mtm78

I guess now I get your entire stance on the issue that I actually agree with what you're saying, with the only exception that I think for quite a lot of people their performance has gone down in a more BB heavy meta, because the skill requirements for effective CA play goes up with the addition of more BB's on the battlefield. You won't notice this because you're one of the best CA players, so for you the adaptation to a new environment comes naturally. Even for me, it looks like my performance is still going up slightly as I'm still improving, but I have found it more 'frustrating' and less fun ( due to having to work much harder I guess.. maybe I'm to lazy ). And if I feel it already, I can only imagine how enjoyable it probably is for someone from the other side of the spectrum. Which will lead to even less CA's being played, which means players move to other classes ( and I fear BB's -> creating a self sustaining loop which eventually isn't good for the game ). I would love limits to classes, I feel it would make battles more engaging for all people playing if they have clear 'jobs' or tasks which they are intended but also capable of doing. Sometimes the matches where one class is represented more heavily then the others are also fun, but I'm no longer convinced this outweighs the issues which make me want to put limitations on the MM.

No no I want him to answer as I hope I might learn something, he claims oversaturation of BB's is not an issue at all, and that CA's are fine when the MM gives them 8 enemy BB's vs 2 CA's on your team ( you being one of them ). At least that is what I think he claimed earlier... You see, I know I am not the best but I think I'm not that bad either, and I surely don't agree with the notion that current oversaturation of BB's isn't impacting CA play. edit: and then he made a claim that people are asking for buffs or nerfs or something, while no one I think has done so so far ( well not in this thread ). Most people seem to agree with me that CA's are being 'shafted' quite a bit with the current BB heavy meta, and that it would be beneficial for more dynamic gameplay to perhaps put more limits to the MM just like they done with CV's.

Not everyone sails a Gearing with defensive fire The rest of your claims are insanely stupid, any high tier IJN DD will die to a semi capable not to potato CV, simply because the AAA on IJN DD's is a joke ( it does NOT shoot down entire sqauds.. or even single planes unless enemy CV circles a squad around you for long time ) and because they are easy targets. Maybe you will say I am retarded, but I would just kindly ask you to look in the mirror then

True, but how much rof increase would be needed to offset the lower alpha? We can only guess, since we don't know what alpha WG would attach to the shells.

Uniscum division results should never be used in balance discussions, you're to far off from the median ps, would like Spithas to reply to my last two posts

I know the detection system isn't flawless but it's the best we have atm. And as others have said, getting rid of a pink status takes 5 games, it's not like you will be not eligible for a long time ( and ofc, I am not claiming the system would be 100% fair or that it wouldn't need/deserve further tweaking ). The main point why I voted yes is the key point: deterrent.

Lol why are you torturing OP @ OP

No one is asking for this, well I for one aren't. All I want is a 'better' distribution off classes by the matchmaker so I don't end up as only cruiser vs 8 BB's ( or two cruisers vs six BB's even ). It's the oversaturation of BB's, I've always liked playing cruisers and I don't think telling me to l2p is applicable here, I don't want CA's buffed or BB's nerfed ( well I want their AAA nerfed so they can't kemp in the back anymore as that opens them up to air attacks ).

I think age in WoWs is not a big factor as this isn't a twitch based shooter. Only ships like a Gearing would come close to that ( or other gunboats ). It's one of the reason I wanted to play this game long ago, it's slower paced and has/had a way higher emphasis on tactics.

I agree, it's pathetic to think you'll be taken serious in any discussion about the game, meta or balance when you are afraid to show your profile. You're free to make statements and claims, and I will try to first judge them on content alone, but without the aid off being able to verify your profile it's impossible to dismiss things like bias or being unable to understand current mechanics. edit: Just to add: I don't show my profile because I think I am good, I show my profile because I got nothing to hide. Not even from the people around here who are performing on a level FAR FAR above my own. I am not ashamed I am not 'the best', and I feel that having my profile visible helps in game related discussions. You seem to think that opinions are worth more then statistics, I don't agree ( and neither does WG, since they don't balance based on 'opinions' but on performance ).

Well.. ok... maybe it shows bad situational awareness as I indeed try to not let that happen ever. But there are to many games where allied BB's don't advance enough, making the gap between DD's and BB's so large that CA's can't support the DD's effectively. I don't mind having to hang back if the game allows it, but more often then not this isn't the case. And while I might not be right at your level of cruiser play, I'm not terrible either, so I don't buy your 'CA's are fine, meta is fine, it's a player issue' statement. Maybe you could elaborate on how you think CA's can work in a BB saturated meta where it's often the case that your allied BB's don't advance enough?

I got baited into an 'argument' with someone suffering from DK, and I can only loose by continuing it.... But if the cake if sweet enough... let's say a nice premium ship of choice....

Don't you need to go post in a topic about skill when you hide your profile.... ow wait...

Spithas likes your post, so I knew it would be bull.

"This user profile is private." sweeten the cake... as you say you pleb don't have anything to lose, if I lose I would suddenly no longer be a bluenicum for some reason

Sometimes RNGezus needs as much aid as possible. And no, 3 salvo's doesn't equal one sure fire.

99.9% sure you're suffering from a faulty mod ( combination ) and Aslain's didn't corrupt your DirectX.

VMF CA's have a very valid option going for DE over AFT, ofc when you get to 18p captains AAA spec's will also be filled in but I got some captains with fewer points and for instance Buddy and Molotov, Schorsch are all valid for DE builds, even for MK it would be valid for randoms.

With the in game dispersion even what you're describing is a direct nerf to the damage potential of CA/CL/DD, which is not what is needed at all.

I am well aware of OP's intention but that doesn't change the fact that I think having a penalty attached to being pink would be a good thing. I wouldn't force people to play PvE, but limiting their access to other more competitive game mode's then random battles seems perfectly valid as deterrent. Don't look to much at the elitism of OP, he sometimes makes good points This ofc would be even better.

I have my good moments to sometimes Glad we have a consensus then on the AAA on BB's The German DP secondaries are what makes them impressive, especially if you slap a manual AAA specced captain on them which doubles their long range aura dps. Well perhaps more cruisers would spec for AAA again then, and some could use a AAA base range buff ( looking at NO for instance.. ). I think that with slapping on AFT and the AAA upgrade you get 5 + 20% + 20% and that's plenty.

Would be more fun if we were able to see which players who are 'frequently' pink have voted no

So... give a suggestion for what can replace fire without taking damage potential away from CA's, CL's and DD's.... If you can't, you got the answer why fires are not 'cheap'. I also would like to show you dozens of screenshots with matches where I landed hundreds of HE hits and only got a handful of fires, but for the sake of argument I'll give the 'easiness' in which you can start fires just because I'm intrigued to how you would replace the mechanic.

But it is equally ludicrous if my Izumo can just yolo and go actively HUNT cv planes ( even if it's a tier 8 CV vs tier 9 BB ). I shot down 30 planes, 28 from the CV with him landing one torpedo on me the rest died before they could drop. I didn't have CA's around me, I had DD's which came to me so I could kill the fighters who were spotting them ( and I did, easilly ). IJN BB's with that much AAA is not a good state of the game imo. Even if it's because of the CV tier scaling ( well it would be normal if it was a tier 7 CV but it was 8 and +-1 for CV's should not impact their abilities this much ). I didn't even need a DF cruiser to help me avoid torpedo spreads, as the CV didn't manage to make the drops before he lost his planes. If they tone down AAA on BB's it would also help with 'kemp bush' meta since they can't sit so far back as it would make them vulnerable against air attacks ( that is, if there would be a CV in the game ). Ships like a Warspite or a Tirpitz, with for their tier more limited AAA, are in my opinion better for promoting teamwork then a 100 AAA rating BB at tier 8. And I do fine with both ships ( better in Warspite and that has even worse AAA for it's tier... it usually doesn't shoot down much it just doesn't get hit due to excellent WASD hax package attached to the ship ).

You're making a mountain of a mole hill, you don't need to stack your entire team together, just two or three ships. Can't wait until WG smarts up and removes the ludicrous amount of AAA on BB's ( I don't even want to lower it on cruisers, just BB's so they once again become reliant on CA's and have to stick close to them ).