_Azazello_

Does the stats on the homepage include the bonus for the first victory each day too? I don't have replays enabled and after i realized the forum and max xp contests are different i haven't made any screenshots either but during the contest period i had a game with 4772 xp without premium -according to the homepage. (even if that is the base xp might have done some teamdamage i guess). Still im happy i haven't won a kitakami, and according to reddit there will be an ingame contest for the kamikaze so i don't mind not getting the fujin either, but i don't know what to do with a model kit -i hope this will be my biggest problem this year.

Xp wise the best game with my fubuki so far, from earlier today: (in-game username: _Azazello_ )

A few days ago i was going to submit this post but it got a little bit longer than i expected so this time i will try again and hopefully won't end up with a terrible wall of text. /edit: it ended up as a terrible wall of text/ I've been playing for a while with all three wargaming titles and i reached the point where im (sadly) pretty sure that wows won't be an exception from the other two. All three games started as arcade but still fun games indirectly encuraging agressive coordinated teamplay, but as the playerbase grew and the more and more passive gameplay and widely shared misconceptions became more prominent the developers instead of trying to turn this tendency around made changes to the games which justified this kind of gameplay. Minimised the impact of individual players, made sure that every player regardless of their (in)competence can get their share of kills and wins (somewhere around the average values) so even the worst can say " ah just the rng messing with me" and keep playing and paying while stripping the games from those characteristics which made them fun to play in both the sort and the long term. In the case of wot this lead to a huge financialy success, it killed wowp and im afraid the same is likely to happen with wows too. WOT: I started playing wot in cbt and got hooked very fast (propably thats why it took me so long to finally give up on it after hoping for some psoitive changes for a very long time). At first there were very distinct classes each with their own strenghts and weeknesses. If a few players were aware these, they could turn the tide and win in situations that less experienced players would just give up without even trying. It had a class very similar to destroyers in wows, only beeing really effective against players unaware of their surrundings and the core game mechanics. Wargaming was listening to these players and (iirc) just before release they nerfed spgs pretty hard and from then on i think there wasnt a single patch without an artillery nerf. But even worse the controversy around the first nerf lead to the "ninja nerfs", why should wg generate endless flame topics on the forums if they can modify the dispersion patters for example. I am pretty sure the accuracy stats or the size of the reticles had some meaning in the beginnig, later they became (practically) irrelevant. There was an other problem: certain tanks with low rof and high alpha damage , obviously their dispersion patterns got nerfed and the zero damage critical hits (previously known as bug) got labeled as overpenetrating shots (this move made the us heavy line practically irrelevant and i stopped playing wot at this point , later i downloaded it two or three times but i havent played more than a handful battles so i dont know whats going on now). After a while all the tanks got balanced around the dpm values, all of them felt exactly the same for me with different skins. All of the choices i faced boiled down to something like this: do i want to sacrifice 20/30/50% of my hp to kill this enemy? Of course this kind of basic game mechanic (apart from beeing boring) justified: 1. the lemming trains -if a bigger group of players have a higher damage output they can take down smaller group of players regardless of other factors. 2. running away from enemys/hiding in a corner of the map/not even trying to win a game: " i wont pay huge repair bills, they can kill me anyway a draw is still better than a lost game", etc 3. and it also lead to more griefing/destructive play So in short the elements of the game encouraging constructive gameplay got thrown away, and players were looking at their teammates more and more often merely as meatshields (and in some cases actively using them as one). While the only "positive" effect of the changes were keeping mediocore/bad players alive for a longer period of time therefore giving them more chance to inflict damage and feel useful (so hopefully turning them into paying customers). WOWP: The popular opinion is that this game was dead as soon it came out, but i think it was a very good game at the beginning. Somewhere between warthunder's arcade and realistic modes. I was hoping wargaming is trying to do something similar to gaijin but instead of adding different gamemodes to the same game, they are releasing different games for slightly different target audiences. But pretty soon they started threating it simply as an extension to wot's tech trees maybe hoping they wont have to add more and more tanks to wot to keep the players in the game (and their purses open). At first the biggest strenght of the game was the fact it had very good flight model (well on the arcade level but still...), that made it possible to outplay multiple opponents with some experience (regardless of using a mouse or a joystick - and both methot was pretty balanced btw). But right from the start of the obt the forums was full of topics started by the wot "unicums" (jesus christ... i feel sick every time someone uses this term regarding of wot or any other game), "why cant i kill anyone?", "how could anyone kill me?", "this plane is op", ""that plane is even more op","controls are too hard to learn"... So wg dumbed down the game, turned it into a world of tanks with wings, excepct all the negative effects of these changes were more prominent (and happened a lot faster) in this game. Planes got some ridiculous flight models, very easy controls (which rendered joysticks useless)and they felt just like tanks: as if they were having some kind of aura eating away the hp of the enemy at a constant rate. So again: lemmingtrains, even more passive gamplay, etc. Most of the battles played out one of these two ways: either players were trying to stay as far from the enemy team as possible maybe some attack aircraft got away and won the game (mostly undetected), or there was a huge furball at the beginning deciding the outcome within 2 minutes. The only thing that was same in all of the games was the feeling of not beeing able to effect the outcome as an indivudal player because even two very bad players had more damage output than one good player. And at this point the game just died: it felt even more arcade and random than warthunders arcade battles or even wot,(and if someone is looking for that why would they download 15+ gigabytes and spend countless hours leveling up instead of just going back to wot, or to a webpage with some flashgames on it?). WOWS: I think the same could be said about this game as the other at their beginnings. It has very different classes of ships each with different characteristics, playstile and damage output. It has a class similar to spgs/attack aircraft, which main job is to punish bad players/teams. There are a lot of bad players (everyone at the beginning) so obviously it seems like as if everyone and their mother would like to nerf destroyers to the groud: "remove unlimited torpedos from destroyers", "nerf torp damage", "nerf torp speed", "nerf destroyer detection", "make torps bounce if they hit a ship at an angle" (!?), and so on. Almost all of these post/rants on the chat comes from player who dont know how destroyers work and they are not even interested in it (and always targetting all of the destroyers while justifying their opinoons based on a few low tier overperforming destroyers). They just want one less thing to worry about while pointing their cursor at an enemy and holding down the mouse botton. But there are a lot of them and they make a lot of noise. /Even players with tier 8/9 cruisers at best ask me if im serious or im trolling when i point out to them they maybe shouldn't turn away from spotted destroyers and start running with full speed to the opposite direction/flank./ The "meta" ( i hate this term at least as much as i hate the term "unikum" btw) is most apparrent with CVs: nothing else matters only the damage oput, on the stat page its not effected by premium bonus so this is considered to be (one of)the only comparable stat in the game. Therefore fighters are totally useless ... If a cv is spotting a destroyer/saving a teammate (meatshiels anyway) from an other CV it only helps with the winrate (and hurts avg damage), but the winrate heavily depends on the RNG anyway so cvs just use the strike setup and worry about their damage output, nothing else matters. -"Low winrate? -"Its just RNG! Look how much damage i inflict in avarege!" And this is my biggest problem with cvs /apart from the hight tier US ones / : they are even less encuraged to play in a team than any other class. (and its maybe just loosely connected to the mechanics or just a feeling but i found that the cv players are the most likely to behave "inappropiatly": -hanging in the corner in the map and spitting acid in the chat four minutes before the end of the battle if someone dares to start capping when there is a juicy bb still alive - a US cv without fighters cursing the MM because the other team has a lower tier jap bb with fighters and killing himself right at the start, -spending fifteen minutes guiding their planes outside of the map to hit the other cv while at the time its already doesnt matter if that cv gets his 6th kill or not, etc ) The passive gameplay: Generally in tier 6+ battles it can be very clear even in the first few minutes if a team has a good chance of winning the battle or will badly fail. Once in a few hundred battles its because the MM balances the game by putting a high tier DD in one team and a high tier CV in the other, but almost all the time its because its very easy to spot if players are trying to get into positions where they can actively engage the enemy/gain some ground or they are just trying to get out of harms way. And it is usually the latter, throught the whole game... Even worse a lot of times it feels like its more about tricking a teammate into becomming a meatshield -i know im just beeing paranoid with this one-, but usually players are just turn away as soon as an enemy is spotted leaving behind their teammates (and their enemys). If they are cruisers they turn at the first sign of a destroyer and run to the other flank. With bbs it happens all the time, they are just get to their extreme range trying to "snipe" from there and then whining about inaccurate guns. The forums are full of posts about the colorado and the izumo beeing way underpowered while i think their not so overwhelming performance is mainly because this playstile that most players pick up around tier 6. In my opinion both of these ships are better than their counterparts but they rely more on their teams, in short these ships are terrible in the current "meta" because they cant run away from fights. Im writing this post now because (even though i decided a long time ago i wont spend any money on wargaming titles), i bought premium and its running out today, and from previous experiences the first bigger patch of the obt can tell a lot about the direction the game is going to. So i was looking into previous patches (only joined in obt) and the upcoming patch plus i was thinking about what would make the game more appealing to me/if it worth to pay for an other month of premium. Based on what the most people consider the current "meta" a lot of things could be made to make the gameplay more enjoyable (just some quick ideas): Give bonus xp/credits when/if: -finishing the battle sooner (10 minutes higher bonus, 15 minutes lower bonus, etc) -killing enemy planes close to teammates -damaging enemys within 50% of max range (or something like that) -damaging enemys while there is only a few allies in close range of the player -hitting targets with each consecutive volleys Give less xp for the same actions if the opposite of these are true. Increase the upkeep cost of ships (so higher repair cost even if the ship is undamaged) In theory maybe these changes would make the gameplay faster, more agressive and therefor more enjoyable. But as thinking about my previous experiences with wargaming titles i realised its pretty obvious (in this game too) that the true "meta" is not about credit/xp/damage gains, its simply about not getting hit. /And btw how could anyone expect players to base their actions on intricate game mechanics if they dont even bother to figure out the very basic mechanics they face in every battle (like torpedos)./ At best most players only consider one thing when they face a choice and it is the damage received/dealt ratio. Thats the reason almost everyone is constantly running away from enemys /threating allies as meatshields. As long as they don't get hit, even the smallest amount of damage they cause from 20+ kms feels like a "bonus", the fact that its made possible by other allies soaking up the damage doesnt matter the slightest. This is the reason why balancing around a constant dps output didnt help the previous games either, while it removes the chance of oneshot kills and therefore should make players more willing to engage enemys, most players are not willing to "sacrifice" even 10% of their healt pool to take out an enemy, instead it greatly reduces the chance of succesfully engaging multiple enemys therefore it encurages players to don't even try to overcome these situations. But what made me very disappointed is the upcoming patch ( i havent played on the test server so only have the patch notes and second hand information) It seems like any of the patches from the early days of wot/wowp: one (half)step forward, two steps backwards: -it removes the pure strike setup from cvs, but doesnt have anything to encurage cvs to play for their teammates (some initiative to defend allies from enemy planes or something- but this could be said about any other class too) -instead of forcing players to play more agressively and to try to take out their enemys faster it makes it easier to dodge incoming damage by reducing rudder shift time /also it is an indirect nerf to DDs ( a really bad sign), and even worse it wasnt mentioned in the patchnotes/ -the worst of all which is a gigantic red flag in my eyes (and its not mentioned in the patchnotes either) is the lowered rate of citadel hits. So all in all i have a feeling this game is on its way becoming the second World of Warplanes. Wargaming comes out with a fun and enjoyable game, then when the players from wot arrive expecting the same mechanics and playstile to be "succesful" that they are used to and they inavitably fail and start complaining, wg simply modifies the game to suit their needs. Stripping it from its unique features and instead of helping to identify/higlight the mistakes players make all the time over and over again, they implement changes that make these mistakes less relevant. Nerfing hardest the class that punishes the most basic mistakes players make, making incoming damage easier to avoid, removing damage spikes from high alpha classes. Overall reducing the number of times when an avarage player could ask themself: "what mistake did i make?"/"what should i do different next time?" and i think that the best games are those which makes the players ask these questions a lot. Also after this process is finished and results in a weird wot clone players go back to wot and start the second wave of hate post, the first beeing "this game is not like wot", the second: " if it is like wot but wot is in a more advanced state and i put more time into that, than why would i play this game?", then wargaming cuts the founding and leaves the game in a vegetative state. I didn't write this post to announce something like i hate this game/will uninstall it etc (more than 16 thousand characters would not worth that anyway), i will still play it, i think its fun and most of the time i enjoy it, but im getting suspicious and afraid its going in a direction i would not like, but i still hope that it won't happen. And supposedly wargaming values player feedback so after almost five years i fullfilled my duty and expressed my experiences and feelings about their games. PS: (a little more text wont make this post a lot worse than it is anyway) Just to point out one element that makes me think this is a good game and it can be even better than now rather than worse is the map "Hotspot". Which is in my honest opinion is the best map i ever encountered in any of the wargaming titles. It encourages players to work together (even if it only means pinging the map), heavily favours agressive gameplay by forcing players to remove their enemys fast. So there is no need to make drastic changes to the game to make it better just some initiative for teamplay like a map that breaks the chain of endless maps with the same layout (one route slightly favouring one team, an other slightly favouring the other, and one "no man's land".)

My last reply to Aeerron's post was a little bit impulsive because it stuck a nerve so i just would like to make sure its clear i dont have a problem with him directly more like with the whole attitude. (also maybe this will be a tldr version of my original post, but maybe im just repeating myself) In all three games there were/ there are a few tanks/planes//ships (or even whole classes) different from the others, with different utility than the others before them in the tech tree. While i think they were just simply a little different from the others by showing their true strenght under less usual circumstances. Maybe a weak attempt from the developers to mix up the usual gameplay and make it a little more interesting/less monotone (the vk4502 for example). But before or later the commonly accepted opinion (more like the one and only thruth) was that they are just freexp/money sinks that WG put into the tech tree to force players to buy gold to get past them. And players (especially the loudest ones) instead of demanding changes that would make the gameplay more diverse and therefore would give more opportunities for these tanks/planes (or inducing these changes themself) wanted changes that would make them more like any other unit - to handle and behave exactly like the tanks before or after them suiting the usual gamestyle. And this is a self inducing process that happened in both of the other games: it enforces the opinion that there is only one effective playstyle and only one type of unit thats fit for that kind of playstile, i guess it also shows WG that players spend less time with the "less usual" units so they are less effective to keep players in the game for longer periods of time and discourages developers to add unique tanks/planes/ships to the game or make changes to the game that would steer it towards a more diverse experience. / And this same thing is happening right now in wows too. If anyone is looking for opinions about the colorado or izumo the only thing they could find is the endless amount of posts/"funny" videos pointing out their weaknesses suggesting changes like: give the colorado less hp/armor but increase its mobility / give izumo more armor and decrease its mobility, until these changes happen just spend some free xp on these ships instead of playing them. So one can say they are bad by objective standards but even these "objective" standards are at least partially based on and reinforced by the common attitude towards them (maybe it doesnt make any sense, but i hope its clear what i want to say). / And the reason why i think hotspot is the best map in the game because that map is the first change i can think of in any WG title thats not made to reinforce the usual gamestyle/meta, but instead its steering it into the other direction. (Of course i could have been too optimistic about it or looking to much into it but it was basically the only thing that convinced me its worth spending some money on this game)

Well i just searched for wows on youtube and was looking for the recent english videos about the patch, checked out three or four videos and in two of them the lower rate of citadel hits were mentioned (one of those was a jingles video, i cant remember the other one and i am not familiar with the wows youtube scene so maybe its nothing to worry about).

I don't think either those changes would make the game better by themself or at all. Maybe they would but i just wanted to point out these changes propably wouldn't make a huge impact anyway because the true "meta" is not purely about inflicting damage but rather avoiding it, so yeah people are overly cautious. Also they would only remove the common excuses people come up with when they justify their passive gameplay but wouldn't prevent it. By inrecasing the upkeep cost i meant a system where the repair cost is only partially related with the damage taken more like a (more or less constant )fee that you have to pay to play a game -so maybe the "i will hide in a corner waiting for the battle to end" kinda behavior would be less likely to happen. (Im aware of the high repair cost, one battle in the izumo if i die is somewhere around 250k credits with the repair+ammo+camo+the 22,5k fire extinguisher thingy, making that higher wouldn't be the best idea) Giving a bonus for consecutive hits, etc: in theory everyone should be aware they cant keep up a steady damage output from extreme ranges yet a lot of players are still (as i imagine) justify "sniping" from the back based on a few lucky hits, but maybe a simple visual feedback and a small bonus (based on the actual ship's ROF and the inflicted damage) would encurage at least new players to dont fall for this kind of gameplay. /and i didnt mean to suggest that the damage of each volley should be increased with higher citadel hit chance or anything like that, i meant it the other way around, players should be encouraged to get into a position where they can inflict a reasonable amount of damage with every volley/ At first i thought i shouldn't reply to this but i will, i just don't want to seem like if iam offended or want to be offensive because im really not. I ran into two of your videos (i think its pretty much impossible not to if someone is checking out these forums or the wows subreddit every once in a while, i dont have any problem with it guess its hard to get enough subscribers to make your time worth), -the carrier guide videos btw-, and after a few "the enemy team has a cv so just in case i get into the corner of the map", "fighters are useless" kind of comments i decided to dont even check your post. I know i can sometimes jump to conclusions early and easily judge people, but i have a feeling you are a perfect example of a certain kind of players i have a problem with. The kind of player who for some reason is motivated to generate a lot of posts/content/maintain a high visibility and even more motivated to don't go against the commonly accepted misconceptions / the "meta" / the one and only truth, but instead just keep echoing it and trying to get on the same page with as many players as possible to please them and making sure they can relate. I guess if you have a problem with (at least) those three points you might have read why i think they are true and maybe you also noticed everyone else in the thread took some effort and wrote down why don't agree or why they do (which i appreciate a lot btw). One of the reasons i wasn't too active in the forums (or even in the wg games) is exactly this kind of behaviour, before or later the keepers of the one and only thruth came by and share some truth with the common folks. No explanation needed either because thats not the reason of their appearance or they seriously believe that if anyone else has a different opinion than the majority it is false by default. So the "I would like to have what you're having, because it sounds like fun." becomes the ultimate argument, no explanation needed.