flip_66

Why am I not surprised about that CV player‘s opinion?

This is not common at all. If something is discounted from y you have to make sure y actually exists. Generally y is the 'recommended retail price'. You are not allowed to just claim that there is a discount without proving so. There are laws against that.

There is one thing I would really like to know about this captain: Where does this 'discount' come frome? Was this captain released prior to this update? When was it possible to buy him for 7000 doubloons? Given the fact that a 10 point commander is sold at 1500 doubloons, If you take the price per Xp as a basis a 14 point commander should be sold at 4746 doubloons. Training a 10 point commander to 14 points using xp conversion with doubloons, this would be much more expensive. I simply don't get what the reference price would be. Can someone enlighten me?

Like I said, this is a very specific build. In ranked battles where winning the initial fight can decide the game Dazzle has proven useful to me. Friesland is not very dependant on crew skills though. You don't need Supernintendo, Fearless Brawler or AFT so it does not really hurt you playing around with a few experimental builds.

I actually use Dazzle on Friesland and did not regret it so far. Surely there might be 'better' damage farming builds but I kinda like Dazzle for close combat fights in ranked.

That's not what I was talking about. You promised to go beyond what is needed. Now you're telling us that you are doing nothing since nothing else is needed. Make up your mind. You shouldn't be surprised people accuse you of breaking your promises.

Buying a loot box that gives you a chance to have a battle without CVs or subs and a premium loot box that gives you a chance to buy a battle without both. Sounds like something WG would like.

So what you are basically saying is that the PEGI rating is none of your business and you are moving within the laws which is probably true. However, in your original message, you were stating the following: Would you say you did go beyond what is required during the past 10 months? This was a promise and I don't think anything happened after that.

There is no law against selling something with a sale on its release. However there is a law that prevents you from selling stuff marked as a sale when there is no reference. Wargaming is doing exactly this at the moment (depot tokens). This should be strictly illegal in most European countries.

So you didn’t say that RTS is not coming back because the game has to 'move on' and people want new stuff? Since I‘m on the phone and your forum does not support that 3rd millenium technology I won‘t quote you. I’m sure you can look it up yourself.

No, what he is saying is: Absolute crap content is still better than old content.

This one made my day :D

Nah this can't be right. After all the silent majority wants subs, CVs and superships in the game.

'shortly' as in 'very soon'?

So you want to tell us ... your devs actually play the game?!

@Seraphice take a guess who won this battle: Amazing game mode, isn't it?

So apart from censorship, have we heard anything from WG's side about the community's concerns?

If WG didn't reward stupid gameplay the playerbase would not be a problem.

Edit: Just censored myself before Skipper does.

Why am I not surprised that a guy like you thinks that way?

This is quite simple. Wargaming wants us to pay money on something that doesn't give us an advantage.

This is beyond ridiculous. You're really making a mockery out of your players. I've never seen a company treating their customers like you do.

Aaaaahahaha yeah that must be it.

Not surprised this guy is actually playing CVs. I bet he's the kind of hypocrite that 'complains' about CVs and plays them himself.

Speaking of (old) new bugs: What's this amazing feature supposed to mean: I mean ... in a mode that relies on DDs taking key areas ...