mtm78

I got New Orleans unlocked for ages and still have not bought her. And atm I don't even lack the money, there are just other lines which I'm grinding and who seem more attractive. Then again, I know NO has a bad name, but I also see good players get great results in them. It's more work, but it can pay off. So I might just buy her for the challenge

This will only increase potential damage output vs battleships, it will not make much difference in the multi role which high tier USN DD's have now. I grinded IJN DD line from the start because they were the better torpedo boats at all tiers and I liked the mainly stealth gameplay they brought along. Kagero will still be both matched by Fletcher as good torpedo boat ( not as good in comparison when keeping your proposal in mind ) and equally a good DD to chase away Kagero;s. That shouldn't be the case imo. So why not both lower Fletcher's ability to bully other DD's ( by decreasing concealment so it get's out spotted and the weaker DD can be supported by allies ) and making Kagero a terrific torpedo boat again? If you lower the Fletcher's ability to bully it, it doesn't need much buffs to suddenly have a much higher damage potential ( because it can position itself much more freely ).

That was not a fun game for me and the Izumo I was in division with, we spent 15m tactically retreating from a gearing and kharb on enemy team with support behind them since our team also tactically choose to run the other way and left us behind Still seem to recall I didn't even do that bad in the team list but ye some forumite in his DD certainly carried this team leading the charge on the other flank

It is not lifted yet, it was a 'partial' release, CCT are allowed to show them in port and show their stats, but they and ST can not talk about those numbers or give impressions off ships. Also, o/ wb Sharana

Your guess is as good as mine? I just feel like: "ok let's do this" when in Atago and match loads ( even tier X games ), while in Zao I'm like: How to perform as well as possible in this match? It's not unlikely that it is just the amount of games I played at tier 8 vs the amount of games at tier X. From most tier 8 ships I will know the important ships stats and characteristics, and in game I don't have to think about what they are, but this all get's more blurred in tier X games. Maybe it's just that I WANT myself to perform as well as I do on lower tiers, and this isn't happening which frustrates me and increases insecurity which get's to be a vicious circle, as I said I am not sure.

This is not possible if WG manages to map in game actions with actual utility. you can't abuse rewarding what wins games?

I agree current system isn't flawless, respectfully disagree on having to 'fix' it before expanding it since fixing it now can be seen as meaningless if the new gathered data does prove to be possible to be mapped against actual in game utility. Since at that point, the new data and new mapping will warrant a total rehaul of the before 'fixed' system. Which in turn means that the initial fix is essentially a waste of resources. The only benefit from your proposed order off things would be that if the new data proofs that a more elaborate rewarding mechanism isn't possible, the fix for the current 'issues' is already implemented.

As I said, the process won't be easy. WG is just starting to collect these statistics for analysis, it might turn out the gathered statistics prove to be non correlatable with how they correspond with proper team work and as such need a> even more detailed statistics gathering b> dropping the whole idea. Also, if current system is also not perfect, attempting to 'fix' it by an arguably more fair ( in correlation with actual impact on the outcome of games ) system can't be regarded as bad can it? No, imo Kagero should benefit from the spotting damage more but it also needs a buff because Fletcher is greatly outperforming it in the other area's. Kagero needs a buff, but it doesn't have to match the actual damage output from Fletcher ( it needs to be able to earn the same experience though, XP is what counts for progression and this should not favor the damage dealer over the utility DD imo ). The core of my post there was that if a DD is of equal value to his team by screening for torpedo's + spotting enemy DD's, but does less damage then a damage oriented destroyers, shouldn't they be awarded the same? I think they should. If I'd answer this point by point I would be running the risk of breaking nda, so I won't I will just leave this here: ST tests and gives feedback, but PT also allows giving feedback. And then, this feedback can be taken into account and acted on, or it can be ignored. Also, feedback is personal, I am not aware of what every other ST thinks ( though yes, we do talk amongst ourselves, but the actual feedback is personalized ). In effect, the reason I want to try is not that I am 100% sure WG will get it right in one go, it's because I think the desired/designed outcome is something we should try and pursue to the point where it's either correctly implemented or proven to be entirely impossible. This off course also means I'm not convinced it's not possible at this time, I think WG should collect the statistics and base further actions on this data, It might proof to be a wild geese hunt, or it might not

So Fletcher has just 4 torpedo launchers? Joking aside ;) There are more aspects at play here, a BB which fires is visible on it's own for 20 seconds, then has 10 seconds in stealth before being loaded and ready to fire again, there could be a sliding scale as to lower the bonus gradually after a ship is spotted by other ships as well. And all up till now is just about raw spotting ( other ships ). DD's should also get experience for spotting torpedo's heading to allies ( spotted torpedo's will always stay visible greatly reducing the danger they pose ). And eventually, cruisers should get higher rewards for shooting down planes or disrupting drops when there are allies in their AAA aura. All of this isn't simple, infact it's very complicated to 'get it right', but not trying is basically imo saying: we don't want to encourage teamwork by rewarding the measurable aspects of it. So let them collect statistics for a while, and see if they can properly correlate those statistics to the actual impact they have on the outcome of games. Nothing will be hurt from this, and as long as changes are tested on PT server nothing will get messed up. edit: I just hope you're wrong and that my positivity on the matter in the end will match the outcome Also, Lesta studio is not the one which made/designed WoT, I'd say WoWs is evolving better and faster then WoT did with regards to game mechanics.

It is not hate, but discomfort. For me at least, I just don't play my Zao enough to feel as comfortable in her as for instance I do in my Atago. This certainly seems the case right? But it's not just economics, it's also performance which isn't publicly tracked or visible. People are less afraid to goof up, in fact we often dismiss our mistakes and claim we have to mimic live server as close as possible ( aka we intentionally pulled an Artic__ I mean tactically beached ourselves somewhere ).

Well the intend is right and I'd say if the result is bad we just tell WG it's not working as intended and have them change it. Is it the right way to proceed if you're scared they mess up and rather stagnate further development? edit: Just to make sure, any such change ( of that magnitude ) will go through extensive PT testing before ever going to live server. Why not wait until the PT where they actually try to use the collected statistics and change the rewards to try and better match actual in game utility?

That is true, secondary guns are being used as balancing factor where the same mounts have different characteristics on different hulls. That still leaves the fact that

Userext, on 11 August 2016 - 10:37 AM, said: I repeat myself majority of DD captains already do .... You are not representing anything or anyone here except yourself, stop trying to speak in plurals. You're telling me what wins games, really? So I am biased and you're open minded? Really? But yeah, good idea to back out of a discussion if you got nothing actually to say about it. edit: Deamon93, if this is flaming... I am the one who is being called biased and arrogant for not agreeing, by someone who tries to speak in plurals in order to make it seem his 'perception' is universally shared, and I'm the one who is being told 'what wins games' by someone who hides his profile so we can't actually see if he really knows better what wins games. So sorry if I don't feel I'm the guilty party here when it comes to 'flaming'. You're right though, there is no point in pursuing this any further

If I give you a Gremmy I bet I could change ur mind

No, not all DD's already spot enemies, not at all. And since when are you talking for everyone with your 'we' mention? You represent all the DD captains? Lol, don't make me laugh and don't make that assumption. Omg really? So, it can go up or down? So basically, it can be 'redistributed' to better reflect the actual utility of a DD for his team? Same goes for my desire for escort cruisers btw ( those which main design task if escorting BB's and providing AAA, there is a need to reward proper escorting as well ). To me that sounds just about 'right' actually Kagero is a perfect example, it is a terrific scout/spotter but worse in other area's ( Fletcher is better in.... anything else then concealment ). So if you care more about damage whoring then being of utility, go play Fletcher, if you want to have the SAME IMPACT on the game by spotting enemy DD's for your cruisers, go play Kagero. Why should both not be rewarded the same if both take equal skill?

And some DD's don't know anything but playing selfishly, why are people opposed to actually rewarding utility? Carriers should just be last in spotting order, ships which are spotting should get higher bonus than plane in same proximity. If the cv is the only one spotting he should get full 'credit' for it. Again, why is rewarding actual utility a bad thing?

Ranked mechanics heavily favour capping bases, that is why DD's were so dominant. Once they get a good sense on the distribution of 'utility' and it's influence on gameplay for others they should be able to rework the XP / credit gain calculations so it matches as close as possible with the actual utility the DD offers besides his raw damage and cap points. I would find a DD spotting / screening for torps and thus saving his top tier BB's from enemy DD's for an entire match just as valuable as one which caps two bases, this is hopefully the first step to be able to reward all of the good things they can do ( contest bases / scout - screen ).

Can you link to your source when spreading fud like that? He is on vacation hence his modpack isn't being updated, there is nothing illegal in his modpack. edit: training room without mod: edit preferences.xml find change it to with the game not running. Start game, press battle ( don't care what button says, you'll be taken to training room lobby ;) ).

Do it, so we can compare your old performance with the one you'll be displaying on that new line, taking into account you should have learned from your current lines. Give us EMPIRICAL data and not anecdotal, since WG balances on those actual metrics it's the best thing you can do.

And there we have it... Some of us actually like the fact that AAA is calculated according to the same values for each AAA gun. The same gun on a different ship should perform like the same gun on another ship ( if shooting same ammo ) . Why is that less important than your overwhelming desire to not let WG remodel the ships in according to a possible upgrade to bring them in line with their competitors?

Some people actually care for the fact that earning XP should be tied to 'playing well'. If you press battle to look at the scenery, no change WG will make will help with anything except making prettier scenery.

It will hopefully reward more for those who actually are usefully spotting for their team and not only damage whoring? Not saying people should not sit in smoke and burn things, by all means do it damage done to enemies is good right! But don't do it when you 're the only DD around and there is an enemy DD you could be countering. Hopefully the spotting damage reward will take into account to which targets they been applied, as to encourage proper gameplay.

Now, this being said, I can link you to people on this forum playing with stock setups and performing well in them. It's not 'required' to upgrade them, but it certainly helps a lot. I am not sure WG would agree with my above opinion on this off course either ;) There are many other reasons +-2mm is fine on it's own, like having enough variance in gameplay and the actual importance of tactics and not having everyone being equally matched to one and other ( I would play some ArmA for that I guess if I wanted it ).

Addition of new cruiser lines has made it a tougher fight, and there was a good point that all those 'new' Omaha captains are meeting are 'us' in our new and shiny GE and VMF CA's, while we met ourselves but besides us mostly new players. But Omaha ( Murmansk.. I sold Omaha as I got both Marblehead and Murmansk ) is still more versatile then the new ships ( or buffed Tacco ), imo. There is not much any of those can do which Murmansk can't do as well ( devastate broadside targets with AP, burn things with HE and weave like a king to evade incoming fire ).

Thanks for quoting that ColonelPete and confirming the above