Ubertron_X

In general global nerfs are more accepted that single nerfs, so you could potentially prower creep every class to approx the same level and then globally nerf the sh-t out of everybody to restore a low level balance. ;)

The thing is that nerfing is indeed a bad concept that will drive players away in any game. If possible you should buff weaker elements instead, however I admit that is also hard to do. On the other hand WG really needs to learn how other games balance things. Most MOBA type games balance in (if required even multiple) 5% incrementals until the statistics of a specific piece are fine, WG still uses a 0% or 100% approach and is not overly afraid to even change gobal rules now and then, greatly impacting gameplay. Also they need to learn to accept roll-backs if changes do not provide the desired result. Some ideas of mine include heals for all T8 cruisers (all CA and BB in T8 to T10 bracket should be able to heal), special BB matchmaking to reduce stress on the matchmaker (Jutland type battles with only BB/BC), special service costs for BB to coerce people to play other ships once in a while, and more distinction in stealth levels in between the DD lines to further help distinguish those lines from each other (yeah we all know that generally the Russians are bad at stealth and the Japanese are good, but come on, apart from some outliers everbody has 6.0 or so in the end, and anybody that has ever played a DD vs a good Kagero knows that a couple of 100 meters advantage can be huge). However I don't know what to do about CVs though as assymetric gameplay is damn hard to balance.

OP is technically correct. The missions are not described consistently. For all other tasks with requirements it says cruiser and depicts a cruiser, but not for task 2. However anybody that can actually read the description should also be able to recognise the cruiser symbol and add 1+1 together. Come on people it is not that hard...

https://media.giphy.com/media/uwxQ7KCXNnKwg/giphy.gif

...

Yes, because everything else would be strange. In no way should the Benson ever feel fully safe as long as the Fubuki is still alive. There are only thin lines in between confidence, overconfidence and arrogance. Don't ever underestimate an opponent, however beat he may look. You outplayed him and will kill him 99.5% of the time, still not enough?

All fine apart from the fact that you can not outplay everybody 100% of the time. Given any singular event luck usually has more impact than skill. It is only over a significant number of events that skill comes into play and this is exactly how it should be. Give me one million dollar and just one game to beat the world poker champion and I will have a fairly good chance of doing so because in this case luck > skill. However if we are to have 100, 1000 or 100000 games he will beat me fair and square in almost all of them. So even with the random element of detonations installed a good player will beat a bad player most of the time, exactly the way it should be. However this should not mean that the bad player can't win at all. To stick to my above example if he is dealt a royal flush this one game is his. And poker is very competitive...

ALL HAIL MEGA ZAO!

RNG is one, but of course not the only one, game element to keep things open. Depending of the type of game RNG can play a major or a minor part of how the game works but it is part of most games. Else try playing russian roulette with a fully loaded revolver. You go first please. And this is exactly what detonations critics want, they want to be safe. They want to be safe from all the chaos and randomess that surrounds us on a day to day level. However this is not how things work. So when you take your 20k HP Khaba to fight a 1k HP Kagero (which already is quite a loaded fight) you still want to be safe. And 99.5% of the time you are. However nothing is 100% safe and this is exactly how it should be, no safety net for bl..dy nobody because this is how life works. Reversals need to be possible in any game. And comming back to WoWs and detonations, in my opinion the amount of RNG involved in detonations is very very minor in comparison for example to the RNG involved for receiving random citadel hits or even deletions regardless of how you angle and how much evasive action you took.

QFT. Blah blah skill here blah blah skill there. If you want to play games with zero RNG go for shooters or chess. Else accept that RNG is an integral element of any game as it helps to keeps the outcome open. Otherwise if everything were decided from start we would not need to start playing.

Ad1) I am not talking absolute numbers here but the relation of chance and result. And if the chance to crash is e.g. 0.000000001% and the result is death I will still fly, and obviously most people also do. And if in WoWs the chance of detonation is 0.6% and the result is that I lose a game and have to start another one (wooohooo thats soooo hard to deal with) I will still play. Ad2) No it isn't again. If your friend gets lucky on the draw, gets a lot of armies for his set of cards and wipes you from the board you sit and watch, same as in WoWs. He got lucky, you detonate and got to sit and watch. However in case of WoWs you can start another game immediately instead of watching your friends continute to play, sometimes for a very long time. The point being is that a lot/most/allmost all (simple) board games are decided by sheer luck, and nobody ever complains about that.

Why not? When boarding a plane you usually also give a *Edited about the accident chance because you know it is rather low... Also I have the genuine impression that most guys complaining about detonations would have exactly zero problems playing Risk or similar RNG dependent games with/against their friends.

7300 battles, 43 detonations, 0.6% chance, nuff said. If you do not want even that tiny amount of randomness in form of a lucky punch in a game go play chess instead.

At least I can now try the guy and the bear, which have been sitting in my barracks since forever as they don't belong to any specific ARP ship...

A step in the right directions but the big question is: When will be finally able to dismiss ARP commanders?

Flag containers do, and that's why I dont understand Tuccy's answer unless it is an attempt at irony. Edit: 74 empty places btw...

Two types of torpedoes? This means that already good players (the minority) will be more effective and bad players (the majority) will be less effective because they will constantly have the wrong type of torpedo loaded. I predict hordes of (even more) useless DDs.

Seeing how many players constantly manage to (mis-) handle their ships and after many many many a polite suggestion to help them improve you just know that logic and reasoning is totally lost at them. You would not argue with a cow either, but yelling and clapping your hands may still do the trick.

The cap is lava!

There is cowardice and there is caution. Not everyone that does not commit in minute 3 is a coward. The reason why people often flock to the outer areas of the map is simple. The middle is often the most difficult and dangerous area as most ships enemy can shoot there and you might easily get caught in a crossfire. This is exactly the same reason why it is also easier to mount an attack on one of the flanks. For BB it is nonetheless often beneficial to stay centerish as the can reach out and touch most of the enemy fleet from there (exerting some kind of map control). Just always rember to have an eye on the minimap (learning to read battles, i.e. when to push and when to do a fighting retreat needs some experience) and always plot a way out as well as the way in.

We had incremental damage costs when the game started, however the devs looked for an incentive for people - especially BB players - to stop camping because of reduced service costs, so they reduced the overall repair costs but made it a fixed fee.

The reasoning behind is that you actually don't have to worry on how much damage you receive as long as you play effectively (in a BB usually by being a damage sponge and dealing damage) and help the team.

Then as a new player please be advised that BB (and any ships) repair costs are exactly the same regardless if you take 1% or 100% damage. So you can and should share some damage to your BB in order to help the team (tanking), just don't get reckless and die early.

You can try to sync drop with other clan mates in order to break/rig the matchmaking thus increasing your chances to club enemy teams and harvest their sweet tears because of the more than obvious clan tag. On a more serious note clan battles are currently not active...

Quoted for truth. With the removal of stealth fire I would extensively test if increased BB detection ranges could pull the trick (or at least some of it). BB's seen earlier could provide the following benefits (not exclusively): 1. Less surprised CA and DD. At the moment fully spec'ed BB detection range T8+ is somewhere in between 11.6km and 13.6km which is quite insane for any unsuspecting CA or DD. Open fire/get spotted in a CA or DD = hail of BB broadsides from ridiculously close ranges. 2. Earlier and longer BB vs BB engagements because no other ships may be seen (yet), which would also be quite historically correct. 3. BB's would be longer "under fire" even when reloading or holding fire because they can't re-cloak as easy thus bringing down their survival rate/time. Imho this does tackle many problems that WG and the player base are already aware of, namely CA and DD survivability versus BB AP as well as BB survivability.