Widar_Thule

FINAL UPDATE To date I have still only unlocked the Tier 4 German Carrier RHEIN via the play-to-unlock German Carrier Containers. To date I have collected and opened all German Carrier Containers from: German Carrier Directives 1, 2, 3 and 4; The Daily Shipments; Three Stream Code Missions; The first set of Weekend Missions (17 July 2020 to 20 July 2020); The second set of Weekend Missions (24 July 2020 to 27 July 2020). As written earlier: The first set of Weekend Missions supplied me with one German Carrier Container that had the Tier 4 German Carrier RHEIN mission. Total German Carrier tokens collected to date: 450. The third and final Stream Code gave access to missions which supplied me two more German Carrier Containers, these final two Containers also did not include a German Carrier mission. Needless to say I did not waste any real world money on buying any of these German Carrier Containers, or gambling Containers to describe properly what they really are. Advice to players: if you really, really, REALLY want to get a premium camouflage for the tech tree Tier 6 and Tier 8 German Carriers then do not buy German Carrier Containers. Instead just wait till the tech tree German Carriers are released in version 0.9.7.0 and then unlock them (via grinding or with free XP) and then buy a premium camouflage in game for the Tier 6 WESER for 1,000 golden doubloons and for the Tier 8 PARSEVAL for 3,000 golden doubloons. Paying 4,000 golden doubloons for a sure thing is better than buying gambling Containers which will probably not give you access to the Iron Cross premium camouflage anyway. The only German Carrier for which you cannot buy a premium camouflage is the Tier 4 RHEIN in version 0.9.7.0+, but at Tier 4 you do not really need a premium camouflage either so that is not really an issue either. As to the upcoming Tier 10 tech tree German Carrier RICHTHOFEN, if you really, really, REALLY want the Iron Cross premium camouflage for that ship you are better off buying one of the three German Combat Mission sets (for either German Battleships, Cruisers and/or Destroyers) in the Premium Shop or in the Armory. Each of these Combat Missions costing 7500 golden doubloons or about 25 Euro. One of these German Combat Missions sets supplies 600 German tokens when completed, with which you can buy a Tier 10 Iron Cross Camouflage (for either a Tier 10 German Battleship, Cruiser, Destroyer or Carrier) in the Armory. So there is NO NEED to gamble and buy German Carrier Containers in order to get the premium Iron Cross camouflage for Tier 10 RICHTHOFEN either. If you play a lot at Tier 10, or plan on doing so, then maybe the Iron Cross premium camouflage might be interesting for you because it gives a good EP, credit income and cost reduction bonus on a Tier 10 German ship, including the Tier 10 RICHTHOFEN if you acquire the Iron Cross premium camouflage for that ship. Better advice still: avoid spending money on the German Carriers completely and simply focus on playing the all-round capable Japanse and USA Carriers in WOWS instead!

There is a long forgotten topic on this forum where forum members could post Carrier suggestions. In fact I suggested a solution to reduce the visual effects of AA/Flak Black Smoke Clouds in that very topic in July 2019, in other words well over a year ago: https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/120282-cv-rework-suggestions/?do=findComment&comment=3075183 Alas few forum members ever posted constructive suggestions in that topic. That is not all that surprising however because most - if not all - constructive suggestions that have been posted on the EU and NA forum by highly skilled, skilled and lesser skilled players are ignored by the WOWS Development team, despite the often repeated claims to the contrary by WOWS representatives on the forums. None of the suggestions offered in that Carrier suggestions topic to my knowledge have ever been used by the WOWS Development team. So yes this AA/Flak Black Smoke Clouds issue is known and - other than guessing where the target is going to be in a few seconds from now when you can no longer see the target due to the AA/Flak Black Smoke Clouds - there is no in-game solution that I am aware of. There is a possible out-of-game solution however in the form modding. What should be possible is find the particle file in which the AA/Flak Black Smoke Clouds is stored and then alter that to make the AA/Flak Black Smoke Clouds more transparent. I for example once removed snow flakes from the particle file because they bothered me in the Hamburg port because it used to snow in that port the whole year through. At the time the particle file was constantly being changed, so with almost every new WOWS version I had to find the new location of the snow flake in the particle file and then mod it again. I assume that it will be no different with the AA/Flak Black Smoke Clouds in the particle file. But if you are willing to invest time in it, then this is probably the only viable solution. To me what is even worse than the AA/Flak Black Smoke Clouds is a full broadside salvo from a Battleship or Heavy Cruiser in the last second or so of a rocket or bomb attack, especially in GRAF ZEPPELIN. Such a salvo obscures the reticle on the target even more for me than the AA/Flak Black Smoke Clouds do.

"Theirs not to make reply, Theirs not to reason why, Theirs but to do and die." - by Alfred, Lord Tennyson Mods are the solution to your query. Contact "MajorRenegade" at WOWS NA forum and send him a private message. https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/40434-0960-major-collection-of-mods/

If you really want a Tier 8 Battleship and pay real world money for it then do yourself a favour and get a good one, get the best one. ODIN is not worth it from what I see. Mind you I do not have the ship but I meet them often in matches and they are effective in the hands of good players but overal ODIN in WOWS is quite inferior to MASSACHUSETTS. Instead of ODIN just buy MASSACHUSETTS and play that ship without end till you learn how to handle her and become effective at Tier 8-10. If you really want a premium Tier 8 German Battleship then you are better off with TIRPITZ, that at least is a real world German Battleship unlike ODIN which is a post-war invention of Russian WOWS Developers working in St. Petersburg. Or buy the premium Tier 7 German Battleship SCHARNHORST, at least she too existed in real life unlike ODIN. I hardly ever meet a player in MASSACHUSETTS that does bad in her... even mediocre players do good in her. EDIT #1: Do not forget that you have a 25% discount coupon in the Armory in-game where you can buy the MASSACHUSETTS, TIRPITZ or SCHARNHORST with golden doubloons and with a 25% discount. EDIT #2: If you want to spend less than 3500 Golden doubloons then you can also consider buying a premium camouflage for Tier 8 BISMARCK for 3000 golden doubloons or a premium camouflage for Tier 7 GNEISENAU for 2000 golden doubloons. Tier 7 matchmaking is a tad better than that of Tier 8, depending on your point of view of what a tad better is of course. EDIT #3: I play mostly Carriers and based on what I have seen in matches the Flak of ODIN is unimpressive at best and not noticably better than that of BISMARCK or TIRPITZ.

Since the IOWA Class could also fire nuclear shells after WW2 I assume that you would like your MISSOURI 1991 to fire nuclear shells as well? If so, you will be happy to hear that nuclear shells are currently being tested in WOWS as this sneak preview makes clear, they are alas still a "Work In Progress" however. You can read more about it here: http://rpgtitles.com/world-of-warships/world-of-warships-hitting-the-enemy-with-nuclear-shells Rest assured however that when (and not if) nuclear shells are finally introduced in WOWS that they will be provided solely to the upcoming Tier 10 Premium USSR Battleship STALIN which you can aquire for 10 million Steel, 100 million free XP or 1000 Euro in the upcoming special "Long Live Stalin" Dockyard WOWS event. This special WOWS event will take place in 2022 beginning on Stalin's birthday and will start two updates after USSR Carriers are introduced in WOWS. That concludes my tongue-in-cheek response... On a more serious note: MISSOURI 1991 is way out of time frame for WOWS and so are nuclear shells of course. But that aside, to me MISSOURI as commissioned in 1944 looked way better than MISSOURI 1991 ever did, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder of course. I would rather see something historic but totally new introduced in WOWS like for example an UNRYU Class Aircraft Carrier, here is a color image of the UNRYU Class Aircraft Carrier KATSURAGI as she looked at the end of WW2:

"Your Last Chance to Obtain Z 35" = Last chance to obtain it at full price, as opposed to obtaining Z 35 eight months later in the Armory where you can use a discount coupon to get the UP and overpriced Z 35 for less money. WOWS disinformation at its best.

So now that this is finally happening can we also finally get some historical ships (back) in the game instead of all this (USSR etc.) fantasy stuff. Top of the list of already existing WOWS ship models that I would like to see in the game as premiums (albeit changed to their authentic state including time-frame authentic aircraft): AKAGI - 1942 final state HIRYU - 1942 final state ZUIKAKU - 1944 final state TAIHO - 1944 final state SHINANO - 1944 final state MUSASHI - 1944 final state GNEISENAU - 1942 final state TIRPITZ - 1944 final state ENTERPRISE - 1942 Battle of Midway state MISSOURI - 1944 as commissioned And while we are at it add "Authentic Aircraft Packs" - even if they are only visual/eye candy - for: KAGA - Authentic Aircraft Pack 1942 Battle of Midway state GRAF ZEPPELIN - Authentic Aircraft Pack 1942 state (Ju 87 C-1, Me 109 T-1) ENTERPRISE - Authentic Aircraft Pack 1942 Battle of Midway state

Thanks it worked

UPDATE To date I have only unlocked the Tier 4 German Carrier RHEIN via the play-to-unlock German Carrier Containers. To date I have collected and opened all German Carrier Containers from: German Carrier Directives 1, 2, 3 and 4; The Daily Shipments; Two Stream Code Missions; The first set of Weekend Missions (17 July 2020 to 20 July 2020); The second set of Weekend Missions (24 July 2020 to 27 July 2020). The first set of Weekend Missions supplied me with one German Carrier Container that had the Tier 4 German Carrier RHEIN mission. Unless there is a third and last set of Weekend Missions from 31 July to 3 August 2020, the German Carrier Containers event will effectively end with Directive 4. So I will simply use free XP to unlock the remaining two Carriers. Total German Carrier tokens collected to date: 450. I have not really bothered to "unlock" anything via any WOWS events since the DUKE OF YORK / SCHARNHORST event, on account of DUKE OF YORK being such a disappointing premium at the time. In this case I did want to get early access to these German Carriers to compare the Tier 8 PARSEVAL to Tier 8 GRAF ZEPPELIN. This German Carrier event again demonstrated to me what a waste of time WOWS events are. One thing is sure: I am glad to not have wasted money on buying gambling "containers" in WOWS. Best thing would be if these sort of online gambling practices would be outlawed to protect the gullible.

TheGreatBlasto posted something funny on the WOWS NA forum: The original WOWS NA forum topic posted by TheGreatBlasto can be found here: https://forum.worldofwarships.com/topic/222989-russian-carriers-are-coming/

Collected and opened all German Carrier Containers from: German Carrier Directives 1, 2 and 3; The Daily Shipments; The first set of Weekend Missions (17 July 2020 to 20 July 2020). The first set of Weekend Missions supplied me with one German Carrier Container that had the Tier 4 German Carrier RHEIN mission. Total German Carrier tokens collected: 450. If I remember correctly there are six German Carrier Containers left to collect now in German Carrier Directive 4. It goes without saying that I am not interested in buying German Carrier Containers for Euros in order to collect ships that I can unlock with free XP.

IF the upcoming German Carriers will be less effective than the Japanese and USA Carriers, like the British Carriers generally already currently are in WOWS, then players that want to win and/or play for stats will keep playing Japanse and USA Carriers. IF that is the case, then it is by design and then it is intended by those responsible for this state of affairs at WG-WOWS. IF the upcoming German Carriers were to have been the benchmark for "nerfing" all Carriers in WOWS then the logical way to go would have been to FIRST nerf ALL EXISTING Carriers in WOWS and then introduce new Carriers that conform to the "nerfed" model. IF an upcoming/new Carrier line is introduced in WOWS that is designed to be inferior in terms of overall effectiveness to the existing Japanese and USA Carrier lines then it simply will not be competitive and thus not be used by the competitive players. You can already see this with the current British Carrier line in WOWS. Even the veteran carrier players that argue for Carrier "nerfs" on the forum themselves do not buy/play the weakest Carriers but almost all of them instead focus on mainly playing only the strongest Carriers - and thus avoid playing many matches with the British Carrier line and avoid playing some of the "weak" premium Carriers. I only have unlocked the RHEIN so far and only played a few matches with the ship. I cannot say that I found RHEIN interesting but then again I do not find Tier 4 Carriers all that interesting to begin with. From what I have seen in matches however I cannot say that the upcoming German Tier 4, 6 and 8 Carriers have impressed me much.

You are not the only one to be confronted with this in WOWS. In fact WOWS staff have admitted that the desync issue is real (which is hardly a surprise as it can be clearly seen in online WOWS videos/streams): More people have reported/commented on this desync issue on the forums. People in the clan I am in also experience this. So you are not the only one. Many topics on the EU and NA forum have comments on this subject. Today was a particularly bad day with desync for me. What I experience I posted here a while back: Sometimes towards the end of a match when there are fewer players afloat the desync issues will decrease in severity in my experience, but even then it is not always the case that a match in which desync issues occured will be totally free of desync in the last few minutes with only a few ships afloat in my experience. You can check out the whole topic that I linked above to see what others experience. Here is another topic on the subject:

Twelve German Carrier Containers opened so far, no missions for German Carriers in any of them. If I remember correctly the total number of free/unlockable Geman Carrier Containers is 25 during version 0.9.6.0 - so 12 opened out of 25 total yielded zero German Carrier missions for me. All German Carrier missions completed except for the last three ones for which you need RHEIN, WESER, PARSEVAL. Without those three German Carriers however getting the 600 German marks is impossible of course. Last year I remember getting at least HERMES and FURIOUS as well as the IMPLACABLE premium camouflage after opening only a few event containers.

That is what I first thought, but on closer inspection of the three texture files in which they are present the idea seems to be that the Dark Grey squares are objects that are ON the Flight Deck. In other words they seem to have been made to represent 3D objects that protrude above the Flight Deck and which have light/reflection qualities. So I more get the idea that they are supposed to represent some sort of lights/reflectors. In any event padeyes they are not. Padeyes have no light/reflection properties and they are integrated into the Flight Deck and thus do not protrude above it as you can see on the images of padeyes on real world USA Carriers for example. Moreover the real world GRAF ZEPPELIN did not have padeyes, not in the 1:100 and 1:300 Kriegsmarine design drawings that I have seen and not in the photographs of the Flight Deck of the real world ship that I posted in my first post in this topic. GRAF ZEPPELIN would not have used Deck Parks for which padeyes might have been useful because of the harsh climate/weather/seas in the North Atlantic and because of the huge two deck hanger space she had which allowed her to store aircraft in her hangers that the USA Carriers had to store on the Flight Deck due to them having usually only one hanger deck. So I more get the idea that the Dark Grey squares are an error. The two images of the steel deck of the real world GRAF ZEPPELIN, which I posted in the first post in this topic, show square steel objects that were probably intended for fixating the wooden planking. When the wooden planking was however fitted on GRAF ZEPPELIN those square steel objects were no longer visible. The real world images of GRAF ZEPPELIN with wooden planking, posted in my first post in this topic, are mostly from private sources while the images without wooden planking were made by the shipyard and stored in German state naval archives. And data in German state naval archives was purloined after WW2 and sent to the USSR and is used by WOWS Developers. If WOWS Developers only used the shipyard images of GRAF ZEPPELIN and not the private source images that I posted above then it is safe to assume that they never saw any images of the Flight Deck of the real world GRAF ZEPPELIN with wooden planking. And then that might explain why they put the Dark Grey squares on: a misinterpretation of shipyard photographs of GRAF ZEPPELIN without wooden planking. Many things on the default ("vanilla") GRAF ZEPPELIN WOWS are also incorrect/missing so it is not as if no mistakes have been made. If a mistake was made with regard to the Dark Grey squares on the Flight Deck then that is not really a problem, but I do need the information for the research I am doing on this ship. On the GRAF ZEPPELIN B the Dark Grey squares stand out particularly well, and when looking at the following two images one can easily get the impressing that they are meant to represent 3D objects that protrude above the Flight Deck and which have light/reflection qualities. Note that the "true" steel objects on the Flight Deck of GRAF ZEPPELIN B, like wind shields and steel rails etcetera, have no such strong light/reflection qualities as the Dark Grey squares do. And if the Dark Grey squares on the Flight Deck of GRAF ZEPPELIN B have such strong light/reflection qualities as can be seen on the two images below then they cannot be "padeyes". Here are the two images of GRAF ZEPPELIN B: found here: https://worldofwarships.eu/de/news/history/black-armada/

@MedvedevTD @MrConway @Tuccy I already asked this question here but it seems that no one working for WG-WOWS answers questions posted there: Since the question I asked is related to a mod and since this mod part of the forum seems to get more attention from WOWS Developers I will post my question here. Hopefully I can get an answer to my question in the mod part of the forum. I would like to know what the Dark Grey square-shaped objects are supposed to be that cover roughly two-thirds of the GRAF ZEPPELIN Flight Deck on the default ("vanilla") WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN model/textures. Can WOWS Developers please clarify where these objects come from and what is their purpose? They seem to be an invention of the WOWS Developers that have no real world basis. Photographic evidence and the original GRAF ZEPPELIN plans do not show these objects. I need the data for my WOWS AUTHENTIC GRAF ZEPPELIN mod and for modelling purposes in general. My most recent AUTHENTIC GRAF ZEPPELIN mod can be found on www.nexusmods.com Some images to make clear to what I am referring to. In the image underneath the many Dark Grey square-shaped objects on the Flight Deck of the WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN are clearly visible Square shaped objects were visible on the steel deck of the real world GRAF ZEPPELIN, but that was before the wooden planking had been fitted. Here are two images of the steel deck of the GRAF ZEPPELIN before the wooding planking was fitted. These square shaped objects were no longer visible when the wooden planking had been fitted on the real world GRAF ZEPPELIN however. Here are images of the Flight Deck of the real world GRAF ZEPPELIN after most of the wooden planking had been fitted. Flight Deck in front of the Bridge: Flight Deck looking from stern to stem: Flight Deck looking from stern to stem, starboardside: Flight Deck looking from stern to stem, portside: Flight Deck looking from stern to stem, portside: Here is a post war image with a member of the USSR military on the Flight Deck of the GRAF ZEPPELIN, looking from stern to stem:

@MedvedevTD @MrConway @Tuccy I would like to know what the Dark Grey square-shaped objects are supposed to be that cover roughly two-thirds of the GRAF ZEPPELIN Flight Deck on the default ("vanilla") WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN model/textures. Can WOWS Developers please clarify where these objects come from and what is their purpose? They seem to be an invention of the WOWS Developers that have no real world basis. Photographic evidence and the original GRAF ZEPPELIN plans do not show these objects. I need the data for my WOWS AUTHENTIC GRAF ZEPPELIN mod and for modelling purposes in general. My most recent AUTHENTIC GRAF ZEPPELIN mod can be found here: https://www.nexusmods.com/worldofwarships/mods/1 Some images to make clear to what I am referring to. In the image underneath the many Dark Grey square-shaped objects on the Flight Deck of the WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN are clearly visible Square shaped objects were visible on the steel deck of the real world GRAF ZEPPELIN, but that was before the wooden planking had been fitted. Here are two images of the steel deck of the GRAF ZEPPELIN before the wooding planking was fitted. These square shaped objects were no longer visible when the wooden planking had been fitted on the real world GRAF ZEPPELIN however. Here are images of the Flight Deck of the real world GRAF ZEPPELIN after most of the wooden planking had been fitted. Flight Deck in front of the Bridge: Flight Deck looking from stern to stem: Flight Deck looking from stern to stem, starboardside: Flight Deck looking from stern to stem, portside: Flight Deck looking from stern to stem, portside: Here is a post war image with a member of the USSR military on the Flight Deck of the GRAF ZEPPELIN, looking from stern to stem:

Yes you can. You can mod a great many things in WOWS. You can check my AUTHENTIC GRAF ZEPPELIN mod out on www.nexusmods.com to get an idea of what is possible. So yes, you can mod many things and even remove 3D objects, swap 3D aircraft models etc. Modding WOWS is more fun than playing WOWS.

Was that actually made by WOWS Developers?

Thanks. A lot of time and attention to detail went into making the mod, more than the changes implemented might suggest at first glance. Especially getting the dimensions of everything exactly right required detailed calculations and these even revealed some dimensional errors in the WOWS 3D GRAF ZEPPELIN model. All in all, the main thing left to do in the mod is to get rid of those Dark Grey squares on the Flight Deck. I have still not removed them because I want to know why the WOWS Developers put them there and because it is a lot of work in three files to get rid of them properly. It is a pity that it is almost impossible to get a straight answer over something so trivial from WG-WOWS staff. --- Without the excellent book by Ulrich Israel and the booklet by Richard Wagner and Manfred Wilske the mod could not have been made. Their detailed data was key, but also the images of the superlative, superb GRAF ZEPPELIN model made by Richard Wagner and Robert Wilske who used 1:100 and 1:300 original Kriegsmarine plans of the GRAF ZEPPELIN to make their model. These two books are really worth buying on the subject. The missing "Fangseil" is a rather embarrassing omission in the default ("vanilla") WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN. For example here are images of the "Fangseil" (Crash Barrier) on the Wagner-Wilske model. I added the "Fangseil" in my mod (although alas not as a true 3D object): I would like to improve the Aircraft Salvage Crane on the WOWS model to what it should be, but it would involve a lot of effort to implement that. Here are the original Kriegsmarine plans of the pre-1942 (upper drawing) and 1942+ (bottom drawing) GRAF ZEPPELIN, the difference between the Cranes is obvious: In WOWS the Aircraft Salvage Crane dangerously points towards landing aircraft, interferes with the "Fangseil" (Crash Barrier) and rests on the Flight Deck, all of which is incorrect. This is how it should be (note not only the different rest position but also the difference in Crane design) , again images from the Wagner-Wilske model: Some of the major errors in the WOWS model of the GRAF ZEPPELIN are the missing radar antennas/sets mounted underneath the Flight Deck, the incorrect radars antennas/sets mounted left and right of the catapults and the incorrect radars mounted in the foremast. I would like to improve all that but it would involve a lot of effort to implement that. Here is part of the original Kriegsmarine drawing of the GRAF ZEPPELIN (1942 status). The radar antennas/sets mounted underneath the end of the Flight Deck are indicated by dotted lines: In total there should be around 10 radar antennas/sets (marked in red on this drawing by Siegfried Breyer): This is how it all should look, again images from the Wagner-Wilske model: The FuMB "Sumatra" (ESM) sets on the Fighter Aircraft Control Positiono are also missing, and that too I would like to improve but it would involve a lot of effort to implement that, again images from the Wagner-Wilske model: A rather embarrassing omission in the default ("vanilla") WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN are the missing Compressed-Air Cylinders without which the Compressed-Air Catapults could not work, as well as the incorrectly implemented return rail system for the starter cars, alas I see no way to correct any of that in the mod: This is what it should look like, again images from the Wagner-Wilske model: Another embarrassing omission in the default ("vanilla") WOWS GRAF ZEPPELIN are the two missing Starter Car Elevators on the Flight Deck without which the Starter Cars would not be able to be returned to the Flight Deck for launching aircraft from the Compressed-Air Catapults. I could however add those in the mod: The area left/right of the Catapults is also in need of correction, but I see no way to implement that in the mod , again images from the Wagner-Wilske model: I would like to have implemented the cable support holders in 3D and other arrestor gear improvements , but I see no way to implement that in the mod, again images from the Wagner-Wilske model: Adding the ship's bell on the navigation bridge would be nice, but I see no way to implement that in the mod , again images from the Wagner-Wilske model: This is the ship's bell of the real world Heavy Cruiser ADMIRAL HIPPER:

Indeed, but they were not visible above the planking as can be seen in the images of the real ship. If they are inventions of WOWS Developers then I will probably remove them. But that will be a lot of work because they are located in three texture files and there are so many of these objects to remove in each file.

The LOS #48 magazine issue you refer to can be found here: https://www.docdroid.net/DDh46rf/graf-zeppelin-los-48-pdf From what I can see that magazine is based on the data in the 3D booklet by Stefan Draminski and uses the 3D model made by him. The data that Stefan Draminski used for his 3D model and his 3D booklet is rather dated and frankly incorrect. Alas his 3D model too is incorrect and missing some key features that GRAF ZEPPELIN had. The most correct and up to date information on the GRAF ZEPPELIN and her aircaft is the book by Ulrich Israel and the booklet by Richard Wagner and Manfred Wilske.

You are probably right. Still, there is one EU player that averages almost 119,000 damage per match in GZ. Maybe his performance is the benchmark for "nerfing" the GZ, who knows. I have never seen him play, in his opinion however all that the GZ AP bombers are good for is scouting at match start, and if nothing else is available anymore in a match. He stated that he focuses on fires and floods. As has been established by DFens_666, TIRPITZ "nerfs" did in fact were implemented - they were just other ones than that I had posted. Mistakes happen. Additionally I "referred" to many things which are relevant to this topic that you however conveniently choose to ignore, and for obvious reasons I might add. Either post something constructive to add to the discussion or, if you do not care about a topic then do not post anything at all. Those are not my rules, but the forum rules. Your previous post served no constructive purpose from any point of view. All you did is pick a red herring as a basis for an off-topic post whose only purpose was to ridicule. For which I thank you because it shows the content of your "character". There is a difference between making a mistake and "inventing stuff to support an argument". You accuse me of the latter, which is your opinion but which you present as fact. Making a mistake is benign, "inventing stuff to support an argument" presumes nefarious intent and as such your statement is clearly a personal attack. Some would say that the poorest "quality" of "arguing" is by making a personal attack, all in all that fits in nicely with your previous post.

My participation in this exchange of words will end if the content and tone of your statements does not drastically improve. You seem to not be interested in an honest discussion. Instead you seem to be more interested in "scoring points", dodging the issue, posting red herrings, personal attacks etc. and act as some sort of WG-WOWS apologist. If that is what you want to do, well then have fun with that but it makes an honest discussion impossible and I am not going to further waste my time with you. Last chance for you to get back to the issue of WG-WOWS nerfing premiums and having an honest discussion about that. Again, the issue at hand is: directly/indirectly "nerfing" premium ships is not acceptable and should not be accepted by the player base for obvious reasons. You implied it. Misdirection statement that dodges the issue. Fantastic response to a statement I did not make. I never said that the end of the world is nigh. Misdirection statement that dodges the issue. Dodging the issue and trying to misdirect to something that you think can win you points with (red herring). Again, the issue at hand is: directly/indirectly "nerfing" premium ships is not acceptable and should not be accepted by the player base for obvious reasons. Now you are redirecting the issue to the customer being somehow at fault for buying a WG-WOWS product. You are avoiding the issue, trying to change the subject and act like a WG-WOWS apologist. Why do you carry water for WG-WOWS? Do you work for them? I have no interest in this red herring. Just a few points and questions make clear how preposterous your red herring statements are. A ship should not be released by WG-WOWS in a broken state (GRAF ZEPPELIN August 2017 release). Do not blame the customer for buying a broken product that the customer cannot test before buying. Instead blame the one that has made and sold a broken product to the customer. Instead blame the one that changes a product after it has been bought and paid for (=WG-WOWS nerfing premiums) And since when can you "trust" any preview/review of ships that WOWS releases? Are you seriously suggesting that players should only buy ships in WOWS based on previews/reviews by others? And what responsibility does WG-WOWS have then with regard to their products? Is it only the customer who is at fault after he has bought a clearly sub-par and/or overpriced product or does WG-WOWS have a responsibility regarding this product as well? Is WG-WOWS to be allowed to get away with selling clearly sub-par and/or overpriced products to hapless customers then? Who is responsible for WG-WOWS selling a sub-par and/or overpriced product? The customer that buys it or WG-WOWS Management that sells it? I have no interest in discussing this red herring of yours, my above questions and points make clear just how preposterous your statement is. You are acting like a WG-WOWS apologist, dodging the issue and trying to misdirect to something that you think can win you points with (red herring). Again, the issue at hand is: directly/indirectly "nerfing" premium ships is not acceptable and should not be accepted by the player base for obvious reasons. I brought up many things that you conveniently constantly choose to ignore, instead you pick a red herring and then add some fantastic stuff to it and throw in some personal attacks in the line above. I should send this line of yours in to a psychiatrist, he will have a field day with it. You state that I "make you bad". You do not need my help with that you do that all by yourself, but more importantly: who is playing the victim card here? In fact you keep using the "victim" word, which is telling. To be sure I did not play a victim card and judging from the way you use that term you do not actually know what that term means. Thank you for accusing me of that though, I always like a good laugh. What I did do is take your word for granted regarding the TIRPITZ changes, and simly owned up to what appears to be a mistake on my part. There is a difference between making a mistake and "getting caught making things up". The former is benign, the latter presumes nefarious intent and as such your statement is clearly a personal attack. For which I again thank you. It is more than a little ironic that you accuse me of "10/10 dishonest arguments". Who is trying to make whom look "bad" here? The operative word being "trying" in your case though. I can make mistakes and, unlike you, clearly have no problem owning up to them. To err is human. In case you forgot, here is what you wrote earlier: What you did in your post is list some changes that make clear that TIRPITZ has indeed been "nerfed", thereby proving that premiums, including TIRPITZ, are "nerfed" as I stated. Which is in direct contradiction to what you wrote earlier by the way, but that is ok we all make mistakes. Even if the "nerfs" in question were different from the ones I listed, it is you that "proved" that TIRPITZ was "nerfed". Thanks for pointing that out. While all that is fine and nice you are again dodging the issue, misdirecting and added a few totally uncalled for personal attacks to the mix. One premium "buff" does not compensate for two premium "nerfs". And the point still stands that no matter how much you try do dodge it: directly/indirectly "nerfing" premium ships is not acceptable and should not be accepted by the player base for obvious reasons. I understand fully, I am however not inclined to accept your more or less implied proposition that "global nerfs" to premiums are "ok" while "specific nerfs" are not. This is a typical WG-WOWS apologist non-argument. Thank you for coming out however and admitting that premiums are indirectly nerfed by "global nerfs". Now the only thing that you need to let to sink in is this, which I wrote earlier: A direct/indirect "nerf" by any other name is still a "nerf". WOWS-WG cannot hide behind semantics. Calling the "nerf" of a premium ship not a "nerf" but a "global change" or "global nerf" or whatever is disingenuous. Again, the issue at hand is: directly/indirectly "nerfing" premium ships is not acceptable and should not be accepted by the player base for obvious reasons. If you think it is ok to directly/indirectly "nerf" premium ships under the guise of it being "a global nerf", or because sometimes they are also "buffed" then we will have to agree to disagree on that. You are again dodging the issue and trying to misdirect to something that you think can win you points with (red herring). Again, the issue at hand is: directly/indirectly "nerfing" premium ships is not acceptable and should not be accepted by the player base for obvious reasons. Now you are more or less again redirecting the issue to the customer being somehow at fault for keeping a WG-WOWS product that they bought with real world money but which WG-WOWS then all of a sudden changed and "nerfed". So the customer is again to blame following your "logic" I presume. By your curious "logic" it is a fair deal for the customer to have to exchange real world money for WOWS monopoly money when the product they bought and paid for is suddenly reduced in effectiveness and value due to "nerfs" implemented by WG-WOWS. You are avoiding the issue, trying to change the subject and act like a WG-WOWS apologist. Again: why do you carry water for WG-WOWS? Do you work for them? I have no interest in this red herring of yours. Misdirection, red herring. Fantastic statement that has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Re-read the 13 March 2019 WOWS Development blog statement: the balancing is now "finished" according to the WOWS Development blog. And yet the "nerfing" of Carriers and premium Carriers is the "raison d'etre" for this topic. Again, the issue at hand is: directly/indirectly "nerfing" premium ships is not acceptable and should not be accepted by the player base for obvious reasons. So now "nerfs" to premiums are "balance changes" because they are "absolutely necessary". A WOWS PR staff member could not have written it any better. A WG-WOWS apologist statement. If a premium is no longer viable, for example due to "powercreep", then of course a "buff" is in order. "Nerfing" premiums should not be done. If some premiums are OP or borderline OP (MASSACHUSETTS for example) then the other premiums and free to play lines should be "buffed" to similar levels of effectiveness and that approach should be taken to "balance" things out. In other words, the collective should be "buffed" and not the exceptional premium "nerfed". This approach would make the best premiums the baseline for balancing instead of them becoming the exception that needs to be "nerfed", or the exception that is simply allowed to remain OP or borderline OP.

What you are writing now is something completely different. Classic misdirection and red herring. The issue at hand is: directly/indirectly "nerfing" premium ships is not acceptable and should not be accepted by the player base for obvious reasons. You wrote: "TBH dont care about GZ - Atlanta anyone? You find useless ships on both sides, and Atlanta was a victim due to CV rework." Your original argument basically came down to this: because ATLANTA was more or less "nerfed" to "uselessness" due to the carrier rework it is more or less ok if GRAF ZEPPELIN is also "nerfed" into "uselessness" as well. Again: two wrongs do not make a right. If you think ATLANTA is in a bad state since the carrier rework then it might be interesting to try out a KÖNIG ALBERT versus two HOSHO Carriers that give you their undivided attention in a random match. To be sure, simply rolling over and accepting premium ships getting "nerfed" does not "help anyone either". And your "do not buy anything" statement more or less comes down to "take it or leave it". As if there is no alternative to that approach. A false dichtotomy. A "take it or leave it" reasoning too does not "help anyone either" though. Come to think of it, "do not buy anything" is exactly what I have been doing as a result of what has been going on in WOWS and that too does not "help anyone either". The whole GIULIO CESARE ruckus however did have a postitve effect in that this ship was not "nerfed" due to the response on the forums, and in that sense the forum response "helped". The GRAF ZEPPELIN rework in 2017/2018 also came about as a result of the response on the forums and in that sense the forum response "helped". So apparently something can sometimes be done that "helps". And no - just in case you bring that up - the RTS GRAF ZEPPELIN AP bombs were never publicly proposed nor asked for by any players involved in the RTS GZ rework on the rework Facebook page, no matter how many times WOWS staff keep saying that or stating that the RTS GZ was "community balanced". The final version of the RTS GZ was totally the work of the WOWS Development team, funnily enough the single most requested item by the players was more and better fighters which were never supplied, in fact the final version had even less fighters than the first August 2017 version. A direct/indirect "nerf" by any other name is still a "nerf". WOWS-WG cannot hide behind semantics. Calling the "nerf" of a premium ship not a "nerf" but a "global change" or "global nerf" or whatever is disingenuous. And yes in that respect WOWS-WG has "nerfed" premium ships as I am sure you are aware of, more than once actually over the past few years and they have both "chosen" to do it and "gotten away with it". There is a difference between acknowledging that something is done and accepting it as just. Again, the issue at hand is: directly/indirectly "nerfing" premium ships is not acceptable and should not be accepted by the player base for obvious reasons. Whether that is ATLANTA, GRAF ZEPPELIN, TIRPITZ or any other premium. And: even if one aspect of a premium ship is "buffed" that does not justify another aspect of it being "nerfed". It seems however that the player base has had no success in being heard since the GIULIO CESARE and RTS GZ rework ruckus. The massive player base feedback regarding both the Carrier rework and the PUERTO RICO has been more or less totally ignored. So in that sense you are right: it all "does not help" at all with regard to have any effect on what is implemented in WOWS, at least not anymore. You are more interested in what I wrote about the TIRPITZ than in the indisputable direct/indirect "nerfs" of the GRAF ZEPPELIN and other premiums in WOWS. Why is that? Classic red herring. Funnily enough the data you posted "proves" that the 10.5 cm guns of TIRPITZ were "nerfed" in two areas. Basically underlining the point that premiums, including TIRPITZ, are "nerfed" by WG-WOWS. Well thanks for that, I guess. Whether all, some or none of the TIRPITZ "nerfs" I mentioned were incorrect/correct, that has no bearing on the issue of the direct/indirect "nerfing" of premiums, and exactly that has been happening for quite a while now and is one of the reasons for this topic. Again: even if one aspect of a premium ship is "buffed" that does not justify another aspect of it being "nerfed". One might even argue that "buffing" premiums is necessary to keep up with "powercreep", something that "nerfing" premiums certainly is not. I do not want to get into that red herring pitfall discussion however. I have long lost my interest in Battleships in WOWS but years ago when I still played Battleships I kept track of all the changes. I am not going to waste my time looking up the lists I once kept, even if I could find them. As to the changes list you posted above, I will take your word for it. Let us agree that the reload and traverse has stayed the same since 2015 to end that subject. The difference in side armour between BISMARCK and TIRPITZ currently still exists (as it should), the earliest data on it seems to be from around December 2015. The two 10.5 cm gun "nerfs" that you mentioned above I cannot remember being implemented but I will take your word for it. Even if only two TIRPITZ "nerfs" can now be found by you, they are still "nerfs" of a premium ship. Whether TIRPITZ was "nerfed" only once or twice does not alter the fact that GZ as well as several other premiums have too been nerfed in WOWS, in the case of GZ repeatedly. Now ENTERPRISE is to be added to that list. And like I said earlier: the GZ has by far been the most nerfed premium in WOWS, even though it has been bringing up the rear since the Carrier rework started in February 2019. That sets a precedent that should not be accepted or applauded. Again, the issue at hand is: directly/indirectly "nerfing" premium ships is not acceptable and should not be accepted by the player base for obvious reasons. Again: a direct/indirect "nerf" by any other name is still a "nerf". WOWS-WG cannot hide behind semantics. Calling the "nerf" of a premium ship not a "nerf" but a "global change" or "global nerf" or whatever is disingenuous. If you think it is ok to directly/indirectly "nerf" premium ships under the guise of it being "a global nerf", or because sometimes they are also "buffed" then we will have to agree to disagree on that. Thanks, good find! Based on what DFens_666 posted above TIRPITZ was "nerfed" in two areas both concering the 10.5 cm guns. Be that as it may, the question is: what bearing does this have on the issue of the "nerfing" of premiums in general? Now tell me how wrong I am about the many direct and indirect "nerfs" the GZ was hit with since 2019, or some of the other directly/indirectly "nerfed" premiums for that matter. Let us focus on GZ to avoid becoming side-tracked. How many direct/indirect nerfs did the GZ get starting in 2019? Focusing on the major ones, here is this one from version 8.0 (removal of Hydro Acoustic Search): This one from version 8.11: Then there is this one from version 0.82: Note: the balancing is now "finished" according to the WOWS Development blog. This one from version 8.4 (hitting GZ most because her low hit point aircraft rely mostly on speed as their "edge"): This one from version 9.2: And to that we might add the upcoming version 9.6 AP bomb "nerf" that again will hit GZ most of all premium Carriers: Since you are so well informed on this matter: are the other "nerfed" premiums in WOWS also related to your aliens and that "secret plan" of yours that you alone are privy to? On second thought, maybe you are better off to keep all this to yourself because otherwise you may get in trouble with your alien friends. Goodness forbid that your aliens might intervene and prevent you from enriching the forum with ridicule!