nerderklaus

That is another big topic. Usually attacking who is effectively your most dangerous enemy gets the TK functions on you and justified, adequate complaints about them get you muted which is another ridiculous LGBTBS move by WG. Not only can such assholes ruin the match, but with this BS they even can effect you after the match. This reminds me of all those retarded NC/Iowa/Monty players. Which ships did I see in clan competition tier 8 whenever I checked it? Amagi and NC. Though these people just sail broadside at 20-25km, have CV immunity from their overpowered AA, get much more than they should because of overpowered cannons and when another BB tries to flank them and pulls off the surprise there still is the overpowered citadel lowering, but they complain about these ships being weak and succeeded with multiple injustified buffs. The kind of people who have thousounds of games, but still weren't in a single situation where they should have realized that 2/3 of the cannons being frontal on NC/Iowa is a major advantage when you play right. They probably think all three turrets rear would be ideal... Though, there are no complaining CVs, because CV are slowly and steadily vanishing... 30% is higher average on a Bismarck? How can I train my RNG to that degree, because I am usually fighting at closer ranges than other BBs with this and still the spread screws me below that number. Still, the range performance really is the longest lever in high tiers. You can try doing things on your own aggressively, but it's extremely dangerous. Not so much, because of torps, but rather because of the idiots in tier 10 ships most likely letting you down and their permanent camo+premium+flags making credit losses almost impossible for them... Yeah, these tiers and the maps are misdesigned, but the players in tier 10 are the biggest problem usually. That extrem powercreep and how retarded most tier 10 players are makes battletier luck far, far more important than it should be for tier 8 and 9 ships... Anyway, I kinda disagree... Divebombers, Divebombers, Divebombers, but the reduced carrier population, in particular in higher tiers, might give you some weight. Actually I wanted to make another rage thread about the gap between panicked manual and panicked auto drops being too small, but a discussion about that with all the BBabies who are already overchallenged when they need to macromanage two units... I guess you get what I mean.

Ohhh I missed too much replies to read all of this. Didn't expect so much... What about A-X-Y CA/CL/DD losing A or Drunkerque or RN BBs with quad+double frontal turret losing the quad? There is too much RNG in this generally, because such a turret loss early simply screws people far too hard. I think generally a lot of BB HE, not just RN is troublesome. Sometimes I do over 100 HE pens without fires in row as cruiser on ships without superstructure fires, but people with good RNG get at least one fire per salvo on RN BB on targets without previous fire. Though it feels like there is some stupid mechanic in play that makes tier differences matter in firechances as well. Are coming from chronical A rushers on Neighbors and Trap this is interesting to read. On top of this getting full HP deleted at high ranges while zigzagging is neither the victims fault nor the killers achievement, because that is all about the diceroll. Well, needing to entitle that to even with player performance proves the value of the ones who do... Emmm... If the USN BBs are put back to where it should be a Yamato with more acceptable pen would be in line as well. What really makes Yamato pointless currently is that Monty has the three extra-cannons, only slightly less damage per shot with same realod, excessive accuracy as well and the USN penetration properties. Though, even with imbalances within the BBs there are still obvious issues with the balancing between different classes which again justifies dragging all ships down by varrying degrees. Injustified Monty buffs, RNBBs and the retarded tier 10 maps actually give Kurfürst the hardest time currently in my oppinion, because other factors deny the ship playing to it's strength like a Bismarck still can. Still, Kurfürst is insane against most cruisers and DD. Though with other BBs getting unnecesarry buffs undone, guess who obviously would need to get adjusted to new circumstances then or generall for the sake of balancing of classes... Did you want USN BB to get lowered citadels with excessive AA and high range with far too high accuracy and punch as ultimate tool for broadsider sailing at 20+km? This is the closest to RN BBs and the excessive AP performance is not as easy to repair as fire damage. KMBBs at least have their main artillery which usually is far worse than other BBs (at least somewhat later in the line) combined with poor concealment, poor AA and generally their huge target properties. RN and USN BBs still are by far the worst when it comes to foolproof points for people who shouldn't be allowed to be toptier and who shouldn't get any points like the vast majority of Monty players. Who usually is the player who should get punished much harder than an intentional teamkiller, because of making his team lose with 20km camping? The vast majority of them is NC, Iowa or Monty and double standards favoring USN BBs look as if these players are treated as special need children like that BBaby asking for general BB buffs. Not saying these are the only duds, f.e. Minotaur has some literally mentally handicapped players as well. They run defAA instead of hydro for the one carrier each three games which usually is a tier 8 that is having a hard time against AA anyway, but the Shimmy that usually is present in every match can launch his AIDSspread into smoke. That short smoke cloud allows overlapping spreads against 15 torps with 20k+ damage each. Typical intellect of people who mostly play tier 10... Sadly tier 6 which seems to be the lowest on BS Ships is getting uptiered most of the time. One shell per FULL broadside (with secondaries) would be high for real BB standards... There would be many seriously broken mechanics with realisms like an exposed gunner KIA getting replaced by an inexperienced ensign or something like this and that new guy shooting all over the place.

There is too much consistency in this. On top of that things like my +2MM winrate being almost non-existent when there are bottom tiers in the other team each time as well. RN BBs and tier 8+ USN BBs are build around the noobplaystyle of BBs that are hiding in the corner or base. WG has the tools to prevent games like one team having one less DD and one less BB. Standard battles got returned to higher tiers after the game got better when they had been removed for a while. Cyclones now have an additional delay for people who didn't notice a timer that is up there for 5 minutes. There is a track record where different RNGs for different people would just be an ordinary entry like many other. Strangely the worst RNG screwjobs (f.e. 3 maximum dispersion salvos in row against a 2000HP ship) happen in games where the enemy team loses 0-3 ships... The spread of the results I get when playing exactly the same way simply is too much to be natural. I haven't heard of poker players having their results go all over the place despite of playing the same way... Awww, USN BBaby discovered. Tier 8+ USN BB would at least need to lose the sigma benefits and get higher citadels back. Friedrich and Kurfürst are some of the best torp targets in their tier, because of the length and poor manouverability. The hydro is more about countering smoke or taking a torp less, but based on the ship design they need to expose themselves to greater riscs of being torped which gets the dices rolled more often and eventually every that can go wrong will go wrong. The USN BB just sits back and does the same or more damage due to the cannon imbalance that is not being compensated for. In tier 8 and 9 German BBs have less frontal cannons. In tier 8 German BBs have one less frontal cannon. Damage per shell negates a lot of the reload advantage on some German cannons. The improved penetration and accuracy properties make the USN BB get more of it's potencial DPM translated into damage. The German secondary by itself isn't doing as much. You need to get the fires as well. It might be better than other secondaries, but still without a fire and with the weak main battery it's not so much. The USN BB getting two citadel on shots that would have overpenned with the KM BB should be enough to compensate for the secondary damage without damage caused by fire. Often in hightier matches every is trying to stay further away than secondary range anyway. The German BB might have benefits when being supported by teamplay, but out of all the tiers in WOWS tier 10 is the one where that is least likely. Otherwise everybody will get more HE damage into them than any other ship except for Yamato takes (even though this can is more effective at range). Which ship doesn't take a lot of HE damage in the current version of WOWS anyway? Permanent tier 10 camos are like when WOT destroyed their hightier economy with making it foolproof so that every idiot can play his one and only tier 10 all day without losing credits (on average). This in return is bad for ships that depend on a team playing together and good for something that can just sit somewhere on it's own. Might not be good for winrates, but hey in particular in tier 10 a lot of games have such imbalance teams (shipwise) that a single player can't change the result anyway. In the end there is the usual experience of being blamed on losses as aggressive top3 XP player by platoon-only players who only play FotM ships...

I mean this BS in random battles with rigged mechanics is getting too ridiculous. Basically I can play perfectly the same way and get recent stats ranging from orange in the rating up to super unicum and any recent WR randomly. However, what is suspicious? That range of results with perfectly the same gameplay already suggests either flaws in the stat system or suspicious activity by WG. I basically try dodging tier 10 games, because the are just camp festivals with most tier 10 players being worse than COOP bots (usually BBs, in particular NC, Iowa, Monty and Yamato). I finished the Dunkerque mission in COOP to compare. So most of the time I play the tier 6-8 range. It already starts with with at least 75% of the matches being +2MM recently. Then there is interesting things going on on top of that. Basically I tracked the following stats: Games with even amounts of all ship classes: 20% Games with my team having more DD and less cruisers: 10% Games with the enemy team having more DD and less cruisers: 60% Games with the enemy team having more DD AND more BB: 30% Games with the enemy team having less DD and less BB: 0 (true 0%, not rounded) Games with more Radars while having more cruisers: 0 Tier 6-8 range where most cruisers can't heal, often don't have the radar from their line yet and generally are usually inferior to either the utility and sneakyness of a DD or firepower and survivability of a BB. Having more BB AND more DD is ideal in this tier range obviously. However, more solid cap contesting or higher chances of killing enemy DD early so you get a vision advantage make life easier as well. I am absolutely certain that either there are dedicated noob protection mechanisms in some RNGs or some system that wants to keep people in pre-determined boxes statswise, f.e. my WOWS results more or less repeat the same cycle since last winter... Get to 54.0% winrate or above it with good recent stats and everything, but suddenly bad results despite of not playing different, because of very bad RNG (dispersion, battle tier, noob distribution, ship distribution) until I am dragged down, then again "climbin the ladder" with good recent values until getting closely to the limit of my pre-determined box and everything repeats itself while playing perfectly the same way all the time. The noobs now will act like there are no dedicated noob protection mechanisms or similar RNG rigs? Really? CV, Dive Bombers, compare manual drop and auto drop spread without debuff and with debuff, debuff = defAA/Fighters... Why isn't the autodrop spread remaining larger by the same percentage while debuffed? Such BS is just pissing off. I wouldn't play this game hardcore, but it has some nice properties to play from time to time. However, such stupid mechanics simply ruin it. Strangely that cycle of different result streaks with the same player performance started with some patch early 2016 where they announced "working on losing streaks". I now suspect that they wanted to protect people against losing streaks like people who play Monty most of the time as use it as white line sniper which in all fairness for the unlucky people to teamed up with them should be treaded like botting!

Your best case scenario, you inventing things in order to cover up for you depending on such functions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect More likely scenario, some mentally disabled former Blizzard fanboy zombie truly believing such stuff: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizophrenia After all WG's communities are where the bar is set for player failure and unsportsmanship... 100% of what I played within roughly a week. I didn't play more because this rigged [edited] and things like 30 BB AP hits CL boadsides, doing 30 overpens... Complete range? It's hard to say what people with platoons get, but WG certainly treatened the solo spread like they allways do. What I notice whenever I check profiles, because some particulary retarded AS USN CV pissed me off or some Edited BB player consistantly got spreads a cruisers wouldn't even dream off it looks like the things I complain about prevent these people from falling below 43% winrate. No idea what profiles that are mostly played by a bot get (stats hidden). Though some people who deserve nonstop-visits by the Phelps family will probably deny something as obvious as bots not being rare as well... And WG says the following things as well: -bots are not tolerated -all ships/tanks are balanced by the same standards -MM and other RNGs are not partial -all customers being appreciated evenly and that EU region isn't the to be abused cash cow -there truly is a support instead of just copy&paste bots (exception: biling support, obvious they manage finanancial transactions) I didn't compare the modes. I just compared the performance of most tier 10 players to the bots. Things like people with shimmy as most played ship who still don't know of radar and hydro or any ship with bad citadel sails a straight line broadside to the enemy solely relying on RNG noob bonus (a lot of Zaos are doing that as well, not just BBs)... It's not like there aren't dedicated balancing changes to make such players get away with who they are, f.e. many lines having an AA power creep at tier 10 or generally the AA on USN BB so that they are saver when sailing away from everyone else and relying on the firing range gap that shouldn't be there or at least not be as big as it is... Yes, that's the point. Though, it probably overchallenges most people here, because most WG players are like "I got three 40m spreads in at 20km in my German BB in row while the enemy had 250km spreads, because I am a good player" or being being forelast in XP and claiming that the 10-0 victory is because of them... Big problem though: Your forgot that bots even move in small groups or work together like the DD going to one cap, CA following and trying to support his DD against player DD. A BB even following them and trying to support it's CA against enemy CA/BB... You forgot another big part of what makes the bots better players than most tier 10 players WOWS still has the same issue that killed WOT back in 2015. Tier 10 is overfilled with the worst players and misdesigned economy prevents tier 10 from being cleaned when such people run out of credits. WG's customer base is full of people who have learning curves like playing a game and their skill going down with experience. Them being better as beginners than when they are after getting their one tier 10 ships and heading on to play it all the time. When you point out misdesigns in the game intended to protect such people they get carried by their shizophrenia to accuse others of confirmation bias. This post has been edited by the moderation team due to inappropriate remarks.

They obviously don't even try to be useful which is very obvious with how they ignore objectives usually. For educated people the objectives should be self-explanatory, but for others there is google and even an official WG wiki (ohh look what is there) that explains what the mode is about, but they still run in their corners. In some rigged games I am the only one who even tries to get to a domination cap zone (with enemies obviously contesting all of them with multiple ships each). This is the most elementary information about the game and easy to find out and official tutorials are provided. There is one "10/10 logic" and one "sarcasm 10/10 logic" here.........................................................................

As if official WG adverticing and 3rd party adverticing wouldn't make a change. WG stated "no nerfs except ones that concern the class or all vehicles as a whole" numerous times and by now they should be well aware of these statements ending up on all the typical blogs. WG certainly knows that they are lucky with some cashcows... After all there are people who buy some 100€ economy package monthly. They fucked up many things, but they are not retarded enough to risc cashcows like people who get credits for real cash, convert full lanes frequently and buy other things. Converting a tier 10 ships and having the permanent camo make the economy almost foolproof is a p2w that even comes with toptier guarantee. There you got a true P2W instead of ad hominem P2W. Nothing wrong with rewarding the people who keep the game running as everybody can get the premiums and the freeloaders wouldn't even have the game without investors.

Well, I mean I had accidents like unnecesarry deaths after estimating damage saturation improperly as well, but such things are far away from what we talk about here. We talk about people who don't even try to do it right. In case of damage saturation this means the game is probably pre-determined already when it could do something for them. Just an example... Anyway, there was some tutorial like this in WOT and it did things such as recommending autoaim while not mentioning that they should bring a decent stack of premium ammo to each battle, because of how bad HT design and bad map design add up in the game.

At the time of purchasing an individual premium I did have agreed to the EULA from at the time. There never was a true refund (cash opportunity) and false adverticing is a common reason to anull business. With relative terms you can get around that, but not with clearly defined terms. Did you maybe get too many kicks in the nuts or have you been born immune to them? Accuse me of entitlement when you motive is obviously power creeping bottom tiers while playing a tier 10 that gets toptier status all the time. Except for Hindenburg all tier 10 cruisers have an easy time dealing with Atago, BB are even stronger in the tier and intended to counter cruisers and get the power creep combined with useless toptier players when getting +2 MM as Atago...

Well, they made too many announcements to not directly nerf them. Changing this policy would cause trouble in one way or another. I am confident that our courts would consider that a justification for cash refunds, but changing the policy on future release premiums probably is another story. However, I am someone who knows how problematic lots of BB in higher tiers are and I think Nikolai is not as problematic as it is rumored to be. It's extremely vulnerable to DD and CV. There are some other ships that can be surprisingly good in that tier +/-1, f.e. Murmansk shell rain over islands. Someone who wants to sealclub would find another ship in case of Nikolai getting sigma 1.8 and less survivability against artillery. What I see as the real problem is that all premiums should be protected against +2 MM. It's just unacceptable when you pay for a tier 8 premium and every single battle is unplayable, because of lifeunworthy life in tier 10 ships.

Shame on anyone who thinks that tutorials change anything. The worst of the worst are entitled to not do anything wrong, because they play a Shimmy/Monty/Yamata/GKF and they still live in their corner when others have died in or close to a capzone.

I thought I am unlucky with two supercontainers in over 100 attempts. Well, some people in the loot thread certainly get much, much, more of them than me, but even I didn't get such a bad streak without SC as the OP.

Honestly, what is toxic are the people that make the own team scarrier than the enemy. The likes of this acting like "evil toxic people" when justified complaints are being posted is behaviour that results in getting knocked down and stomped on the ground when acting such audacious in reality. Depending on your you do it a mark with a knife might be left (f.e. "buck fifty"). What makes it even more audacious is that the complaints are usually watered down as if they are a compromise. Who truly should be called "toxic" gets proven when people have reports over for the justified complaints when actions like a BB camping in the corner should quickly drain all 7 daily reports. It's the typical scumbag move to only react to this while ignoring that kind of griefing and bots which should be number one priority. Hell, compared to this I wouldn't even mind cheaters being ignored, but hey in (WOT) teamspeak I was told by a couple of people that their "it's just a mod" never caused any "trouble" for the four years they used it. That is another topic though.

I kid you not some of these people give perfect broadside at ranges like 6-8km, get noobsaved by RNG on first salvo (1 overpen + remaining shots maximum dispersion when aiming mid-lenth, slightly above waterline), double cita on second salvo and they act as if there was some sort of laming, a hack or luck when the only thing considerable something like this was the first salvo...

I frequently get these 0 damage pens and overpens with AP on full HP ships as well... I didn't have this during Summer, but suddenly after a couple of months without ships it was pretty damn common.

Emmm, that actually is extremely good to some of the teams I got today, f.e. a match with lots of BBs and all but one random BBs in my team got steamrolled (quckly killed without doing damage to them) by enemy BBs who constantly give broadside... In particular the random Monties today were extreme...

Because the purpose of this certainly are some of the missions...

Honestly you post looks like someone who knows of his inferiority complexes, but tries to pretent being something else. Based on your education I must tell you that an inferiority complex is justified with the education to compensate the deficite being the only cure. BTW this is the accusation that people make. WG cherrypicking input from people like you who prove themselves of not having creditibility. Everyone starts as a mislead sheep, but bad actions as a result of being mislead still are bad actions. Obviously, the argumenting there is SJW BS that expects game design to compensate for misplay. Your "arguments" look like RR in her last fight...

RIP 10char

I wish they would put it on all high tier ships so that these tiers become playable again instead of camp festivals that are mostly about ship selection and RNG.

Aren't even worse things happening with BBs and Shimmies? The only difference is that with a BB there are certain mechanics that are there despite of being denied by all SJWs compared to CV gameplay being relatively clean except for RNG in plane survivability or when every noob CA/CL runs defAA for the one carrier that is there in every 3rd game instead of using hydro for the 2-6 DDs that are there every game...

Doesn't Nagato get easier matchups battletier wise compared to what it used to get a couple of months ago? There is quite a lot of power creep with 356mm artillery vs 410mm artillery and armor protection of different tiers. Did the ship get a sigma buff recently as well?

It depends on what you want with cherry picked games. Obviously you can get most entertainment value out of these. In some games it's even common to make highlight montages. It will look a bit like off-topic while reading, but not when the post is done. An example for the sake of illustration: Yet, again this is oldschool hardcore. A player with more skill than all players of one of the best WOT clans combined and the game scaling on skills that are nullified by design in new games. There is some noob gospel out on these games not having tactical requirements, but they actually are much higher than the ones I remember from WOWS, random WOT or the WOT clanwars of which I won 90% as FC (would be higher, if some roster cleanup requests of mine wouldn't have been ignored and if the deputy didn't mess with lineups). Extreme games for proving points or reviews of ships? Not so much. Extreme games usually are the sum of luck, more failure than usual in the enemy team and more failure than usual in the own team. When I was new in WOT Kolobanov medals where explained to me like "You got to get enemies that are too stupid to group up and gangbang a single tank and a team that is stupid enough to get wiped by these enemies". The average/normal game when the ship is played right would simply be most representative. Still there are factors like RNG being able to completely make or break a game, f.e. BBs shooting the broadside of a cruisers at 10km can range from full HP deletion to complete RNG save from any damage. An example for the sake of illustration: MK People allways ask for Monty buffs, because of how it compares to two ships despite of being more than just potent against all others. MK often is said to be OP. I could make a video of my MK getting full HP deleted in a single monty salvo from more than 20km away or even distances that require that range upgrade. Based on that I could claim MK is useless even though it wouldn't be an argument despite of the fact that such luckstrikes truly should not happen. I only had one 200k+ game. Sadly I didn't have replay on for this and some other ones. I actually learned most from voulezvous, because the stuff he shows in commentaries is against enemies that do more than abusing game design flaws and relying on RNG like most pubbies.

Isn't retaining get cheaper, if he doesn't skill? So he basicly could corner camp with 0 skills, because the lightbulb is free now and get stronk kaptan in stronk yummytoe.

Big problem is I am at Leander in the regular line and have a Belfast. I don't know whether the rudder gets more solid later on. The big thing is Belfast having HE and the regular CL not, if you want perfect captains. Minotaur looks like it doesn't need EM, but Belfast is sort of in the 50/50 range when it comes to this one.