Karkong_the_Impaler

But not what you were writing. But I'm happy that you agree.

Apparently you are wrong, because, you know, the gaming industry didn't milk the playerbase then but does now. Come on... They a) didn't have the idea to be such .... greedy persons they are now and b) no one would have played along. It's the pollunder wearing economy majors sticking their grubby fingers everywhere, just like planned obsolescence in, say, kitchen appliances, because you know, you can EARN EVEN MORE MONEY when the wife has to buy it anew after four years. What these assholes don't consider is, that if the quality name is ruined, no one will ever buy their crap again. And when they rectify their mistake, the one who is actually at fault is already at another company with a healthy rise, "fixing" their company gains. Unfortunately, the latter is untrue in the gaming environment, you're just getting milked.

Sorry - do you have ambitions to reach gold league? If yes, the new rules are in your favour, so why would you "get started" about that? I don't understand.

No. I would have laughed at them. Not that I owned many actually bought games on my C128D. Today I can easily afford to pay for it and the gaming industry understands how their player base is now rich enough to be milked.

Yeah, but in the 80s people weren't ready to spend 10 bucks monthly they already bought, that just worked with WOW. Or purchase ingame items for their epeen. I blame these retarded apple cell phone games. And nowadays? You purchase football players for your FIFA for hundreds so you can have the "better" team. And they probably sell your personal data on top. That is layers of sleazy caked with scummy on top. And idiots still pay for that. I for example don't buy anything where EA has their greedy fingers in, at all. Compared to that, wows is quite humane, one has to admit.

I was referring to being able to be carried to gold easily.

I just wanted to point out your mistake. The reason is earning even more money. You're welcome.

Why? Don't you profit from that?

This is the first thing that came to my mind as well. This is a "git gud" kind of problem. Look, if you were a good or even average player complaining, one would take this more serious, because no one here can tell if it's the ship or you showing broadside, and considering a 42% winrate at tier 10, the latter one is likely.

Unfortunately people play them still, so we're not done yet.

Untrue, in one of my first games with the shikishima I killed eight and we still lost. About 300k dmg, so no kill stealing, either. No, I also have no idea what the rest of the team did.

Only fair, considering CVs ain't fun for anyone else. Probably a good reason to actually play subs, if they weren't so toxic. Just say no to immovable camping objects. Nah, just get rid of fantasy laser guided homing cruise missiles torpedos and use WW2 ideas. Decoys could be in the same as the concealment mod slot, with the effet that you only have a 50% chance to get hit by these things. There were torps that homed in on engine noise, so, throttle AND speed should have an influence, so you need to use the remaining energy to dodge the torp. Or make torps that move in a pattern back and forth through an area. You just need to rework the torpedo spotting mechanics that they don't stay spotted when out of range, maybe with a single warning for those downrange, maybe on the minimap for as long as they're spotted. Who knows, this might even teach people to watch the minimap... Or maybe people can choose to load mines instead of a number of torpedos. Not talking about italian torpedos, real mines, drifting slowly around, really short detection range with a life of about say, five minutes. If dropped from depth, they take a minute to float to the surface, so it's not a "haha, they're trying to waterbomb me" kind of weapon. And ofc detectable by hydro, inside of 2km. Also, make the torpedos single launch, as they are now, but allow a maximum of two homing torps inside 20 seconds, the alpha on DDs is just too high.

These superships make it feel like a cheesy halloween game mode - which I avoid for a reason. Subs I can see as having some kind of value, a different kind of gameplay, a counter to the endless island camping cruisers and the hordes of BBs. If these CVs could only reliably hit big targets or the nose forward Petropavlovsks and Stalingrads....

Don't get me wrong, he should enjoy the heck out of it. It's just a small step to falling prey to WGs 'dark patterns' and their purchaseable lootbox scheme. Sitting and waiting for each container to open individually, expecting a beautiful present, is stimulating to the 'reward' center of your brain - it helps when you know that it is aimed at the dumb and the weak willed, but you can't evade it entirely. And yes, compared to pixel ships, money is as real as reality gets.

Someone hasn't met supershit CVs yet...

I see, that is a valid reason. You fall for these cheap psychological reward mind games and draw it out even more, so it "feels" better? You're tight in the grip of WGs business model of dependency. Watch that you don't spend real money on pixels with exactly zero value.

I don't have any issues at the moment - note that I'm not saying it's not WG, but could it possibly be your own hamster?

Ok, this is beyond me. Why would anyone "store" containers apart from to the usual three so you don't have to force watch that crap animation?

a) what would be the chance to end up on the better teams side? b) couldn't you influence the outcome more as an unicum when on average the players are worse? Edit: Also at that tier, you can have that on EU, too.

I would admit it's easier for a DD to escape the border damage. On the other hand, the BB has a longer time to contemplate just where he is going...

Potatos on the team randomize the results. They do unexpected things, sail behind islands where they're useless for the next five minutes or throw the game on a 5 to 2 advantage because they can't cap and get killed one by one. But on average you have the same spread per team, so it shouldn't make a difference across the servers. Unfortunatly potato CVs have the biggest influence, followed in a far distance by DDs and unicum divisions have an even higher impact when the average player skill is low. Especially if they bring their own CV or superships or, heavens forbid, super CVs.

I'm class fluid, at the moment I play Druid which is unlike anything. And Incomparable, who can't deceide what it is, either. Yes, I had to hump the border once or twice, too, when showing broadside was no (viable) option. I do not care what solution WG thinks of, as long as it is being discouraged more than it is now. The addtional amount of time it takes to kill a single border humper is just too long compared to one who can only flee.

I'm not talking about you, sorry if you misunderstood. And with 50% you're not a potato, you are average (same as me, btw, you just feel potato when being outplayed by unicums, also same as me). But someone here is insulting all players on EU servers because apparently they won't carry him, and boy, eight horses ain't enough for that carriage. But I'm interested, I guess on a 'better' server his win rate should drop some more, because on average the enemy team is also better. So, to the contrary, he should go to the 'worst' server possible. But I guess the issue is, that the team doesn't want to play his idea of tactics, and he could even be right and have brilliant plans, but playing them alone isn't going to help.

Just detonate border humpers after x seconds (depending on ship class). Or make all shells and torps hitting the border nearby deal damage to the ship.