mtm78

Yeah that armor profile is a big handicap. But seeing her in game performance, you can not actually buff her armor profile unless they nerf something else.

Top tier gameplay. Think about tier VI - VIII. Maybe BB Kevin's get good results in those tiers, that is why there are more and more of them getting into your tier X matches where they continue to be BB Kevin's and think they can go sail alone. They aren't learning from lower tiers which kind of illustrates the point no? I don't play BB's a lot, I don't feel comfortable knowing they are the one class which suffers from overpopulation and which has changed the meta of the game so much but being so overly popular. I mean, I played a lot of low / medium tier premium BB's before but I even stopped doing that. But I'm not terrible at playing BB's In fact I'm better at winning games it seems in BB's then in my other classes, even if you take out my grossly overpowered tier 4 seal clubbers.

Those are the players which draw in new players and who keep playing the game. Drawing in new people is nice, as long as you keep them interested and they stick around, try to get a lot off ships and play a lot of games. If you get a lot of new players who play 100 games and then move on, WG isn't making money of them.

WG is capable of making sure BB's need some effort to. For one, they could make it more important they pay attention to minimap and stick with their team ( AAA nerfs, tone down secondaries on some, tone down hydro on some just to make sure they actually need cruiser support against CV's and DD's ). Maybe even roll back the global rudder shift buff to BB's we had a long time ago ( when everyone complained 'they' nerved USN DD's and 152mm shell arcs which actually never happened as it was just the ships turning quicker which actually changed ). Would it make BB's less fun to play... yes, and that's exactly the point. Fun in this case is being careless and still having decent results. I see to many BB Kevin's which play terrible but still get decent results, it's the single biggest reason I am losing interest in playing this game. But... instead of making the one class which is causing the issues with MM more dependent on teamwork, they do it to DD's... This is a sensible change. Hence I am not thinking WG will look into it. Instead they will immediately dismiss it as punishing BB main's.

Not sure about reports having influence. I have seen the counter not go down in some games but that was surely not games where I didn't do enough damage to enemy ships... In WoT it totally depends on the ratio dmg to enemies:damage to friendles. In WoWs this was never stated, it was always said it is a straight game count penalty.

WG has already commented on the complaints about the global IJN AAA nerf, Yubari was compensated with the AAA consumable ( it had none when it came out ). Do I agree? No I don,t, you shot down more planes with old AAA and no consumable then now with the consumable ( damage multi works with the guns with the largest aura... Yubari long range aura is crap ). But WG says they won't buff it. Either way... you're misrepresenting stuff -> Only 25% of his complaints are about AAA

It's a big DD with a citadel and terrible torpedo arcs But it makes up with being fast, nimble, laser gun's and workable turret traverse. She scales nicely with the captain you put in her, having things like AFT for the AAA consumable, and DE for her fire chance, CE for more stealthy approach and so on, really makes her more enjoyable to play.

Yes you were, the punishment starts with 5 games always..

I fear for your students. Lol... you think you can slander people when you feel like it? You're pathetic, every time people try to teach you something you go full ad hominem since you can't actually refute the things they say otherwise. I never said otherwise. 2. The thing is, I actually understand how most of them actually work something which can't be said from you. Client side cheats don't need to reside in the same folder btw, they can be processes running fro ANY location. This again shows you don't understand what I been telling you about intercepting drawcalls to the renderer. Nothing. You probably didn't even click on the link trying to educate yourself ( though articles by someone with a doctorate from Stanford might be going over your head?

Something here is crystal clear yes..

1. yeah those stats like... .. are actually what causes those silly numbers like w/r and dmg. 2.

I don't play WT, now sure about player numbers, and you got a good point with free 'booster time' due to shared premium account. never heard of islands

Go ask strangers123.... flamu told about it on stream, but when a Hindenburg removes 24k hp from your butt you know there are some issues there

Well he does have a point if he bought her like me because of the premise of 'skysweeper' ( yes, that word was used in her advertisement... ). The 25mm AAA nerf has dramatically lowered her AAA performance, not to mention that low tier planes had their health buffed iirc? edit: above is all time, this is last two weeks

That 16mm rear citadel bulwark though

Player with 61% wr Yubari wants Yubari buffed.... Top kek, 10/10 thread. No one yet checked OP's performance? Wew... guys I am dissapoint. Ask OP, I win 1% more games but he does 5k more dmg per game so I guess he's doing a better job sailing her

Shoot commanders hatch = get full dmg rolls It's just as WoWs a hitpoint based system, sure you can aim for and incapacitate modules ect but it will always be arcade. Want (more) realistic tank combat go play WarThunder.

I haven't played on live for a week I think But I will collect the data when I play again, it's quite interesting if true.

WG dev's have publicly spoken / posted about this more then once, I am not going to do your homework for you though if I had a link ready I would of course give it. However I am confident you should be able to find a 'proper source' for it by yourself. Pollution? WoT? Relevance? Do you have any programming background? because what you're saying points to a big fat nope.gif. A client ALWAYS has it's own positional info, there is an interval based client - server synchronization ( this causes those desync symptoms where your own ship model seems to pass through enemy torpedoes, or get's hit by torpedoes which according to your clients render output looked to have missed ). Then the server does visibility checks with all the other enemy players, only if a ship is considered detected your client needs to be aware of the positional data. This whole model was implemented to ensure the client can't be modified to show enemies which should be hidden due to concealment. Even in WoT this system works the exact same. The only thing which can give away enemy locations in WoT is a mod which tracks destructible environment being broken ( trees, fences and so on ). This is also not done through interception network traffic, it's done because your client get's the destruction data since it has to update render state of those objects. Moving to a system where the server would only send object status if they objects are inside your actual current render viewport would only stress the network throughput and would create more possible issues like object 'suddenly' changing state when getting into view. In short, the rendered form is still based on server send data for anything except your own ship, and even there it's intermittently synced with server data ( server has authority over client ). And the server does not send data for ships which should not be visible to your client. The only possible client side modification to this would extrapolate a visible's model's speed and course + current rudder settings and extrapolate a probable model based on that. But you surely understand that the reliability of this extrapolation model diminishes rapidly with time as any player input which changes heading or speed incrementally creates a larger variance between actual position and the one from the extrapolated one based on the last know variables.

WG. Those were 3D 'radars'. The aiming 'helper' intercepts dx draw calls, not network traffic. https://graphics.stanford.edu/~mdfisher/D3D9Interceptor.html is an interesting read and shows both theory and practise. It's also not the subject, I know fully well how the aim 'helper' works so let's just stop polluting the actual 'question'. How do you get the client to display ships which aren't spotted, eg when the client has no information from the server about their location.

I guess you haven't dropped by the Forumites channel yet Seriously, we all do this pretty often. Usually we end up facing each other more often then we are on the same team though ;)

Mine is 3.1 to 1 ps his is actually 20.1 to 1 not 2.3 to 1 that's pleb territory like I am edit: actually sorry nvm me, I was looking at K/D not kills per game His K/D is actually the most impressive, just as his 88% survival rate. That's showing that besides knowing his own ship very well, he understand how to tactically play incredibly well to.

I am still not 100% convinced. Give me some more individual players with different most played ships / tiers during this timeframe and I will find it much more convincing.

There is no data being sent to client unless the the server decides the enemy ship should be visible to the client. So try again. ? The part about drivers = ~~ .. you seem to not actually know hot it works if you think there is server - client communication for unspotted ships? Positional data is only transferred from server to client if the ship is spotted so there is nothing to intercept in the scenario I asked you about.

Explain how you think a client side cheat can hack WG servers to get positional data for unspotted ships, I would be delighted to learn how the game mechanics work.