Shaka_D

too strong for tier 5 but far too weak for tier 8, want a refund for sure

Great effort WG, thanks for this, +1

I don't think WG's long term strategy is in any major and sincere way directed by actual player input. They say it is, but for a long time now with things like rpf, etc we see them tweaking the game for their own reasons using arguments which quite honestly don't hold much water. If their truth-telling could be rated out of ten I'd give it a one or two. We all know by now that when WG decide to do something they set on a course of getting it done and only justifying it all afterwards. Pity they hold overall player opinion in such low regard, but then again, us forumites are the minority and don't really count.

Soooo, now because you've answered so calmly when my post was a little overly defensive, you've made me feel like a troll with an issue. I suppose you are right in this sense. I truly have no major issue with it because I earn more than enough from my games and I know when I earn little its because my effort wasn't good enough. Perhaps I'm being a little intolerant of the system. I think it's probably a case of my personal dislike that some players get away with proverbial murder while others have to work hard, haha.

Please correct me if I am wrong but the winning team is rewarded more for the win in terms of xp and credits not so? So even terrible players on the winning team who did little to nothing will receive win bonuses? If I am incorrect in assuming this then I'll eat humble pie! But I'll take the plunge. Edit----------- Losses happen to the best of us. I realise I have much room to improve, but I'm far from a bad player, and there is a certain sour taste when someone (lazy scared ignorant guy) on a winning team happens to reap the rewards not only from the actions of others on his team who worked hard, but also over and above those on the losing team who worked hard for their own respective team.

Nonsense. Wargaming's MM is definitely not truly random in every sense because it deliberately manipulates certain factors (ship classes, certain tier restrictions, and perhaps one or two other things) but there is no way it decides who wins and loses before the game begins imho. Perhaps their mm is inefficient in that it pays zero attention to skill differences between the teams, not even to distributing player skills a little more evenly across the teams, and it's this inefficiency (in my opinion) that 'randomly' sets up uneven teams and one-sided games, but it's not a deliberate move. Add to this strong divisions on one team and weak divisions on the other. To me, a very real solution to this whole 'I had noobs on my team', 'I am losing too many games', and a cure to much of the frustration and saltiness is to stop making the game so damned wincentric. WG need to drop their archaic, failed, defunct mindset and should start rewarding players for their own effort rather than the unfortunate situation of being on the losing team and fighting hard only to see some loser on the winning team getting rewarded more than you and all he did was spectate mostly.

Thanks for this. And here I was thinking my Blyska was fine. Quite disappointing to see, especially in relation to the leningrad on the EU. Now a funny thing is I prefer playing my blyska far more than my leningrad, and I'm trying to think why. It's guns are primary, followed by torps and the only problem I had with it personally was/is its detection range. I just cannot see how the leningrad is better, but this all possibly relates to my own playstyle. Is the leningrad a more forgiving ship to play? Suppose it turns faster thus allowing for more survivability whereas with the blyska once you're comitted you're in until the death bell rings for one of you.

What are the sample sizes for each ship in terms of their respective 'battles-played' counts? It would be interesting to see how those percentages were derived. Apologies in advance, I'm not in a position to follow the link so had to ask. I realise its over a two month period, but I think seeing how many battles each was played in would help distinguish how accurate those percentages are in relation to each other. I think the lead developer is obviously drawing on non-existent stats if the ones you've referenced are really accurate.

The only reasonable answer here is to wait and see whether our enjoyment of the game is affected after the update. I'm already spending far less time ingame due to lack of content and an alternative meta. I've 'grinded' all I need to grind and am really bored.

At the risk of sounding like a hash trying to blame others for cheating, I have to ask the question because I don't use mods. I prepared to man up and be tarred and feathered for this too, but my ignorance is my weakness. Is this something controlled server side or is something like this even remotely possible? In 3 separate games, all three in ranked, I was in my dd and popped a trail of smoke. I came to a stop and as is my usual style I alternated my movement so I wasn't in one place at any time, but always in smoke cover. There were no cruisers with radar or anything of the sort. I was never spotted and on two occasions I was not firing my guns. On all three occasions I was targeted successfully by a single ship, not by multiple enemies, always a single ship. They fired at exactly where I was and hit me for major damage and on two occasions killing me. I was within range of my benson guns, so within 12kmm but never closer than 9 or 10km.. As mentioned, never spotted so I presume I should have been undetected. I know there are great players out there, and lucky ones, but this happened 3 times in two days in ranked so perhaps it was just a run of bad luck on my part. Tell me folks, do I need a doctor before it's too late or am I starting to look for reasons beyond my own fault? Is this a case of 'replay or it didn't happen'? My first assumption is the players were experienced enough to guess where I was, although moving backward and forward in a long smoke trail causes doubt. I'll have to see what I'm doing wrong perhaps, but it's a hard one to judge so thoughts from our panel of experts here would be good.

PEF seems just fine for me. Has some pretty awesome AA and after 23 games I've got a 78% wr in it. Not a bad tier 6 bb for 'free*' - *implying time spent playing to get it What are people complaining about?

Thanks for taking the time to respond, debate is always welcome. Your argument broken down (sorry, it's long) 'The port GUI is already cluttered in the way of amount of objects and logical spacing of these objects' - according to who? Is this a fact or subjective? '(e.g. coal and steel resources can be found in Arsenal while credits, dubloons and free XP can be found in the top bar, top right corner)' - arsenal is irrelevant. The port under the 'exterior' view with a view of signals has ample space for a little 'button' surely? 'Just because there is still space in terms of pixels doesn't necessarily mean there is still space for cognitive processing.' - Again subjective. My cognitive processing can easily handle making sense of another button, are you saying other people would be unable to adapt to a additional small option available to players in an unobtrusive place? Watch....WG will no doubt add a lot more in the future and we'll revisit your whole cognitive processing argument again and compare their additions to that of a small button of sorts, lol. 'One common mistake is to equal ones own perception to that of everybody else (it works for me so it must work for others), in your case: it would work for a few so it surely works for everybody. You MIGHT be right but there is a huge chance that you aren't. People have different perceptions'. - Indeed they do, but you are assuming way too much about my perceptions and biases. Objectivity is key. There is space, a fact, more will be added in the future, as it has in the past, almost an undeniable fact. I did not assume 'everybody' anywhere that I recall, but I have heard very weak counter arguments based almost entirely on subjectivity and personal preference than objectivity. My previous picture was aimed at the idea of one small additional thing cannot hurt. If everybody gets to add one small additional element, the screen would be full. Designing the GUI means to make a compromise between the objects you would like to display (maximum) and the objects that need to be displayed (minimum). Then there are different "depths" of a GUI. Some elements are more visible than others (through animation, contrasts, size, etc.). Some elements are accessible with one click, for others you need more. Furthermore: how often will a player be using that GUI element you asked for? Daily? Twice per update? Only twice during that snowflake event? (question of quantified usefulness). Obvious stuff, and Irrelevant. You're making massive assumptions again. 'I'd actually like to have a button with which I could remove all flag signals from a ship. Not for all ships, only for the selected. That would not only be useful for snowflakes but also for clan battles. Alternatively there could be something like a preset system, where I can define flags for a certain ship for CB, for Randoms, for Co-op, for Scenarios. If I switch battle types, the flag signals would get switched automatically. Only an idea...' - Now here lies the huge irony. They are good ideas, but you undermine your entire argument by dismissing my single suggestion where you use arguments relating to space, perception, et al, and you offer your own ideas which will take up just as much if not more space? Massive LOL.

Hahaha, it'll hardly be like that. Amazing how we all want the bells and whistles but we wish away some of the smallest, yet most practical elements in our lives. Port GUI has ample space for more, and doesn't even require rearranging for the addition of a small little button which in itself packs a powerful punch in terms of time saving, practicality, efficiency, and convenience. Why are people fighting it so much? There are almost zero effective rational arguments against it and far more sensible factors favouring it.

Evenly distributing the teams in this way would in my opinion be a great idea, with more or less equal number of newbies, noobs, good players on each team. But sadly this has been discussed for years and years in more WG games than just this one, and WG still hasn't taken the bait, are not interested, won't ever do it. A lot also has to do with the divisiveness of the forums with so many for and against ideas like this, and the fact that even those of us chatting, debating and fighting on the forums are just a minority. In other words, it's a pipe dream, and my very sincere advice to you is to simply forget it.

Nice, you've given us a really good practical example of why this simple feature should have been a no-brainer for WG a long time ago, +1. We have a shipton of flags we barely ever use which clutter up our port view and which generally serve no purpose other than to satisfy purely subjective aesthetic gameplay experiences (nothing wrong with it of course), and they take up so much space, but we cannot have a small practical button option to, in a single click, dismount all sigal flags so we can reassign them if we're running low without having to search for them. Sure we should manually dismount them, sure we could leave them on, but the first option is massively time consuming, sluggish and fiddly, whereas the second will only cater for those who have an incredible wealth of signal flags or couldn't care. The button option can hardly be accused of being uneasthetic, space wasting, or in any other way interfere with our experience of the game. It only serves to add a feature which enhances the game by allowing us to spend less time mucking about in port wasting time managing signal flags, etc and more time getting back to actual gameplay. Which is more important to WG?

A single small 'button' is hardly cluttering anything up at all. There is ample space for it to be added without it getting in the way and could be sufficiently hidden. They've done it with tons of things in the port most people barely notice. Hardly harmful without us now pointing fingers at everything else they've added which serve less benefit but are no less adequately out of view?

Is there any harm in this very simple option? There isn't. It's an added feature that sits in port, is completely optional to use, causes no adverse effects to gameplay and there is not a single valid objective reason it cannot be implemented unless it's technically impossible. That said, I cannot see how you operate your port, I cannot see how you manage your ships, signals, flags et al. What I can see very clearly are the issues I have with respect to my own port and ships. I have close to two hundred, and sometimes I run short of certain signal flags, and because I play different ships I know I've often left signals on ships I've forgotten to dismount. Contrary to how you could possibly manage your ships, if I don't intend on using a ship for a while I strip it of all signals and camo's. It's how I do things, it's how quite a few of my many (former) clan mates and friends have similarly managed their ships and port (as far as they have explained in friendly conversations). It's not a quirk, it's not a weird request, it's in fact a very very practical thing. And it causes no harm at all.

WG have for some strange reasons opted to ignore some very obvious 'buttons' that would serve to benefit their playerbase. One is a button that strips all ships of all signal flags in one go (When times get tough I have a lot of ships to go through to see if I've left any flags lying about on ships). Another is as the OP mentions, an 'isolation' switch to prevent spending dubloons on anything such as signals, camo's etc. If WG can do it for things like collections where they've added the option to stop collecting, then these previous two are easy to set up. So why haven't they if they're that obviously beneficial to players? I know, because they're not beneficial to WG.

Seems so. Haven't been able to play, lost 1 minute of premium time..demand compensation immediately, 5 mega containers will do it.

Thanks WG, don't mind at all.

I think you grossly misunderstood my tone. People are also welcome to ask questions this evening, in fact they are encouraged. The tone of my post was tongue in cheek. Take care.

Skill based mm? I just want a player base that's for the most part at least marginally skilled. In fact, most players these days in high tiers are simply just skilled. In fact (again), I'm all for a killed-based mm. If the mm can balance the average death ratio / survival time of players maybe both teams with have players that stay alive more or less the same length of time. But then again, many bad players stay alive quite long skirting the borders and such, while us blessed few who are not afraid of a few pixel fires and citadels like to get up close and personal and die like heroes, most of the time scoring far more than out compatriot spectator tourist like team mates. What an utter load of rubbish. Sorry, I'm thinking out load - now you see what I have to deal with inside my head!

Hey there old lady, pretty sure the stream is on Twitch tonight?

I bloody well am NOT below 45% wr. How dare you noobarise me as a 'trash talking below average skilless cretin' so inaccurately in this way! Get it right Bushy, I am a 'trash talking above average 'I haz a little skill' cretin' and no-one likes me in their clan because I sometimes can't help myself. It's a sickness, but WG likes my money and tolerates me. Now and then the game actually allows me to use chat in between bans...ups.

@op: Stop playing tier 10 and join the rest of us yokels at lower tiers where you can make more money, or as others suggest get some premium time.