mtm78

Actually with Mogami my prime target is BB's. With >18km range and HE I can't do much else. In a 1v1 at close range with a 203 armed CA I should loose. So I engage BB's at max distance, and leave CA's for others unless around 15km when I have a higher chance to score reasonable damage on them. If they come closer I'm usually in trouble, depending on their hp and how well they can aim. DD's are only a target is they are stupid enough to close in with me or my BB's ( which should be smart enough to avoid ambushes and keep some open sea around them if they don't know the location of enemy ships. edit: I should add it's not fun to be one of three CA's in a BB heavy game, I need enemy BB's to not focus fire me since I can't dodge that many shells as reliable as one BB shooting at me. With too many BB's, I need them to focus on my allied bb's and just let me tickle them ( and luckily, enough people still keep focused on the BB's and leave the CA's unless they are close enough so they feel they will have a fair chance in taking me out ).

I'm doing fine so far in my Mogami and Myoko, and in cbt I highly enjoyed Ibuki and Zao as well ( more then Baltimore or Des Moines ). CA's are not irrelevant at higher tiers.

Learn to internet, a HACK is an intrusion on the WG servers to alter info stored there ( gold on your account, xp/free xp, silver, unlocked ships, stats). The aim MOD is not a hack it is a malicious modification and thus qualifies as a CHEAT. hth

Kuma such a floating piece of garbage Anyway, I got 6% draws. Imo, if you complain about draws you're either: 1) A bad player 2) unable to read the victory conditions. 3) A bad player unable to read the victory conditions. I'm actually proud on most of those draws, because each and everyone one I feel had been a defeat if I hadn't played my best to deny the enemy a undeserved victory.

Only bad players will use this as excuse, are you such a baddie?

That is all fine and dandy sir, but what about those download counters at the various sites offering for download something that even further enhances people's aim? I don't think dismissing it is doing any good for anything, but I will fully support that yesterday in the few games I played there was no toxic stuff in chat about mods, nor did I feel anyone was doing anything I wouldn't expect from good players to do. It's just that honestly, I can't tell who is the good player and who isn't because there seem to be a lot less people around who really can't shoot at all. The xp chart used to show a small upper part with a few people who had a good game, then a few who did decent and a few who did nothing of importance. Yesterday and the day before I had many games where that lower part only existed of people who died really quickly and no longer people who are alive all match but who haven't done any damage to speak off. The middle part is a lot closer to the good players. WG didn't say about the first aim mod "it is not desired because it removes a large part of the skill from the game" for no reason. Just like the first iteration, this could all be verified or denied by WG who has access to the actual figures, but my observation is still as above. Btw, I don't think even replays would show proof either way, unless you have a few replays from the same player all showing a noticeable and steep increase in damage/hit ratio compared with his historical performance. Only on a more global/server wide scale, can the numbers already indicate that there is an issue. With one player the difference might be small, but if a large percentage does it the cumulative changes in server wide statistics should be undoubtable proof either way. If there is nothing out of the ordinary, it's all player's perception ( which is also bad, since perception is even harder to change than facts ). So again, ball's in WG's court, they are monitoring those numbers always ( because it shows how well their game is doing and what needs adjusting ) and they are aware of the issue. Let's hope we get a better permanent solution in the near future

He was shot down because it's a> promoting a ecosystem which should die out quickly b> screwing everyone who doesn't have an nvidia card. Nothing you said has any truth in it, and as such it has no value. I guess you're trying to make something close to a self fulfilling prophecy in your statement, applied back on itself?

Mantle was not a closed system, AMD has worked a lot with Intel on implementing a lot of it with DX12. Gameworks is a totally closed system, and games which utilize it are not allowed to optimise for AMD. Notice a difference? edit: ps I absolutely loved Mirrors Edge when I had an nvidia card, it was utterly amazing! But the point isn't about what the addition can do ( limited to one gpu vendor, with degraded performance on other vendor's hardware ), it's about the ecosystem Nvidia tries to push with Gameworks.

Son, you just learned your first and most valuable life lesson ( well, right after that other one I'll teach you about, about wearing rubber clothing in some situations ) The moment I saw: no battles, and 2 posts, and then the content, it was no longer worth replying to

It's like a big SCREW YOU to any AMD gpu users here ( I am one of them ). Gameworks should die, quickly.

I still don't 100% agree, there are many situations I find myself in daily where I can have an impact but where a BB would have been quite useless ( granted, no sane BB players would put his ship where my cruisers go ). I mean, ok, on one side you got this XX vs XX where XX can be both ship count or total HP, and winning depends on either removing that XX to zero, or controlling a map and getting the enemy XX lower. If removing hp, sure you need the two classes with the highest damage output. But, for map control, you would better have some DD's and CA's to cover them. And even BB's and CA's CV's don't do all that damage on their own, if I don't give AAA support to my BB's they will be sunk before they can do the required damage. CA is not less important imo. DD isn't less important, well maybe on high tier where planes and reaction time make torpedo's a lot weaker then on the lower tiers. edit: how the heck can I missed that oopsie, better correct it before anyone notices

I agree fully, don't get me wrong. The problem is that support's first initial answer is as shown: automated system, we don't handle manual reports/tickets for team damage. If you stop there, it is not reviewed manually, my personal experience leads me to believe this at least. Each time I escalated a ticket, I did get responses which went into what happened in the battle ( which doesn't mean I was 'right' in all cases btw ), but escalating shouldn't be needed. Now I can understand the business side of it, but it doesn't make me happier edit: Have to add my personal experience and reference I mentioned was with WoT support, and not WoWs support. So far, my WoWs support contacts have been without exception positive. But others seem be having worse experiences, I can't say if it's related to support or those people or just something like RNGezus.

Sheez man I should really start playing those other classes, I mean I obviously can't have an influence on a battle without playing a carrier or a battleship von_Boeg, on 02 October 2015 - 04:05 PM, said: Sorry, this is absurd. Is this a game about WWI-II naval warfare or a game about current playerbase size? If the Chineese or the Brazilians starts showung interest in the game, will they come first then? Why is it strange to cater to where your money is coming from, within reason?

I heard this version has a complete xml file from the start ( eg it's already pre calibrated ). Not much brain needed to 'get it to work'. But if this thing still needs that 'reduce gui refresh' box ticked then that fact would make me a bit happier since some of the other mods don't work with that box checked.

I agree, with a but.. Since, MrConway on forum has said to report excessive team killing. His own words. The automated system is not fully functional/tuned in, and there are clear examples of this ( I can name someone who the system let go up the at least 125 known team kills ). So we need a supplemental way of reporting that what the system doesn't pick but which still warrants action. With the current statement from support; what they are basically saying is that people who know how the system works can abuse this knowledge to grieve without penalty as manual reports will no longer be reviewed. Not a good situation, I would rather a WG official reply on this and assure us that excessive behavior will still be manually reviewed when needed.

Look through thread, AVG has been iffy about that file for some time now multiple reports. Add to your safe list or disable AVG while installing.

Strange argument to use, since in my live client nothing is visible yet. Do you have another type of client? Or do you use a 3rd party modification which unlocks the full tech tree? Rhetorical question, thanks for the discussion

Playing devil's advocate.. The fact that a 3rd party mod enables viewing content WG otherwise not available perfectly fits the definition of a leak, if WG wanted people to have access to the data they would have unlocked it. My fellow ST members refer to me as 'the noob', 'scrub' and so on, and I often get told to 'l2p' so no worries

So you found this on the NA forums and you thought... Or did you make this mod yourself?

You sound like you're just trying to justify cheating with an aim mod for your guns 'just because torpedo's have them to'. I'm sorry but if you have 20% hit ratio in a BB it's not because those with 25-30% are cheating.

Fuso was sunk by one torpedo, are you really asking for full realism

Because if you change course once in a minute or change speed and don't expect to spend the match in sniper view while passing behind an island where two minutes ago a destroyer was spotted all the while there being a smoke screen in the opposite direction of where you're fixated on in your sniper view, even then that destroyer has a large chance of not hitting you with more than one torpedo after which he has to reload for well over a minute? All the sarcasm aside, torpedo's on long range already should not be a problem unless you 'sail in straight lines'.. Thoug you're right, if you're really close you don't need it as it's aimed at the center of the ship with the heaviest torpedo protection. Hitting below a magazine or closer to the rear/front is a much better choice. Nah I have hope for a more permanent solution 'soon'. Recent posts clearly indicate resolve so I expect nothing more. I might sound like a dark horse but it's only because I know how poisonous this can get if it's not nailed in the but and I really think it's quite clear by now that they are not going to let that happen without a fight. It might not be exactly as people might want, me included off course, but I expect that whatever it will be it will be the best possible.

Damage counter and clock right? That is because the mods are fixed by the same person after the patch broke them, so he probably used a common component in one of them which the others need.

Ask Sharana, he already posted a 'review' of it and it's a lot better now than it ever was before. I been told this. I at the time claimed it changed the meta, nubs were shooting as good as experienced players. Games lasted a lot shorter and there were less draws as well, all because people were doing more damage in the same amount of time to ships in their engagement range. Off course, that was my personal observation, and it certainly was colored by frustration as I did not like this new meta at all. Last couple of days hasn't nearly been as bad in seeing a 'uncommon' distribution of good and bad players as with the old python mod ( thank god ) and only yesterday I saw chat taken over by toxic cheat/anti cheat accusations and discussions. I don't think the current mod is as widely used but I am not sure off course. Either way, perception and given figures don't need to match, would be nice if they did though

What exactly is bugged in it then I only played a few games and having the high transparency Sharana has set in config was already distracting a bit so I didn't notice anything off besides that.