mtm78

It's two sided right, limiting numbers would be a quick fix but it wouldn't solve the 'problem' of why people are drawn more to certain ships atm. If the problem is torpedo boats, adjusting some stats to make them less attractive will cause people to perhaps take their gun boat dd's out more which both reduces the amount of torpedo boats as also causing more ships to be in battle capable of countering them to an extent. I understand why WG is reluctant to just go for the 'quick fix' if they expect to be able to actually fix the underlying issue itself.

For saying the truth? Commenting on balance issues is a good thing, but only do it when you're actually capable of understanding current mechanics and meta and argument how any proposed changes would affect this. If you are a bad player, you don't understand the current mechanics and meta ( in 99% of the cases ) and you have no argumentation on how changes would affect them. That doesn't mean I am saying bad players aren't entitled to their opinions, it means I am saying bad player commonly have opinions based on their lacking understanding of game mechanics and thus can't give very valuable feedback other than indicating there might be a skill gap issue, where good players usually can indicate both but are likely to be prone to looking more at the skill ceiling aspects of ships and mechanics. Both are valuable in some way

I have to pick up my son at exactly 14:00 so I can't attend, though it's going to be a long stream I heard so I can probably still catch a large part of it ( and I already won a Cambeltown with the team battles event ) Thanks for providing a service for the community

On high tiers you're not supposed to keep playing co-op, which is why your gain's don't increase with tiers. There a 3rd party mod which enables training rooms, but you'll have more fun against other players unless you don't like being challenged.

Doing something for the community requires payment? Boy am I glad there are people like carnotzet for instance who just do things for the sake of doing it and don't ask for something in return.

Every cruiser on the IJN line up from Furutaka carried type93's ( the torpedo's Shimakaze has in game ), so again: do you really want realistic torpedo ranges? You can't ask for 'realism' only for one nation ;)

irl IJN CA's carried Long Lances... still want realistic torpedo loadouts?

Isn't NA on the next patch already ( patch day is always before us )

UP!

True, design wise they were not BC's.

You'll talk differently I am sure when you're taking Crappy for a spin

Other nations classified them as BC, even in USN they have been referred to as such: Age of design btw is totally irrelevant in this discussion. What is relevant is the armament. Displacement, well I might be wrong about their expected concealment ratio but then again..

I was thinking about concealment before firing, What do you mean with CB? Alaska is a CC ( cruiser capital ) according to USN register, other countries would classify it as BC ( battle cruiser ). I am hoping we will get BC lines for most nations separate from BB line's, would allow more variety in gameplay ( but would also strain MM because making balanced teams without knowing if players are actually capable of non mirrored engagements is very hard ).

I agree I want it, I am not sure about the feasibility. a> 305mm >>>>> 220mm on Moskva. b> Alaska would be visible from ranges BB's are visible. c> Alaska's armor is only able to withstand 203mm cruiser fire. d> Giving it to high rpm would make it insanely OP against other cruisers. e> But enemy cruisers can always dictate engagements due to concealment. f> Alaska can't control engagements with enemy BB's ( to the same extent as enemy cruisers can with itself ) and is too big a target to dodge battleships. g> Alaska would therefore be to situational, would only work on large maps with sufficient tactical information to engage cruisers but stay clear of battleships.

It's BS to correlate avg damage done with actual hp of ship / classes, and shows a clear bias for BoringBoats from a player which played just short of 70% of his battles in such BB. Sorry if no one takes you serious. I had some battles yesterday playing tier VIII IX and X and almost all of them were ok, almost thought the issue was gone until I finally got a 6 tier X dd one one side and 3 on the other game. DD mirroring is clearly broken.

Why do you think you can even begin talking about balance when you're only looking at it from one direction. Play some DD games, show us how 'broken' they are, amaze us with your incredibly high DD win rate, damage, kills and so on, and we might change our mind

You're talking to someone who played 68% off his battles in BB's

Only to your cruisers, a few CA's played well will kill your quicker then any BB unless you like giving enemy BB's broadside. This is also the reason people complain about meta, if BB's don't kill CA's first, CA's would actually push up more often with BB's ( enemy CA's ofc, because you don't attack them first ). Meanwhile, your DD's get pushed back by enemy cruisers because you don't kill those cruisers, which means your CA's and you will not get screened from enemy DD's any more. I know, 'ideal world' aka 'teamplay' doesn't happen anyway right?

BB's should prioritize cruisers first -> biggest advantage to their team because they melt quicker than BB's.

I don't feel that argumentative atm, there are bigger things to worry about than semantics ( as I think we're not that far apart in reality ). So ok, you won the internet, have a cookie Sorry, I couldn't resist it looked so good

Hell yes, after TB time is over the amount off decent players per team is substantially higher ( given my limited sample size ofc, I might have just only witnessed it from my personal perspective and other people might not have the same changes in team composition ).

You're confusing 'better human' with 'better player', 'more valuable human' with 'more valuable team member' ;)

Sadly, the WoWs version is still under NDA

I am not new and certainly not that average yet I don't see this pattern where WG has a skill based MM designed to make you lose more (which is what you been complaining about the whole time ). The MM will put you as top or bottom tier according to some rules which are disclosed already, but it does not take into account any player stats. You can deny it, and claim it is obvious, but that claim is hollow without evidence you can't give.