Exocet6951

Historically accurate to perfection

Oh snap, Marvin was lurking here! By the unholy power of sarcasm, I summon thee back, @mtm78 !

Turns out that there's a set path to take, and 60% of the battle is based on an automatic mechanic. So simple and straight forward that even the average player can not completely fail. Dynamo is ground zero. Glad to know that we at least found the bottom.

[heavy breathing in Daring]

WG just keeps on confirming that the average player is just helpless. Absolutely helpless. " jesus christ how do those people remember to breath every few seconds" levels of helpless. Just get it over with and have WoWs be a railshooter game.

They also thought of subs but found them not to be a good fit for the game, so you can bet your Christmas dinner that in 2-3 years when they run out of things to add, they'll proudly announce that a glorious new guided missile mechanic is being introduced. Also, they said no T10 medium tanks in world of tanks for the longest time. They changed their mind about that so much that they went on to make roughly half a dozen T10 Russian medium tanks

Oh, when do I get my anti citpen spec so I can avoid being deleted with no counterplay other than RNG?

inb4 AP rockets made to kill subs, but just ends up citpenning cruisers instead

You read it wrong you silly cashcow valued player. "Any (battle)ship should be a self-sufficient machine, but you just need a few sacrificial lambs to soak up hits and spot for you." PS: Called it back during the RN BB release. WG would pull a panic move and try anything to keep more players pouring in after all the big ship names have been dropped. After all, why try to fix the game to make it worthy on its own when you can use the good old "have more and more unbalanced content while extracting as much money from new players as fast as possible before they leave" method of F2P gaming?

But god help you if you dare mention reprehensible US and British actions like firebombing cities and shooting neutral ships in a neutral port, or crack a joke about the Hood. Then it becomes a disrespectful message worthy of lengthy discussion about how you're totally wrong and all those actions were all 100% justified.

Almost as if once patches with cruisers wears off, we're back to seeing the consequences of YEARS of pandering to BBs in everything including the way XP is attributed. You want less DDs? Make BBs less attractive and have less of them per game. Quite frankly, it'll be better for DDs as well, because right now half of the time your battle hinges on you having the right DDs. Have too many Z-52s, Harugumos, etc... in the opposite team? RIP your DDs capping. So your chances of winning goes down the drain. 4-5 DDs per side is even worse for DDs than it is for BBs. So yeah, nerf BBs in order to buff BBs.

How we see him: "The man, the legend." How he sees us:

My waifu decided not to dignify Death with so much as a polite nod in its general direction, and kept the dakka going. (2860 base xp)

That's the crux of the issue right there. If the Haida player doesn't power through the initial (and potential, given the nature of RNG) disadvantage but rather panicks and tries to retreat or fire torps, his actual advantage starts crumbling. If the Haida player understands that forcing a retreat, getting in a knife fight, or just prolonging the duel is in his favor, he's more likely to win. It's all about handling the initial contact. Haida has the significant advantage, but can quickly lose it if the player isn't ready to lose a bit more HP than the GM in the opening salvoes.

By virtue of having more HP and more alpha, I'd say that the Haida has the better chance. However the Gadget Majong has better forward firing angles, so if they meet head on, the GM will present a smaller profile and might just win out with some help from the RNG fairy. It's a double edged sword however, as the Haida has the option to retreat with all guns firing, whereas the GM effectively loses its front turret. So my conclusion is that the Haida has the overall significant advantage, however the duel would start in the GM's favor should they meet head on. An advantage that could make the Haida player make the mistake of not pressing on and either winning with simply superior DPM and HP, or forcing the GM to retreat, making it lose 33% of its firepower.

You underestimate our power to complain about everything.

Wat. Is that per turret/mount, or the total amount for a ship?

Unless it's ****ing "anti BB" (lul) AP bombs that hit you despite having DFAA activated and the CV having lost literally all but 3 planes. AP bombs are still one of WG's worst mistakes, and most catastrophically poorly implemented mechanic to date.

I found conflicting info:

"2016 will be the year of the CV" - S_O Yeah, about that....

Then you look at the top 5% of players are see the same inconsistencies. And guess what? The top 5% Zao and DM players tend to also be the top 5% Stalingrad players. How do you explain that?

And linking those two events, there was a "No there is no bug" period during those 2-3 glorious weeks where BBs could actually be citpenned again. Followed by "we fixed it, but we heard your positive feedback on the increased citadels and will be investigating" , followed by no investigating at all

I hate to break it to you, but you are not average. You are below average. But that's ok, there's nothing wrong with that. From what I can see from your stats, you do acceptable damage with good accuracy, so the aiming and hitting doesn't seem to be the issue. You do appear to be consistently around 40% WR above T7, so that tells me that you don't know when to push or pull back. That's a skill that's learnt no matter the tier. It's probably even better at lower tiers where your battleships are slower and get in trouble more slowly. I urge you, for everyone's sake including your own to go back to tier 4 in order to learn that type of skill in a more controlled and more forgiving environment.