Figment

Where's the captain? FFS man, it's about the captain as much as it is about the ship. This Groningen 'solution' just makes things worse. This.

Clearly not, since Pan European captains can't be placed on Dutch cruisers. But you knew that this is the problem that is being refered to before you trolled:

Wait, you're saying there's stuff you can't seal club with?

Click on the [ + ] next to quote for multi-quote.

The worst part is having to grind a captain again for a ship you've owned for a long time and invested heavily in. Some minor balance tweaks wouldn't hurt any ship and shouldn't be above any ship. If balance is needed that supercedes personal interest for community interest. But simply copying a captain is all it takes to make this fair to all. :/

Seeing as the Friesland has undergone that balancing and is a pretty well balanced ship, there's little reason to adjust a clone of it. Maybe when there's anti-sub warfare that those systems may see a revision, but I doubt it would affect anything else.

So you'll have a useless Friesland if you exchange it seeing as it needs a 12-13pt captain to compete? No thanks. How does this help at all with the captain issue?

What does this mean? That you lose the Friesland and get a Groningen? Without a 10+ pt captain?

Yes? If they don't plan ahead, that's their problem. They however, put out statements leading to players to make their choices in game. That's the main issue for me. I 'lose' an investment in the Dutch cruiser line because WG suggested to invest it in another line. Blame me for taking their word as meaning something, but still, it's not the "safe" option, it's the lazy option. That's subjective. :/

I don't think it's a huge problem as long as the surface water clearly shows where shallows are and if there's a slow slide movement option to get unstuck when a collission is detected. And neither of those things is implemented at present.

Clearly. Even if a statement of intent has been made many times over, it's clearly worth crap. :/

Never move a ship without a commander unless people have no commander in it. People likely invested time and effort in a ship's commander. A clone of special commanders isn't as much of an issue since the bonuses are relatively small, I'd be more than happy with a standard commander as you'd get two commanders for the price of one. That's a huge time investment boon. What if they wanted the Dutch free EXP ship and therefore pumped all their free exp in the Friesland because WG told them it would be the free EXP ship for the Dutch line? Which incidentally, WG did. Multiple times. :p I mean, you're cherrypicking here. By announcing that the ship would move to the other line, you're creating expectations and people will act on this. Don't make announcements if you're not certain. Giving "collectors" an option doesn't mean a thing to other people affected.

I thought the policy would be that the Friesland will move to the Dutch line and you'd get a copy Dutch commander while the other captain stays in Pan EU? I've been training its captain and pumpin captain Exp into it specifically for use in the Dutch cruiser line... This policy solves absolutely nothing and just creates an anomaly. Just create a duplicate Dutch captain and move the Friesland over and leave a captain in the Pan EU line. :/ If you create a problem by putting in ships in the wrong line, it's your job to fix it, not create a replacement issue. Just clone the damn captain and you're done.

The only upside so far is that most Ise players are crap at both BB and CV play. >.>

Unfortunately WG is Tone deaf to this. You'd think they would impose similar MM restrictions as there are on CV to avoid multi-multi-multi torp drops.

But gaming IS a hobby. To me this is like asking whether cows are animals I think a relevant question regarding micro-transaction games would be, is it a gaming hobby, gaming addiction, shopping addiction or a gambling addiction? >.> Or a bit of all?

I'm not on playtest, but I'm struggling to understand why, when you can't in any way, shape or form, damage an ally (1, 2), you'd get unsportsmanlike behaviour messages for hitting them whether by accident or on purpose (3). After all, you just removed all incentive to take care of your allies, since you do it for them by removing any negative effects from getting hit. Point 4 and 5 seem excessive, 15+ hits can be two salvo's for some ships. I'd advice making this dependent on the RoF and amount of barrels firing in a salvo. Some ships have 12 barrels and if someone sails in front of you while you're in zoomed out mode, this can cause such hits. Sustained fire could be a form of harassment, so I'd look at the amount of shots that continue to hit after the first in multiple salvo's, rather than a total amount. I'd also be very careful about providing "return damage" for damage one is not actually dealing. I'd much prefer there to be an automated muzzle on these ships, that stops them from firing temporarily as a penalty. The only thing missing a warning for under these rules, is blocking an ally's path for a prolonged period of time, or pushing ships into harms way. As you don't take damage for it, it could be a far worse harassment tactic. Duration of pushing an damage taken from enemy fire during this time might be worth pinky status. Points 7,8 are situational awareness indicators. It gives you notice that an ally is attacking an enemy, or that you might be blocking the line of sight of an ally in your current position.

I hardly ever got deto's, so they stand out to me. Got 3 in a Marceaux in 6 battles on one evening, then none for weeks again. Could just be really bad luck. :/ Could be some ships are more susceptible to it or with certain ammo? Does SAP give a higher chance of it maybe? After all, there are more Italian ships around currently.

Kansas, Minnesota are ace torp dodgers with rudder upgrades. They're just so slow and fat they've got small turning circles, becoming too agile to hit. It's funny how many people aim ahead of my Minnesota in ranked or fire over and next to me as I turn towards them too.

Smolensk's homing beacons are great for smoke-citadels though. The more it spams, the easier it is to locate and often stationary or slow moving and easy to lead. So provided it's not behind an island at an impossible angle requiring a spotter, it's one of my least concerns. Colbert on the move otoh is a *(^$@@#*$ to get a good lead on with some slow reloading BBs.

First off: - This is just one of the many balancing design choices one can make in a game. Whether or not a game is "arcade" has absolutely nothing to do with it, nor does realism. - During the WoWs RTS CV design, carriers could run completely out of their various types of bombers as they lost them in combat. So there's significant precedent. It actually made AA cruisers like the Cleveland quite useful.

I'm not sure that's what happened in my cases, as I press repair near automatically in case of rudder disabling, but could indeed be that there's an interruption in steering needed for the client/server to realise that the old input is still valid.

Not sure if it also happens under different chat circumstances, I've had to 'reset' my rudder a few times as well before it would start responding again and I don't use Q and E either. I'm wondering if it's package loss of some sort.

Hold on, I gave a shitload of reasons combining... FFS never mind. This is going nowhere. ...And people's grind's were largely done already or people gave up on the more annoying grinds of CVs that were no match for the IJN ones, if you'll remember those topics too. Except a lot of people were likely turned off after all the drama, didn't like this gameplay, didn't like to play with something they considered OP or simply were done grinding. There's a multitude of reasons that combine. Not just that nobody wants to play CVs and not just if they're OP, because then they still wouldn't play if they didn't want to command carriers in the first place. Question. Do you enjoy people yelling at you for picking a ship and having an angry mob of pathetics downvote your karmapoints (even if it doesn't matter), insult you and try to ruin your leisure time? Do you keep looking that up or do you tire from it even if it's amusing for a while? You think most people will continue to play under such toxic circumstances over time? Because a lot of people play just for the BBs and then whine about CVs, torps and HE. Quite.

And rules of the active ranked event or whatever, sure. WoWs is having almost more game modes than players at times. ;) But yes, that too negatively effects queue lengths. I think carriers are awed by a lot of players, but shunned in part because of the balance perceptions. Alone for the stigma of being a CV player (and receiving the abuse), people play it less than they would. Just look at how many people are irked by the anti-CV Karma warriors. When people play they want to have a good time and relax, the constant abuse CV players get from both allies (not helping specific people enough according to those specific people) and enemies alike (even post-match and in karma penalties) puts people off because it's not a good time anymore. I know there are people who refuse to play it as long as they perceive it as an indirect threat you can't counter by shooting it. I know there are people who would like to play CVs, but disliked the gameplay design of RTS and quit the game since (no idea how they felt about the rework) and I know there are people who don't like to receive damage from CV's in their current form and therefore don't wish to harm other players in the same way as long as the unit is considered somewhat OP by some. Some think it's too easy and like seal clubbing and therefore below them. There's the people who think ships should be about surface ships only. And then there's the other issues that the game does to deter usage that I mentioned earlier. There are a lot of reasons for the inpopularity, but to suggest virtually nobody likes the concept of CVs is an overstatement. I'll agree to the suggestion that the fast majority of players who have issues with the current and older CV gameplay in WoWs, have so just because they've been made such jacks of all trades that can hide far out of reach to most, yet can attack quite effectively regardless of actions taken. None of that is beyond fixing with gameplay balancing and changing mechanics, which WG simply hasn't had the imagination to do properly. I can't name many other games where you can use CVs as individual player in an online setting though, so can't comment on that.