G01ngToxicCommand0

Number of ships in port.

I mostly play cruisers an destroyers and I agree with OP but only because there are so many bad BB players out there that the good ones have to be able to solo carry and in the current firestorm meta that is not possible. And no a BB would not be able to be burned down by HE spamming destroyers or even heavy cruiser as HE would only set superficial fires but I know; game balance, which Wargaming could not have implemented in any other way as that would have been too advanced, complex and too taxing for the hardware for the Potato PC group that WG wants as their primary source of customers with the retarded logic that the players with the worst performing PCs and who don't spend money on those would also be those that spend the most money on a game they have trouble playing to begin with... Also, having a meta where players are forced to use repair in order to stop flooding only to be set on fire/new flooding again without being able to do anything about ir untill repair is back from cooldown is just bad and gimmicky game design IMO and should have worked more like the damage model in Naval Action.

I'd rather see skillbased teams.

Your's is just as fine, I wouldn't have posted mine if I had seen yours

Technically speaking the Imperial German Navy never officially had battlecruisers; they had 'Großer Kreuzer' which served a completely different task than the british battlecruisers. The Großer Kreuzer's task was twofold: first as part of the scouting groups to provide the eyes of the Hochseeflotte and secondly, when the battle with the main enemy force(The Grand Fleet) was joined, to take their place in the battleline just like the Schlachtshiffe(transl. battleships) classes of ship and to be able to withstand the same kind of punishment and enemy fire like the latter. The Großer Kreuzer was built with heavy armour to ensure their survival as Germany would never be able to make as large a navy as the British thus ship survival was more important than sheer firepower in order to preserve the fighting strength of the Hochseeflotte. In short german Großer Kreuzer philosophy: Survivability>Speed>Firepower The british battlecruisers had 3 tasks: to provide a fast and hard hitting reaction force to be used in the defence of the British Empire's colonies and sea lines of communication by chasing down commerce raiders such as cruisers and armed civilian vessels, secondly to act in a scouting role as part of the Grand Fleet and thirdly to provide a flanking force for the Grand Fleet so that when a battle was joined between the Grand Fleet and the enemy, Hochseeflotte or other navies, they would encircle the enemy fleet from the van of the Grand Fleet while the enemy fleet was preoccupied with exchanging broadsides with the british battleline in an attempt to completely encircle the enemy battlefleet. They were never designed to take the place in the battleline as their armour was too light for that but to exploit that the enemy was already engaged with the more heavily armoured battleships in the hope that the enemy battleships would not notice them or chose not to fire at them with anything larger than secondary batteries. In short: british Battlecruiser philosophy: Firepower>Speed>Survivability From the British definiton of the battlecruiser the Imperial German Navy did not have battlecruisers but they were labelled as such due to a lack of a british definition of the german Großer Kreuzer type of ship. The later term 'fast battleship' would probably be more appropiate.

Two famous shipwrecks - one nurse the common factor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Jessop That argument you posted is invalid as it can be as it has the flawed logic that a player is immune to chaos, entropy and random events; thus being able to exert absolute control over the events they find themselves in all the time. No one has that power. Now the negative influence a player can exert on the outcome of the battle will always be greater than the positive one, as it takes more work and energy to turn chaos into order by reducing the batlle entropy the negative players causes than causing chaos and the increase of entropy. Entropy being the same as chaos and can be players doing some irrationel, unexpected or comepletely random actions that places their team in an unfavourable position; DDs being just outside the objectives and spamming torps or hunting for enemy CVs instead of helping the team scout for enemy DDs for example. On the other if a player has a winning streak is that very statement used as an argument for showing how good a player is performing? No it isn't because we all know that a single person can not win teambased games singlehandedly against the full enemy team and that player influence on the battle/game is determined by the enemy's and the player's team's actions. If a single player had so much influence on a battle that they could singlehandedly win against a full enemy team in any game or battle that person would be a god and not a man. Thus winning streaks are also the result of chaos and entropy, rather in this instance the chaos and entropy the enemy team is experiencing, due to the bad decisions the enemy players, is just larger than the player's meaning that the amount of work the player is putting into the game has a larger effect and influence on the game's or battle's outcome than if the player was on a team filled with lesser performing players than him or herself. In short: if there are too great a number of bad and below players or extraordinary bad or destructive players on a team it will not be possible for even the best players to affect a positiv outcome of the game thus making the age old statement about the common factor completely invaild.

They probably are; there do seem to be more and more players in the game that are completely unresponsive in chat or when using the map or verbal commands for calling for help or trying to alert the team's attention to map/battle developments that need immidiate attention. Can't say for sure if those players are bots or just that bad players though.

Find someone who knows the game better than you play some divsion so that other player can see what your mistakes might be. Do some talking and reflections on how to change yoru playstyle and approach to playing the game and it should make you a better player. You can always look me up in the game if you want to and I have a TS3 server running for discussing.

Spotting for other ships in the game's timeperiod wasn't even theoretically possible back then due to lacking the required technology, in praxis it only became possible with modern day datalink and battlefield management technology. So while it is period correct for radar controlled gunnery for individual ships to be possible, the current mechanics where ships can spot enemy targets for friendly ships out of line of sight of the enemy is not.

USS Johnston used radar controlled fire while hiding in a rain squall during the battle of Samar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_off_Samar#American_destroyer_and_destroyer_escort_counterattack so yes it did happen.

I've got a 1/350 SMS König model kit with photoetched upgrades and brass barrels waiting to be assembled, it is indeed a beautiful ship

Well you obviously haven't received 1.000 containers yet and the probability of getting one is very low and as the player can have a maxium of 3 each day that translates to about 1.1k containers/year a player should expect to receive something than less than 10SC/year so..

No ship class is supposed to be able to solo push, this is a team work based game where the team that is the best at working together wins. It is a mistake to believe that any one ship should be able to solo push without getting sunk in the process and if only people would understand that both the game experience for all involved and the level of toxicity on this very forum would improve quite substantially.

Which is why I stopped playing ranked and why I am a proponent for 'team deathmatch' game mode only in this game as the game mechanics and meta is simply to complex or abstract for the majority of players for various reasons. At least playing only to shoot the enemy's ships should be a simple enough concept for all to accomplish.

You can't fight stupid or force cowards to be brave, please stop your efforts in futility, it will just turn you into a desillusioned misantropic bitter old git like me.

Not XP wise they don't - what they show is that you farm damage rather than help where it is neeeded - WR>XP>Damage which is the best order of checking how good a player is with a certain kind of ship.

Ad 2e) It is actually called a division due to the limited size of maximum 3 ships, flotilla was usually used, in the game's era, when the ships are torpedo boats or torpedo boat destroyers of larger formations but any type could be named flotilas if the formation was large enough https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_(naval) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_battle_at_Jutland

I've set up a clan Team Speak Server: ts3server://85.236.107.44?port=10117 No password.

What I was referring to is a complete manual way of dropping bombs and torps just like the way we aim guns and that the player drops the ordnance immediately when pushing the mouse button and not the way it is now, where the player picks an area on the map then clicks the button and waits for the strike aircraft to reach that area and then drop their weapons. In short I want the player to be the pilots themselves so that flying the aircraft squadrons with the mouse and/or WASD and dropping bombs and torpedoes with its own reticles for divebombers and torpedobombers will be more in common with the rest of the game than the RTS game in the game it is now if that makes sense?

I'd really like to have manual aiming of the strike planes similarly to aiming the artillery/torpedos so that it will be up to the player exactly when and where the weapons are released with RNG introduced as well. I really miss the feeling of player agency when using carriers which is primarily why I rarely play them - last time I played a carrier was when the GNB was running..

Reminds me of this:

Invite sent and welcome to the clan FYI, I had to buy a new gamer PC as the old one died on me on saturday, SATA ports - all of them, graphics card and SSD due to a possible power surge in december and then a gradual decline in performance and loss of SATA ports untill finally nothing worked and just today I finished assembling and reinstalling the last hardware. I am reinstalling WoWS today but will probably not be online tonight. I will see you later for divsion play

For once I had a great 100% weekend with quite a good winning streak - then my PC died on me saturday evening so now I have to buy a replacement...

Tell that to Leander, she doesn't care.

quoted post removed Poor attempy of trolling, however; do not sail into torpedos.