Doolio

But the goal of the BATTLE is to win - while having FUN because you, well, like the GAME. And, in my opinion, you should leave your "port shoes" at the door as you enter the battle. The "other goals" are meta goals, to put it bluntly - economizing, calculating xp, juggling upgrades etc. While I don't find the fastcap games (didn't have one so far in WoWs, had them in WoT) enjoying, I accept them as the valid outcome. I never, EVER, mix my "port brain" and "battle brain", I am completely "split personality" regarding that. "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas" kind of thing. Battle - ok, we came here to win the battle by all the legitimate means we have on our disposal, let's try and do that - just as any other sports, game, fight, competition etc. Port - ok, let's see what would be my strategy and which trees should I grind, should I sell the omaha to get the money for the Nagato or should I keep her as a moneymaker, should I spend money to convert xp or I'll grind through the stock hull of ship xyz and so on and so forth. I never mix the two. From my point of view at least, that's logical. I don't miss layups on purpose or circle around opponents if I can finish a game of basketball quickly, even though I like to dribble and such. Not because I am a win-freak (FAR from that, I would enjoy a quality loss as well and congratulate the opponent, without getting frustrated or overcompetitive or anything). I mean, if we go by those groups, I seem to be in both of them, then.

I'd take a guess that "heavy damage" is really only a "type of damage" and not necessarily the amount of damage, as I am under impression that I have sometimes received more damage by a "moderate damage" shell hit than by the "heavy damage" shell hit. I'd say heavy/moderate/low is for the healing consumable purposes primarily, so you could gauge how much you'll gain from it in a particular moment. Citadel is indicated by the shellshock effect, as far as I thought?

I don't think it's a crosshair, I believe it's a simple replay interface issue, where it doesn't show the "sniper view" aiming interface.

I get what you are saying but I tried that and failed miserably (and I don't mean in a "I tried for ten seconds and gave up"). From the start of games that make sense in both invert/non-invert way (so, 3d games where you don't "point at stuff" but "look at stuff") I couldn't do the non-invert. It really had nothing to do with my past experience or habit. Although, first games of that kind that had mouselook did have an invert option by default if you wanted to aim with mouse and not automatically with facing in general direction with keyboard controls, so that might be it (doom, duke). Nevertheless, as soon as fps's started to incorporate the option as "normal" and under "controls" in the GUI (q1, q2, hexen etc), I tried to play non-inverted. And I really tried. You should have seen me bobbing my head like I was having a seazure and blinking like a lemur on crack for tens of minutes and even hours - only to make zero progress at all. I am not exaggerating. I don't know why or how I have it "locked" like that, but it's so "instinctive" at this point (and strangely enough, it was like that even at starting point) that you could really put me in a room, lock me, keep me fed and stuff and give me to play mouselook-based games non-inverted for years and when you finally decide to check on me after a decade, you would find me twitching and blinking in a poor attempt to connect vision-brain-interface Oh, and I highly enjoyed OFP (inverted of course) - yes, it did have smallish circle in which you didn't move the view but it didn't help (yes, I tried using non-invert in OFP as well, in my non-invert endeavors ), but it did nothing for me brain-wise, as I still perceived it as a "reticle". My ability of "normal mouse aiming" doesn't go further from something like minesweeper That said, if you gave me something like moorhuhn, I will perceive the reticle as the "pointing device" and not as "fps aim" and move it along the screen as I would in Windows or in warcraft or something. That said, moorhuhn, duck hunt and such really are point and click, cursor-based games, there isn't anything that would "make" them into "aiming with reticle" games, so I guess the cosmetics and notion (shooting with a reticle) aren't the factor at all, but still, I couldn't do it in OFP and I had a perfect reaction time and precision when playing OFP, even when I moved the reticle inside that center circle. And what I said is really true - I can't play anything else fps/tps now. I probably would have to quit with wows for like a week (or more, as I did have such pauses and it still messed me up) and then play, for example, WoT, quake etc. exclusively with invert on, to get back on track. I mean, I tried reactivating myself in WoT (as the premium time is unified, so I said why not) and the fact that I tried to push WoWs aiming in another "brain folder" (moving "accros the sea plane" and not mouselooking), it didn't help. I simply got confused with both in WoT (could play inverted with limited success - that means occasional confusion every ~5 secs - but absolutely no success with non-inverted, even though I played WoWs exclusively for like a month or two). Probably because the "moving forward and backward" only works for sniper view and not for 3rd person view in WoWs. I do find it odd that I can't apply it to other games, especially when considered that I managed to play WoWs normally, even though you play most of the time in 3rd person view, which is your vanilla mouselook. I really don't know why my brain is so rigid. It would make more sense to me if I couldn't play WoWs at all without the inverted mouselook. That said, while the other guy certainly wasn't exactly pleasant with his post, that doesn't mean that inverted mouselook is "less natural", but I'll take your response was more a reaction to his post. I say that because the 3d plane could be interpreted both as "head view with stick up the [edited]" and as "2d desktop with icons around to click on" and I do think it's a coin flip which way someone's brain will "choose". No, you don't move the mouse the same way you move your head in a literal sense, but you also don't move the mouse the same way the screen interprets it either, as you would lift it up and to the left when asked to click on "my computer" (like my dad would probably do, for example, if asked to do such a frightening task as to sit in front of a computer ). So, for "natural", I'd say that everything goes. There's always the interface block which creates an indirect input hurdle which your brain has to conquer, inverted mouselook or not. I know one person that can actually do both and when I say that I mean you give her quake, tell her "rail that dude over there", she does it in a millisecond, then you change the option in a second, tell her to rail some other dude and she again does it in a millisecond. It's really baffling (of course, she might miss, but not due to the mouselook confusion but simply because she didn't aim well enough), especially when considered it's not some kind of trick where she prepares for the change or something, you can literally let her play some game for an hour and then say "excuse me" and change the option and let her continue and she will continue as if nothing has happened, even though she had an hour of one-sided feedback. Maybe it has also something to do with me using high sens (I could probably play quake for five hours with my mouse never leaving the ~2x2cm area at which I grabbed the mouse when I started playing), who knows... I mean it could... maybe if I was a low sens guy, it would be easier for me to convert as I would have to make large sweeping gestures which would give my brain time to accommodate or something...

I find that odd too. I mean, even if it was a purchasable singleplayer game with progress (tiers), it wouldn't be strange if the higher tiered items needed some kind of in-game grind to maintain. For example some RPG where you have to harvest stuff to fill your potions quota or where you have high level weapons that are expensive to repair etc. I don't see the purpose of currency if you were only earning it without gold sink.

Yes, to a certain point. After that point, the influx of new players is not enough to keep low tiers populated and the whole ball of player base slowly but surely moves upwards in tiers. That's not exactly news and it's not WG's invention. Granted, this can be solved through several ways and often it is solved with more than one. But, given that this is a f2p game where you are pushed to, but not required to pay, it's reasonable that one of the mechanics would involve players dishing out cash (thus paying the devs) and/or "grinding" (thus making the effective active populace bigger across the tiers). As the player base will slowly snowball to the end game and at the same time, new players will be left alone, you need tools for those new players. In p2p titles it can be done differently (as you don't need the "pay" incentive, you already accomplished that through the subscription). Let's take WoW for example. There are DOZENS of tools and mechanics (purchasable or gameplay-obtainable) that literally propel new players to the end game (and I mean propel, like, giving you "yamato" right away). So, if the low levels aren't populated, you can buy your way to where the majority of the player community is. There are also mechanics that somewhat keep the low levels populated (but not that much, they aren't exactly populated) - people leveling multiple classes, doing achievements etc. Also, with patches that broaden the content instead of simply adding it, help with that (maybe a new profession that would require you to run around in low level areas or something). That said, WoW has decided, since it's a p2p title, to go more for the "propel" strategy, so low levels in WoW are not exactly populated in general. That of course has a huge impact on your gaming experience - the game is tweaked so you can simply run to the endgame in a VERY short time BY DESIGN - which means that, if you want to play "properly", you won't get the right experience, as you will ALWAYS be in desync with the environment, being more powerful than you should, richer than you should etc. Your experience is off, when compared to someone who leveled their character ten years ago or so. Everything is geared towards the end game, forcing you to run to it. Point being, they couldn't have accomplished to have the population similar across the levels, so they opted for the "let's put all at endgame" approach. WG has opted for the "let's force players to play at the widest variety of tiers" option. Without going into the analysis of quality of such solution, I don't personally mind it. If you look at it from another angle, you might not be frustrated - your high tier ships are your darlings and they require a lot of maintenance to walk around with, so you have to "work in" order to afford going out with them (or pay them outright for their services)

To be fair towards WG, if not for that philosophy, the mid tiers would be lacking as the player base slowly progresses through the tiers with time - similar to how now highest tiers are low populated (as people didn't get to them yet) and mid tiers are the most populated. This relation shifts with time if there were no mechanics in place to make players turn to their lower tier ships to sustain their higher tier ships. While the design surely exists in order to people to pay-to-not-grind, it also has a very game-oriented practical purpose and while in a vacuum, it would of course be more enjoyable if you only earned credits, in reality it would effectively kill the game, given enough time.

In which case, the saved free xp would help, as he can research the hood and get a very capable semi-stock bb, which he would be able to elite from that point without pain (as, imho, the hull is the only "hard obstacle" with fusou, other modules are desirable, but not mandatory, not even the engine). Yes, I pretty much repeated what you said.

I think it's a simple disparity between the arithmetical average player output and what the "engaged community" perceives to be an "average player". In other words, if you ask someone who browses through forum, watches youtube videos, reads news, knows basics of wows mechanics, can provide impressions and feedbacks when asked about the game/ships etc. what is an "average player", he will probably double the true average output, as he automatically thinks about what would he deem as average performance in general. But the true average (percents and stuffz) will always be lower than what is considered "average/normal" by somewhat involved players. Mainly due to them being conditioned to gauge things with themselves in mind ("I am playing so-so, I am not very involved, nor do I practice that much, so I am average" - which isn't true, often by the very fact that they possess such thought process ) and because they interact with others players who are often that level or better. Which means that there's a "bubble" of players who are probably top 30% who base the notion of average among themselves, because that's what they see. The truth is more likely that majority of players don't know the mechanics (apart from the obvious WASD etc), never browsed through forums, never visited WoWs website, never read patch notes, watched academy videos, asked (themselves or others) about some specifics (what does HE do, why my torpedo bombers change drop arc sometimes, what is a citadel hit and so on and so forth). I mean, I might sound snarky and douchy, but that's not my intent, nor do I perceive things in that light. It's just that it's a common occurence with every mass product (interview people do they know what's inside TV or do they know basics of what's under the hood of a car).

Personally, I would never skip such a low tier, as you could effortlessly grind through it even if it was ten times worse than it is I would keep the free xp for key modules on higher tier ships. But, that's just my philosophy

No, it's evaluated based on his post alone. The torpedo lead is giving you the solution as if the hugger could go through the border. Just pay attention to the thin connecting line between his trayectory and the center of your spread angle (It's hard to see if you are using a high quality sea graphical option). Has been like this since forever. So you have to relay on manual aiming or, if possible, launching torps paralell to the border line. Explaining the problem of the gunner requires to understand that when you are selecting a target your guns AUTOMATICALLY aim at the center of the selected target and what you are doing is altering that fire solution to compensate from target's movement while the shells are flying. The problem, up until the patch WG did specifically to fix this, with a border hugger is that this "center" was shifted serverside beyond the border of the map, requiring that the gunner to compensate it based on the angle of the hugger relative to the border which increased the difficulty of aiming at it. On top of this, the "slide" over the border could be swaped very fast on fast moving ships with small rudder shift times (ie most DDs) resulting in extra difficulty. Well, I don't know exactly the details as the only one that can confirm it is a WG Dev, but from my experience the central shift problem has been removed on that patch but this is not enough to explain how easily you can connect to a shifting small target now... My theory is that when a ship is hugging, now the server "cheats" shots that are aimed to the border to "magically" hit the hugger as a penalty for such cheap tactic abusers. I repeat, this is speculation (The part about the serverside "cheat") just based on how easy is to connect them now. I would have prefered a more obvious solution which is the "sticky borders", in which any1 hitting them would be immediatly stopped and prevented from movement for a period enough for the slower reloading ship to fire at it again (Around 60s). This way ppl would have to pay the same attention to borders as they have to do with islands, for example. Thanks About sticky borders, they mentioned that they were testing it internally (as if borders were islands) and it didn't exactly work. So I think they would have to come up with some mid-solution, where the edge won't devastate you with vengeance if you touch it because you were making a turn or were unaware of it and on the other side, the edge would punish the humpers.

Nothing, but exhibitionists will find the way to practice their stuff through special snowflake topics

I find it more interesting that the ancient "anti-us bias" tinfoilery still goes on in WoT, after US perpetually getting insane tanks in the past 2-3 YEARS

I never understood the pain of grinding through the <5 tier... I mean, the combination of me being a new player and the speed at which I got through the myogi (35 battles and that's a large number I would assume, as my myogi results are probably the worst on the planet - I mean, it took me LESS battles to go from vanila kongo to fuso and I never spend free xp) made sure that I don't exactly got to even form an opinion about the ship I also never understood people complaining about m3 lee in wot, for example. I do understand a painful t9 or even t6 if it's completely below any sensible of viability, but, at least for me personally, grinding through myogi is in the same boat as, I don't know, grinding through hashidate

Would you say that the lead is wrong due to the calculation mechanics getting confused or simply because the hugger wiggles constantly without wiggling, to put it that way?

you might be right we might develop empathy at the cost of concise writing so we could communicate perfectly via the internet without having to worry about whether the recipient got the gist of our message you are right i can give you that i think we should all try

Hey, leave q3 aloan

Well, as a new player as well (two t6, one t5, some t4's) I never felt that way. I got to the fuso and aoba with great ease, while I am grinding through the wyoming for decades because when I look at her speed and range, I, well, play something else And st. louis is loads of fun indeed, but you get through her in like two and a half games. I literally didn't have the time to form impressions - except that kuma is versatile and that south carolina kills me in the similar way to wyoming I guess different tastes.

I would say even less than that. I mean, it's all down to personal experience, but I have literally never experienced a situation which would make me to assume that someone was using an aimbot. Not even close. Everything seems to be working as it should - if I am broadside and don't bother to wiggle or change speed, I get screwed, if I am angling and changing speed I am not screwed etc. I mean, I have been detonated like two times in 250 battles, I would expect that number to be at least three times bigger, even in a non-aimbot environment

I am mesmerized by this I think I can't stop writing like this now this is getting frustrating what should I do maybe I should take a break from typing but this is so addicting and I am not sure if I can fight it

Luckily for me, I did like ~3 pve battles before realizing they were pve But I could have easily done more. About the second thing - oh god, good, I am not having a mental disorder (or we both do? ). Though mine "switch" was a bit worse, as I was playing with furutaka, thinking that I selected kongou in the menu. And it took me HALF OF BATTLE to realize it. Yes, the shape of the ship, speed, RELOAD TIME, RANGE (!), I somehow happily turned all the info off and proceeded to play my kongou for freaking ten minutes And then I couldn't heal, wen't "wtf" and discovered he truth. Funnily enough, I had a good match lol. Furutaka is good with AP and somehow people weren't focusing me.

omg I think you have a typo in ship's name, it should be asssex! /I'll see myself out Since I didn't know about this topic till now, I'll cheat with the first "entry" a bit. Potential next ones will be for the same day Second game in omaha, stock omaha, "half-captain" That said, I don't really like the feel of US cruisers lol, I dislike the machinegun style.

I am very surprised by the "european USN BB bias" I thought that japanese ships in general were more pop-culture iconic and even more so in europe (for the more or less the same reason we tend to like samurais, while the japanese wouldn't miss the opportunity to put a blonde medieval plate mailed knight with lots of L's and R's next to each other in name in some video game) - in fact, if I were to make a guess, I would say that ijn ships would be most popular in europe (not counting japan, ofc). I am sure that even my mother heard about yamato or nagato and I am also sure that she absolutely never heard of any usn ship. Of other nations, maybe bismarck and stuff like that. Now, granted, my mother wouldn't play wows, but I would say that even though wows attracts enthusiasts, the majority of playerbase is "closer to my mother" regarding knowledge, awareness and pop culture referencing than to a naval "geek". US ships I would assume are a bit more of a common knowledge (in general populace) in US, but not outside of US, while japanese ships are - of course, no sources for that, just thinking aloud. And, another thing - I would assume that, due to japanese infamy in number of asian countries and the fact that US is probably "us-centric" regarding "warship pop culture", this leaves us with europe as the most likely candidate, besides japan itself, to be attracted to various yamatos and nagatos. And, probably a very minuscule influence, but influence nevertheless - the kancolle video game/anime, which I've seen heavily referenced throughout the forums and the battle chat alike. Also, europe had its own ships, so to speak. And, while the US is western and for that reason probably subconsciously seen as "competitor to OUR ships" and japan is "somewhere out there in the land of maids, anime, chikans and katanas", one would think that the stance of european players would be more open to japanese ships. Even to the point of being "most open" in general (as russians might dislike german ships, english germans, germans russians and so on and so forth, you know what I mean). So, it makes me wonder, what would be the reason for the US bb popularity? Either my view on things is completely off (which wouldn't be surprising, but it did surprise me ) or there's other factors in play. Maybe US bb's are more "user friendly"? Or something like that?

What he said. You were probably counting xp needed to unlock modules on a previous ship - which are, indeed, needed for the next ship (not all of them) but they aren't the ship - the ship has it's own xp cost. So, when looking at the xp cost of unlocking a ship, it's just for the ship, not for the path before the ship.

Dude, I DID pay and I DID get screwed, read better. But I can't exactly feel CHEATED as I was informed of it through eula. I am NOT defending WG (nor any other company because out of 10-20 big companies, WG is far from being worst - TRUST ME - if you don't, go and see for yourself). OF COURSE I would LOVE to see premium ships being offered to be refunded, as I am the customer. But I gave you examples why that's not going to happen. You either didn't read them or think I work "undercover", which is stupid and rude, especially when considered that my stance about WG isn't exactly positive. Also, I was trying to be HELPFUL AND INFORMATIVE, but you obviously only like to see posts who fuel your notions and you don't want to discuss. You LITERALLY ignored my points because reasons, while they are perfectly valid points about the workings of large game companies. I wrote what I wrote in order to WARN CUSTOMERS, not to JUSTIFY what companies are doing. I don't like companies, especially big ones, for your information. As much as I don't like our government, but I am not runing into skupstina with dynamite belt - hence, my EXPLANATION and WARNING to the people buying stuff and then ending up surprised. You might get sick of it and change the game - BUT IN THAT OTHER GAME IT WILL BE THE SAME. That's what I'm trying to tell people as some of them clearly don't have the experience with microtransactions and big game companies and are obviously used to one-shot bought games of different nature. As I said, try HotS, compare balance changes to any WG game and then compare the customer policy and see what I mean. To interpret my ADVICE and WARNING and DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT REALITY (for which I NEVER said it was good) as something, I don't know, bad, something non-true and to even indirectly mock me, while I am trying to be HELPFUL... Well, just think about that for a second. Thank you, you will hear from me no more - "tako mi i treba kad ocu da pomognem" proves to be right with some people yet again. I have a severe nerve inflammation which means that after every post like this I literally must lie down, take bunch of painkillers and moan for several hours - yet, I wanted to write them FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON that the people would know what to expect and not get screwed or surprised. But no, I didn't run to wg's headquarters and blew myself up, so I must be a shill or crazy at best. Shameful.