mtm78

T0byJug, on 26 January 2017 - 04:27 PM, said: ... No, the XP multi for BASE xp is high on Sims, it's not the cammo which causes her high XP gain. All ships have a base xp multi, sometimes you see them mentioned in patch notes if they are adjusted. Sims will get in a match with equal cap points/defense points/assisted damage and inflicted damage, MUCH more base xp then for instance a Mahan / Leningrad / Blyskawica and so on. edit: that is what makes Sims so good for XP missions in the campaigns ;)

Because two ships have more guns™

There are also many times where we see threads being closed here and comments added that 'it was just more whining'. They are calling it out over themselves by treating the community like that imo. edit: Let me just add this: it's not a question of who is to blame / who started it. That is actually irrelevant imo. What is a question is: does WG EU value input from community and if yes, how do THEY propose to restore a better working relationship? We have some more Q&A going on now, that's a major plus in my opinion so there is that at least. And it was my biggest frustration that EU community had the least access to actual developers, so if this is being tackled, the reminder for me would only be the amount of trust being put into the interaction itself. Community seems pretty negative and not have a lot of faith, while if I read other regions forums the developer comments are generally more seen as acceptable. So is it just a problem from the WG side, or has the community turned sour in such a way it should also look inward for some self reflection?

Last 333 days I played 26 Imperator Nicolai I games, 17 ARP Kongo's, 3 Arkansas Beta, 6 Scharnhorst, 11 Nagato, 67 Warspite and 81 Arizona games. If you had checked a bit earlier it would still cover my grind of mid tier IJN BB's more, but yeah you missed most with 333 days. But saying I only play Arizona is a bit... incomplete, certainly when looking at my 67 Warspite games. Last 333 days I played 37 Belfast, 33 Fiji, 32 Shchors, 30 Molotov, 29 Yorck, 28 Nurnberg, 24 Murmansk, 19 Buddyony, 17 Kirov, 17 Leander and five Marblehead games. So saying I only played Belfast is a again a bit weird, almost like you think it would show something relevant, and it's especially weird since I played only 4 games left in a Fiji but you claim I don't play other cruisers. edit: I also think you should be glad I chose to NOT add to the overpopulation problem with BB's and started grinding Bismarck before it would eventually be nerved a bit ;)

Not true at all, tier 9 cruisers gain heal ability so in a 1v1 cruiser engagement they should alway win. The biggest drawback of tier 5 cruisers vs tier 7 cruisers is engagement ranges and static meta -> they will get focused first by enemy BB's because they are the closest.

I misread that last part of the sentence, my bad

Aha, I didn't search with the PLAGUE_ prefix

I had a BB division rage at me for 10 minutes ( they were on enemy team btw ) in I think Italian, that I was a camper and a cheat / coward. I enjoyed replaying with "lol" which made them type even more which I didn't understand. They were right though, I lost all but 2xx hp in my Murmansk so I was trying to hide behind islands and shoot over them. Lost my hp right at the start of the match, was the last guy killed and managed to accumulate around 100k dmg by that time. I don't agree you shouldn't be afraid of dying, I would sooner just say you should try and do your role in battle. For a low HP BB the same goes as for my Murmansk, staying alive so you can keep dealing damage is the biggest addition you can make to your team. I don't want BB's to push until they die, I want them to push until they almost die, then fall back and heal up. The amount off dmg they soak up during this time is damage not being dealt to their team's less armored ships. Pushing is not overextending. Just saying, being afraid of dying is a good thing. Being afraid to loose hp is a bad thing.

copypasting name from OP shows me no games played using official WG wows profile lookup?

I am hoping that a lot of good players with a lot of high point captains are abusing the heck out of it. If Lesta sees that good players are such an influence in matches where they use RDF equipped ships they can't argue the skill has no measurable negative impact.

9.9km concealment when firing main guns... it's the main reason why it's so strong. The not nerfed HE dmg and HE fire chance are of FAR lesser influence on it's performance.

Murmansk was fun yesterday, didn't see tier 7 at all. Probably a fluke though, but it was a nice experience. Guess the large influx of Graf Spee's meant that MM can make more tier 5-6 matches without tier 7 being included. And I don't disagree, tier 7 is a bit of the sweet spot certainly for some ships which can still work in tier 9 ( DD's, and some BB's ). Cruisers are a bit tougher though. Either way, being pushed to tier 7 is not the same as being pushed to tier IX and X which was the statement I reacted to. You can reach tier X without paying, it just takes longer. And 'conservative' voting, working class people? You can profile demography off WoWs and tie tier preference to political and social economic groups? I'm seriously impressed!

Well I was and am still 200% against it, yet I haven't putten it ony of my ships at this time. Could also be because the few high point captains I have are on ships which don't benefit that much from it. And, I don't see that many ships who are using it against me either ( well it comes and goes, then I have 5 games in a row with a DD where each time a radar cruiser is using RDF to help with radar usage.. then I don't see RPF for a bunch of games ). But when I do, it's game breaking still. Especially with radar cruisers and USN DD's denying my IJN DD's any space to work with.

Blyskawica: 38 + 1 = 39 Belfast: 25 Scharnhorst: 38 -3 = 35 If Belfast had torps it would be on par with Blys due to also having excellent concealment. Scharnhorst is more valuable in a early game scenario but the later in game with the less enemy ships remaining concealment starts giving more and more tactical options. Anyway, I feel this thread might still take a LONG time to 'end' judging from the last few days..

It is right? Whoever made that chart so many months ago I guess was offered a job at WG HQ right after

Somehow I wouldn't give them to much credits, they most likely don't complain about AP just to try and get WG to introduce more AP only cruiser lines .. you're an accurate fit to be the last guy alive in 80% of my matches. Yesterday we had 3 FULL HP BB's left on our team with everyone else death, but those BB's probably think they did alright because the rest of our team me included removed so much hp from enemy team those BB's were able to clean up. THAT is the problem, these frigin coward manure players who 'get away with it' on the merits of their team being good and then think it's THEM who actually played it well.

Guess which squares are ticked by removing SF ability -> SF is bad -> WHY? Why would it be bad? Because it can be countered by teamwork, like smokescreens? Or wait, teamwork shouldn't be needed? Fine, then remove radar + hydro as well, it's a bad gameplay element as you need teamwork ( focus the radar cruisers so DD's can do their job for instance can be called teamwork right ). Stealth for some ships is the same as armor or hitpoints or heal ability on other ships. Removing it will just shift the balance more towards those ships which have armor, hitpoints and heal ability. Wait, those are battleships you say? So, this looks like another developer drive to move away from World of Warships and into the realms of World of Battleships? You don't say, old chap!

Password for Forumites channel is play4fun

Uhm afaik all ships could make smoke through changing boiler settings, which is afaik what GE used as well while only some distinct vessels had chemical smoke generators ( in particular RN cruisers )?

Plenty of people do NOT like end tier content and only play mid tier or even low tier.... how exactly is everyone pushed to the two highest tiers?

Mechanics are the same, yesterday I had it twice with MK that I thought I would get a last puff when my deployment timer hit zero but I didn't, then I had it Leningrad as well, no smoke puff at the closure of the deployment timer. It's just that with both ships there are much more intermediate puffs so losing the last one isn't always that noticeable. In the end it's good that it will be changed, as the dev's said if a mechanic is working as intended but majority of players has issues with it, the mechanic is wrongly put into place.

Try to apply that reasoning to me please? Ow and I would rather even go back to +-3 for some time so baddies learn how to play or quit.

They got you to huh, well since you came out I can't deny it any longer either. They totally rigged the MM against me with their click divisioning, they even handed me two of their players to pretend it was a fair game, but those two players didn't even carry me once, not even once!

This is my current Blys captain, with the 3 remaining points I will probably spec BFT. EM needed? nah not really but why not take it? I don't need more smokes since I am generally shooting on the move so this built maximizes fires which is the bread and butter of the Blys imo.

Yup. And in case of scammers a little naming and shaming isn't an issue imo As long as it's actually true off course