Ectar_

Hello, If you contact our customer support team they'll be able to check your account to see if it's been sold. It's also possible you have a filter set in your port which is not showing that tier/class.

4-6 is my favourite tiers. I can't stop playing my Clemson, Nicholas, New Mexico and Warspite!

We're about to have a forum overhaul for both World of Tanks and World of Warships in EU. I'll see about adding in a clan section for the World of Warships forums.

We're looking the credit flow for high tiers. You can come out of a battle on the losing team and still have a profit. It really depends what you're hitting and what damage you've done. If you play passive then your returns in the battle are going to be low. I'm not saying everything is perfect, however there is no immediate short term changes to high tier credit flow. It is something that we've passed on as a concern. The reports do work, but they're never going to work at a level where you report someone in the middle of a battle and then they're instantly removed as that would be wide open to abuse. We are looking at ways to make the team killing system something which is more balanced and punishes deliberate team damage without being too harsh on the rare accidental situations. We're working on a better system to remove afk players. Sometimes if it's at the start of the match the inactivity can be due to poor connection, low spec PC or mods causing the game to load slower. Again it's important to target the people abusing the system deliberately and not by accident. Understandable as World of Tanks has something similar. In World of Warships however the credit generation is much higher. I'll make sure this is passed on but can't make any guarantees it will happen. It really depends where the CV's are and where their planes are. I have multiple fun battles at tier 4-6 in Destroyers with the Clemson and Nicholas being 2 of my most played ships. Matchmaking is never going to be perfect. We want to avoid a situation however where you have like for like because then all that happens is certain ships will always come out on top. We'll continue to tweek the MM system as and when we feel it's needed. I appreciate from a personal point of view things can seem unfair sometimes but we look at a much much larger sample of data from all matches.

Credits are used to purchase new ships, new ship modules, to repair your ship and to rearm your ship after each battle. They're also used to purchase camouflage, consumables and equipment. At higher tiers ships become very expensive.

Are you running any mods/addons?

Please can you contact our customer support team who can run through some checks with you. They can be contacted here

People getting sank simultaneously? Otherwise there is a massive point shift coming from a base capture.

In World of Tanks I'd sell old tank or tanks I didn't play as much, later I'd always regret it. Made a promise in World of Warships to never sell any ships I buy, so plan to have them all eventually!

You're twisting my words there. I was simply pointing out we can't be present in every thread that demands a WG response otherwise all that will happen is every thread will do that. Our forums are primarily a source for players to talk to each other and we'll join in those conversations when we can. You cannot look at every topic created as an open ticket to customer support waiting for a direct response. Thank you for proving a point made in an earlier thread: Ectar, on 23 September 2015 - 12:09 PM, said: With regards to converting excess exp from elite vehicles into free exp, that has always cost players premium currency (Gold and now with Warships Dubloons). The fact that gold from Warplanes/Tanks can't be used currently to convert Warships exp is an understandable issue and frustration, however we can't give the player a different answer than the one he already knows - Currently it's not possible. As soon as we have more info about merged economy's (free exp and gold) we'll let players know instantly because it's extremely important to have that information rolled out to players. Being silent doesn't always mean we don't care. Sometimes it's because the answer is still the same and when we tell players it's still the same, the reply back is "we don't care, only tell us when you have new info" - In that situation we're damned if we do and we're damned if we don't.

Has been covered multiple times already on the forums. There is nothing new to say to players. This has been passed on via another thread. The only main issue I've read about this has been based on some high tier feedback. If you're losing matches and losing money that's intentional. If you're winning matches and doing barely any damage or landing shots and then not coming out with a profit I can only recommend that people start hitting enemy ships. I've passed this on to the relevant team. Sadly the Community Team don't set the in-game missions so I can't change that directly. You're going to have to expand more on this as I'm not sure where you're coming from here. Can I ask you to expand please on the "stuff"? Whilst I will take ownership of issues when the arise, and I will apologize when we are in the wrong, there is a lot of stuff I have no direct control over. I don't like to highlight this as people are quick to claim that I'm then passing the blame. Now whilst I can't affect certain things directly I do pass on the feedback to the people responsible when I know it may be helped. Demands on the forums however don't equal immediate action. This topic had a pretty comprehensive reply by myself on the same day the thread was created. The posts by myself weren't just some small 3 word answers. The underlying discussion on this thread is that some players are unsatisfied with how they feel different servers are treated. That's not something that can change in the short term nor is it something where we can give a different answer from what's already been said in the thread. Highlighting the recent NA thread just shows that some people will never be satisfied no matter what is being done. We are not going to get into a situation where every time you or someone else puts "WG" or "I want an admin response" in their title, or does something like a name drop in a sarcastic reply, somehow is a trigger for us to come running. All that happens then is every post has "OMG WG REPLY TO ME" or similar in the title treating the forums as an open instant messenger conversation with the rest of the forum users as their audience.

Each class is easy to learn but difficult to master. Some ships are easier than others to play. I'd say Battleships are potentially easier as they are more forgiving due to the heal, but you need to understand when to push forward and to be thinking 5 mins ahead regarding where you want to be and where the enemy is expected to be. You also need good awareness of how the battle is evolving around you and where the enemy planes etc are. It becomes more complex when you break it down.

Closing thread, please use/read this thread - http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/36548-regarding-the-ap-shell-issue-with-bbs-and-he-shell-issue-with-certain-guns/

Closing thread - Please use this one - http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/36548-regarding-the-ap-shell-issue-with-bbs-and-he-shell-issue-with-certain-guns/

Posts like this need to stop as it's quite clear you're just looking for anything and everything to complain about. As the post you have quoted mentions - reddit is looking for moderators reddit is a 3rd party website, who are looking for EU based moderators specifically on their World of Warships section. This has nothing to do with Wargaming EU

If you're a "good player" you'll have good stats... You can't have good stats if you're always losing. The only "fixed" thing in each battle is that you're in with 11 other random guys and against 12 other random guys (unless you're in a division). You can't always expect to control those games like someone going on a bullet rampage in a Call of Duty 5 on 5 where 1 person can take down half a team in seconds.

Nope, "Next on the agenda" does not equal "We are building a full Chinese tech tree with 4 complete branches". "Next on the agenda" is a term of phrase to which simply means the next thing on a list. A Chinese presence in game is something which naturally has to be considered as we have a fairly massive Chinese audience. An example of how this might work could be that some Chinese ships may be added only for the Chinese server/market. As Ev1n says it's something at the moment which is only being considered, it's not 100% locked in as 4 full branches... The French white flag thing is old, boring and lame, please don't do that. I've lived in France now for 3 years and the French people are very proud nation who had to deal with a lot of nasty stuff in WWI and WWII. No one here takes that as "just a joke", it's both insulting and disrespectful. I'd like to ask you to especially take note of the post below:

Fairy tales and gossip I'm afraid. I know the source you're being drawn into and if that was even half true, then mere months later we wouldn't have had a tour of the conservation section for our Community Contributors the day before Tankfest, hosted by both people mentioned in this fantasy.

The Chieftain is a tank, not a Warship. Measurements and data were taken and provided to our Developers for that vehicle when it was requested and the Developers are the people who decide what is and isn't added to the game. It's another good example however of the dangers of talking about future content when the actual decision hasn't been made yet. I love the look of the tank myself but also I don't feel it quite fits being a "heavy". It's more of a full on MBT which kinda puts it in a category of it's own. The modelling is the easy part, the balancing of armour etc and hit mechanics etc, not so. I say delicate because you don't just walk into historical military archives like you walk into a local library. As an example 2 members of staff were recently at a French Military Museum and had to undergo various background checks before they could be approved and were under armed escort at all times. That's before going into the reason for their visit and justifying it to the French Armed Forces. A lot of the data regarding past historical fighting vehicles is still under lock and key and not publically available. Whislt there is lots of books on the subjects we like to have as accurate information as possible and not for example, just fire up Wikipedia and type in the names of ships.

Hello, This is covered in our FAQ which can be found here - http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/22738-frequently-asked-questions-please-read-this-before-making-a-new-topic/ We have no date we can quote as to "when" future Nations will come. The only new nation with a confirmed date is British ships for 2016 as they were part of the initial 5 nations where work has already been started.

Where do you believe you should have the extra day's premium from?

British ships have never been promised for 2015. Currently we're working on the German and Soviet Navy's along with work initial work being done on the British Navy. There is only so much that be added at one time however and having multiple nations in for the sake of it when each nation only has a single branch, isn't exactly a better compromise. The projected tech trees have been internally known for a while (although they're not set in stone) - It's not like World of Tanks where we can just send 3 or 4 people with measuring equipment to a museum. Many Warships were destroyed or scrapped after the war and getting accurate schematics is sometimes a very delicate matter.

Hi there, For now adding additional languages to the forums is on hold. It's possible new language sections may be added in the future but only when there is a requirement for it. Personally I don't feel adding new language sections to the forums adds any value unless the vast majority of that country don't speak English as a second language and we have a very high percentage of players playing from that country/visiting the forums (which our current statistics don't show). Note my personal views are not the deciding factor, the player numbers is the main driving factor that would require the additional support and this is something we're always monitoring.

Thanks for highlighting this, it's been passed on to see if it's something intended/permanent or not.