mtm78

Seems pretty straight forward I though but ok -> did all the cruisers camp in the back of the map, together with the BB's?

5 BB's could be ok, depending on how good the players are. Battleships force cruisers to stay at range, much more then destroyers do this to battleships ( if you doubt this, well look at the max range for IJN torpedoes ). And battleship captains complain about allied cruisers spamming HE from range, but they don't realize it's because of their own class being over represented. BB's should just not outnumber cruisers, and dd's shouldn't outnumber battleships. I mean, for a game or two or three it's not a big deal, it limits / dictates how people / classes can play but some diversity is a good thing. But when you constantly have BB's being a multitude of cruisers in game, it just puts those cruisers in the role of long range HE spam. Which again, on it's own I don't mind, I got plenty of cruisers which can fill that role. But it's not good for the meta. Same as above, 5 BB's means there are more BB's then cruisers ( assuming there like most of the time are also DD's and at least one carrier. Which is 'acceptable' as long as it's not the majority of games. And tell me, how static were those games?

WG Dev's finally stopped claiming IJN DD's were just high skill demand, and they admitted RDF will be pulled if to many people use it. That were my big issues atm with how WG is approaching the meta... though then again they admitted there are to many BB's and then they announce more BB lines So yeah still here. threat-to-gameplay? BB saturation is a threat to gameplay, this thread is more entertainment noting else You're still making the same blanket empty statements as ever so I guess that's right ( edit: this is not a condemning factor btw, I don't think a lot of threads need actual contextual answers myself )

Be glad flooding doesn't stack like fires.

Go check my actual answers when I wasn't tired of explaining that TO YOU before. You don't agree though and that's your right, you may think World off Battleships is the 'better game'. But don't keep asking me to explain why if it's not anything you would listen to anyway.

I said stupid because no one has it, not 'some people' not 'a very select few' but no one ( afaik ). WG said it might return as reward but right now, no one should have one in their port on EU server. And with stupid I meant 'bad', sorry if you read it any other way. How about it proofs that we should change the rules so it's clear the voting has to be done on a> ships which people have or have played (with public record preferably, no PTS stuff ), on ships which are currently still in the game

All WG has to do is ( well most... ) is to stop nerving natural counters. Stop nerving DD's, and stop buffing AAA so BB can stand alone vs CV for to long. At least let them try before claiming it's not possible and we should embrace World off Battleships

Problem is NOT the map, it's the players. Like with many 'problems' this game has.

Stupid example no, a ship which NO ONE has. And thanks for proving the point that we should better define voting rules for next round... if it's still appealing with so many people who seem to think 'no other reason then performance' is ambiguous.

We will fix it, by introducing more BB lines! ........................................ I am starting to believe the developer roadmap isn't a fluke, but a pebcak issue.

Forum mods are volunteers... anyone feeling up to 'policing' community for nothing but a 'warm and fuzzy feeling inside'?

quoted post removed Buff BBabies brains, so they stop whining on forum plox

I saw threads getting closed this afternoon for being ' unconstructive ' ( they were ), I am sure this thread was reported by that time already but I guess it wasn't important enough... I mean comments like --> quoted post removed ... aren't important enough to warrant a thread closure or account ban. No, you have to be terribly toxic to get those

Send replay to support Call me a shitter and I will laugh, while looking at your stats. Call me a noob, I will do the same. Call me anything you want, I will just try and get more salt from you. Go there were this thread is about and I will send it to support. People forget this game is PEGI7, banter and even some trolling is fine imo, but 'wishing cancer on people' should be a one way ticket to a permanent chat ban. Or maybe not one way, but it surely shouldn't happen twice or let alone 3 times...

How does Gangut compare with Imperator Nikolai I??

I think they are really good at making things sound positive

Maybe if you did more of this there wouldn't be so 'much' ? ps Ruskie DD's stronk!

There is a reason casters for the tournaments always spectate from a carrier -> prioritized packet handling causing least amount of desync possible.

^^ Packet loss causes your client to display ship in different location then server thinks it is. Impact / damage calculations are done server side, not on your client, so client can render hits but server does not -> desync.

Cambeltown in list of best ships Stopped right there

Client server desync caused by packet loss.

He has a point, you can not downvote ships you have not played as you have no actual idea about it's performance ( rule #3 again ). Next round we clearly need better confined rules about voting

< > Timestamp 0:27 in Monty video, well before torpedo drop, squad losses first plane < / >

I bought Hindenburg and Donskoi and Kiev recently, I'm only siting on 10m at the moment. But I got so many premiums I can play I am not really bothered ( playing without premium account does make grinding sluggish but meh ).

u pleb, y u no admit CV mahst be removet from gaem!!!! CV kill gaem, no one like CV only cheat playa who want abuse broken klass!!!