mtm78

Enough to dismiss the notion that 'ranked equals skill', and don't you need 2 consecutive rank 1's for Flint not 3? Might be wrong, it's a minor detail. I couldn't bear it to get to rank 1 one season, you think it's lack off skill or not wanting to endure the horror of six random people ( and getting a very famous strike ranger more then once as your 'carrier' ). There are many players who I consider skilled which don't even bother with ranked. This whole notion that rank 1 are just the 'top players' is utterly and blatantly false.

I agree 200%, I don't want automated bans based on reports, but I got no issues with automated bans for team damage. I don't believe team damage caused automated bans would be problematic ( which also quite clearly indicates what my stance is on all those : 'I turned wrongfully pink wtf WG why do those allies turn into my friendly torpedoes all the time' threads which pop up from time to time ;)

There been people who grinded thousands of ranked matches to reach rank 1 with a 4x% win rate. Sorry but your notion is simply, very very wrong.

Yes please, remove SA from everyone except 5 point skilled captains, that way my low tier IJN DD's can have more fun! Ow wait... you know, game balance.

Can you unhide your statistics so we can see how passive you are? Your examples are not empirical they are anecdotal ( and no screenshots showing the amount of hits vs the amount of fires, nor a replay to see if you're managing those fires as best as possible ).

I have of yet never heard of someone getting manually banned in WoWs where this was later overturned. Since they want to automate that system, I see no problem. The automated team damage tracking system is working a-ok in my experience so no problems there. The question is where the ban threshold will be, at 100% reflected damage, later ( how much )?

1. Until anything is announced here, all those discussions do not apply ;) 2. The piece I read wanted to automate bans for team damage and that is where I commented on. They don't need player reports ( nor is there a report option ) for team damage, and there is already an automated ban system for an automated team damage tracking system in World Of Tanks Also, there is no need for screenshots or replays for chat bans, as all chat is logged on WG's servers

Did you consider that perhaps their 'original' configurations wouldn't be balanced in game with the existing ships from other navies? Maybe that is what is meant with 'balance reasons'? Which would then have nothing to do with actual historical configurations of other ships already in the game ( or well you might want to argue those should then be rebalanced according to the new ship line being brought in but yeah.. ).

Have you ever been manually banned? If the answer is no, and I am assuming it then you got nothing to worry about right? Automating a system does not imply making it more strict.

BS your torps your responsibility, period. Also, please provide a replay indicating how bad it was for the other guy to mindlessly drive into your well aimed friendly torpedo;s please. Announcement on NA, and one which is aimed at all WG games ( physics abuse is an indication as to which game this was initially aimed at ). Wait for an EU announcement + details.. Nope, Karma system would be ignored afaik, just 'chat bans' ( which are given automatically if you get reported enough ) and other 'rule violations'. ...

In your particular example the only 'naming and shaming' which was done was by those caling him a noob not knowing that he actually by any definition in the book, most certainly is not. Also, I see this behavior very very rarely, if not seldom, in WoWs. Fire up World of Tanks, and it's every other battle Gallantry and sportsmanship certainly exist, what helps is being communicative when the game starts, wish people luck, through around some poi and people will usually be much kinder in chat ( and you might get some more teamwork out of randoms as well! ). But yea it's gone down since CBT ended, but that always happens with f2p games. Still, there is a old core which is sticking through it and there certainly also are some of the new people who been showing how online gaming can be.

All this crying about nothing. If you 'like the port', tough luck you're stuck with the ships. If you don't select the port the ONLY thing which would 'bother' you are the ARP related missions in the darn mission overview, ow god jesus how could you possibly survive that? edit: they should however not occupy reserve space if you select another port, that's kinda silly

Watch out man, according to some toxicity is on the rise on these forums, and the proof of that is everyone who looks up people and has access to their actual statistics.... cuz statistics are evil yo

Monstrofill's players panel with damagelog and statistics is part of a lot of modpacks. Also, imo, toxic people will be toxic regardless

I would have to see the most recent numbers but I don't think much changed recently, and historically fires only seem like to be a big damage dealer while in fact the actual % of damage they do against BB's was not that high.

Today was problem free for me, not one game with real issues.

1 page is great, for all those small topics... I wouldn't want to load this topic in single page mode

Did you do the other step -> launcher - options - check file integrity? edit: Btw, that screenshot to me is almost certainly a driver issue. If you got an AMD card, don't use the newest beta drivers they cause issues ( I been told ). If you got Nvidia, or even Amd but not beta, try updating your drivers. If you just updated before the issue started, roll back your drivers. I would do this before a file integrity check as it's the most probably cause.

Maybe the cause is that so many people play on low res so they can't give enough lead while still being zoomed in enough to get the aim right

I've had the stuttering in the first match I played after starting the game, that doesn't coincide with it being a memory leak. On the other hand, there might be a combination of factors for different people all giving comparable results

You shouldn't need replays as the in game chat is logged on WG's servers ;) I think this 'thing' might work, though I do feel everyone should start with a clean slate. Also, until there is an EU announcement, I am not taking anything as gospel from other regions regarding rules about ingame behavior

options are always nice to have and generally don't hurt anybody

Seems you focus on the content of the rant more then his 'mistakes'. Being unable to shoot allies who 'kill steal' because it would get him booted from the game, and having seven battles played. There are certain people in this community who just like a 'kill stealing' discussion sometimes, especially in the weekends. But no, off course the one who points out he has seven battles are the toxic one's, and only because you do not see the possible relevance of his battle count. Also, I like to point out that no one said: you got seven battles so shut up your opinion is worthless. I suspect that you fail to the (possible) relevancy of statistics in more than just this case, and that that is why you're classifying certain responses as toxic. But that's just my perception of things, I might be wrong. Will you admit your perception might be wrong?

I am not sure how corbite ignites, if with pressure it might? And if the gun was loaded, I mean remove human factor and keeping the mechanical side?

I am sad to say, havaduck, I sold my Mogami after the changes. And I bought a Kutuzov . Not directly as replacement, but for team battles ( which I haven't played much... ). I agree, it just didn't feel nearly as capable anymore, but it's still not as bad it seems as New Orleans. NO needs some love, but then again check the server top for New Orleans they are doing quite comparable to the other 'better ships'. Seems the skill ceiling is quite high on the ship, or the ship is not played much by the better players ( which would indicate it's not as good, but also that the stats it has now are not 100% representative for what they would be if equally distribution of players would occur ). About Tirpitz armor, since the other BB's in that line are so busy being tested isn't it quite feasible they found an error in the previously modelled ships and corrected that already in the new one's, and have now extended that correction to the existing ship? It does to me. And as I said, WG should not hold back fixed, but if stats indicate overperformance there are other steps to take. Withholding fixes, even if they influence balance, is not the way, the influence of any change or fix is off course something which should be tracked in the performance thereafter. The premiums, in those case, might have one gameplay aspect in which they are buffed a lot, that is still not p2w. If you take a Texas and there is no carrier, you might as well be in the New York as the firing angle benefit is something most players wouldn't be able to properly exploit anyway. Kutuzov has better AAA and smoke, but lack the concealment of it's counterpart. Mahan is arguably not worse then Sims in almost any way, infact Mahan has by far the better torpedo's. So while your list is on point, it's not the only side to this. Do you think StinkySuchi is overpowered? Or Mikasa? Smith? Murmansk's rudder btw is what makes it special, far far more then the 'magical krup' value ( or the torps / anything else ). So no, let's not turn that around for the premium vs regular ship. Not because I own one, but because if you do no one would ever buy one, it would kill the future development of the game if you can't sell any ships ;)