it3llig3nc3

I noticed this trend of realistic weekly missions as well. Let's hope they fixed the concept and it will continue like this. However I'm more worried that perhaps the top mission designer guy is on vacation for two weeks and the substitute dude did not get the right memo as what to do.... :-D

You made an excellent good point. I completely forgot about the Tier VIII premium releases recently (Alabame) and the upcoming US DD...! You may have a point of having WG choosing Tier 8 this time again... While I guess you made this comment as a joke, it strike me as an idea of having to play RANKED battle concept with fixed ships only. that would be interesting and MM would no longer be an issue. Imagine a Benson only RANKED season.

Tier 2 is Tachibana for me Of course with 19 skillpoint captain.

Well... you may be right, but what if they come with the SuperBuffed Hood and make the next Ranked Season Tier VII again? Wicked WG :-D eh? Yes I want to try the Tier IX. Black is there of course for the players who earned Rank 1 5 times. By the time I get to Rank 1 they will be gone for good enjoying their 6th (or 7th) win and won't disturb the scene Missouri is practically the only publicly available Prem for the tier, but I do not think it can have such a huge edge. I can see going with Tier VI from the community perspective but I do not see any motivation from WG's perspective to choose that over other options. However if you remember the last Ranked season's so called RANK1 reward battle tier it was Tier V... So Wicked WG may have been thinking about making a Tier V Ranked Season? :-D Who knows.... Yes last ranked season was geared toward the prems, no doubt. And again the upcoming premiums are mostly will be launched in tier VII. Wargaming admitted that the last Ranked season was the most successful in terms of participation and number of players reaching Rank 1 Since WG almost abandoned releasing premiums for Tier VIII I'm worried about their Wickedness to make another "Prem Showcase Tier 7 Ranked Season" ***** The only additional thinking I have if WG wants playerbase to work on the Bismarck campaign in RANKED. (BTW: what does the PTS says about battle types for the Bismarck campaign? Random only?)

Grinding Captain for the Brit cruiser line is difficult, because no Brit premiums are "working" efficiently with the skill-set required for the standard cruiser line (short fuse AP specialist smoke hiding torpedo ships) My strategy was to grind with the standard Brit cruiser line one captain and use all flags to boost captain skill process. I have Belfast but when I tried to use the standard Brit cruiser configured captain on that it made the gameplay inefficient. (I did not like it at all) By the time you get to the Minotaur (if you do not skip (FreeXP) some ships you will have a decent captain around 17/18 skillpoint. Grinding the rest in Minotaur is fun if you like the style of the Brit cruiser line - I'm not a good player, especially in Minotaur but I like the ship very much. Another way of Captain Grind - if you already have at least 1 19 skillpoint captain, then configure it and put it on a prem ship and play a lot with it. It will gain FreeCaptain XP that can be allocated to any other captain later. This way you can develop captains of any nation even without actually playing them a lot. Last and most expensive way (NOT recommended, but technically possible) to convert your FreeXP to Captain XP.... )))) Wargaming will LOVE YOU! forever.

This is the statistic of the RANKED seasons so far: season 6 ( 2017/02/11 - 2017/03/24 )season 5 ( 2016/10/02 - 2016/11/14 )season 4 ( 2016/06/10 - 2016/07/25 )season 3 ( 2016/01/06 - 2016/02/17 )season 2 ( 2015/11/20 - 2015/12/23 )season 1 ( 2015/09/17 - 2015/10/29 ) Based on this I cannot really make any reasonable speculation. Last year pattern was that there was a winter/springtime (S3) and then a summer one (S4) and then a winter one (S5) There were 3 seasons in the year. this year so far we had one - say winter season (S6) most certainly there will be one at the last quarter of the year so the question is when will WG time the "middle" season? Since there is a lot going on now in promo: Hood, Kaga, Bismarck campaign and the recent Clash of the Elements my guess is they will delay the next Ranked season to June most probably... Ohh, and going by WG logic it most probably will be Tier 8 (although my silent hope that it will be Tier 8 and Tier 9 for the final 5 ranks. Tier 9 would be interesting to play in)

It is strange to get 19 pink battles for a CoOp team kill. I quickly wanted to look up the official TK rules on the forum, but when inside the EULA the TK link took me to a page where World of Tanks TK was discussed with "Blue" status. Any moderator or Warship people can point us to the official rule description of the TK system in place in WoWs?

Guys, a question. I accumulated 54 containers (unopened) during the past few months. I can't remember correctly but there might be 2 SC in them. Haven't opened yet. There were a few that was auto-delivered by the system when I forgot to pick up at the end of the day. Most of them were picked by myself: either "More Luck" or "More Signals and Camos". Typically I picked one "Luck" and one or two Signal+Camo one each day I played. So the question: is it better to open all of them at the same time one by one or maybe create some batches of 10? How is the randomization works here in your experience? Has the container's content already decided when I picked them, or WG will randomize the content at the moment of OPENING them? (I'll report the result of the openings here of course once it is done)

I have a bit different point of view on this dilemma of Warships being less interesting than Tanks: While it is certainly true that WoT is much simpler to play for an average Joe, mostly because of its fast paced action (vs. Warships where mistakes shows very late compared to when the players makes them --> snowball effect), there is another key element to the success of Tanks, that is the Clan Wars and the entire "industry" that is built upon the concept. Fact is that if a player plays WoT well it can earn enough internal funding to have decent premium at no real money cost. (grind tanks --> join a clan --> play clanwars --> earn more XP/credit AND earn Gold) Overall if you play a lot of WoT you can get in-game advantages like ones using real world money. However in Warships this is not true. Warships is a money grab and no matter how much you play you can never get to a "status" than in WoT with internal game income and premium content for it. While in WoT there is huge purpose to grind a Tier X tank, in Warships you have only the pride, but thats it. And I believe this difference in motivational system makes almost 200,000 players to play WoT at peak hours at the EU server and only around 30,000 in Warships. Flamu's test is eye opener, however the raw power increase that the DEF AA consumable gives to the ship will be less evident: during the reload time of the consumable the ship is still vulnerable, and also the short range AA bubble can be mitigated by torp bombers making far drops - the Hood will be a slow turning, maneuvering plus very long so it will eat torpedoes for sure... , When it comes to WINRATE I suggest you look at iChasegaming's video on Youtube about the statistics of World of Warships. In short: looking ONLY at one indicator does not provide a reasonably fair and objective picture. ====== Personally I still agree with the original idea of this thread that WG is going a bit "wild" with premium ships recently. However I'm less worried about the Hood in terms of being OP, for me the main issue with this ship is that WG does not give it the necessary respect it deserves as a warship in naval history. My greater and most worry is now focused on the Kaga: as what I hear it will be a carrier geared towards easy play with big impact. Honestly I do not see this the good way of fixing the carrier class problem in the game.

I belived the very same thing until I came across this: https://thewarshipspodcast.simplecast.fm/episodes/68121-episode-36-warships-math-with-sub-octavian fast forward to the last 2 minutes and listen to what WG says about carriers. Eye opener!

When I say the game is "broken" I do not implicate that it cannot be played - perhaps I used the wrong term. Broken to me better means "out of balance". I have made several comments about this in other threads but in essence I attribute to this "out of balance" state symptoms like the Battleship plague. I view the game and ship classes as an "ecosystem" in which each class is a predator and a prey at a same time. In this ecosystem carriers were assumed to be take part - WG said itself that they envisioned 10% of player-base playing them actively that means roughly 1 carrier pair in each Random Battle. Since carriers are not liked they are absent. so one predator left more hungry and one prey happy. Think about it in the old classic way: when there are less fox in the forest rabbits are happy but ultimately they over populate and it becomes bad for everyone. --- I wont argue about the RTS style as it is a personal point of view and I see that others are sharing this - including WG who explicitly advertised the new control method as "RTS like". ---- Last but not least I would like to draw attention to all carrier enthusiasts to this podcast: https://thewarshipspodcast.simplecast.fm/episodes/68121-episode-36-warships-math-with-sub-octavian If you are interested in only the CV part, then listen to the very last 2 minutes only: in this SubOctavian from WG admits that carrier class has big problems and their 2017 plans are to try to deal with them. To me this is the first positive good news about the subject for months. I hope it will hold true.

I'm devastated about how Hungarians represent themselves on this forum. My only fear is that it is not the bottom yet... I have reported this thread in the morning but it seems that WG moderators does not care a lot about this. Wonder why...

Looking and commenting another thread today I realized that this once popular thread about carrier class haven't received attention for almost a year now. This simple observation shows how bad shape this ship class is - and the unfortunate fact that nothing really happened for one year that can be said improvement to the class. Adding to the salt is the upcoming information about the new premium carrier Kaga and it's design. Regarding this I strongly remember a one year old Wargaming communication in which the carrier class was touched: When a question came about the carrier class and the Saipan premium carrier the product manager stated that since WG is not happy with the situation of the carrier class they do not plan to release further premium carriers until the class is improved as they do not want to cause bad experience for paying customers. The surprise to me is that now the Kaga is about to get released, however the carrier class is more broken than it was - and the recent control scheme update (left click / right click) helped nothing at all in this. So the question comes: does WG think that the carrier class is now "fixed" so a premium carrier can be released expecting "good player experience"? Or Kaga is just going to be a money grab with its over-powered torpedo bomber squads?

First of all this topic reminds me of the long forgotten predecessor of the subject; http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/43214-aircraft-carriers-need-an-overhaul/page__fromsearch__1 Since almost everything has been already said on the subject (except from WG's official opinion about the detailed suggestions) I keep it short: 1. CVs are (should be) important in the game as it was DESIGNED with this ship class as part of it. I consider the game now broken because of the badly implemented carrier class that practically screws up the "Rock-Paper-Scissor" concept of the ship class design 2. CV is a difficult ship class, because its VERY EXISTENCE is CONTROVERSIAL. Carrier class was the main disruptor (game changer) class during the real World War 2 as their evolution and presence changed naval strategy and thinking completely. Therefore it is "built into" the situation that the seamless integration of this class into this game is a huge problem. There is no easy way out of this. My problem here is that the way I understand WG's communication they not only misinterpret the problem but also they do not see any real (and good) solution. This happens despite the fact that community members have listed several different ideas more than a year ago! 3. My personal opinion is that WG must make a decision regarding the future of this class: they either make it more "epic" and "first person experience" (i.e. manually fly the planes and take actions simulator like) OR they make it more RTS style (more flexible unit management, action handling, etc...). The kind of middle ground they are now at is - in my opinion - is doomed to fail, and if we're not lucky it will take the entire game with it into failure.

Well I gave a try to the IV step, respec-d my Tirp and Yama and their captains for secondary build, but have not been able to get even close to the 125 secondary kills. Getting close caused me burn to death most of the time. Nice mission but very situational. I had more chance with Tirp, but most of the time I was in tier IX and X battles - and once I even got a detonation from a side torp.... luck was not on my side this weekend.

Another new thread again on this - too bad that many forum members avoid the SEARCH button. as far as I see and have been discussed numerous times it won't happen. too bad.

Well this is a thread WG must study closely - this situation what happened with our dear new player AronForce is why many experienced forum members made proposals to limit the use of the Brit tech tree back when this was launched, especially for new players. Brit ships are magnets for new players because it is a very famous nation for anyone who heard even a little about naval warfare - therefore it is an obvious first choice. But here at WoWs Brit tech tree and their cruisers are designed to be "expert handled"... So dear WG - at least make a message box into the client that when a new player (say less than 1000 battles) starts to use the Brit tech tree they get a warning that this line of ships has high difficulty!

You might be hitting the nail here with the GTX980. I checked the performance issue on a different machine this weekend (laptop) and there were no noticeable performance degradation. But again WG could test this out easily in a few hours based on the pile of information to reproduce the issue. Why not they take action?

My statement MAY be false if you consider human factors are strong, especially the individual's power to influence the battle result. However if we consider randomness then we assume that there are 2 x 12 players selected for each side for the battle from the "random pool" of available players waiting in the queue so the individual strengths / weaknesses are evened out. Therefore in each team there will be "good" and "bad" players, so on team level the difference must be smaller and therefore the chance for one team to win the battle on average should be around 50%/50% My point about the streak (series of winning or losing) was different. Analyzing a series of individual events mathematically is more complex than looking at just the simple odds of one event. If I ask you this: what are the chances that you will get 10 times in a row BLACK at the roulette table what would be your answer? :-)

Since it's a Duca thread I'll just say that there is evidence that it was difficult sometimes to get a Win with Duca during this weekend. As for the statistics

Since I played more recently I'm starting to see some patterns as when the FPS drop happens. (see my prev. post for reference to the issue) It is evident that under "normal" sailing FPS is in the 50-60 range. Two situations can bring my config to its knees that has not happened before 0.6.4: 1. extreme brawling situations: lots of islands, ships and torpedoes around me in relatively close range. 2. any kind of air-raid taking place inside a 4km radius (2 or more squads) In settings I tried to reduce the level of detail from High to Medium to see if it helps, but it did not. It looks to me that there is some bottleneck in the calculation "power" to resolve complex situations where there are lot of detailed textures and objects needs to be taken care of. What I do not understand why is it happening now and not before? Did they change object models? (increased polygon numbers) or added some high res textures that are not optimized yet?

I see the various opinions and without comments I respect them all. Here is mine. To illustrate, first I see WG's behavior towards this community like the Russians act in this movie clip: They do very bad things for the good cause. WG's culture is not a good fit for Europe an the EU office fails to explain this to the HQ. Evidence is the size of the player community on the EU server (stagnating). Even more evidence is the size of the US community. We Europeans are more open to tolerate the Eastern "Top-Down: I'm the Boss I know what is good for you" attitude. Americans are less tolerable, hence the US community size is HALF the EU despite the fact that the population is roughly equal. But even with this I'm a warship enthusiast and the good cause justifies me to buy premium ships and doublons and Prem Time. The way I look at these costs, spending is that it is an ENTERTAINMENT cost - I have a monthly budget for that and WoWs "competes" for the money I spend on cinema, concerts, books and other activities I enjoy (mostly) to do in my free time. Money spent on this game is a money sunken immediately. No expectation for future "value" or anything. It's like a restaurant: you hungry go in, eat a good (or bad), pay and leave.

I'm not going to accuse anything or anybody, but just show facts from last night: This was 10 loss in a row out of which 5 was with the Duca. Out of those loss games with Duca, 2 was Tier VIII and 3 VII (Duca was never top tier) What is even more remarkable is how the loosing streak ended: With Duca the battle finally become a Tier VI battle, in which I absolutely played bad (managed to navigate into crossfire and died early), therefore it was not me but the team who won (for me) As for the Minotaur it was the Two Brothers map in which 5 of the enemy ships decided ("for fun") to sail through the middle channel at the beginning of the game. Of course they were all destroyed. So in this case it was not our team who managed the WIN, but the enemy managed to lose all by itself. Go and talk to an expert or PhD in Mathematics and Statistics and have them calculate the chance of having a 10 battle loosing streak all by random and see what they say.

I just repeat my post that I placed in the Current Update comment section - that is obviously a ghost town... Maybe it helps recognizing the issue? --------------- I have never had performance issues with WG titles before this patch, but now the graphic performance went terribly wrong. My confing supposed to be a high-end with Core i7 5930 CPU, 16GB RAM and Nvidia GeForce GTX 980.not to mention the SSD storage. Before this patch I was able to experience 55-60FPS rate in Maximum setting in 1680x1050, but now it is peaking around 40-45FPS with drops to 20-25 mostly when ships are showing up close range or zoomed in. Also the air attacks and AA activity do cause the same. I tried to lower some settings to Medium with no effect. It is to be noted that the new port while beautiful produces the same issue: 20-30FPS performance when it is selected. I guess some optimization was missed from the patch or some new feature is taxing the graphic calculations, Truly hope it will get fixed soon as in its current state the quality of performance is garbage. ------------

knowing WG they may make this buffed Tirpitz available only for the NA server (aka "to develop the playerbase"), while in EU they actually NERF both Tirpitz and Bismarck in such way that they remove secondaries and torpedoes and replace them with paddles --> feature being you can paddle your ship if the engine is down...