AgarwaenME

You're asking biased people if they "notice" things and you get biased results based on no actual data, and you think that proves something crazy and nonsensical just because you need to believe in insane conspiracies because it makes you feel smarter. Yes, that's just what I'd expect from people like you.

That's not what random means.

Hopefully the banhammer hits you aswell as them then.

But they'll get WGs personal attention atleast. For the 2 seconds it takes for each of them to get a ban.

It has it's own port slot or doesn't need one, pick either it works the same.

Rofl, so you managed to find one thing you could argue against, and ignore the real point. Fine, so you do everything I said - divisions to just farm stats. (and no, I don't have a 100% I am right bias, I have a "data is worth more than opinions" bias, and I'm perfectly fine to be corrected). Which is, when you play in a manner that's simply designed to put you in an absurdly favourable position then yes of course you'll carry more. However that doesn't mean you all your WR is due to you even then, nor is every loss due to your team. And that no matter peoples skill levels, they still easily have a biased view that they actually deserve even more.

No, you depend on singularly playing an overperforming, ship with a maxed out captain, against mostly newbies or far worse ships with stock setups and captains with a fraction of the skillpoints and often does it in a division. And even then, many wins would still be wins without your contribution. Sealclubbing just allows you to turn far more games around. And as it is, even good players often think they "deserve" even more.

FTFY

That it called "expected streaks in random distributions". And as usual, people who think this is somehow strange, always refer to these times when they cause losses, which shows their personal bias in that regard. And sure, I have streaks with hopeless teams, and so what? I have as many or more streaks of hopeless opposing teams where I win nearly by default no matter what I do. And in this regard "hopeless" is as much "luck of the draw put some guy some ship up against some other guy that might be better or worse but where one ship just is better overall and more suited for that situation, or where one team had people just happen to split or go in one direction and the other team move differently and thus one team got an advantage they never really could have planned for". People just want to blame any difference between their actual performance and their imagined level of skill, on anything else, be it MM, imbalanced ships, WG going "you've hit too many times this battle so now we'll force you to miss for a while" (yes, people have actually claimed that they do that) or any other absurd thing.

Yes it is, there's absolutely no difference in MM for these ships (beyond tirpitzes being by far the most played of either).

You've well addressed a point I was going to make. And another point that tends to fly in the face of those who looks at their own efforts with rose coloured glasses, and try to somehow make it possible that the average player level could be worse, and that they somehow then can't take advantage of that somehow, which flies against all logic. But there's another small point to make. In a team where more people "do their job", as in they don't actively just play for their own gains but give support where needed, then you can play for the group and get better results. Though if the average is the same that just means you can keep your input relevant. Unlike a game of "potatoes" on both sides, where a veteran in a good ship can just go yolo and dominate the game by slaughtering a large part of the enemy team. Mind you this is really something you now really pnly see in the sealclubbing range of tiers. p.s. And another tiny note on WR. There's many of us with draw rates still in the 3-4% range, who merely by playing similarly are gaining WR due to these draws becoming a smaller part of our total amount of games.

And? BBs while having the highest amount of hp, still does as much damage and largely against lower hp targets. Thus you'd expect their % damage to be higher, not lower than other ships. Thus by your own words, BBs are even better off. And while it might not be most CAs "primary role" to attack BBs, they should of course still be able to fight them to some extent. And pretty much every case where a BB burns down due to CAs firing HE, it's a case of multiple vs one scenarios. And while BBs have a large advantage, who wants them to easily be able to defeat 2, 3 or more CAs single handedly?

No. Why? Because someone who's just better at the basic skills (turning, aiming etc) can still do better even if using a worse tactic. Nor does damage done necessarily go hand in hand with winning games (you do quite a bit of damage in your tirpitz, but you fail to have an impressive WR in it). As I already said above, using a BBs presence on the battlefield is as important as using its guns.

Yet these ships are at the top end of damage done. So how much of a nerf to damage per shell would you take for better accuracy?

Sorry, did I say you were or were not doing something? No. I did not make any claims about you at all, nor was the reply even to you. I just said why going closer isn't merely possible, but often the best choice. If you somehow take that personal, that's all on you Also, I don't sit back in my Titpitz, and I have no issues doing damage, nor winning games (because that's what you should be playing for, I'm perfectly fine if I open up the possibility for others to do damage too).

Because "getting closer" actually does work, while sitting back at ineffective ranges does not and relies on others doing the work for you. And "getting closer" does far more than simply get you into a better range to fire. It puts pressure on the enemy team. CAs do NOT like to see a BB come to a range where they can be easily erased, and they are the ones protecting all those mythical invisible DDs that some players see all over the place, while cowards in BBs (with your mindset) also run away when other BBs comes closer. Thus you provide a better safe area for your own CAs and DDs to protect you from the things that can kill you (beside your own ability to not eat every torp launched at you, and to use repairs in a way to effectively negate what HE does to you). Or you can just sit back and make up excuses while using tired and stupid clichès like "lemming train" and "XYZ spam", and then complain you make so few hits.

Basicly, and as always with you, you just ignore any arguments against you while you babble on hypocritically. So nothing new there. Also, you didn't only ask for buffs to USN CVs (to counter nerfs you've spent a year begging for), you also asked for nerfs to IJN CVs, so you'll never learn how just begging for more nerfs is going to turn back around and bite you.

You confuse bias with the actual bias that you've shown since beta. Cherry picking "omg unrealistic omg" arguments when it suited you, and then ignoring unintended consequences which is what you're whining at now. All the nerfs WG introduced proved, is that they'll do a lot to appease whiners, and that such appeasements will never be enough to satiate such whiners. Comparing WR of CVs to WR of other ships shows how ridiculous your cherry picking is. While it might show USN CVs underperforming, it's absurd to compare that to anything but other CVs, due to the mirrored MM. Nor is further nerf crying against them warranted, when all you need to do it balance the poorly performing USN CVs to fix that issue. But then you don't want to play those I guess, so your bias shines through again. And again, it's whining just like yours that have caused that imbalance. Basicly, you continue being a selfish hypocritical whiner, while blindly ignoring where your demands would lead.

Stop looking for excuses.

There's been no changes to it. And you shouldn't expect to sit at 17-20km and get easy hits in the first place.

Lmao.. the guy who spent a year trashtalking CVs and demanding nerfs for them, are now complaining that they're performing poorly. Should I be shocked that it's because you're just started to get into a little higher tiers on these ships? Nah, that's just about as little shocked as it's possible for me to be.

Thing is, and don't take this personal, you're trapped in personal bias. You think your previous WR was deserved and due to your skill, while when it drops it's due to your teams. It's seems impossible for you to understand that the fact might just be that you had been lucky to have that high WR to begin with, and your current WR is closer to what you should expect for your efforts, and which is what you'd expect to happen the more games you play. Also quite possible you're doing worse as you go into higher tiers and face better opposition (thus you're no longer carrying games, but rather struggle to carry your own weight) and might "deserve" to go even lower in the end. WG doesn't need to do anything for this to happen, statistics does it for them.

Your recent record is actually just a couple losses away from your average, and thus well within reason and expectations.

still?

[edited]