mtm78

Yes they should be fixed, the TK system doesn't auto ban yet like in WoT so sadly second line torpedo's are not being punished as hard as they should. Yup, people torping from second line are cretins, you're 100% right. You didn't check the situation, you fired torpedo's which could intersect a friendly. No matter what YOU THINK the other player SHOULD BE DOING, you got no insight in what he is thinking/planning so you CAN NEVER make assumptions and when those turn out to be wrong, blame it on the guy who 'sailed into your torpedo's'. You pulled the trigger, it would be wise if you just manned up and said: they were risky torps, I should perhaps have not fired them but they were zoning torps and I took the risk and it backfired. Just man up and stop putting the blame outside of yourself. ^^

My Hipper would like a word with you about 'consistent' damage in relation to enemies being potato and giving broadsides, or enemy being not a potato and angling I guess overall you're right, but then you can more so apply that to other classes as well. BB's have potent HE as you know

Basically this. Cruisers as class are fine, some are strong some might need some love on their own, but the bigger issue is the matchmaking. Cruisers suffer the easiest, yes DD's sometimes don't have much 'fun' with lots of other DD's but it is cruisers which suffer the most from being a minority. You simply need to play passive or you die because you can not properly track, evade/dodge and 'occupy' more then 2 or 3 BB's on the enemy team. More then that and accidentally giving a broadside becomes much much harder. edit: and now it's even worse because of the frequent bow and stern citadels. And this I think is indeed impossible to fix without changing class characteristics so much it would break any and all immersion. So yeah, MM limitations might be the only way to make sure all classes have the ability in game to play to their roles. It's not even important just those kind of 'details' tick my curiosity

You have played 26 cruisers not 39, perhaps you meant you played 26 and skipped some others?

You got a dirty mind

That's what I mean with different 'heatmaps' for different ships/classes or even lineups and game stages. All in all, the idea would be too complex to work out ( I think.. if you can prove me wrong please be my guest ).

Well yeah, and even more so when DD's are being made increasingly gun centric as indicated in the RU Q&A thread as the reasoning behind the IJN DD split, having lost popularity to RU DD's.

You're right, language confusion I guess, sorry man and it's all good on my side as well. I am just trying to say your gradient map can't work since those gradient are dynamic and depend on team composition and even stage of a battle ( and class of ship ). The idea is great, I fully support what you want to do, but it's not going to work in the way you're proposing it.

Yeah was about to say, you need to do dmg not score kill secures While killing helps to win the game, you get more rewards for the damage you deal then the final blow and that's exactly how it should be.

So you DO understand what I was saying, thank god...

Well MM can always be tweaked and there haven't been many cases lately where I hit even close to the 5m mark in queue ( not even close ) so there might be some leeway in spreading the tiers more evenly. Interesting point will then be if there will be a 'natural' reaction in the increase of DD's or that WG's shown intent to make DD's more and more gun centric ( RU Q&A thread, reasoning about IJN DD tree split ) might mean DD's won't be capable of dealing with the BB flood ( since fires are also OP and need nerfs ).

I think you should read again, I said you can't use a heatmap for any single map on it's own as every battle's actual heatmap depends on team composition. If you don't see how team composition influences the heatmap, or would only consider cap zone's at hot spots ( ignoring other places which control vision or firelane's for instance ) is ... yeah idk, maybe just agree to disagree. Heatmaps not changing with team composition is like saying: I don't care about how many ships of each class are in this particular game, or where we spawned, I always go the same way and fight in the same spot.

I don't think you can use a standard heatmap for each map, seeing that the actual 'hotspots' greatly depend on the team compositions.

Well that is then also a MM issue no, and not just a class imbalance. It's nice to see that the autobalancing WG wants to see is actually happening, in that there were a surplus in BB's and as counter ( or to farm.. idk ) people started playing more DD's... or did I misinterpret the actual player numbers?

I thought they had fully traversable teabag launchers, capable of teabagging every imperialist, communist and even hurt freedom itself.

Tophat's is where it's at man, tophat's display style

No no, we shall leave that out, you know, some people might not realize how futile that statement is edit: not to mention I did try to look up last week(s) tier x played game stats but warships.today shiptracker seems down ;)

Yes, DD's OBVIOUSLY need more nerfs

Why 50% then though, where is the 'cut-off'? Maybe you mean that sub 50 you would be a 'bad' player, but being 'bad' or 'good' is also about perspective. Some people find themselves bad if they have daily results sub 60%'s or even 70%'s and others will be content with getting that 50% to break even. As long as people play to win to the best of their abilities, they are doing themselves right and that's all there is to it. Yes I sometimes '[edited]' on TS about the quality of my team members, but then again I am 100% I'm just as often the subject of such thought and outings of tremendous overwhelming love of the worst aspect of online gaming: other people

I can offer plenty of anecdotal evidence of the contrary, bow and stern citadels are the worst. BB who complain about HE and fires are the one's who just repair their first fire and then suffer the consequences. And idk what you think to be 'hard and frustrating' but BB's at tier 8 have a lot more then 40k health ( and do substantially more damage in turn as well )? See what I did there, it works both ways. One side is actually supported more by the facts and not just by anecdotes

Win rate only means something if you take into account why it's like it is.

Which on it's own is a bad thing in that it simplifies the game by removing DoT counter management.

I hope you don't mean to say you needed 232 games to get the New Orleans

Well that is the issue right, if you want to make cruisers more ap centered, how do you preserve their damage potential?