daki

If I remember correctly it was said that 40% of battles you are top tier, 30% of battles -1 and 30% of battles -2 tier. Your sample is still too small for conclusions.

Pathetic trolling attempt woppy. Bad, bad, bad....

Though there is some merit in the statements that high tier BBs are less "fun", so can be said for DDs and CAs (I cannot comment CVs as I do not play them). Nevertheless, that does not change the fact that you wrote posts that can be only defined as trolling so the responses you receive are more than deserved. This thread deserves to be canned.

Well said and to the point. Nothing more and nothing less is expected from SA. I do not care about the visibility "penalties" increased for balancing reasons as that is something players can adjust to, however SA should work as you described no matter what.

Look no further than the OP post. His team had 6 cruisers (of which 5 with heal ability just to mention), versus the whopping 0 cruisers on the enemy side. In this specific situation they should have "eaten alive" the enemy team in the first 10 minutes. If anything MM was in his team favor. Hence the loss just shows the major failure by the cruiser group.

The main problem is that the vast majority of players have difficulties in adjusting the playstyle depending on the team matchup. It seems that it is much easier to come to forums and complain until WG makes a "fix" (usually not a good one). Basically many people in fact want a "babysitter" MM which creates as identical matches as possible without any "surprises" or needs to adjust the playstyle. Yet, the more WG caters to such players, it just makes game more "boring". Commenting the issue of DD imbalance, whenever a team with more DDs wins easily for me that is just an indication that the cruisers failed miserably in their job, but as we all know it is easier to blame the MM. That is especially true in situations of big imbalance in number of DDs (say 2 vs 4 or worse) since imho the team with too many DDs is in fact in a big disadvantage: much lower team HP pool, much weaker gun damage output.... So far what I have seen in such matches is that if the team with less DDs plays very aggressively it tends to roflstomp the enemy. Conversely if they decide to camp (which is unfortunately too common in such situations) the opposite happens.

Just saw waxx25 and evoside. Even patriotic songs were sang in the beginning

Agreed there. Imho the main reason why Armored Warfare failed rather miserably is due to the design decision to try to offer fully fledged PvE and PvP as standard gameplay modes. This resulted in: - Too large population on PvE and not enough on PvP - especially with their attempt with "skill" based MM in PvP - Lots of balancing issues between the modes (income, XP...) - Lots of complaints from players WG nicely avoided those issues with PvE having been designed for an introductory role for new players and a testing role in case of newly purchased ships for example - without any promises that this will be a "standard" mode

I would say that there are plenty of Youtube videos available with games before 0.5.5 patch proving that Edit: Ninja'd

After playing a bit with destroyers after the patch, my subjective observations are: - Did not really notice the so called 3s delay, rather it seems much much longer (10-15s). Example: I am running away from a DM, smoke screen is behind me and "detected" sign is not flashing. He hits me in the rear. OK, that was just a good prediction. I start evading, yet the next 3 salvos are still accurate with even scoring a few hits. While I might just have encountered an epic player, since it happened in many similar situations after the patch, I clearly suspect the change in mechanics - Detected sign popping without apparent reason for a second then disappearing. I noticed that happening even when there were no DDs in the enemy team left, no CVs, and other ships being well beyond spotting range or radar range (incl. scout planes). That seems to me as a possible bug. Do not get me wrong, I do not have anything against being more visible to enemies and for a longer time, but the interface should show as much since DDs captains count very much on the accurate functioning of SA in order to make their decisions on what to do. They do not have sufficient HP pools to just absorb a salvo or two due to wrong information provided by SA. While it may very well be a bug (like we had with armor in the past), I would not discard that we had a "non-disclosed" change in mechanics. The rationale from WG? - testing new mechanics without the biases in the feedback from the player base which occur when the changes are formally announced and then people already for opinions on impact without even actually playing. Last but not least, if anyone wants to organize checks and testing in the training room, and needs some cannon fodder, I am available

Never mix tiers. Never! Ever again! Joking aside, matchmaking takes into account the highest tier in division. As a T6 ship can enter the T8 match, your friend basically pulled you in high tier game.

My comments mainly refer to high tiers (T8+) since I do not find mid tiers to be particularly affected by camping / passive gameplay issues. First of all, I disagree with general statements claiming all BB players are "idiots" or "clueless"... It just brings toxicity to the discussion without any benefit or hope that such statements will change anything. While some are (clueless I mean regarding their role) the same can be said for all classes playing high tiers. Though the rare CV players in higher tiers tend to be much better players on average than in other classes. That being said, as it is unlikely that the average passive high tier player will somehow "understand" the mistakes and change the playstyle, it is definitely up to WG devs to adjust the high tier meta to fix what can be simply defined as "less fun and less enjoyable" compared to lower tiers. My suggestions: 1. Lower the size of teams - I would reduce it to 7 (or 9 max) as the few random games I had with less than the full 12 player roster, were much more dynamic and aggressive. The reason is quite simple imho: As the tiers increase, attack capabilities (guns, range...) tend to increase much more compared to defensive capabilities (HP, armor...). This basically leads to situations that the more aggressive players are focused by a large number of ships (even 6-7 sometimes) which tends to end up badly quite quickly. In lower tiers mainly due to limited ranges the focusing is not that big of an issue. With teams of say 7, usually an aggressive player would be focused by no more than 2-3 enemies which is much more manageable. The smaller rosters would also help fix the MM issues as the balancing would be much easier. In addition, campers tend to dislike being all alone on the map borders - with 12 players you always have at least 2-3 of them who are happy to stay in the back and feel protected by other campers, and with fewer players they are "forced" to follow the more aggressive ones. 2. Abolish standard battles for high tiers - rationale is simple and straightforward as standard mode inherently promotes camping. Domination FTW! 3. Reduce map size and/or gun ranges - in order to force closer encounters Now I know that it will probably take years before WG properly understands the issue or takes steps to address it. In the meantime I refuse to become a camper no matter the big incentives for such playstyle in high tier meta. I do not care if I lose credits in HT games as any loss can be easily made up in 1 or 2 lower tier games. Last but not least I do not mind playing the role of a rabbit (as in athletics) and setting the higher pace in the match despite seldom seeing the end of it and occasionally suffering abuse in the chat from campers. Always remember that aggressive players make the matches exciting and fun, while the campers kill it.

I am also way too often faced with the same dilemma. Usually the stage is set by me pushing forward (no matter the ship) being followed by a few battleships/cruisers. Wrongly assuming (in about 70% of cases, and more in case of high tiers) that the fellow captains will provide the support, I spot the enemy and start drawing fire. Unfortunately, in most cases, as soon as even one enemy is spotted, the escort seems to be slamming the Q/E buttons and beating a hasty retreat. Usually I just think f-- it and proceed to yolo and die in the fiery blaze - though on occasions I do have a chance to successfully turn around and disengage after sacrificing an electronic sheep on the altar of RNG deities While looking at the great new sinking animations, occasionally I do write a mildly ironic comment in chat (never calling anyone idiot, moron, noob....) such as: "the mighty Hipper managed to scare off 2 BBs without even shooting at them, well done guys..." - which does seem to irritate fellow captains way more than any toxic abuse I could throw at them in the chat, and just seems to reinforce their opinion that always running away is how this game is meant to be played...

Have you ever heard that people might enjoy something else than you do? One of the most pointless posts/replies I have seen in the last few days... It is nice to hear that WG is improving PvE experience as well. Well done

While there are some obvious similarities, it is rather unfair to compare the 2 games. If you insist though, imho the comparison of classes is as follows: 1. Cruisers - medium tanks 2. Battleships - heavy tanks / arty hybrid 3. Destroyers - light tanks / tank destroyers hybrid 4. Carriers - rather unique class. The only similarity with arty is that they can launch attacks without being "directly" challenged by opponents. Unlike arty in WoT though, they can be used as great scouts (their planes that is), carrier standing still is usually quickly dead & useless, and finally it has basically 0 RNG in the gameplay. The best defense against carriers is being aware of the situation around you, i.e. starting evasion before the planes drop their torps - that will of course not ensure that you will avoid all of them all the time, but it will for sure minimize the damage. If you encounter truly excellent carrier players (which is rather rare), then basically forget being able to protect yourself (as they are great in predicting evasive maneuvers) and seek protection from sailing closer to AA capable ships in your team. Last but not least, even though I am not a carrier player, I wish they would be buffed a bit and made more popular since to me the most fun and interesting games are with them present in the match.

Hahaha well said mate On the flip side, I played WoT for about 5 years (since beta) until WoWs beta, so taking into account the time horizon, while the invested funds were significant so was the amount of fun overall (hence no regrets)

I spent money on WoWs, though I do not find it that relevant to discuss the amounts on forums. Suffice to say, so far WoWs has offered me a better "bang for the buck" compared to WoT and to all AAA titles I purchased in the last 10 years (excluding Civ 5)

You can use Ping plotter. The instructions can be found here: https://eu.wargaming.net/support/kb/articles/50

Just claimed the bonus of flags and premium days for both PT sessions, without any problems on the link provided (though I am yet to check ingame). Edit: It was credited ingame as well. Though there was no notification whatsoever

TBH I would be most happy if only the core playerbase of about 15K as Admiral stated would stay, and that we would not go beyond 20-25k concurrent users (ideally it should be 10-15k). Taking into account that I expect a large portion of them to be paying customers (compared to other games of the F2P genre), that is more than enough for a quite nice financial success of WG and enough funds for further developing of WoWs. So far, whenever we had surges of players it was always followed by a strong increase in toxicity and deterioration of the community - not even to mention the quality of games. Having played WoT since the early days, the best fun was with 20-30k population on EU server, and once it exceeded 40k, it was just basically the downward spiral. Not because of the game direction as such, but because of way too many trolls both ingame and on forums (which is I guess to be expected in case of large populations)

That might be an issue with AMD. I also have Phenom BE (with a much older ATI 6950 graphics card). While most of the time I have 50-70 fps, on regular basis (i.e. every few seconds) it drops to 15-20 fps and sometimes even below 10fps. Lowering of settings did not help. It causes quite a bit of stuttering and sometimes it is quite annoying as it messes up aiming especially when trying to hunt the destroyers. I do not know if the same happens with Intel/Nvidia, but if someone has any tips about fixing the fps drops, I would be quite grateful.

For a change we were the lucky ones which did not have to deal with the bug. I can only imagine the huge whine and rage fest here on forums if we were in NA's place

While in principle a correct statement, it is too vague, and as stated subject to exaggeration. The problem with people here is that they often tend to call even small differences as "unfair advantage". To take a RL example, do you see a whine in the boxing cruiserweight class when there is a match between a 80kg boxer and 90kg boxer? What about the heavyweight class where there is no upper weight limit? Translating this into WoWs, yes I agree that MK or Atago are a bit better, but not to the extent that the player skill becomes irrelevant i.e. not P2W. That is why I believe that a more sensible definition of P2W is: "Games that let you buy better gear or allow you to make better items then everyone else at a faster rate and then makes the game largely unbalanced even for people who have skill in the game without paying. " Lets be honest, if all the whines and arguments about "unbalanced", "P2W"..., would be taken into account by WG, we would have a game with: 1. 1 ship available - so no premiums, no other classes, no tiers... as one could always argue that something is "wrong" or "unbalanced" 2. 1 map available - most probably just Ocean, as otherwise there could be some "disbalance" on the map in case there are islands. 3. No flags, consumables... - basically no economy whatsoever 4. Super duper skill based MM algorithm - which would strictly enforce a 50% WR (excluding occasional draws) no matter the skill level of a players to ensure that no one is under or overchallenged. Maybe some people would like it, but I for one would not even consider such a shallow and boring game.

Fully agree mate! The vocal is just beautiful - well done on that WG