Kartoffelmos

In many of the old maps, destroyers could cap with little risk to themselves (you could block a cap the entire game if you wanted) which meant that you had to outplay the enemy rather than hiding behind the same rock every game in order to not be deleted and/or wait for the enemy destroyer to make a mistake. On the flip side, the games could be rather boring if no one wanted to push. As for open maps, both Ocean (was not a fan of this one in my Atago) and Land of Fire required the teams to move into positions in order to cap and in the case of the latter (and maps like North), you were quite safe when doing so. Destroyers could spot you, yes, but this usually meant that the destroyer in question had to go to either an isolated/vulnerable position or would waste some time travelling. Instead of camping behind islands or in smoke (though this also happened), the battles were fought whenever a team tried to push into a good position or when they tried to travel to the enemy cap. Using Land of Fire as an example, you could punish people when they sailed towards the cap, but then you had to stay behind the fleet or splitting your forces (risk vs. reward and all that), which the enemy could take advantage of. In any case, maybe I'm just nostalgic regarding maps, but I can safely say that battleships are the cause of the camping meta. Who wants to push if you are severely punished by doing so? If battleships didn't counter other classes so well or had a decent counter to themselves, you would probably see more dynamic gameplay. This trend was also beginning to show during that season as well. Many games consisted of equal number of destroyer and battleships with a few additional cruisers, so it's not like the "BB problem" surfaced recently either.

AR does affect torpedoes, the special commander does not (apparently). The man who came up with the perks for the commander should be given cleaning duties for the next two weeks though... with no vodka during the food breaks . Depends. The earliest seasons (prior to the introduction of radar) did not have this problem because you were not forced into a killzone in order to cap or when you moved between caps.

Aced it on my first try and I even used the silly French destroyer which isn't really useful in the operation. Then again, I was in a division with Bagel (@Vogel ) which compensated for one of our team mates. The player in question found himself a lovely waifu mine (minefu?) and after the initial hug, they lived happily ever after . Same here. I guess it's a combinating of not focusing the squads and not installing the correct ship upgrade.

Obviously not. Neither have they played ranked in order to (easily) realise why we have a "smoke meta problem" to begin with.

Flamu (during the ongoing stream) implied that the leaks regarding the smoke changes are outdated, so it will be interesting to see how this develops.

WG figured out that they were spoiling us European plebs with too good servers and decided that we were overdue on some surprises.

Please bear in mind that both WoT and WoWs (same engine, after all) are very resource-consuming when it comes to HDD (instead of RAM), so the problem might be more related to slow hard drives than any of the other specifications.

Does it? Does it really? The entire point of my post was that the change is bad because it punishes teamplay, makes offensive smokes useless and makes battleship pushes more effective. Consequently, the only thing that really stops battleship pushes is other battleships (the change does not affect torpedoboats, so those ships will literally have the same impact against pushing battleships). If you say that the ships are out of position based on the fact that the change has already gone through, then why discuss this at all? There is no point since we then have to base all arguments on the established meta and thus every argument that compares the "new smoke" with the "old smoke" will automatically fail. In any case, I will do as you say: Destroyer lay smoke close to the cap and realise that this is pointless, leaves the smoke and stay at torp-range without ever being spotted (the first bit is a joke, smoke will mostly be used when one is spotted while capping (usually bad play) since there is no better use). Battleship and/or cruisers will stay at max range or take cover behind islands since they know that if they are smoked up during a push gone badly/defence, they can no longer support the team with their firepower for fear of being caught off-guard. Passive meta continues since only battleships can attack/defend. How is this an improvement?

That's why it is a bad change.

DD lays an offensive smoke close to an objective Yamato sees the offensive smoke and realises that it is in a good position Yamato fires his guns after reaching the intended destination No more smoke Great reward for teamplay Replace Yamato with every other ship in order to see how silly this "feature" is. Or rather, replace it with a cruiser that supports destroyers like a cruiser should, but cannot do it any longer because the reduced smoke duration means that the cruiser have no time to escape before the smoke dissipates.

The sad part is that only the "overpenetrations" and "limited torpedoes" remain "uncrossed". The rest have (or will be if this goes through) already happened (though visibility of torpedoes have both been nerfed and buffed, so I'm not sure if the result of that is an overall nerf or not). As for the topic, both Kutuzov and Belfast are too strong as it is so one shouldn't complain too much about those two, but the rest of smoke-dependant ships will suffer. As for the argument that these ships will have to play as the current "no-smoke-ships", will the game be better if ships use island as cover instead of using smoke as a tactical measure? I think not. You can use smoke to deny a capture point versus certain ships, but this will be more difficult with the proposed change. Smoke was also a good aspect in the destroyer-cruiser synergy and this will also suffer. Dumbing down the game because one ship class cannot do everything alone is not the way to go. Moskva will also be overmatched in a bow-on situation, but her 50mm deck plating (aka middle section) prevents overmatching by plunging shells. So your claim is not quite correct.

Time to focus on the positive aspects: more customisation for Japanese ships! I'm looking forward to see all the pink ships in action . Personally, I think blue will look nice so I'm curious about the colour palette we will have at our disposal.

On the bright side, the smoke changes make BB smoke camping less viable (good for competitive games, etc.). On the not-so-bright side, it is a huge nerf to ships that rely on smoke (indirect buff to battleships) and promote more selfish play (sharing smoke will make the penalty even worse). On top of that, you can now grief other players by sailing close to the smoke and unleash a full broadside. I guess this is the logical step after the removal of stealth-fire to reduce the battleship overpopulation.

We need more BALANS! More CONSUMABLES! More of EVERYTHING! ~WG head developer Gee, I wonder why they find the ships hard to balance. "Hopefully" the nerfed AA will only make the ship strong against dive bombers, but I fear that a AA-build will yield good results against torpedo bombers as well. As for the captain perks, I expect them to be heavily tuned down before release. For now, it's nothing to worry about (it should be obvious that those passive bonuses are too strong, right? RIGHT?!). I sincerely hope that if (as usual leaks are not 100% set in stone or necessarily accurate, but I do not have much faith in the balancing department at this point) all of this is true, the supertesters and community contributors point out how utterly stupid it is. Also: Halfway to Kartoffladamus . I predict that the next change is that the the AA of those ships will be altered further (reduced in some way) in order to make the radar appear more balanced. You heard it here first!

We need more peculiarities and gimmicks to mask the disadvantages induced by questinable developer decisions! How can ships ever be difficult to balance if we give them enough parameters?

Give the KGV radar so that the loss in anti-cruiser abilities is compensated by anti-destroyer abilities. Problem solved. No, give her RN cruiser heal as well so that she can survive longer in order to have the same damage output as other t8 battleships!

Because giving away untested (for normal games, that is) premium ships is bad for business? Do we know anything about the captains? Are they locked to the ship or can we errr... indoctrinate them to other ships in order to keep them after the event is finished?

Bisku confirmed weak! More proof of how crippled the ship is: Not the most impressive damage but when you chase kills for silly missions, you have to sacrifice something (RNGesus also wanted me to waste 3 salvos on a ~1k HP Gneisenau). I also became extremely greedy once I realised that I could potentially sink 5+ ships so there's also that .

Why do you think that the RN scrubboats obese cruisers battleships have 41 % fire chance on their HE-shells? Seriously though, I'd rather have a battleship firing AP at my cruisers than having my ship set on fire by broken HE-shells.

I don't hate battleships... I hate the players who play them and the developers who are buffing them despite saying otherwise.

Not really though. If you position yourself in such a way that you effectively cover two caps, you have already a good presence. If in doubt about which cap you should support, head to the one in the centre. Your team should win one of the other ones (with your support if needed) and you will serve as as a roadblock when the enemy team tries to expand their control of the map. Note that you will need someone to contest said cap at the start though (who you should support as well). Otherwise, go to the cap that wastes the least amount of time or that offers the easiest/shortest path to the next cap. Different maps require different approaches, but in general, the above holds true. Having said that, destroyers and cruisers also need to consider where they should attack, so it's not like decent positioning is something unique to only battleships: it's just that battleships have the largest impact on the movements of the team. Edit: holy sardine, Batman, the act of copying parts of quoted texts with mobile devices is painful with the new forum.

Battleships are quite forgiving and easy to play (heal, AA, decent manoeuvrability, etc.), but they have a big impact on games because they are the only ones that can reliably push (as well as locking down areas). If your potato battleship captain rushes to the map edges, he does not do any of those things, nor do he pose any real threat to the objectives (capture points) and thus he will make the game harder for the rest of the team.

It's an icon that corresponds to the player's placement in the ranked season (beta) in World of Tanks.

Considering the certain players in this thread who for some reason thinks it's disgusting behaviour to chase down the remaining ships when the battle is already won, the minor inconvenience seems to be rather major .

I can confirm. It is your problem, everyone else are unaffected.