out, and not just reskins or half-assed clones of armies already in the game. 

The Aksum are a north-east African tribe, and are themed around their role as spice merchants, monopolizing the trade route to India. As such, their unique campaign centres around completing missions to improve trade relations, secure resources to trade with India, and mercilessly crush your trade rivals and hear the lamentations of their stock marketers. If all that talk of trade has you fearing Phantom Menace flashbacks, don’t despair, much of the profit comes at the tip of your khanda. The faction is well-modelled, and cool looking, with awesome silk outfits and unique Indian weapons. It is gratifying also to finally play an African faction in Attila, one that is savvy, technologically advanced, and with a unique campaign goal: making the spice flow.

Next are the Himyar, and these guys are the new kids on the block in the Arabian Peninsula. In the vanilla game, the Sassanid Empire goes all but unchallenged in its Persian realm (it is basically the game’s easy mode to play Sassanid). Now, the Himyar rise in the south to challenge that rule. Hymyar get a number of cool desert-themed units, including axmen with terrifying silver masks, reminiscent of the immortals from the film 300, or the sons of the harpy from Game of Thrones. Their campaign not only brings you into conflict with the Sassanids, but also sticks you with the ticking time-bomb of an ancient dam that threatens to burst and wipe you out if you don’t pay careful attention to maintaining it. This is what John Oliver meant when he said that the best way to make routine maintenance of infrastructure seem sexy was add in the threat of it exploding violently in full HD. 

Finally, we meet the Tanukhids. These guys represent the latest horde faction to enter TW: Attila. Horde factions are kind of what sets TW: Attila apart from previous entries in the TW franchise, and they represent migrating people without homes. Much like the Huns, these guys will probably be most fun to play while in their horde mode, rather than settling down, and make them great for action hounds that love to watch the “civilized” world burn. Their gimmick is that they gain food from sacking cities, making it more of an imperative than a leisure sport as it is for the Huns. I like this trait, which makes more sense in the desert, where food and grazing lands would be harder to come by, making your horde’s quest for food more understandable. 

Should you buy this? I feel like CA has finally earned this one. The DLC for TW: Attila was a step and a half above the content packs from previous TW games, where it often felt like you were paying for nothing but cheap reskins that a modder could have made in a weekend. Attila’s DLC has all been uniformly high quality, but just felt like it was being force on the player too hard, and too fast. This lot has been given time to brew, and more particularly, it feels like the timing is just right to refresh the game one last time before Total War: Warhammer goes live. You’ll make up your own mind what you value as a consumer, but as someone that has both loved, and been stung by DLC before, I can say that this is one I will spend a good while enjoying while the storm that is Warhammer builds on the horizon.