ilhilh

The lower/mid tier USN BBs can be a trial for people who like speed and range, but they are still capable ships with the general improvements in armour and number of barrels (Fuso/NM being the exception barrels wise). Having climbed to the top of both trees there is not 1 tier where either ship seemed massively outclassed by the BB of the other nation. Different yes, but not outclassed. You mention your 4k games but in that you've only got to 1 tier 8 BB. If we compare your 2 tier 7 BBs you actually get higher ave damage in your Colorado than your Nagato (same for Wyoming). And then your ave damage in the NC is down from the Colorado and this really shouldn't be the case. You are a decent player by anyone's standard but you are not getting the most out of the NC - I would hazard to guess that you are trying to use the NC how you want to play battleships as opposed to fitting your playstyle to the ship but that is speculation since I haven't seen you play it. Either way, the NC represents the most radical shift in stats from the predecessors and you have not made the adjustment despite a healthy number of games in it.

It would be nice if the reports could be effective, for example, at getting bots banned but the example given by the OP is essentially someone not playing the game how the OP wants them to and this is not a bannable offence. He might have lost count of the number of games where 1 player firing over an island has lost the game but on the flip side I've lost count of the games where I have had to turn back and defend (my play-style is aggressive - I am not a camper) only to get called a camper/coward/noob only to finish top of our team and by some margin. I know how this happens - they get to a point where they are swarmed and die. They get angry. They look at the mini map. They see someone like me near spawn with 0 kills (and god help you if you are in something like a Tirpitz because they will defo assume you just bought your way to tier 8). Insta-blame. They have no idea what I've done for the past 12 minutes of the game, they have no idea what has either pushed me back towards spawn or threatened it enough to make me return - all they see is that I'm alive. People are irrational. Players spend most of their time in a game focussed on their own play and as such don't usually have much of clue what other players have been up to all game - this makes them totally unsuited to judging whether someone should be banned. And do you think banning someone for sitting behind an island will make them sit there and go "gee, I must have been playing badly, I should probably spend my ban period watching youtube clips and then in future do whatever the shoutiest person tells me to do"? Not to mention the abuse the system is open to now from people who are bitter that they got schooled. I watched someone go mental in chat the other day and report one of my team mates because the guy detonated him. He even apologised, but because a game mechanic kicked in and killed the enemy he felt it was ok to insult our player for about 2-3 minutes and report him. C'mon!

Those are some nice enough results but if you remove the consumable costs and you are making a profit of 70-100k in each of those games at tier 8 on a free account. I don't see that as a problem. Hell, profit would have been around 170k/game running premium - that is decent credit gaining for a silver ship.

Saw JG4_Skylon in his Molotov... didn't get chance to say hi as he died first

Since you want to cut him out of the discussion on stats lets look at yours... less than 60k ave damage in your Montana? Simply not enough. Daki has had his say but caps and farming DDs are not exactly the staple of a BB diet. You need to do more. I don't have top tier DD but I can see that you are below ave damage in your Gearing... but you have a very limited number of games in it so you are probably still adjusting to it slightly.

Let's see. You post your captain loadout It might not have been an overly constructive response but my reply should have suggested I didn't agree with your choices... Apparently it didn't suggest that because all you can figure out from the reply is that I'm trying to up my post count. My bad. I over-estimated. Yea, my reply was a bit rude but if you are going to make a stupid response and make me explain things further then that might happen - I'm a grumpy person. If you want to take the high-ground on my tone/attitude then you really should refrain from comments like "did someone smash your face [in yet]", "or [don't] you go out enough for that to happen" and "you clearly think you know it all". As for knowing it all, if you refer to my previous post I did actually explain to you why setting up your captain that way was a waste of time with figures that supported my argument. I will add further clarification - vigilance and high alert are far better options than manual AA - this is because 100% increase to crap AA still results in pretty crap AA particularly when you take into account the number of guns the Tirpitz has that are of the correct caliber to benefit from the skill. Where I'm from we say "you can't polish a turd" and that applies to Tirp AA.

I like how you read the earlier posts about spam and decided to translate that to my reply being spam. It was almost intelligent. I could have added 'what a stupid use of skill points' but I thought that would have been self-evident from just writing Eww. EDIT: If you want me to show you why it is a waste just look at our plane kill stats - in your Tirp you average 2.86 plane kills/games and yet me specced for brawling/survivability averages 3.16. I kill more planes per game by virtue of being able to stay alive longer in games, and whilst I'm alive (and shooting down planes) I'm able to keep shooting ships as well.

Ewwwwwww.

Someone already mentioned the drip feeding planes to the Montana. but also, was it early in the game when his AA was still all in tact? My Montana specced for AA can skill take hits when focussed by a CV... p.s. feel free to write a whole response and then hit 'post' rather than have 5 replies in a row... I'm not in that much of a rush for your answer. EDIT: lol Mister_Greek beat me to it. You shouldn't be over 50% of a thread on your own...

I don't think you need to prefix your thread [EU] on the EU forums...

I never came back to this because the options weren't there for none when I first looked but my votes: DD: Blyskawica (although not sure my captain is up to it). CA: None (I'm not good enough in them) BB: Potentially Colorado as 1) I have my NC captain who is excellent and 2) I quite enjoyed it - more so than the Nagato... CV: Hiryu or Saipan (but I need 100k exp to get the 5th skill on Saipan). So I have plenty of options although 2 have captain issues so perhaps I will end up restricted a bit more (I also own Pensa, Myoko and Mahan but I don't think they are suitable). What I like is that I have more class flexibility than the first season when tier 7 was top and this means I can hopefully use something that fits whatever meta develops quite well. Having got to rank 10-11 from last season I expect I will have to do some 5-6 bracket games and Fuso is my ship of choice. If I somehow manage to die really early and want to play another then Gremyayschy will probably get a run out as she should be able to pull her weight despite the tier difference.

If something has a % chance of happening it will happen more on some occasions than others. Why do they need to fix levels before a game? The fact that games 'appear' differently fits exactly into the format of RNG. As for 'in some games it is much harder to get citadel hits' perhaps you are fighting a better opponent... perhaps things like distance to target are not the same, bearing of the ship, target ship class and your own ship are not the same. And all of this is before the RNG of dispersion, fire chance and other factors. Your own expectations will make you think things are basically the same when the reality even similar fights can have drastic and crucial differences. I probably shouldn't be even engaging with this topic because my general experience (bias?) is that people who are so certain of the 'obvious' fixing with no actual proof are generally not the kind of people who will shift their view whatever counterargument they are presented with. All I will add, is that if I thought the game really deliberately manipulated games to determine outcomes then I'd sack it off and find something else to play.

I don't mind them selling it, but I'm with JapLance that I don't understand why they wouldn't just sell the Kamikaze instead of the R version... or the Fujin since they both exist.

I'm not sure you need to be 'rich' to have a laptop that runs a decent resolution...

And yet plenty can. My Tirpitz stats are actually slightly lower than both the Amagi and NC. If you want to earn it you will have to go for her sister when the KM BB line arrives.

Why do you need appreciation from your team? Just do your thing.

But games are not meant to be a coin toss. If you really expect MM to be able to make each game entirely balanced so that if repeated the opposite outcome was equally likely then you are a bit crazy. There might be an argument that MM could match things better particularly on ship weighting but depending on who is captaining each ship it is only half the story. p.s. if you have more loss streaks than win streaks then perhaps you should pay more attention to your hidden stats.

I think the Atlanta in experienced hands will be hard to deal with. That RoF for DD hunting, that AA for keeping swathes of the sea clear of enemy planes and the gun arcs for pissing off anything from out of sight if the situation arises. For all of the criticism it gets generally it might really shine in a DD-heavy ranked set up where it is top tier.

I expected this might be the case and it does make BBs less attractive if DDs are 3-5 players on each team. I can buy the Colorado and put a very good captain in it if it looks to be a viable option... but I will play some games in other ships first to decide if it is worth it or not. Whilst I have the Mahan it is not the best option and my Blyskawica is pretty new... nowhere near to having the 15 skill points for concealment expert and that might make it harder for me to be effective in it. CVs might be kind of useful if that is the meta. If DDs are a problem then keeping them visible will be important. I have a 5 skill Hiryu and I'm about 100k exp from 5 skills on my Saipan which I'm pushing quite heavily. I am actually considering making CVs my primary source of progress in the 6-7 brackets.

WG has plenty of concurrent missions. For example, look at the boot camp missions running currently. As another example look at the last set of ARP missions where there were 2 running consecutively. If they had split up damage and hits into 2 separate tracks then all they would have done is increase the amount of each you would have to attain in order to complete the mission. With all of these things they look at the 'difficulty' (time needed would be more accurate) in relation to the reward and then they set the targets.

Perhaps they should make all 4 goals available at the same time? Lol. It is slightly annoying it is only main battery hits but lets face it... TB and DB hits are relatively low in number anyway - if you want to complete those missions then they are entirely unsuitable ships for it. ...and as soon as you make it for torps/bombs as well the next request will be for secondaries... and then I'll complete the missions in my Yamato only :p

The rudder shift time might make it a tasty target for CVs... in fact for the DDs too. Get your average lemon who only turns when the torps get spotted and it will be possibly too late with that thing.

Seems that maybe appeared in the OP. Ranger has to be a horrible choice. I hope I see plenty... but I won't be using one. Hiryu should be the best option but Saipan will be no slouch. Whilst the Hiryu might have more squadrons, more planes in the air and more chance of DoT, the Saipan boasts faster and tougher planes coupled with a fast turn around due to low plane numbers/squad. This allows you to a) get more attack runs in and b) have a much better chance of intercepting the enemy when they get spotted. I will probably try both but, it is unlikely that I can get the 5th skill for my Saipan in time and I feel having 4 fighters/squad would really help the Saipan. My above analysis is using the 2/2/0 which realistically is the only decent option for Saipan but if someone wants to make the case for 3/0/1 then they maybe could - my Mahan got killed in 2 sorties by a 9-bomber DB squad the other night (no damage from other sources)... although last night 1 hit my Blys and only did about 3k dmg. Couple that with 3x4 tier 9 fighters would be a serious obstacle to getting your damage in if you faced that. Totally not an option without 5th skill - probably a terrible option with it!

Better argument? 1) He makes out like it has changed. It hasn't. 2) He just is distinctly average. The problem isn't the ship. He manages 55k ave damage. Which is very average and as such he doesn't like it. 2.5) Following on from that he averages 59k in the NC which although above the Tirp it is only slightly above it and is still distinctly average. He claims tirp is far worse but his contribution in each ship in terms of damage is very similar (and lets face it damage is a pretty handy indicator for BBs). 3) The fact is that it is a competitive ship. All tier 8 BBs are nicely balanced in comparison to each other as the statistics show.