mtm78

wowsreplays is closing, jammin not getting any support from WG to actually read replay file content ( and another site replaywows or something does have that info ).

Evading the fact that this 'fix' doesn't fix anything? Making it look like other player skill is irrelevant? Why do I have good low tier stats even while I don't play CV's? Shouldn't I be denied victories by dirty sealclubbing top players on the enemy team in CV's?

If you claim something is OP, better have some experience in it. Preferably from BOTH sides. Aka not BBaby crying about torpedoes or HE+fire. And certainly not low tier player who has never played a single game above tier 8.

But experienced players using any other type of ship to 'take the p1ss out of low lvl games' is perfectly fine? You also seemingly forgot that this 'fix' doesn't fix anything it just moves the problem.

Excuse me... Also, what's your friggin point? Don't like the message but got nothing to bring in against it, so go after the messenger?

BUT IT IS NOT A BUFF

Voted no. VMF DD's will be buffed, so will GE DD's. They won't be the only DD's being spotted all the time, so it's a buff. But other then VMF DD's, and BB's and maybe some Moskva when I get her and my Hindenburg when I feel like it, I don't think I will touch any IJN DD's at all... probably not even continue with USN DD line. Certainly won't even touch Akizuki anymore.

How are you able to extract the battle results from the replay files? The only plain readable data you can extract is player/ship list ( ok and map and game type ).

Who would have thought WG not willing to cooperate would ever be the reason of things not going smoothly..

Lmao you haven't played a single game above tier VIII and you're mentioning Gearing and Yamato in your feedback?

He sounds abit like iChase with the RDF video don't you think

Have a look at WG Development roadmap, both past and future patches are included ->

Another one which doesn't get the concept that a> stealth fire was not widely applicable b> stealth fire effectiveness depends on player skill ( both the one using it and the potato being the victim of it ) c> stealth fire had enough counters, it just meant you can't play like a potato and be out of position, it meant you had to rely on your CV or your DD's to light up anyone trying to stealth fire you, or it meant you had to either push into the guy trying to stealth fire you or just pull back outside of their range. No one defending stealth fire spend their entire game using the ability, not even Zao players ( though that is one of the ships which could pull that off ), it's not effective for anything but potato farming. But hey, ok BBaby/potato cries about mechanic, and WG thinks it is costing them potato money, so let's rework it fine... but this sledgehammer is just plain and simple retarded. Giving BBaby same concealment as gun range when firing is flamuW. Forcing DD's to keep stock FCS and no AFT = flamuW ( especially on those ships which have semi decent AAA so taking AFT is something you don't just do for more range ). Forcing a more campy and more smoke dependent meta = flamuW. Especially since the next item on the BBaby bingo card will be ...... *drumroll* 'nerf smoke'. But you're right, best way to show it is just not playing ships which are bad in the coming meta. E.g. join the BB Kevin squad, or play VMF / GE DD's which are actually buffed because now not only them but any DD which uses it's guns is spotted the whole time by anyone. And you said you read the thread... so you should know it's NOT about just being spotted, it's about AFTER you win the local engagement how you're still spotted for a full 20 seconds. Which just means it's not worth the risk to 'be brave and go in front'. Even if you kill the DD you encountered, his allies will keep shooting you for 20 seconds. If you can't kill the DD and he smokes up, you're still spotted because there is bound to be an enemy within your maximum gun range. Good against the stale and campy meta people complain about on higher tiers right Wait, do you even play higher tiers?

He sounds like a certain minister of information sometimes, proclaiming everything is fine and they are winning the war easilly I would also very much like to know, top 5% Shima players, how many games in that group as opposed to top 5% Gearing. Since as flamu pointed out quite eloquently, the issue with Shima is consistency. So maybe his 'top 5%' are the few lucky one's which gotten a few good games in a row and then stopped playing it to not jinx their luck, while the Gearing players can keep pressing battle since it's a reliable factor in battle. Then the comments about not catering to BB Kevin... Really? Nerf torpedoes -> check. Buff AAA -> check. Reduce DE + add FP -> check ( wasn't needed.. anyone remember the chart WG THEMSELVES posted about the damage inflicted on BBabies? ), And the icing on the cake -> remove concealment as a factor during engagements, NERFING everything EXCEPT BBabies since they are getting a concealment BUFF when firing instead Does he himself believe the things he is saying? I for one surely don't. Some changes, like 20km Shima torps, sure.. but it was done with a sledgehammer, just as now with the concealment. And they hide behind empty rhetoric: stealth fire as never intended so any game balance which resulted from it is trivial and doesn't need preserving. So they basically admitted that BB's are their intended target audience, having a 40% overpopulation problem was just a lie, they have a underpopulation problem. As to new smoke meta coming as a result of this, don't worry guys BBaby bingo card development roadmap shows it is next in line because it prevents BB Kevin from enjoying his big battleships. Isn't it funny btw how many of those things on that card have actually happened already? If WG would just admit to using it as roadmap they could even claim competence.

Did you check ánimate small objects' or something like that in settings? If you don't, showing only one plane in a squadron is default behavior.

Thread derailment successful, troll feels accomplished I bet

There is a difference. 1. BBaby whine about CV's -> CV nerved, BB AAA buffed 2. BBaby whine about torpedo soup -> nerf long range torpedoes across the entire tech tree ( well ofc except Gearing, we all know USN had the best torps in the war right... ). 3. BBaby whine about HE + fire chance -> HE + fire chance nerved 4. BBaby whine about smoke spammed HE -> introduce new CL line without HE / introduce DD line with shortest duration of smoke. 1. Community complains about bow on BBaby camping -> try reducing bow armor -> doesn't work, change cancelled. 2. Community complains about BB heavy meta -> WG keeps nerfing counters and claims there is nothing wrong, then admits there is a slight problem, then admits there is a 40% BB overpopulation issue, yet claims it tried to 'correct' it by increasing total dmg on high tier torpedoes IF you manage to get a full duration flooding ( which is almost never ). 3.Stealth fire change -> all ships ( except some GE DD's ) get a fire debuff nerf, EXCEPT BB's which are BUFFED tremendously. See the difference? Option 2 honestly sounds almost more appealing to be sure.

Caring about stats equals caring about winning. You can't win WoWs alone, you need the other to be semi useful at the very least. Your sentiment doesn't hold any ground. That is true. I recommend OP applies at OMNI

Leaving can be a strong signal to developers. Stronger then forum complaints which are not considered anyway.

He said he uses them, he didn't say they are 'good'. He also said he is waiting on his precious 'statistics' before giving final judgement. Akizuki will be fine, she is very honubru 1. Indirect buff -> nerf to DD and CA/CL concealment. 2. Direct buff -> flamuWG flamuW flamuWG flamuW flamuWG flamuW Best part was: we will buff ships which plummet in performance... but who the HECK would play a broken ship / in a ship which suffers from a broken meta. So the one stat which will plummet the most ( ofc some scrubs will just 'play4fun' ) will be battles played.

37% wr after 438 battles in PvP ( 69% in BB's ). Sorry, you're past the point of 'having to learn'. I don't think you're capable of learning or you would be at least around 45%. Ow and only above 90% in PvE? I have 100% wr in PvE ( I get carried by stronk divisions ofc ). Why did you buy a tier VII Leningrad, why are you playing a tier VIII dd in PvP, or a tier VI Anshan? And a Cambeltown? In your combined 31 games you won 10 of them, that's 33%. Why? What drives you to press 'battle'? I checked all your BB's. Your hit ratio in all of them is below 20%. Even in Arizona. Even in Warspite. What are you playing this game on? Is your hw holding you back or do you not know how to lead targets? What ranges are you engaging enemies? Are you being called a noob because you constantly sit at max range of your guns and 'snipe' ( well, fail to snipe ) at the enemy? Do you think you have a right to complain about your team voicing their dislike of your contribution? In almost all your battleships your survival matches your win ratio EXACTLY. So the answer to the above question is no. Which doesn't mean you shouldn't play. But grow some skin, you're a terrible player and your stats indicate you're also a BBaby camping at the back of the field being utterly useless to his team in every way, so you will be called out for that. Noob is an accurate description of the level of contribution you're providing to your team. Either get better, or disable chat if it bothers you. And if people actually insult you with worse then just calling you a bad player ( which you are ), then report them.

Can you please stop trashing this thread?

Seriously, Imperator is just simple to play due to 3 forward facing turrets, but it's not that much better at clubbing seals then Arkansas Beta as long as you put in some effort in your AB clubbing.

There you go! Wonder if WG will pay us an commision