KurtVonSteiger

I think the overall issue is not one of national pride but one of dual standards...use one standard and stick to it and all of these threads might just go away! either use historical accuracy OR gameplay balance.....using both is the cause of all the passionate arguments about the buffed/nerfed ship stats as it leads to people believing that their favourite ship is somehow being unfairly treated. Ectar made a very valid argument relating to Warspites turret traverse as being historically accurate but then we get the "range is adjusted for gameplay" argument that leads to the forum rage. If historical accuracy is the keyword, keep the 72 second traverse but increase the range to the similar (adjusted for game mechanics) performance of the 15" calibre guns on other ships - this should satisfy the criteria of a premium ship as the turret rotation speed is a big issue at closer ranges/ dealing with faster ships. finally, people just have to accept that some ships had design issues that meant they were not as good as other nations contemporaries....not every ship can be equal - if they were there would be no challenge in the game.

Almost every map has clusters of Islands...these pose a serious problem for BB captains as they limit manoeuvrability due to huge turning circles plus being forced into narrow spaces pretty much guarantees an invisible destroyer will put a few fish into any BB who tries to go through - now add T/B's and Dive Bombers and any BB captain who knows what he is doing will stay as far away as possible and use sea room to fire and manoeuvre. BB's were designed and built for long range engagements on open ocean but WG has small maps filled with Islands to give more opportunities to DD's and CL's. it is wrong for a BB to chase a CV to the exclusion of all else, but given the level of torment BB's usually have to endure the desire to get even is understandable. remember that due to the nature of naval combat the outcome is often decided by the course you set at the start.....get into a bad tactical position and you usually are sunk long before you can extricate yourself so some players camp to try and avoid this.

I think different sea states as eye candy only plus fog banks to reduce visibility slightly would add greatly to the quality of the game....at present all maps with millpond seas and mostly clear blue skies are getting a bit stale - a mix and match of sea state and visibility would triple the number of maps. For example: Ocean....calm sea, sunny, sky. Calm sea, stormy sky. Swell, foggy. Rough sea, stormy sky. Etc. so you get 9 possible combos just for Ocean. If done for visuals only should not have Much impact on hardware and no impact on gameplay as the fog banks would work like DD smokescreens

Just had to reply to the last post! If it is of no use to someone who knows what they are doing and of limited use to new players then why not just agree to bin it? If we can all learn to shoot better than the mod then surely no one should care if its banned - the "people will find some other excuse for getting hit" argument is lame......if the game is fair for all players and I get owned I need to play better. Suspicion of cheating/unfair advantage is TOXIC.....lots of Alphas on this forum can do what the mod does but the suggestion of using such a mod calls their skills into question - no mod and you rightly got owned no excuses!

The question should really have been - "do you think XVM for WoWS would be a positive benefit for the Gaming Community? the MM is a separate issue as skill based MM has many arguments for and against. Same as the discussion on Toxic chat....on the whole the WoWS community want's to keep things friendly and enjoyable - of course, as Adults we can handle abuse and name calling....point is do we want this as the accepted norm? There are many games out there where these behaviours occur but as we are Beta testing this one the bulk of us are trying to make this game different by trying to keep such behaviours at bay. Rational argument for inclusion is fine, saying "it's in other games live with it!" is not so persuasive.

Last two posters - Stats are an important measure of success in game and no one is complaining about them or trying to get them removed - it's great if you are brilliant and I suck. Be justifiably proud of your gaming progress and success - but those who are not gaming gods just do not want to start a game being told that they are crap and that they will be the cause of the loss. We are all different in our abilities and as the MM is random sometimes you get the team from the bottom of the box - but surely if you get to do the max damage in your team of 'specials' is that not enough - shock, horror but sometimes you will lose - we just don't want the whole "we lost because you suck" routine.

When I first started playing WoT I gave no thought at all to ANY statistics and I hit the battle button and played very recklessly just to get the XP to upgrade until I got to the tank I wanted to keep not worrying about all the times I got killed. Once I began to understand the game more and become aware of my stats I began to play a lot more sensibly BUT, after loads of battles in low tiers of the original US, German, Russian and French trees the damage was done and my stats absolutely sucked.....only now am I dragging myself out of the pit but it is a long, slow progress. Point is, how many new players will do the same?,,,,,rushing through the early tiers to get to their prized ship - then XVM arrives and the insults start despite the fact that the player is not necessarily bad but was just in a rush to get through the grind as soon as possible? XVM does cause people to discriminate - it's like assuming someone is a crap player because he says "semka" in chat.

XVM is just a tool - but it can be a dangerous one....."a gun is just a tool - guns don't kill people, people kill people!" .......True, but they make killing a hell of a lot easier! Having extra information is not necessarily going to help - their best player in a BB spawns one side, your best BB player spawns the opposite end of the map - by the time they get to engage the battle might already have been decided. XVM says you have a 10% chance of winning - morale goes down the toilet and players just die quickly so they can play another game with better win chance. Good players are huge Torpedo/shell magnets to the exclusion of other players in perhaps more valuable ships (e.g unicum DD so BB's ignored just to kill him!). And, good old human nature kicks in - "my stats are great - his are crap....we lost because of you, you *******!" Statpadding and toxicity do tend to go hand in hand and people tend to forget that we are playing this for FUN, not because having a good win rate will somehow change your life or make you attractive to women (or however you roll) I want to sail certain ships - I don't care if they are a bit U/P I like them so want to sail them - if my W/R suffers so be it - but I don't want a load of abuse about my stats.

Hood and Prince of Wales are both supposed to be T7 ?.....and anyway I want to be captaining Hood!

In my humble opinion we need to maintain this sort of role specific imbalance to keep the unique identity of WoWS - WoT has been making the mistake of listening to far too many "omg - the X is OP please nerf" moans and as a result is slowly but surely moving towards the "everything the same only the skin is different" destination - as quite a few of the posters here have replied the two nations had specific tactical doctrines that shaped the design of their respective ship classes therefore you can not reasonably expect them to be evenly balanced.....I know I will now get the "but this is a game so balance" reply but for some of us it is overcoming the weakness and playing to the strengths that makes the game challenging. WoT is all about high alpha - run around with a 122mm gun and you are usually golden - in WoWS a DD can rip the guts out of a BB 2 tiers higher so no one enters a battle going "OMG I am useless at this tier" but you HAVE to play to your strengths and minimise your weakness and this is what will make this game a great game.

As noted historical battles failed due to human nature - most players wanted to be the one in the OP tank so the waiting times were ridiculous - in my personal experience when you could get into a battle the asymmetric division of forces made for some very interesting games. So, if we can have Historic battles as PvE this could be the solution - you would be sailing the ship of your choice and not having to wait for players who wanted to sail the lesser ships (not to mention I can get Hood vs Bismark eventually)

All of them as my eventual game plan is to have pretty much the whole RN mid to upper tier line up!

Do we like the game ?......yes Will the RN and the KMS be in it at some point ?.........yes So, with regards to the above - what's the problem? We just have to wait a bit longer - we are still in closed beta so it's not like the game is going live on Monday is it?

We really need to move along from this now as this is a done deal and trying to reverse it is pointless! Ectar has been quite tolerant of some of the posts so far but some of you are pushing it......as per WoT it has a huge Russian player base so naturally WG are concentrating on them - as for bias, are we behaving any better? Demanding the company does things our way is just as bad. Personally, I respond better to reasoned argument and polite discussion than to insults.

Guys, the arguments are in on both sides and it has to be said...the starting line up is a Commercial decision. pushing for a speedy introduction of the RN and KMS is fine but to keep demanding it comes first after the Devs explain it is for Commercial reasons is being unreasonable. instead, accept the Russian line will come first but keep nagging for the rest soonest - a hell of a lot of us are waiting for these lines (Hood &KG5 in particular for me!) but the Commercial success of the game must come first, if it makes money it will grow if not it will sink! polite expression will have more of an effect than calling people stupid etc. so let's continue to try and keep these forums and the game toxic free and civil

Glad to see that there might be a new movie made about the Bismarck although since Universal will be involved I'm not sure about the love triangle and it being the Americans who actually sunk her

noProblem, just have a number key to select for cruisers and BB's - the key fires stat shells from the secondary armament

Skin mods - great!....sound mods - if you need them - great! even GUI and port mods - all fine and dandy, but there should be not a single damn thing that gives anyone an advantage over anyone else!

The problem is we are now beginning to see the fruit of the poison tree - when mods that clearly give someone an advantage to the point of an outright cheat are available and not banned it calls individuals skills into question - did he hit me because he is good or because he is using an aiming assist cheat?...then follows the inevitable name calling and insults and everyone is upset - the player who was sunk by what he thinks was a cheat and the other player who actually was not using a cheat and takes exception to being called one. Of course the lowlifes who actively use cheats to win don't care at all but the ordinary players begin to be suspicious of everyone as the poison slowly seeps into the game - then it reaches the ''everyone else is using it so why shouldn't I?'' stage and what could have been a great game is reduced to a cheat to win clickfest.

Indeed, and fully agreed!....my rather facetious post was in reply to the ''How many.... part, but in truth as long as an opinion is well thought out and has some experience or research behind it there is no minimum number requirement - unfortunately too many people are playing a couple of games and screaming for changes without understanding the meta-game itself then adding insult to injury by ignoring more informed testers

National pride to one side - I think that the market for the Royal Navy is perhaps a bit understated due to a large number of the RN's ships being famous world wide.....Hood, Ark Royal, Prince of Wales ,Kelly, Exeter, Ajax and Achilles etc. so I feel a lot of players in various countries will be quite keen to sail in these ships in the same way that they will want to sail in the KMS line.... Bismark, Scharnhorst, Graf Spee , Prinz Eugen etc. Merely taking the view that only Brits will want to sail in RN ships is perhaps denying a possibly significant number of potential players - that's like saying no one will sail anything but their own Nations ships - a bit hard to believe. Of course, they will come in time but hopefully if WG reads the forum posts they might come a bit sooner.

It seems that for a few of the new testers the answer is 4 (1 game in each class) ''your Destroyer sunk my Cruiser! - I am Ace so clearly Destroyers are overpowered and need Nerf! '' ..... ''your Carrier sunk my Battleship! - I am Ace so clearly Carriers are overpowered and need Nerf!'' ,,,,, ''your Battleship sunk my Destroyer! - I am Ace so clearly Battleships are overpowered and need Nerf!'' ...... ''your Cruiser sunk my Carrier! - I am Ace so clearly Cruisers are overpowered and need Nerf!'' All sorted! - now we can Nerf every class and go straight to the final Release stage. - job well done!.

I personally feel that WG have an opportunity with WoWS to make a statement in the Beta test that toxic behaviour will not be tolerated full stop - if they did this I am fairly confident that not only would WoWs be the success I think it will be but it would actively gather a player base from other games suffering from high levels of toxicity and they would not lose out financially due to player retention (e.g not losing players from WoT to Warthunder etc.) Most people play for fun and relaxation and have a wide disparity in skill - a game is just not enjoyable for a new/low skill player when he is barraged by insult and invective as everyone who has posted here knows. Making such a stand will go a long way to the LONG TERM success of the game. Getting access to the closed beta is a privilege and with so many players clamouring for a chance to take part those who abuse it can make way for those who will treat the test and the players with respect.

Keep seeing these threads and have come to the conclusion that a lot of the beta testers get a few games in and make these posts without the full understanding of the deeper game mechanics whilst arguing with the alpha testers who have months of experience and have learnt that team play is VITAL to succeed in WoWS. Beta testing is about finding bugs and providing data and stats for the developers to see what needs fixing for rebalancing purposes and constructive comments are useful but better coming after a lot of experience - not first impressions.

Just read this all and felt I needed to reply....reading some of the replies from the Alpha testers made a lot of sense and showed me where I have been making some mistakes in the game. Unfortunately loads of new testers are playing this game and are pretty much playing like WoT players.....i.e solo players in what is even more a team game than WoT. This leads to problems as this game is a lot more unforgiving than WoT but most people being who they are seem to expect the game to be relatively easy. Beta is especially hard as there is no tutorial - you follow Darwin rules....learn quick or die often! and this is causing a lot of these ''this needs attention'' threads - if you don't fully understand the game mechanics (and I don't!) then things seem OP or broken - some things MAY need a tweak but we newcomers need a lot of water under our keels before claiming ''this is broken'' So, I for one am content to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune (torpedoes) until I get to the point where they are a minor irritant or I can make a solid case they need fixing.