Dragosh1205

Here is my experience after taking a 3 month break because of the stupid tier differences in the matchmaker. Again, i am very pleased to see nothing was done to alleviate this. In the screens below are 4 consecutive matches. Enjoy the "balance". I want no part in being overpowered vs a lower tier enemy, i want him to be as equal to me as he can be, so that my skills can be the victor, instead of my ship. And the same thing applies to me vs higher tier enemies. I want them to be equal to me so they can kill me (if it comes to it) with their skill and their being better at the game than me. Not because they derp around like a potato in a top tier ship vs a 2 tier lower ship. This is like boxing a lightweight vs a heavyweight. They have categories for this exact purpose, balance. If adding a button that enables "same tier matchmaking", even with 5 minutes of wait time is so hard, then I am sorry again. Yes, I would spend that much time waiting for a game, knowing that it's at least balanced. Instead of wasting 10-15 minutes getting competitive in a match where the other tier 8s abandon hope and the fate is decided from the get go. This is simply unfair. DOTA takes 2-3 minutes to find a match, Counter Strike has the same average wait time, HoTS has around 1-2 minutes of wait time between matches. I understand the "need" of having the shortest wait times between matches, but that should be the priority AFTER the matchmaker is balanced. And to my conclusion, I will take another break or perhaps even quit the game entirely simply because i do not feel the need to be humiliated time and time again in this game. Yes, i can play vs tier 10 too, but there is absolutely no fun in it for me. Perhaps if a change in this matchmaker policy occurs in the future i might come back to it. You won't feel my presence either way. But when I am one of a thousand cases, then you might see a wide fluctuation of player base. Also, if i started feeling cared for in this game, i might even start spending some cash on it. Due to the current ignorance toward me as a player, or at least my type of player, i will certainly not spend a dime. Not my loss. A game should be first and foremost about having fun, and the players having a good time playing your game. If this basic rule escapes you, then as a developer you have failed. Sorry to go again. The rest of you, have fun! EDIT: bash me all you want, i don't care. I play casually and if you're a hardcore player then the comparison is not at all equal. I do have a social life beside the game and for the short time i can play per day, i want a balanced and fun experience, where i can blow off steam casually, not while being angry or pissed. If i wanted to be an e-sports champion i would have started playing Dota competitively. Alas, i am not as such.

For the love of god (or satan since god left this to his fate), fix the damn matchmaker. Tired of asking, and tired of being one of the many people who ask for this. I absolutely do not want to be instantly matched in a game only to see i am stuck as a tier 8 vs full tier 10 enemies. To be honest, tier 10 sucks in my opinion and i never want to play it. So why am i always playing vs higher tiers? 50 matches and not one of them was i top tier, always 2 tiers below enemies. Why can't i get tier 8 and find full tier 6 enemies? Totally unfair. Let's take this in order: First of all, there have been no cases where i clicked battle and could press leave battle (leave the queue) because a match would be found instantly. So if i change my mind suddenly because of random reasons, i am stuck fighting that battle in order to do some chores that appeared unpredictably before the battle. This reduces my battle appetite and in a way "tilts" me from performing well in that battle since i am in a hurry to finish it and do what i have to do outside the game (happens mostly at work). Secondly, you want to provide a quick queue in order to do as many battles possible. It's okay. But the trade-off to that is not worth it at all. I want to fight tiers equal to my own, not more, not less. It is totally unfair playing an Edinburgh and getting insta-deleted by a yamato firing from 20km away, and hitting your nose with 2 shots which citadel. Where is the fun in that? Where is the fun in going broadside in a paper armored ship and getting no overpens from an enemy, only arming ap shots which should pass through like on a DD. You recently fixed the DD losing more than 75% hp in a salvo, but cruisers were not such a case even at extreme angles. At this point I literally cannot play the Edinburgh and progress further down the British CL line due to the incredible matchmaker that always puts me with tier 10 enemies who delete me in one slavo regardless of angle. Or in some extremely lucky instances where i have 10% hp left. Smoke doesn't help either since they can shoot blindly at your last firing position if they pay attention and 1-2 hits can also be scored. Thirdly, inconsistent battles because of this have made me do one thing every time. The same thing you enforced with a pink color ingame. Yes. Whenever i get dropped in a match with tier 10 enemies, i will leave. Period. I don't care anymore if i get penalties or not since nobody cares that we don't like playing vs top tier ships in lower tiered ones. Now i'm not saying its impossible to play vs them, but it is incredibly situational, and it shouldn't be. Take a moba game, it is situational but every matchup has the means to counter and finish the game, up to a point. You don't have that option here. This incredible frustration the matchmaking has given me has come to the point where i deleted the game in a rage quit. And i won't be installing any time soon until i see that fix that i have been waiting for these last 2 years at least. It is extremely infuriating to play only to play, not to be able to play to win or to be satisfied with results and to be satisfied with how the game works out for you. I cannot play anymore when I, the customer, am treated like a pleb only there for my money and nothing else. There is literally no respect in putting me in a match vs enemies 2 tiers above. Imagine a football match with 8 vs 10 players, or a box match with 2 different leagues. It is simply not fair. Solutions? Simple. Give me the damn option to TICK A BOX where i opt in for a longer but fairer queue. I don't care if it takes 1-2 minutes to find a game. If that game will mean i get placed with equal tiers then i will be satisfied. There's 7 million or so players from what i heard in this game. The queue wont be THAT long with so many people out there. Heck, even modern mobas (i will compare this to a moba since it is similar in almost every aspect) will wait a bit to find the perfect match for you. This game, it throws all the rules away and finds the quickest out there. As a conclusion, this is my frustration searching for a way to be let out, so that i can move on, so that i can be done with this game if nothing else is done. Bash me all you want, i don't care anymore. I am sick and tired, the pain has numbed my senses to this point. I also don't think i need to post screenshots of every chat after i or another player gets instantly deleted by a 2 tier higher enemy. Literally all of them complain about the matchmaker, literally all of them bash the game for being stupid and so on. Or at least in my experience, there's always exceptions too. You won't see me again anymore, sad to go, but also satisfied with my conclusion and totally entitled to it since you brought me to this. I dedicated 3 years of my life playing this game and i have been rewarded with nothing but petty incentives. Nothing to make my loyalty worth it.

So 3 years worth of playing is not old enough? I play since game released. Never got motivated enough to farm any tier X and i despise the high tiers anyway. To me, the real game is at tier 8. Call me a twinker or whatever then.

Extremely disappointed with the supercontainers, again. Tier 8 players are left out of the rewards again. Not to mention constantly being forced to play versus higher tier enemies and tons of tier 10 enemies in a tier 8, but they also get rewarded while you get the short end of the stick and try to survive for no rewards at all. What, 10 flags, okay, appreciated but those SCs are what really help or matter. And IMO, what help do the tier 10 ships need since they are already maxed out? But a tier 8 instead could use the xp to get to tier 10 faster, just saying.

1. Description Cannot sell stock modules on a ship if the stock module has another module depending on it. Example: Pensacola Hull (A) cannot be sold when you purchase Hull (B), if you already have the Firing Mod (B) and sold Firing Mod (A) 2. Reproduction steps If you sell modules that depend on the hull before selling that hull, you will not be able to sell the hull. Example: When I bought the Firing Mod (B) on Pensacola, I was still using Hull (A). Then I sold Firing Mod (A). After a while I bough Hull (B), and when I tried to sell Hull (A) it won't appear so I cannot sell it. 3. Result Some ships that I have sold modules in the right order are fine, while others still have the Hull (A) purchased, Example: Some of my ships still have Hull (A) available and it is not sold yet. As such, I have some credits I can obtain from those hulls if I can sell them properly. 4. Expected result Selling modules should be done regardless of dependencies. Example: All modules should be able to be sold regardless of their dependencies. Afterall they are being sold, not purchased/equipped, so they do not need a certain Hull to be equipped in the first place. 5. Technical details Screenshots posted below. Queen Elizabeth has Hull (A) and Hull (B) waiting to be purchased. I have already sold Fire Control System Mod 1 and purchased Mod 2. When I purchase Hull (B) I will not be able to sell Hull (A) - Screen 1. New Mexico has all stock modules sold (proof that if they are sold in the right order, they can be sold) - Screen 2. Pensacola I mentioned above, Hull (A) not sold as can be seen and Hull (B) equipped already - Screen 3. Pensacola Hull (A) dependencies (Main Battery Mod 2). If I had not purchased Battery Mod 2 and not sold Battery Mod 1, I could have sold Hull (A) - Screen 4. Any other details needed, I will gladly provide. Thank you.

Whenever there's a mission or campaign to be done, the gameplay changes. Take the basic example of the long queues whenever there's a mission requiring a BB to play. You start seeing 200 BBs in queue along with very few DDs or CL or CV. This leads to bad gameplay in order to get missions done. I don't deny not doing as such either (I did charge with RN CL just to hit some torps because how else are you supposed to?). Anyway, back to the matter at hand, my main issues with this campaign: 1. Mission gating - time requirements In the case of children and teenagers playing, this is acceptable. But this game still has quite the adult playerbase. Players who have work and other mundane tasks to do besides playing a game. And that takes priority. So forcing people to rush/farm the missions quickly in order to have free time is unacceptable. The only benefit this gating provides is ensuring there are no players with the desired (Duke of York) ship until a certain given point, when it becomes unbearable to the ones who don't have it (for instance Mission 5, when everyone starts having DoY and you start seeing maps with 4-5 DoY consistently). 2. Task accuracy - specific tasks in specific ships I understand that the mission represents historical events and creating tasks that reflect how the battle was fought historically add some measure of realism and accuracy. Fine. However you do have to realise this is a game and not a historical simulator, nor does it pride itself on being the most historically realistic game either. Some battles are basically arcade battles fought with historic ships and that's the only historic fact about it. So requiring players to hit 11 torpedoes in a British cruiser that is specifically engineered to be played as a gunboat is utter [edited]. Charging a lone battleship in a RN cruiser almost always ends in a sacrifice run, dependant on RNG if you hit or not the torpedoes. Requiring 70k experience in a task within a mission instead of maybe the final task of a mission is again [edited]. The Graf Spee campaign was in all respects, a FUN and ENGAGING campaign. Even if it required loads of XP farming. But in doing so you were free to play whatever ship you liked, how you liked it. And that took some time or constraints off people. But i for one enjoy this aspect of the game: freedom to choose how you want to play. Instead, I am forced to play as a DD with a Cruiser, or forced to do this instead of how I normally play. 3. Difficulty - tier 7 ship and that means it must be difficult to get Wrong. Let me emphasise this. WRONG. It should be FUN. Yes, there should be some tasks or some way of ensuring people spend time and effort to get it. Totally fine. But how do you want them to remember that time spent? "Those F*****G 2-3 weeks when I had to barricade myself in the gamer-cave just to play some missions that were designed with the developer's behind instead of his head..." or "That totally fun campaign I played back then, when I even got a Bismarck or a Graf Spee while doing so!". The main issue is with the ship itself. I get it that you would want to get money for the ship before people would get it for free but there are certainly other ways of encouraging that behavior instead of just giving free players the finger and saying this is our game, we do crap how we want. If you want premium players or people spending money for the ship fine, but then don't flaunder that ship in front of the free players and tell them: "here, free candy, but you have to sell your soul for it". Either make the campaign for anyone or don't make it at all. 4. Mission number - Duke specific missions The whole purpose of creating missions just for the Duke is to ensure people also buy the ship ahead of the campaign finish. But this in turn disables free players of completing the whole campaign and getting the achievement due to the short time span (short time span after getting the ship to finish the left missions). However in doing so, the whole purpose of gathering stars becomes a chore. Because there are 4 tasks available. And since there is no way to complete the campaign wholly, why not give people more tasks? That way you ensure both free players get more stars more quickly, the final mission is time-gated anyway so they cant rush it either way and the people who want to buy the ship can also do so without interfering with anything else. The difficulty level drops? Well what would you expect? Bismarck and Graf Spee were not difficult at all, nor did they require time, right? No. They had their own "flair" and that was fun. I for one remember them gladly and am happy having taken part in them, but this campaign? This monstrosity is something I will surely despise for years to come. It's thought "backwards" and not worthy of being remembered. 5. Tasks based on RNG - Mission 4, I'm talking about you Check the player stats and see that every player with more than 1000 battles has less than 10 or some similar number of High Caliber or Dreadnought achievements. Requiring players to get those 2 achievements for 2 tasks in a mission ensures NO ONE, or at least unlucky people, have absolutely no way of completing the full campaign. I am curious in the end, how many players in total will have the achievement for completing the whole campaign. And let's not even mention casual players. I don't consider myself hardcore, nor super casual, but in 1500 battles I have only 4-5 High Caliber achievements and only 3 Dreadnought ones. Do you see where I am headed? It might be I play less BB than CL or whatever. But those are incredibly situational achievements and can never be done starting a battle thinking: "I will get Dreadnought this battle, no matter what". It doesn't work that way. And setting such tasks is not only morally wrong, but also rubbish, and egoistic in a bad sense. Those 2 tasks reflect greed and disrespect for the community. Such behaviour should not be encouraged. It has no place in a company as reputable and well thought-of as yours. Sorry to say this but my respect for you as of now has been shaken. 6. Subtle encouragement to buy premium ships Think Mission 5, and Gallant. Think whole campaign and Duke of York. Please, premium ships are there to be bought IF YOU WANT TO. I don't want to, so don't force me to play according to different rules or do something else. 90k damage with torps yells Gallant all over it. Hitting 11 torps yells Gallant again. Destroy 11 battleships yells destroyer and since it can be done simultaneously with other missions such as the 90k torp damage and hit 11 torps yells Gallant again. Get what I mean? No one forces you to buy the ship, but the game subtly tells you to. It tells you: "hey, you're struggling on hitting torps with Emerald and Fiji, why not buy Gallant and be done with your trouble?". This is wrong. As a side note, before people bash me or say that I am a cheapskate, think: what is my salary? What are the ship prices in my country? Why can't I afford spending so much money on a virtual ship that provides no real benefit to me other than historical name/accuracy, or vanity. And as another side note, my Fiji and Emerald have 35-40% winrate. Because I have to charge or employ stupid tactics in order to hit torps with them. I can't play the normal gunboat style that they are supposed to be played as. Thank you for ruining my game, WG.

I have been playing since the game has been released. I have one major issue with it and it has been bugging me ever since. In World of Tanks, every giveaway found on the internet gives special codes which can be redeemed for gold, premium tanks, and other bonuses. Those are split into 2 categories. Invite codes, and normal codes, which can be applied to already existing accounts. Ok, no problem thus far. However, with World of Warships, all codes given are either invite codes containing 500 doubloons and premium ships or normal codes for existing accounts which only give 1 day premium and a port slot. Now, where is this fair for the already existing players? I understand that inviting players is paramount for the game to grow and I have no problem with it whatsoever, but I do think that existing players should be also encouraged. Giving them 1 day premium is like tossing a stick on a fire that has already been lit in order to keep it aflame. Another point to this, let's say I want to purchase a ship model which Wargaming got a partnership with Italeri. So I purchase the Bismarck model and as a bonus I get a code giving me 500 flags and a Diana ship, plus 3 totally useless codes (for me) for inviting new players. What's more, those 3 players would get 1000 doubloons each and 7 days of premium. Meaning that I as an already existing player am treated like nothing while they are treated like kings. And be this as it may, but a Diana ship? What use is that to me since I already have all ships beyond tier 4. Perhaps a Tirpitz since I buy it's sister ship as a scale model. And another issue, let's say that invite codes have their reasons, I can live with that. But then again, new players spend no money and get an advantage over us existing players. How, you may ask? Just those 500 doubloons or more given to them can provide an edge since they will be able to afford the premium consumables (2nd level consumables) and that will give them a totally unfair advantage over us existing players who spent no money. If this issue is not addressed I will not spend any money on anything. Why would I need to spend money to get something, when I could roll a new account, get a bonus code from someone and get a small amount of doubloons to get me an edge over the other players that pay nothing. With all these said, I do want to spend money and buy premium ships but if Wargaming does not take this into account, it means that I literally mean crapto them and thus their game is totally not worth playing. Thanks in advance, Dragos.