Ubertron_X

How about the losing side wants to play a fresh game instead of having their time wasted too? Playing whipping boy is only so much fun, so perhaps better to lose a doomed game fast for a chance for more credits and XP next game? And of course reversals are possible and one of the best moments of gaming, however rare, especially given the situation as per the screenshot. If it was a landslide victory it should be over fast, not 10 extra minutes of mopping up hapeless victims.

For me it was not the weak amour and/or high citadel that did make the ship not working according to my playstyle, but the worse concealment in regard to both Edinburgh and Minotaur. So if anything I would like to see her concealment buffed.

Remember that strike vs AS is a game of outdamage vs outlast. However this means that an AS CV will only be able to triumph over a strike CV if a very specific set of conditions can be met. Most important of those is that the game is long enough to actually achieve air superiority, i.e. the total sum of AA kills and AS kills needs to be able to deplete the enemy CVs plane reserve by mid game latest without your team having lost it already. Rule of thumb is that the first 10min belong to the strike CV, the last 10min belong to the AS CV. The longer the game lasts while being undecided the more probably the AS CV should be able to win. However the above is heavily dependant on the following: - strike CV plane reserve can actually be depleted in due time (currently not the case in high tiers) - the game does not end prematurely because of the strike CVs front-loaded damage while he still has planes (very team dependant; not the case in most random battles) So as long as the strike CV has the capacity to deal damage over the whole length of 20min and your team does not give you enough time to achieve AS by playing smartly and minimize damage you can not win in an AS CV. And this is the exact reason why AS set-ups are invalid in the current (random) meta.

One major problem with CV's is not how to balance them but how they are percieved by the non-CV players. And in this case their greatest strength is their greatest weakness. Though it is 100% correct that carriers should be able to strike where they want to, almost nobody else likes those 'finger of god' moments, neither in FPS games nor in games like WoT or WoWs. You just gunned down multiple enemies in a tough close quarter fight with your shotgun or submachine gun because of better movement, reflexes and aiming skill? Boom... sniper shows you the finger of god. You are just about to outfight multiple enemies by skillfully taking the high ground and using superior hull down tactics in your tank? Boom... arty shows you the finger of god. You are just stalling/killing half the enemy fleet by skillful maneuvering / angling and superb ship knowledge and aiming skills, surely netting your team the win? Boom... carrier shows you the finger of god. And the problem with the above is that your own carrier is most of the time not seen as a boon (even if he does a gazillion damage), however the enemy carrier that targets you / takes you out / makes your life miseable is always seen as a bane (and rightfully so). Perception is a powerful thing and as long as WG can not give players a feeling that to have a CV on their team is a bigger boon for themselves (like having a surplus DD in a domination game) than having to play against the enemy CV players will always loathe CVs.

Yes.

I am pretty sure that my hydro equipped Hipper will surely add much to a NC's air defense... (It's sarcasm for sure, but please keep in mind that not every CA is a defensive AA equipped fly swatter)

You cant dominate what you cant hit...

Friant = absolute garbage I will take a St. Louis or Tenryu over this POS anytime. Arcs and travel time of shells are outrageous. Requires at least 2 monitors to have sufficient lead even on battleships.

cro_pwr, on 22 April 2017 - 11:17 AM, said: Yeah, looks like a severe matchmaking fail, just add 5 more BB and a proper battle would ensue.

Actually I would prefer if WG would rate certain gunboat DDs as cruisers and not use them for DD matchmaking, as usually the guys getting the gunboats (with the noteworthy exeption of the Khaba) end up at a severe spotting and capping disadvantage.

Not entirely true, but looking at DDs usually is a good starting point to determine match outcome as WG has not yet succeded in balancing DD matchmaking. 1. Domination mode? 2. Enemy has more DD than you? 3. Enemy has better (more suited / stealthy) DDs than you? => you probably lose. Nothing like funny match-ups like Shimakaze and Udaloi vs Gearing, Z-46 and Yugumo. Not impossible to win but heavily stacked against the former.

The art of BB play is to know when to push and when not. In addition to that you have to decide if you want to push regardless of your own death and in most cases you will also heavily relying on your team to follow up and support you properly, so you don't die a meaningless and early death. An aggressive or 'sucide' push can be brutally effective if your teammates are able to make use of you drawing attention and fire, however if your support is shot to pieces or bails early you are left doomed with little or no effect (apart from looking very YOLO'ish). I don't know about other BB captains but in random battles I ideally want to achieve numerical superiority and reduce the overall number of enemies before I am going for the big push in order to increase my own survival time under fire as well as to reduce team dependency. For example if it is 6 vs 6 on one flank (2DD, 2CA, 2BB each), I will probably wait until 2 enemy ships have been deleted before advancing aggressively.Thinning out the lines to give the big guys more room to fight so to speak. And this is the point were I feel that other captains, especially cruiser captains, are often not patient enough to give BBs enough time to evaluate the situation (which ships constitute the opposition, have all enemies been spotted already or are there additional camouflaged cruisers and destroyers that need to be taken into account etc) and as well the effect of their opening salvos (if the opening salvos already cripple or sink an enemy ship a push is more likely). Edit: Please note that things are very different if talking about clan or team battles or pushing with division mates, simply because you can rely on them, respectively you know that they know what to do.

Sorry but we can't hear you over the sound of our own awesome BB song:

Thing is, if anything they only needed to buff Tirpitz secondaries to Gneisenau levels to remove the inconsistency in KM secondary range and/or buff Tirpitz AA out of historical reasons (late war Tirpitz had a lot more AA than Bismarck). But this buff is just hilarious.

Next in the $$$ shop: Space battleship Tirpitz, now featuring defensive AA, hydro, radar, smoke and speed boost.

Checks date. 1st of April has already passed...

The thing about WoWs is that many things are not very intuitive or even counter intuitive (like game mechanics messing up with the crossing the T maneuvre). Though your suggestion really is one extremely viable order of battle for any MMO (scout >> tank >> damage dealer) and probably will be executed as such during team or clan battles, it is not the order of battle that is the first thing that comes to mind for random players respectively in random matches. * For DDs life will be much easier because they can now torp BBs a lot easier and will also not die as fast when cruisers hang back a little (my DDs worst nightmare is a previously unspotted cruiser suddenly opening fire at <10km, Atago or Chap for example). * For CAs life will be easier when BB are leading to 'tank' damage and they can DPM from a little afar (however due to the brittleness of CAs it is still valid to try and shoot a however angled cruiser at 12km over a head-on BB at only 8km). * For BBs however life will be much harder because the margin to manage their cooldowns (DCP and heal) will be much smaller due to higher torpedo thread and additional focussed fire (you probably gained nothing if you go down fast with 4/5 heals remaining). So two classes would probably like the third one to go in front, however for the third class this is not intuitive at all. Why should anybody strife to make one's own life harder (and probably also die faster)? In my opinion class specific incentives (the right ones!) are the way to go. If WG really wants our BBs to go up front, why not reward them properly (read: reward them properly if the play their expected role properly). For example, and this is just one of many thinkable examples, the xp and silver rewards for damage dealt by BBs could be significantly reduced and the rewards for potential damage received significantly increased.

This! Just get random 12BB vs 12BB battle of Jutland style games and *bam* no problem with "but queueing times" lame excuses anymore, which are usually used to not fix the match maker. Alternative solution: Raise the minimum CA number in any given game from 2 to 4. Alternatively it can also be 0. Lift maximum numbers for BBs and DDs entirely. This way you could e.g. take two unliked 5/2/5 battles and create one 4/4/4 (or 3/4/5 or 5/4/3) and one 6/0/6 (or 7/0/5 or 5/0/7) battle. No impact on queueing times and battles would be ok from a cruiser point of view more often.

On thing of note apart from coins: WG please stop the real time display of the team results as this is in no way promoting competative play but only promoting winning-team-joining. Personal progress: Yes. Team progress: No. Team progress should only be shown at the end of the round (aka after each week). Otherwise it is too easy to determine who will win a round, even after just a couple of hours...

The only thing that CVs successfully do is to herd people together. Still not stopping a blob of 3+ BB with overlapping AA auras to snipe from 20km. CVs simply punish solo ships, regardless of class or position, be it frontline DD on cap or singular BB at map border.

If I may add an additional detail why RPS is not working: Order of battle. Order of battle is usually dictated by gun and/or torpedo range and somewhat resembles BB<< CA<< DD <=> DD >> CA >> BB. So let's take a look at it from a RPS point of view: BB counter enemy CA. Check, because BB can engage CA (or virtually any target) at almost any range as long as the target is spotted. CA counter enemy DD. Somewhat check. IF (and only if) there is no opposing capital ship CAs usually get the job done and can at least drive enemy DDs away. DD counter enemy BB. No check at all. In order to counter BBs, DDs have to first overcome any enemy DD and CA in between them and their pray (and not even taking into account carriers). So RPS in WoWs is inherently flawed by order of battle. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Another thing that needs to be taken into account is the result of massing firepower. A man with a knife might beat a man with a rifle if he somehow manages to get close enough. Not an easy task but quite feasable and with a high chance of success. However 10 men with knifes will most probably not be able to ever beat 10 men with rifles unless they somehow manage to conduct a well coordinated and simultaneous surpise attack. In gaming turns this means that the closer the attack needs to be delivered to deadlier it needs to be. And while torpedoes are deadly at close range, BB guns are almost equally deadly at any range.

As Negativvv already pointed out: Any decent DD player that has hit 10 torps in a single battle has already carried the battle hard on his very own as it usually requires a lot less torp hits to carry a battle in a DD.

Saipan T9 planes always were cheat from the very start. Even without the new rules any decent Saipan player could easily outplay your squadrons simply due to the speed difference of the planes. Quit Hiryu for Shokaku, never went for Ranger (stopping at Independance) and never ever looked back at T7 CV play again...

In order to get the ~263 coins per week for either of the big rewards you need to get to the second to last milestone on nearly every parameter (270 coins then): Ships sunk 180 => ~26 ships per day (~26 games if kill ratio is about one to one) Battles won 100 => ~15 wins per day (given a win rate of 50% thats ~30 games) Total dmg 8M => ~1,15m damage per day (~23 games @ 50k damage per battle) Ribbons 21k => 3k per day (heavily depending on ship class but I guess could be easiest, as with some classes you can easily do 200 - 300 ribbons per battle, so something ~10 - 15 battles) Base XP 160k => ~23k per day (~23 games @1k per game) Rough estimation is 20 to 30 games a day, which at an average game length of 15 minutes equals approximately 5 to 7.5 hours of play per day. So I figured this event is aimed at school pupils and students (making full use of possible Easter holidays), the unemployed or retired people, as there is almost no way that people with families or jobs can invest such heavily into the event over the course of 3 weeks. Sorry WG, but I don't have the time to do a 'gaming job' along my regular job...