ilhilh

The OP makes it sound like the Tirp has changed from when he got it and I don't believe it has. Sure, the dispersion is not great but you should only be shooting at long ranges whilst you close in. A guy I have divisioned with calls it his Russian DD because that is how you should play it. EDIT: If you have 26% hit rate on it and I have 29%... is my Tirpitz different to yours?

It is the rank you achieved in Season 3 of Ranked Battles. Season 4 starts in about a week. EDIT: See http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/53036-ranked-battles-season-4/ for more info on the next season.

Need to have options for 'not playing this class'. No way I am going to burden my team with me in a CA.

But he minimizes the before he takes his screenshot - can't have people seeing exactly where the credits went...

The other thing to bear in mind is that I'm expecting far more CVs than previous seasons... and Nagot loses out on AA and torp dmg reduction to the Colorado.

1) No I'm not. 1.1) It wouldn't matter if I was as I wouldn't whine about losing credits at tier 10 if I was a F2P player. 2) I won't shut up (work on your manners). 3) Your maths sucks. I did 0 maths and can tell you that 70k loss is wrong. I just looked at your screenshot and you would have lost 35k with premium.

F2P player loses money at tier 10 shocker. p.s. also read what LilJumpa said about targets damaged.

Well I managed 67.8k ave dmg in the Ranger as 1/1/1 which is still pretty decent and at the same time I was able to help my team to a certain extent by stopping damage to them. I say strike is selfish because you give the middle finger to anyone getting bullied by the enemy CV. Your help to the team in strike is by causing massive damage to ships helping your team to get the numbers down. But, in strike you have to be a bit more sneaky and make sure their planes are in the wrong place and it can take a lot longer to execute an attack especially if the enemy CV gets some fighters into the way. DoT only works if you are getting the damage in and with some fighters I can reduce the number of attack runs you make... particularly against strike setups when I know the sky is mine. Sure, an IJN can lock my fighter down but I'll only let them do that when it allows me to get my TBs/DBs through to target.

Well, all I see is either strike or AS and I would argue that balanced is best in most circumstances. Strike can work with decent players but plenty of people pick it who are not good enough and also it is a hugely selfish setup.

I have only got to the Lex and so can't talk about the top 2 tiers but I can tell you that Indy->Ranger->Lex are fine. They perform fine. The Hiryu is better but not enough to make the Ranger useless for example. And, 99% of players are not capable of utilising the advantage it gives them.

I'm not sure what rank I'll start at having finished 11 in the last season. Assuming I have to do some 5-6 ranked it will be Fuso all the way. When it gets to 6-7 I have quite a few options: Hiryu (lvl 5 skill), Saipan and Blyskawica. I do have the Mahan and Pensacola but I won't be using them. Then, I can re-buy Nagato/Colorado if I feel the need to do some battleshipping. Although, if I remember correctly Fuso is somewhat viable at tier 7 although it does to a certain extent rely on the enemy BBs being a bit average. p.s. whilst I can see a role for cruisers in ranked... it is not a role I will be filling!

Only after season 1. Well, I don't know about 3 but I know for certain there wasn't after 2.

I half expect them to read this uproar and decide that they will be nice and give us all an extra 100 diamonds each... at which point everyone who spent up now thinking there would be no more will hit the [edited]roof

As Xevious says, in WoT you have a crew, not just 1 man, and the amount of EXP needed to level your captain up is relatively low... especially if you use a premium with its added XP generation. There is no need for ACT in WoWs.

Hmmm. I think it is slightly unclear for all scenarios or perhaps I'm being thick: Scenario 1 - never got rank 1. You will need to get rank one 2 times in a row to get the Flint - earliest Season 5. Scenario 2 - have the JR 2 flag. You are eligible to win the Flint in Season 4. Scenario 3 - have JR 1 flag from Season 2. This is me. My consecutive rank one counter is at 0 and so I am stuck earning 2 in a row so earliest opportunity is Season 5. Scenario 4 - have JR 1 flag from Season 3. This is where it is not explicitly stated in the rules but assuming your first rank one comes from Season 3, you will be eligible for the Flint in Season 4 because you will have 2 rank one awards in a row at that point. My point is that I don't feel I am too different from the scenario 4 guy despite being in scenario 3. We both have reached rank one once and as I say I had fairly solid reasons for dipping out of Season 3.

I met loads of forumites last night but largely it ended terribly for me. I was chasing my final few BB kills and it didn't go especially well despite having some cracking games. First there was ZombieCheeze on the enemy team in his Udaloi. We didn't meet but my flank collapsed leaving me horribly exposed to 2 Kageros and a few others ships in my Yamato. Crushing loss. Then there was Ataw in his Tirpitz on the enemy team. My flank ran... I should have followed but me (in my Tirpitz) and a friendly Atago tried to hold the flank. I hit Ataw's div mate with a citadel in his Chapyev but he still managed to live through the game and come top. Ataw might have killed me but a few were shooting at me, but the Atago hurt him really bad before we were both dead. When I died we had a Pensa and NC sat behind the CV. Also saw kfa in a destroyer on the enemy team. Map was Neighbors but apart from remembering seeing him and him annoying me with HE spam for a little while (possibly RU DD) I have no recollection of how the game went. Finally saw creamgravy in his Blyskawica on the enemy team (Neighbors again) but was sulking at my run of losses and didn't dare say hi. I was in my Texas, went for 1 flag after failing to convince my div mate it was a horrible idea and found myself essentially alone. I did try and get out of there but there was possibly half of their team dipping in and out of islands and whittling away the health of my bottom tier BB. I came bottom in this game. My most embarrassing result of the night Having written all of that up it sounds like it was a bad night for me but I had games where I got 3 kills (2 of them CQE) in my Yamato, a nice 13k salvo from my Montana into a Kagero followed by a CQE kill on him, 3 games of over 200k damage etc. so it wasn't all bad.

I love ranked... and after a break I'm ready for Season 4. I like most of the changes but I need to tell you my story. It is a story of how changes to the rewards and new criteria are constantly working against me and although I might be in a fairly small group, I am in a small group who has proven they are willing to work hard in ranked. I reached rank 1 in season 2. Got my Jolly Roger. Love my JR flag I do, it is on every ship I own. Season 3 rolls around straight after I had put so much time and energy into season 2. I had burn out from it in all honesty... and all you got was the JR I already owned (and loved). The rewards didn't look that great from my perspective (sat on the deck of my ships with my JR flapping in the breeze) and I also wanted to progress past tier 8 and own some tier 10 ships and I didn't have time for both. So, I quickly got to rank 10, fell to 11, stopped. Then, because of the complaining about the rewards you introduced a fancy new JR but it was too late for me and I couldn't get it. This made me grumpy. Now, you need 2 consecutive rank 1s for the Flint but this is new information I didn't know about when I decided to quit season 3. I can and will get my second rank 1 in season 4 but it won't be consecutive so I now I get penalised again. This makes me more grumpy - it is a double slap in the face for anyone who worked hard in season 2 and then took a break season 3 because it didn't look too attractive (timing/rewards). I can't be the only one in this situation, and it won't keep me away from Season 4... but I just wanted to highlight rules that seem to hit me especially hard.

Week 5 missions would have given me a shot at my goal of 800 diamonds to get the Smith and Katori. As it is, 700 is all I will manage and I achieved that this morning with a nice double strike in my Tirpitz (torped enemy Tirpitz on my Port side and shot the Myoko on my starboard side). 500 games was never an option and really did ask for a huge time investment to achieve. The fact is 300 wasn't an option though for me! It took almost exactly 200 games (204 to be precise) to get the 100 BB, 100 DD and 25 CV kills. I also managed 11 CA kills and played perhaps 10 games in DDs/CVs that I didn't need to as well so I would have achieved it inside 200 if I had stuck to the rules :p I'm also glad that I decided early on to focus on BB/DD kills (CVs didn't really count as something to focus on because between the week 1 mission and daily doubles getting 25 kills is insanely easy). Now I am sat here having completed 3 class missions with the CA kills sat at 11 and unachievable. If I had tried to do all 4 I would have probably failed all of them except the Overall, I enjoyed the event. I can only echo what others are saying - some things could should have been made clearer and from the start. It is a shame that the event will almost end in controversy when it would have been easy to avoid - if you have WEEKLY missions on a FIVE WEEK event people are going to (rightly) expect a FIFTH set of weekly missions and it should come as no surprise when things kick off when it doesn't turn out to be the case. I know some people point to the 1k points max as telling us we wouldn't get a 5th week but I shouldn't need to add up weekly points and work it out. Please, more events like this... but just iron out the creases before the next one

Horrible map. When it was first released everyone used to smash into A and get stuck there. After a while everyone realised it was a black hole of doom and so everyone switched to going to 'B + C'. Which in reality means 90% of both teams going to C and dies in a black hole of doom whilst 2-3 players ninja cap A and then fight over B. there tends to be so many people at C that even the team that caps it cannot leave the area as they are trapped into protecting it. Horrible, horrible map.

The DD nerfs have been handled horribly but there was still a problem. You could not be aggressive with so many shimas in there. I find it interesting that you thought that everything was fine there was no problem with the amount of torps flying around at top tiers because I found it dull and changes needed to be made (not the ones that were!) to try and address this. The problem is that now even without the same dd threat many players choose not to be overly aggressive. It might sound like n excuse but I really am late for leaving work and going camping for the weekend but I could easily drag up threads of people in cruisers whining about being deleted. It isn't all one-sided by any stretch even if people like to portray it as such. People whine all of the time from all directions and usually from the narrow perspective of their favourite ships.

So, which ship? Again which ship?

Who is disputing this? As I keep saying their balancing attempts seem to make things worse. But, I think it is ridiculous that people think that whine threads on the forums, mainly by inexperienced players have caused this to happen. Half the time people complain that no one listens but then try and say that the changes are because they do listen?

Please. You mean from the guy who has played 31 BB games at tier 6 (his highest tier of BB)? If this is your BB mafia then it really does make me lol. Particularly since he is predominantly a CA player.

It is like you are doing your best to prove my point - you paint me as BB mafia based on 1 post. If you seriously think there was not a problem with the torpedo infestation at high tiers then you really do need your head looking at. But as I said in this very thread their repeated attempts at balancing things seem to make things worse from patch to patch - why would I say that if I am just 'BB mafia' and apparently trying to claim my place at the top of the pecking order? The mafia comments only come from a small proportion of people (like you) but you just end up looking bitter and it dilutes any serious point you might try and make. You also have a standard tactic of throwing in snide comments and then follow it up with some kind of reply hinting that the person is probably just not clever enough to understand your original post. It is really tiresome.

It doesn't take much for you to get described as being 'BB mafia'. For example, if you could see a problem with the torpedo soup at high tiers you would probably be automatically assigned membership of the 'BB mafia'. Usually these tags come from a small number of disgruntled CA players who are bitter about... well pretty much everything.