Doolio

For a "pure non-f2p player" you surely sound like you would fit right in LoL or something like that. Just add caps to that and be sure to criticize teammates when you die and you are ready to go. Also, I have seen one intentional team kill in 250 battles and two unintentional ones. Maybe it's you? :O

I remember a community manager telling us that he'll "pass it on to the devs" two months ago. That's the ONLY instance I've ever saw ANYTHING related to invert mouse coming from anybody remotely affiliated with WG. I am as confused as everybody, especially since it's a vanilla feature for any 3d game - AND it's there in their other games which are built in the SAME ENGINE. So I really don't see the problem. I kinda managed to somehow get over it by tricking my brain that I am not moving the reticle "up and down" but "forward and backward" and I can play somehow - BUT at the terrible cost - I can't play any other 1st/3rd person game. I can't. It's not that I am having difficulties - can't. Of course, I can't uncheck the invert option in other games as I can't really play with non-inverted axis, I just barely make it in wows.

I never understood the wallet warrior hate, it's the system that keeps f2p model running. Although it's a symbiotic system, f2p players make for the ever needed player base (as "wallet warriors" make ~2% of population). I especially will never understand the wallet warrior hate in a non-p2w title. That's really absurd. So the dude makes more credits/xp than you - absolutely irrelevant regarding actual battle situation.

Every t8 in wot surely have the same multiplier, it's up to the player's and tank's abilities combined which will make you more money. I am pretty good with type, but my friend dies in type faster than if it were loltractor and can even go to negative with it (!). I am also good with heavies. BUT, that same friend is deadly in a TD, but if I were given a TD, I would probably stand somewhere behind the mountain and get hit by artillery in first ten seconds. And that's basically the difference. Also note that majority of type players actually know very well to play that tank as 90% of them have it for like four years. That said, these last screenshots from tirpitz battles do look viable credit gain-wise. Which makes me wonder about the atago - is the ship's multiplier worse or people don't know to play it or the ship is bad? I also didn't quite understand your middle paragraph - you are comparing t5 premiums with t8 premiums? In that case, it's natural that t8 will earn significantly more.

I don't really care, especially as I don't look at the flag that much in battle That said, I do use the mod for the japanese flag, as I like japanese ships and it looks a lot better than the plain japan flag. Especially on ship "portraits". I could live without them though... That's interesting. I find it natural for some countries, yet some are a bit confusing to me. That said, I think there's a distinct difference between the red star and the swastika in particular. While both symbolize respective regimes, if we remove that aspect, swastika still stands for a problematic ideology (nazism/fascism), while communism isn't exactly problematic ideology-wise. In that sense, both bans work from the "offendedededness" point of view, but from the pov of "pure symbolism" (so, no regime-tied), red star or hammer and sickle can't be problematic. Though, it depends on the usage. I see absolutely no point in censoring ANYTHING if you should depict a ship/tank/building/uniform/xyz that was actually equipped with such symbol. If you are making some nazi graffiti, ok, you are propagating an agenda blahblahblah, I understand that. But to censor a historical depiction, even in an arcade game, that's strange, to say the least. It's as if someone will have a sudden heart attack when faced with swastika. 99% who had any contact with it and might be prone to some silly ptsd are dead anyway Also, to the victor go the spoils. We will never ever see the US flag being treated this way, unless they fall down on themselves and "lose".

Jingles would avoid that for sure /hides

I don't think that's a good analogy I mean, you could say that a healer in an RPG doesn't hit as hard as some barbarian or something, but that doesn't tell anything about the viability of both.

Are they really the strongest class? I am not challenging your statement, I am asking. I am a new player (fuso, wyoming, furutaka, hosho and that's about it) but I've seen a lot of videos and follow a lot of "pr0" youtubers and the notion I've got is that bb's are lacking. I didn't quite get the specifics, but it was the "atmosphere" of their videos, streams etc. and it was pretty uniform in that aspect. My personal experience - I have no problems with any class so far (I like bb's the most but I liked them before I got the game so I just slipped in, so to speak) except with cv's (but that's a personal problem, I just seem to suck with awareness and multitasking). But from the "air" around me I picked up that bb's are weak in fact (not terribly, but on the verge at least). For example, everybody was thrilled for the accuracy buff in the last patch and stuff like that.

It has nothing to do with wargaming specifically - and yes, you should be wary up front, in any online game. Think very hard before making a purchase of an item that will inevitably be tampered with. You won't find a game in this umbrella of genres that won't do that to your premium ship/xyz. That's why you think about it before and buy it only if you are ok with that very certain possibility. For example, an example of one of my friends buying a hero in hots (i bring hots up a lot because it's the new black apparently, but it's a good example, as it's an asymmetrical flowy AAA pvp game): "oh look, a new hero came out! It's 10 euros, hmmm... I like the hero. I expect it to last about a month before nerfed to oblivion...hmmm... if I like the hero this much and 10e is this much, a month is this....hm, I'll buy it!" And he isn't crazy or anything, he is just rational and knows that things go that way. He might choose to not be a part of it or to be a part of it. He chose to be a part of it as he calculated every aspect. But in order to calculate that every aspect, you have to know how it all works. And of course, after a month, the hero was nerfed to the unplayable levels - and voila, my friend wasn't frustrated, because he knew what he was getting himself into. He knew what would happen and he concluded with "it was fun". It's not pretty, but it's reality and if you calculate things like that, you'll be able to make decisions and not get frustrated or "betrayed" - of course, one of decisions can be not to spend any money whatsoever because you don't like that policy in the first place - which is fine, but if you DO decide to spend money, it's wise to be educated in the "ways of asymmetrical pvp games of high caliber"

But it's a common practice, it has nothing to do with WG whatsoever. Look at mobas, for example. Hundreds of heroes with HUGE balance shifts that people buy with real money. Look at asymmetrical shooters - same story. Everywhere where there is a dynamic setting and a multiplayer component and asymmetry in play, you'll see changes to money-bought items CONSTANTLY. Companies that don't do that more likely than not simply don't make these kinds of games - ie, there is no need for dynamic changes in an adventure game, or any singleplayer game etc. Wg aren't necessarily "evil", there are things that can't be controlled in such environment, hence the constant patching in EVERY massive pvp game there is. Which includes balancing of ships/cars/characters/tanks/etc. It is literally impossible to release a ship tested in such a way that it doesn't potentially need to get tweaked, for better or for worse. Now, I don't think WG particularly cares about players or anything, but this in particular has nothing to do with WG specifically. I am repeating myself, but try playing HotS, for example, by the all-loving blizzard and you'll see WG as innocent small-time puppies, for example. Also, the power creep. It's not nice, it's not moral, but everybody does it, because the games would simply - die, if not for it. Maybe some smaller companies can rely on having all twelve loving players satisfied, but that simply doesn't happen with games who are expected to be played by millions. So, basically, you release a new character/item/xyz, it's powerful and then, right before the release of a new character/item/line/etc that one gets hit with the nerfbat - because companies want players to transfer to the new, better item. Is it cool? Hell no. Does everybody do that? Hell yes. It's something players know and consciously have in mind and then juggle whether they want to participate or not. And, I repeat, it's not a WG thing. And it's not going to stop and WG won't refund a tweaked/nerfed/buffed premium ship - unless it's tweaked beyond recognition (superpershing), and that is very rare. But even rarer is the fact that they offered a refund - because you won't get it in HotS, even though some heroes were nerfed from the number one position in the meta to the LAST position - and I am not talking about perceived position or a feeling a player might have, I am talking about hard numbers which even blizzard admits. And they might (emphasis on "might") rotate those heroes back by buffing them a bit, but not necessarily. It sucks, but actually that's the lesser evil, as the bigger evil would be to have ships set in stone, while the meta changes constantly and fluidly. Think about it, what would happen if you would issue a "no tweak" order on premium ships while the game goes on and how it could potentially affect the balance. About the power creep, that's harder to defend. Yet, there might be a reason for that too - maintenance and incentive, to name a few. Also, population. Things aren't that simple. Cars don't need to be balanced around other cars, as they aren't involved in a pvp multiplayer action. You are thinking about ships as single items in vacuum. If a ship is threatening the game balance at some point (which WILL happen with every ship inevitably, as the game changes - which means ships have to change too; also, meta changes, which again, affects the game etc, so we have a circus viciosus) you HAVE to tweak it, sometimes very harshly. There is almost no chance for a ship to be constantly "there" through the various stages of the game and the meta. I repeat, that's not necessarily pleasant for the player, but I see no possibility of NOT touching items while game constantly fluctuates. Basically, be aware of it and act accordingly - think before you buy and always know that it WILL be changed. Not in WoWs, but in every asymmetrical pvp game of a bigger scope. There literally aren't exceptions - because there can't be exception because of the very nature of such games. Thank you.

But, is the glass half empty or half full? I mean, they could have introduced soviet ships as the first line, in which case we probably wouldn't have kongous and fusous with their pagodas and stuffz That said, I can understand the sentiment. I am not a huge naval buff, so my knowledge doesn't go much further than yamato or bismarck, which means I am pretty much covered by japanese bb line, for the time being (until I start to inevitably with time observe the game as the game and ships as items, in which case I will play whatever suits me the best and which gameplay I enjoy, rather than on the basis of being interested in a ship as, well, a ship).

He responds to every twentieth posts at random, it seems. At this point I think this is becoming a bit trolly. I mean, what's the point of discussion if the OP himself is not participating and when he is, it's to sarcastically address a random post.

But it's only temporary. Sure, maybe soviet lines are op at the beginning, but the circle then starts to turn. Look at WoT, ussr tanks beat german ones in the beginning - ok, so their tree was op. But then came muricans and a bit later, muricans literally ate everything with their opness. In the meantime, french t10 med, whole arty line and high tier td's were also op as fu-k. Later on, soviet high tier meds regained their opness, while heavies remained so-so. Second german td line brought the most op thing the world has ever seen, which had to be nerfed or the earth would implode, while the second soviet td branch was so painful that I believe people committed suicide mid-line. With the introduction of high tier lights, again, russians had little to offer with bulldogs running all over the place eating everything for breakfast. And so on, and so forth. Basically, everybody is in the spotlight for some time and in the dark for some time and russians weren't the exception, although some like to put on their "russian bias" goggles and never take them off

This is the line I have the trouble with. If you are strong in your ideology, why play at all? If I was disillusioned in a company (which I will never be because of my approach to dealing wit companies, but that's beside the point) I wouldn't touch their product with a ten foot pole, free or not. I imagine you getting screwed at mcdonalds, angrily throwing food at the floor, declaring "FU MCDONALDS" at the door before violently slamming them and going home, only to come tomorrow when it's some free promotion to taste a bit of big mac. I just can't get the notion I would avoid mcdonalds, period. I would feel like I was whoring for a big mac if I was eating at their promotions or whatever. If you are "done with" mcdonalds, I would assume you are done with them and their nasty products, policies, restaurants, fliers, job applications, advertisements etc. Not "I am done with this company... but if it's a free sample..."

The game, as in, matured game is like two years from now, so even if they break the balance, it would be an experience for future dev endeavors. At least I look at it that way. Today's "ongoing" mass multiplayer games are forged in the course of years and beta, alpha, release and all that jazz doesn't mean anything. It's very different to have a game like this or some tomb raider sequel which requires a very different (and much shorter) approach. We can look at WoT as an example. It had billion tanks added, physics revisited(!) and engine overhauled (!!) and it's still basically under development. That is perfectly natural. Freaking WoW has UI issues and clumsy quest interface, for example. So, whatever happens, it won't rock my cage That said, the hard part for games like these is to survive the infancy period of those several years. The server numbers for wows don't look promising. I don't know if I would invest in this game further if I was wg, as this is steady small, but safe income vs a high risk high reward. Hard to choose. So, whatever the new dd's do INITIALLY, it's a drop of water in the ocean of trees, ships, mechanics, tweaks etc.

omg super nintendo skill... never thought of that... that's actually hilarious Maybe he thought you were one of "those" tirpitzes?

I don't understand... one post ago you were claiming you wouldn't pay for their products because they betrayed your trust.

This is the most beautiful screenshot ever ahaha, well, I knew people were impulsive and not so strong, but this... this is golden They can't boycott a video game ffs. I can't imagine if one of them would want to stop smoking or something

You won't pay, but would you play their titles? I am asking because I wouldn't if I had that kind of policy. I don't, however, as I am quite flexible and I never tend to have a "relation" with a company, but assume the worst from the start and am prepared for consequences. But I am curious as to what would you do. From my point of view, it would be completely absurd to even play their products, for free or not.

Exactly.

I wouldn't know about wt as I've played very little, but I can tell you that blizzard, as one of more loved companies there are, and one of the companies that like to pretend they are cuddling with their player base, is worse than wg in several aspects, at least - and then, better in some other aspects, but not better overall. And I can say that about majority of big companies I have interacted with in any way. A small example - recently, blizz banned bunch of people based on false positives, ie the error in their program that "hunts" maphacks. SOME of the people were reinstated, but far from all of them. A lot of them remained banned even though they were falsely detected. I am talking about permanent bans of accounts and, some with hundreds and hundreds of dollars on them. There was a huge commotion of course, and what they did? They made a small forum post of all things, outright lied about what happened and about the scope of the incident and went silent forever. While the people who were falsely accused were getting pretty unpleasant messages from blizz support (i really mean that, I haven't seen that kind of tone anywhere else). WG will need to nerf A LOT of premium vehicles in order to get near to that. And blizz is one of the gamers' darlings.

I think this is one of key points but that it's constantly overlooked. Health is a resource you use, not different to ammo or consumables. It's not some magical fairy that shouldn't be touched. If you preemptively avoid torpedoes, you will eat two instead of like seven when in a cross-stitch between two bomber squadrons and that's a great outcome. Now those planes need to go all the way back to rearm (probably at least half of them will die in the process) and then again attack something else after ten hours of flying back And you are at 2/3 hp, ready to dish out punishment AND if you are attacked by cruisers, you will get to 1/2 and then heal again to 2/3... and so on and so forth.

No, no, I edited it I meant they are not selling you anything as in it's not yours, it's only borrowed - I made an example in the edit. I would like to know if that is against the law (changing stuff that are still theirs, you are only having a right to use them).

It does not indeed, but another thing is that they aren't selling murmansks. I don't know if that contradicts the law. If I let you drive my car for 10 euro a day and then decide to paint them, take out the radio and the air condition, that wouldn't be against the law. And as far as I understood, they are doing exactly that with murmansks. None of us has a murmansk, but the licence to use it. It wouldn't be surprising if they legally retain the right to all the changes and stuff. I mean EVERY game company does that. I doubt they get high and just write whatever in the eula. It would make more sense if eulas were compatible with laws in general.

There are other things though, relative repair costs, tier/credit cost dynamics, ammo cost, consumable cost, module slots, module cost, battle duration, damaging mechanics in relation to xp/credits, daily bonus, flags, missions and so on and so forth. It's not that simple to determine.