Del_Mare

since i don't know what your problem is, i cannot answer your question. but yes, you will unfortunately have to wait for a response

yepp, if mm simply would tell the players that there is currently no match possible, we would have not a single "mm is baad, i am sitting now in the corner, tears running down my cheeks"-thread they would be replaced by "MM is baaad, i have my new shiny ship and your damn game tells me i am not allowed to play it"-threads you have to choose between the devil and the deep blue sea...

once in 50 games i would say usually 0 in a 24 hour period ;)

i just see 3 easy kills in this screenshot ;) you have the armor to fight them, the guns to cripple them, the accuracy on that distance to reliably hit one or more citadels each salvo. speed and turning rate still requires you to play alert to not get torped to pieces. the only fail i see is that your teammates on your flank rushed ahead to get killed before you could give them support, but cruiser players will eventually learn that they cannot take on a bb from tier 5 on.

as a cv player myself, i second the idea to lower torpedo damage for the carrier tiers 4 and 5 to get new players in a less deadly way accustomed to the thread of torpedo bombers. they should still hit, and still hit hard, but it should be possible to make a mistake without getting totally wiped in one go ;) (well, it alread takes two go's aka 7 minutes to kill a battleship tier IV with a carrier, but thats another story) keep in mind that usn and ijn carriers are balanced according to each other, so of course it would be neccessary to lower usn cv dmg as well

well, i guess with the transition from closed to open beta, they recieve a flood of tickets right now, resulting in longer waiting times

it encourages teamplay by forcing cruisers and bbs work together to some extend, also it is the counter to battleships sitting at their maxranges, forcing them to move with the fleet instead of clinging to the map edges indefinetily. it helps scouting, uncloaking destroyers, spotting torps. also, cvs require all players to be alert at all times and watch out for bombers.

there are open sea battles battleships on full health can oneshot cruisers at full health, not the other way around, so... lets say its hard to loose vs a cruisers in a 1vs1, except for maybe sitting in tier 3 BB's ;) and yes, it is wot on water, it may have something to do with beeing developed by the same developer as wot

the minimum requirements are 4gb ram, so i would guess your computer might be too old to play this game without encoutering some issues. also, your cpu and graphics-card are important

didn't even talk to you, but since you felt adressed: so, since you believe that wargaming tries to make the teams imbalanced, tries to scare players away, why do you play it? yes, i agree, this game needs players, but how does filling the forums with this sheer flood of baseless assumptions helps? since we tried to explain to you several times now the reasons for the current imbalance, yet you don't want to even acknowledge one of those explanations, the discussion had ended long ago in this thread. its just you bringing up more and more subjective stuff, balance issues existant or nonexistant in other games, unfounded comparisons and most of all: gut feelings without any support. and you want others to be constructive? you made your point clear: you think its imbalanced, will stay imbalanced and that wargaming wants that imbalance, and nothing we might write would change this, all you want is to convince others from your point of view.

well, i felt always able to contribute to a degree that i had some meaning in the match. in all ship-classes

both, atlanta and atago, have been taken out of store, because wg statet that the new players who might buy them would only face experienced beta testers, get sunk constantly and think their ship might be drastically underperforming --> lots of tears some players will tell you that the intention of wargaming is to raise the price instead because they became so popular with us beta testers. but well, that might be idle rumors. we will see in a few weeks

"they have admitted" "incorrectly" well dude, sorry, but even the staff told you, along most players answering in this thread, that the rewards are spot on. (in my opinion still way to high, but thats my opinion). so i unfortunately have to tell you, that your crusade for changing this issue is futile ;)

oh, team damage in platoons is not punished? that needs a change

psst, don't tell them ;) most of those coming to the forums and talk about this unfair mm are here because they want a scapegoat. and as in wot, if your winrate is low, blame it on the matchmaking ;) rigged, impossible, already won or lost before the game started wg has the stats, and they are interested to keep it as balanced as possible, in their own interest.

risk vs reward while playing vs bots is just about who gets the next kill faster, pvp is more demanding because sometimes the enemy team might win ;) you had your answer by the staff, if you want to ignore it and continue demanding changes... well, try throwing yourself at the floor, thrashing around with your arms ;)

that was for the north american server, not for the eu-server different prices, different contents

so, galadul, you say a) aa was massively nerfed b) that aa was buffed by 50% make up your mind

yepp, pve should not give any xp at all after they are transfered into the real game, imho

i totally understand you beeing pissed off about this, but currently mm has no other chance to form matches, especially in the higher tiers. is it unfair? yes it is. is it meant to be unfair? nope, but with the low amount of players in the high tiers right now, mm sometimes cannot create fair matches. only way out for mm would be forming no teams, keeping the players in the queue indefinitely until they give up and drop out to return with low-tier ships things will get way better once mm can choose from a pool of players instead having to work with this small amount

in the "about battleships" section, he explains a lot about AP vs HE, penetration mechanics etc

when i listen to this i tend to do the same:

well (wait and read the rest, too), i would love to see xvm, because i like to see my stats, see some details of my gameplay etc. i also love to see if the guy who wiped the floor with my ship was really good or if he just did what he did "by accident", so i can throw a "gj dude" at him to tell him he's on the right track right now i furthermore like to see, if the two cruisers on the "other flank" are good and can maybe hold their ground or if they are inexperienced, so i can speed towards them for additional support but i accept that i'm doing it wrong with xvm its used to tell players to stfu because of their stats, disregarding whatever point they might have. its for elitism

well, disabling would be... well, it would solve the problem, but maybe just give us a feature to put players on an ignore list, so they are muted not only for this game, but for every game you play with them

yepp, thats exactly what happens when your planes get panicked by enemy fighters or cruisers