Mad_Dog_Dante

SE is vital, I'm using RL on almost all my DD builds these days. Both of these are important survival skills. If played properly you do not need the extra consumables provided with SI. I run without it. Same with PT, I hardly use it anymore on any of my DD builds. Below my current 17 point build on a 19 point captain. Waiting for the 20th point to add AR to the setup, and the last point will probably go to CS to speed up the TRB a bit, or GTG to help with kiting while gunfighting. Maybe IFA, but I'm always assuming people will be shooting me instantly when spotted anyway. I'm currently here stats wise, my current main gun kills are at 229 and the torpedo kills are at 239. Dont forget to use those pretty aft guns ^^

I'll throw up instead

Cant play, it's installing something which takes ages apparantly.

Yeah keep removing ships in the name of 'diversity'. ROFL.

Still getting the torps wont fire bug. Has been weeks or even months now hasnt it? Great stufff

Clean

The Marceau is lots of fun and action packed, but a bit hard to master and when teamed up with subpar team quite hard to pull weight in. I love the ship. If you like the french dd tree shes the most fun out if them all.

Remember: Dont sit at the back lines kids!

Uhuuh <3

? I play randoms and nothing much else because I like the chaotic nature of it. Thats not what random teams are composed of

I dont have your issues I think? You either get as close as possible to specifcally torpedo battleships that are decent, or you pick sensible lanes through wich you can torp backliners sniping and carriers. On top of that, the Asasshio's detection range and 2 aft turrets with decent alpha.

Appropriate counter action is very simple: change your spending habits.

I assure you it defenitely can be.

Possible reason why you are a bit less careful then usual perhaps: Too eager?

With their extended value since the rework I'd say get Lutjens if you alrerady have a few German BB's. I actually play my special captains almost exclusively these days.

Contact his clan leadership.

Yep. This topic is. Bait.

I'm looking at one. You better learn how to properly use torpedoes fast mate.

Lots of sarcasms were lost during the post reeework eras.

I understand your points. Just let me point out to you that your WR is probably also not always consistant with your efforts, so there is little difference in that regard :-) I'll end with this cheeky note, as I have very little interest in ranked personally.

Your issue seems related to how XP is currently calculated, which is flawed, not to how stars are awarded. What league do you play? Gold, silver or bronze?

To both of ye There will always be the odd match where players get too little XP for some crucial play they performed as your examples show, but those are usually exemptions and not the general rule. What you 2 are pointing out is where the XP reward system is flawed, not the flaw in the ranked star earning system itself. There is also personal bias in player experience in how much he/she contributed to succes. In short, sure there are matches where a player can get shafted in XP earnings. But as a general rule, if someone ends up bottom 3 on a winning team it is usually means they got carried, with an odd exemption every now and then. My suggestion is not about getting it perfect or fairness in XP rewards, and players will always game the systems. But bottom 3 on both teams lose a star will make it really hard for bad players to move up through the ranks to silver and gold, while at the same time top 3 on both teams earn a star shouldnt be much an obstacle for good players like you two to rank up, provided your goal is to get to rank 1 in gold, not just collect rewards at bronze every week. Playing the Cossack at that level is basically sealclubbing All kidding aside, my suggestion is about creating a better player pool at silver and gold, not about fairness in XP earnings or reward pools. Edit: The top 7 XP earners get a star sounds about right as a general solution, but that XP should be XP without the 1.5x win bonus players get for being on the winning team.

If a player ends up winning on 5th 6th or 7th place he/she was carried that match. No matter how awesome his spotting or cap contesting might seem, the other 4 players above him actually made the win happen. Top 3 earns stars on each team would also allow a player to earn stars while losing while trying very hard to actually win. If a player ends up 4th or lower on a losing team, he/she defenitely didn't contribute anything worth earning a star. Especially true for destroyers.

Being ranked/rated on the performance of a randomly selected team composition is stupid as a 'competetive' mode. It doesn't channel players based on their contribution to matches. Bad players in 7th, 6th 5th and 4th position get awarded stars simply because they happen to be in the winning team, good players get shafted for being on the losing team ending second or third, absurdly punished for not being the top damage farmer. Facepalm so much. Rank players based on their performance in each team. Top 3 of winning and losing team get awarded a star, the rest loses a star. Maybe no.4 on the winning team doesn't lose a star. I don't know. I don't care really. Ranked has and is stupidly designed as a ranking mode.