mtm78

Cruiser division works as cruiser is supposed to support. Playing a full 'id10-1' division ( battleships ) you NEED your team to not be ... well you know, average wows players. That is why it's a '1d10-t' division, since you aren't self reliant. Cruisers can do everything, have some map control, have a bit off stealth and have consumables which help them perform different duties. Full BB or full DD is just harder to complement each other ( exceptions aside, like a spotting DD and a gunboat working in tandem ).

Uhmm uhmmm don't tell me it's on the tip of my tongue I swear... uhm uhm uhhhhhhhhhhh Aha, ye, it's BabyBoat.. or was it BBaby... or.. meh picture says a thousand words.. especially if the picture has multiple frames... with words on them... *edit: ofc not aimed at you personally, but as pictorial description of how BBaby looks like when I think about them...

Depends on changes to IFHE, if any. Even in a pure damage dealing role Belfast might keep up due to IFHE working even better against angling as RN CL AP. If you get broadsiding BB's the whole time you might be better of with just the raw AP damage. On the other hand in a cruiser meta there might be more dynamic play which leads to more value for having a heal as there are less positions you can just sit and farm in without taking damage ( in the longer run ).

ftfy

I seen sub 50% wr Gremmy's, that's my point. It's not an 'I-win' button no matter how comparatively stronger the ship is ;) Pay2win - always winning through paying for advantage. Pay4Advantage = pay for having an advantage which results in winning more. But yeah, I know how this definition is different from the one's other companies use ;)

This is what you get with ruining your game WG, you get posts from me which are outdated as I don't play nearly as much anymore Shame, shame, shame, shame, shame, shame, shame.

Neither is wiki, and yeah I agree that pre 1920 the list was a lot easier.

He later posted it's better value buying fleet package as you get slightly more doubloons as well as some fluff.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hull_classification_symbol

Forget about the class, focus on the characteristics? I don't agree, yeah on global scale some ships might not seem problematic due to being 'rare', but that's still a broken concept like putting concealment module on a tier 7 ship with radar and smoke making sure it will be able to jump on anything which it runs into. Or putting radar on a Fletcher / Iowa. They are rare, but it doesn't mean they aren't abominations which shouldn't exist. Something as a Belfast might be gimped by players which don't have the strategic / tactical experience needed to employ a radar ship properly, it's offset by the performance it gains by better players. Ships should scale with skill, I like that aspect, but there has to be a limit to the ceiling of that performance in influencing matches. Having such imbalanced ships in the game, certainly when MM doesn't take into account even something basic as which ships are equipped with radar, can actually be really detrimental to the game. What would a new player just freshly reaching tier 5 say when he meets a Saipan - Belfast - Sims ( or was it another Belfast.. not sure ) division? I don't need to guess here, neither do you, I can link you to a post in the MM topic about Blogis 'clubbing seals' in his saipan with some other SCRUBS. Even if the same would likely happen with those players in a Hiruyu and Fiji + Mahan It's still a broken perception, certainly because there are quite some premiums which are basically improved versions of tech tree ships ( well either that or the downside is so not relevant to my personal play style I don't feel it's a downside.. like gun range difference between Leningrad and Minsk ). I actually think the best premium WG has ever released so far is Harekaze. Simply because it has multiple variants all catering to different players and I hear people who play with 127, the usn gun setup and the 100mm.. and they all think it's 'not bad to quite good'. So WG can imho put out interesting and balanced variants ( though I admit imho only the 100mm is really good, then again I really really really like those gun's.... ) of even the same ship, with different hulls which have some influence on how you can play the ship. Difference there is quite big though right, I never really used guns on Minekaze and on Kamikaze they seem a lot more useful ( might be cognitive bias due to actually just using them more.. ).

No we were not, but I blame your English language usage for any disambiquity There issue with last patch with loading of assets ( black screen during loading and start of battle ) is known. what you just describe sounds like a server hickup and those also been more frequent since last patch ( maybe more RN BB fanbois playing and server isn't scaling properly idk? ). No. But I will report you for being AFK if I have reports left and I feel your ship would be highly influential during opening moves of a game. And for the simple reason that WG won't take action unless there are multiple reports for a single player, and even then a manual investigation is done before any actions are taken. So no, AFK reports should be used, it's what they are there for, and no you're not 'punishing' people over something which might be accidental as WG doesn't need you to make that consideration. So don't, there is no need. As some would say, let god sort em out. Well, in this case WG as deity but hey according to some there might not be a big difference It's, in my case at least, limited to people who are willingly/frequently AFK. And tbh, I don't think it's the game's biggest issue atm :)

Belfast requires tactical insight like all radar cruisers.

So, Atago and MK? I mean, sure it's not 'massive' but in any tournament those had been the ships of choice... With CM being the new kid on the block due to range and spood beest.

You would appear as not connected with front turrets still facing forwards and back turrets facing backwards. I hate DD's which are late connecting, but with 7 reports I don't have the 'luxury' to be able to spend them on that. Now, if your turrets moved right away but you wouldn't touch your keyboard for a minute.... THAT would be worth a report. And rightfully so. I've argued this time and time again: STOP trying to make this an emotional issue. There is no emotion, there are just facts: players appear AFK + there is a report option for it + WG ONLY TAKES ACTION AFTER ENOUGH REPORTS. So no, it's not sorry for the guy with an heath attack, he probably doesn't have them very often. The report option is there to report people with it. Only WG has the data to indicate if a player indeed has suspicious behavior. And I don't mean 'I don't like him so I report him' but they can actually see when he is inactive and when he's not, but they can't check every player continuously so they need US to report people who we expect to be AFK. Even if we realize it might be unintentional.... Heck I've left a game to run 5 stairs down because one of my kids told me the other had fallen and hit his head... and while I can tell my division on teamspeak I'm running downstairs I can't take the time to type that. And yes, I was reported after that game.... and I don't care. They were right to report me, and I don't fear WG taking action on it because it was an EXCEPTION. Report AFK people, don't be afraid, no one get's banned who just was taking a leak during queue and then realized it would be a number one. But if you do that on a regular basis, they deserve everything what's coming to them.

Doesn't help that it's a carbon copy of the worst liked tier 8 to start with though. If it weren't, the wr would probably be higher with the premium version as more competitive people would buy the ship. As it's just a bad ship, most wouldn't even bother even if they need a German cruiser trainer you can always use Scharnhorst for that Which indeed is why WG doesn't like the income generated through this sales model and instead give us ships like the very balanced Belfast. Balanced through the amount of people playing her without knowing how, and yet it STILL had a higher wr as KA did which got pulled instead. But LOW TIER overpowered stuff is much more damaging as you lose more players over it, when you meet ships at higher tiers which are 'questionable' you already have an investment in the game ( if only through time spend ). Heck some people where even crying how Belfast would be 'bad' if WG nerved IFHE I was told today I'm a grumpy old man which doesn't like new features ( like 'submarines' ) being implemented.... guess I'm happy to be called old man

Why not give team the option to vote to replace whoever they think is AFK with a bot... I mean gameplay would surely be enhanced if we replace those kind of players with bots on our team, they might not end up full hp in their CurryWurst at the end of a loss.... You can determine if someone if afk -> his turrets are not faced in the starting position. It's impossible to get that back once you connect, your turrets move to a single aim point. Just saying, system is already there. Now, the issue can be that the client is connected but the player had a hearth attack while seeing the team list... technically he's AFK and there is a high probability he wouldn't even mind having to pay a few extra credits if he logs in a next time... Then again he might be a human piece of crap which doesn't like being up tiered and who goes AFK on a regular basis, or worse as it's harder to detect which just suicide into enemy team because they don't like the lineup. The first would be happy to pay some extra imaginary currency, surviving such a queue is quite a feat, but the latter should be banned for a year to start with, and next sentence should be perm.

I am starting to feel that way to..

Going AFK on purpose is an action which imo should lead to a 1 year ban. Sadly I can't convince support with just a forum post, could you please upload a replay where you go AFK? You like bragging about it so that replay would surely impress the hell out off us :)

So you were one of the guys involved with the downfall there as well? How about you keep it convined, WoWs shouldn't really follow WoWp's example or want to claim otherwise? Ow my ffin god it's becoming clearer and clearer why WG is frecking up their own game if this forum is a representation of it's playerbase edit: seems I misunderstood the bomber issue in WoWp, still doesn't mean we need submarines in this game.... but then again I might be a grumpy 'old' man

You're the missing guy from that village aren't you? WG has never claimed to be a realistic simulator..... strange though I never see you cry about the unrealistically high babyboat accuracy. It's only 'bad' if it hurts your precious baby boats, which makes it pretty clear what term can be used to describe you.... ps:

My ARP Kongo's do so much better as my normal one, I am quite sure it's the nice captain's telling me 'must not fa...' ow wait, I mean they keep cheering me on

Leaving the ill implemented and therefore impopular class off carriers as only 'counter'? Lol..... and people wonder we have have world of babies There are more f's given about relevant stuff, as laughter and disbelief about shitters combined.

Irrelevant much? I'm pretty sure there were more surface vessels lost as submarines but most of those were merchants. Submarines weren't made to fight warships head on.

I want a stricter punishment for any destroyer which isn't moving after 10 seconds into the game.... like a 24h ban CV's initial scouting is nice, but only applies to certain games where you actually have one, but when you have those shitters in destroyers which think their role is to start moving after 5 minutes and even then to ignore the caps.... infuriating!