mtm78

You already have one clear cut example right above, what else do you need? Do you want me to draw you a minimap with places I can better farm in my DD while I use my team as spotters, instead of playing to win the game, screen them from enemy DD's and spot incoming torps or something? Would that satisfy you? You're repeating the same argument, good players save stars, without new arguments, yet you demand 'proof' when someone has an opposing opinion. Good players are not always those who get saved by the star system, you don't always do tasks which are rewarded in XP especially things you do besides just dealing damage. And as such the star saving system creates a toxic environment. Maybe you don't notice, but the few games I played made me realize clear enough how frustrating it is to see some get more XP as me because he didn't play to win and farmed useless damage. Frustrating enough to make me realize that in order to prevent sad frustration in the future, I should mimic that guys playstyle. Which meant I rather quit ranked. I rather play to win every game, as to play to save a star. Now if you want to argue you don't agree, that's fine. If you want to argue that star's are being saved from the 'best' player on the losing team, allow us to disagree to the extent I have troubles containing my laughter thinking about it.

Calm your tiddies Don't need me to explain you anything, not that I would even spend the effort unless you ask nice

A> no it makes the guy who plays for his star better advance faster B> not really an argument at all C> you can always juggle requirements and steps needed, I have no issues with keeping 50% out of higher reward tiers. Shouldn't this be about skill, wasn't that always the argument? So if only 60% or 70% can reach rank 1, without the star saving toxic behavior inducing gameplay it would actually be a challenge.

See, it's not that hard to imagine different ways of how this star 'saving' mechanic isn't related to 'best player on the team'. Coming up with these actually seems quite simple. Really?

I have no more answers I can post, I don't want to insult your intelligence.

Another result of REEwork, WASD used to mean you avoided a huge alpha strike and took one or two torps at the most, now Hosho will just drop you since if you avoid you avoid two torps not losing your whole ship, but turning and risking getting caught broadside is much more dangerous. So CV basically has free farm, just as designed by WG.

You're really asking for ways to ensure other players have less xp as you Almost making it sound like the XP system actually reflects what one's does in order to win a game

I'm down to 50 or so detonation flags.. up till a while ago I always ran them on DD's as I had plenty. I'm running a bit dry I feel, I want a min number of them available ( and I don't want to buy them, that is to easy ) so I am running my DD's without that flag for some time. Like you I'm still waiting on those new tasty detonation flags..

Not when you consider that making sure you're on top also includes making sure others are not.

But this difference in approach as to how to get a victory together should work itself out in game on it's own, for instance isn't it true that sometimes even a good player has to go along with a bad plan in randoms since the best possible outcome of sad plan is him leading it? Which is exactly the opposite of what star saving does in ranked, you're enticed to always make sure you're top of your team. Needless to say I don't like the format at all.

And even then other players already sad it would create a toxic environment if you create a contest within your own team which is just as if not more important as getting a victory together. Ow that only requires WG to step up their sanctions for those losers, I recon 1 month account ban on first time, six months second time and bye bye account on the 3rd.

But that's the only point we're raising, it's not balanced against CV's, and you currently have a LOT of CV spam. I never sad it's a bad ship overall, just that you're basically free food for any competent CV player. Arkansas Beta has decent performance even while being known to get singled out by carriers in the past, this is because most beta testers understand WASD. This is a premium and will attract novice players who's perhaps first experience with this game will be current Hosho spam vs ship with no AA. I just don't see that as a good thing.

I trust my own in game experience ( WoWs monitor ) over any graphs posted by WG.

All CV games, and you shot down ZERO planes. Says enough. Just that you met scrubs in carriers, or got otherwise ignored by them, doesn't make it a ship with nothing wrong with it. Indeed.

Correcting, it was a good day to be one of the two premium DD's which still melt planes

I am seeing so much here I can't wait for all the other tinfoil hat theories. I am also very curious.

At tier 5 yeah on average I'd say every game seems to have at least one CV in it, yesterday even had one with dual tier 8 CV's. Gameplay was pretty toxic bth. I get that you don't care about performance, but don't comment on those who do proclaiming everyone just wants overperforming ships. Some people care more about actual balance..

Having no effective AA against a capable CV player means you die. Yeah, that sounds 'fun'. The ship would have been more in place at tier 4, and even there... Not everyone just enjoys ships based on heritage or looks ( though she does look really nice Another post from someone who thinks performance does not matter, and who wants to dismiss concerns about being CV food based on 'awww they think it's not overpowered' Giving the ship normal levels of tier 5 AA would not have made her OP. Or you want to claim Texas is OP?

My fondest memory of Katori were burning BB's from max range where even thicc gurls can dodge a bit. The moment you start to get close to anything tho you start taking damage, it just doesn't WASD at all and has no armor other that just enough to arm AP shells. In close games, this means she can be 'fun' since positioning allows favorable engagements. In games where enemy pushes you to hard, you don't have that much influence, same with games where your team steamrolls enemy you're just to slow to pick up a lot of damage.

In reply to my post this suggestion makes me doubt you're actually a good destroyer player. In said match the DD player should have not left my flank giving up map control to enemy team. That is the biggest issue I see, DD's not screening and thus I'm unable to push alone in my BB, or BB's hiding in the back when I'm actually screening for them in my DD. The problem isn't classes, the problem is bad players. I blame anyone who with 10k games hasn't been able to reach north of 50% for not trying the right things. By that time, you should have met enough players able to show you the way to play your ship and in my mind you're just not putting in the effort. edit: this indicates that if you're such a player, and someone asks you to maybe not leave your flank empty, you should perhaps listen

Humor, remember? Yesterday I did think of this thread while playing, and looking at my 46% 10k games DD player on my flank refusing to play the game and planning on sitting between the big ships because there was a carrier... It was quite infuriating I admit. Having an AA bubble to escape to does not mean you spend the game hiding behind the BB's not doing your job. The issue is though, that I see just as many crap players in battleships all the time. And it's just as annoying being the DD in a game where your BB discovers his balls haven't dropped yet, and decides to go look for them behind the nearest island.

Now this thread is making more and more sense

There is absolute ZERO causality between those two

At least she looks more enticing as something like a Texas. In fact, I really like the model, but since it has no AA and REEwork/hosho spam is real, no thanks

Yes. Nope, no but's. It's not important. You launched them, he ate them, your fault. Was it probably a muppet, no doubt. But you still the one who took the risk, so there is no spreading blame. How about being the one in front? That way you can not get 'blocked' by your allies. It's really simple, the one in front is 9/10 the guy being focused or running the highest risk. You don't increase this risk with torping from behind, or if you do, you accept the risk of being a naughty lil pinky.