mtm78

Lol I have higher win rate with AB then Imperator Nikolai... it didn't need a buff man really.

The dpg I can vaguely understand.. that it bothers you I mean.. not that it's strange considering CV's should counter BB's and BB's have the highest hitpoints. And Zao's should not focus on burning down BB's as much as it should kill DD's ( rock paper scissors ), so while it's easy to pad your dpg it's not always helping your team unless you can focus the BB and kill it it will just heal all the damage back up. But I can relate to your feeling of unfairness, you want CV's to do the same damage... not realistic but ok. But wanting to lower survivability? Why? Why does it bother you? What EFFECT does a CV's survivability have? None.... And why does it survive more.. because it's designed to not be engaged directly. WG has even ensured this by giving defensive fire consumable to prevent CV sniping.

Well they could market as a training ship for new captains who want to learn the art of manual drops. Would sell like hotcakes.

1. It is not STATS, it's PROFILE. Statistics are just a measurement of relative performance, profile shows your actual experience in the game, your ability to have a unbiased opinion ( or a biased one.. ) and your ability to understand and make use of game mechanics. 2. No you are not. Bias would describe anyone's opinion when based upon a very limited reference point. You just don't think the mechanic should have been in the game. Well you are a decent BB captain, have some DD's in which you are pretty decent, I recon they are your latest unlocks, In fact, looking at your STATS ( just to make clear I am actually looking at those now, since you brought it up ) you're actually improving a lot and you ARE a very good player if those very high scoring one's are your last played ships. But the few DD's in your list which would benefit from timely use of SF capability are all very low in performance. So you might have never attempted to use that strong point of them and thus might therefore be less inclined to see the benefit it gave to certain ships. Either way, even if you never used the mechanic, are you saying that you really agree in the MANNER OF WHICH wargaming has removed it from the game?

I'm not interested in your STATS, I am interested in your possible bias and/or in your knowledge and ability to implement game mechanics.

True.. Even Alabama citadel was fixed before release. But bow armor nerf was nothing compared with this.

Maybe he only plays BB's and he always went to the wrong places so he could get farmed by those nasty stealth firing DD's every darn game?

When is the last time WG EU has actually listened to a reasonable debate?

There is no trolling. Trolling is done for fun. What you see here is just utter disgust which can't be shown without breaking forum rules so sarcasm has to be employed. WG is certainly spoiling us a lot. See what I did there. And it's not just these changes, it's the TOTAL disrespect WG EU has for the people on this forum, It's the EU office which has declared this forum not worth developer attention, it is WG EU which closes threads and call it whining, it is WG EU which has said that this forum is just filled with people with 'wrong' opinions. Do YOU really think anything will change due to feedback being worded differently? I know you don't. WG EU is perfectly capable of digesting the feedback in current form, they just don't agree and thus don't care about passing on our feedback at all.

Say no more.

But still legitimate. And to the why... don't ever think for a moment WG doesn't actually know all the counter arguments already, I am sure they heard them all before. if this idea made it to PTS still in this form, they just plan on executing it like this in the exact same way.

Yeah, which is why it's bs as you're better off having low range on your DD's ( taking stock FCS and no AFT ). Indeed, they are even buffing BB concealment debuff .... Balanced right

It's not that childish, even now BB's are being buffed

Because that's a buff with no consequence mostly, as both those lines never ever rely on stealth fire in the first place. Infact for my VMF DD's this patch will be a buff, now all DD's will stay visible and thus I won't get focused as much.

edit: damnit I had a post here on which I worked for like 15m or so and forum ate it only showing a quote from someone ...

No. WG should NEVER sell this ship to OP. It's to broken, and OP can not have it. But I bought her right away, and I ain't giving her away Not that I still play her, it makes me feel dirty as hell. Besides, I get higher w/r with Arkansas Beta anyway

I guess I am starting to accept I will lose those battles anyway, and I would rather not get recked during the first minutes of a game in an attempt to play the objectives when I can also stay with the fleet and just farm damage instead. Is it the best solution, heck no I know that. I probably will lose more games because I give up on winning when I could actually have won. But this change is so detrimental to those who go in front I really fear I'm not the only one thinking it's best to ignore cap zone's now and just wait until a BB goes in front. Actually, some games on PT I actually had this happen, I complained in chat because my team was 10km from closest cap behind me and I had to run away because massive focus fire, and a FdG found his W key and just pushed into cap. Suddenly all our DD's were smoking him up and screening for torps and engaging enemy DD's, because we could because we didn't get focus of 2/3 of enemy team ( I use PT, I had 8 people aiming at me when I was running away first time after getting spotted ). We won the cap, pushed them back and eventually won the game. All because ONE battleship actually understood that any DD in the cap which got spotted was melting under focus fire and couldn't sustain a cap. I hope more people in BB's will do it, but I don't have a lot of faith in it happening. Before, DD's always risked a lot with going for caps even without stealth fire removal, but BB's which push into a cap with at least 8 enemy ships there of which a few have torpedoes, well if he doesn't get support he is also dead. And once committed, he can't disengage. So he needs the smokes of the DD's, he needs the DD's to screen for him and push out enemy DD's and he needs maybe some CA/CL to help the DD's take care off other DD's/CA/CL's. So in short, what this change does is maybe on one hand good, as I really like the necessity of teamwork. But if this requires the one class which I think is played the worst in most battles ( because of WG's design history making them easier and easier ) to be the pivot point in this teamwork meta... it just makes me very very scared. Because I don't see the BBaby mentality changing at all, none of those who camped before will now suddenly realize they should shift their gameplay. Because if they had the capacity to understand this, they would have done it earlier.

But don't you realize you're one of the biggest exceptions? You're not only an exceptional player, but being one of those exceptional players is also because YOU don't camp, that YOU know when to use W key, that YOU know when using W key is not a good thing. I am sorry, but it is my impression that a majority of those who play BB are the kind which does not know this. And because they do not, because they lack the skill needed to actually understand when to push, as a result of this they have pushed at the wrong time/place in the past, got wrecked, and now refuse to find that W key because they think it's the best option to stay 10km behind the nearest cruiser, which is at least 5km if not 10km from the nearest DD. Trust me, if I were in a DD with you in my team I would be ahead of you no problem

All these suggestions are nice and all, but it's not like WG hasn't heard half of them BEFORE they put this on the PTS. They still went with flat removal of mechanic without compensation. Don't think, even for a second, all the rightful complains and better suggestions being made are going to be listened to. But please keep making them, because it will show how again WG ignores player base objections.

BB better to go and cap stuff you know, once DD opens up it is spotted and remains spotted even after local DD is dead. Why risk HP for the camping BBabies in the back? Ofc, if BB finds W key I will support but would refuse to go more then +-5km in front of him. BBaby even get's buffed, tier 5 DD with 13km range get's spotted at 13km when firing, Konig with 15km range get's spotted from 15km range after firing flamuWG flamuW flamuWG flamuW

It's a nerf yes ofc it is. But Gremmy can work without stealth fire at it's tier, though it remains to be seen how badly the influence of no longer fading into stealth after winning the local battle affects her.

That is what I said, stay FAR away from objectives, forget about PTFO and just camp with the BBabies in the back of the map. Fun and engaging gameplay.

Gremmy doesn't rely on stealth fire. Sure it is a nice bonus, but I want to make you a bet that my statistical performance with her will not drop much if at all. Gremmy is fast, turns like a ballerina on speed, has 130mm stalinium shells for dealing with cruisers, has good HE for anything angled, has range ( though that might be a bad thing now.. ) and it can stealth torp easilly with pretty decent torpedoes something you won't get on the normal tech tree ships until tier 8. Quick command carrousel like in WoT, gib it nao WG gib gib gib. Ofc, it's low priority, first they have to finish 6.3 and then when BBabies start crying how smoke is overpowered and hampers their enjoyment of the game that's get priority as well.

Exactly, if stealth fire is preventing new players from getting into the game ( which is a lame excuse, it has nothing to do with new players it's all about milking the BBabies but alas let's forgo on the cause and focus on the implementation ) then yes it should be reworked. I said reworked, not removed. Reworked so that DD's and CA's aren't NERFED again when BB's are BUFFED again. There are a few issues; 1. DD's and cruisers winning local engagements and staying spotted due to range increase in combination with the concealment debuf increment. 2. BB's having a max concealment debuf matching their gun range which is just .... flamuW Issue 2 is an easy fix, BB's should keep their current debuff penalties period. Anything else is flamuW. Issue 1 is harder to 'fix'. And it has big implications. It makes DD's and CA's more passive, as you can't fade back into concealment after winning local engagements. And I thought community was against static campy gameplay, so why encourage it?

This is the issue, normally when you killed the ship you were in cqc with, you become unspotted because the other enemies are outside of your 'stealth fire' range. Now, Akizuki with 15km range will be spotted by people at 15km even if it killed the close by DD. And it will remain spotted for 20 seconds afterwards. Some ships, esp cruisers, won't be really affected a lot. But DD's will. Essentially this forces a more campy playstyle, forcing DD's to stay much closer to their allies. edit: also, the hidden profile has nothing to do with playing a stats card, it;s about hiding your profile so others can't see if you might have a subconscious bias ( or a conscious one ).