xxNihilanxx

So in that image BB players are rocks, cruiser players are scissors, DD players are papers and CV players are... that hand gesture looks familiar but I can't quite.... ah yes... got it. And I totally agree! I guess the collective noun for CV players is a "wunch" then.

*Sigh* So much effort put into being so wrong. So, in this concocted fiction of yours did I get gifted the Arkansas Beta when the game went into open release and decide to myself "I know, I won't play this ship until I have 12000 battles under my belt and are semi-decent at the game and only then will I come back and play the ship so as to pad my stats in order to win an argument against somebody who isn't even playing the game yet at some distant point in the future" or did I read on the forum that changing course and speed is a good way to avoid torps and decide "Yeah, I'll give that a go"? Which seems more likely? What does Occam's Razor tell you? As for your pathetic attempt to insult me for no reason whatsoever I know I have always been blessed with boyish-good-looks but seriously, in no universe ever could somebody look at my 47 year old arse and think I was a school boy. Grow the phuq up for a moment and stop being so ridiculous. You are making a laughing stock of yourself and I would humbly suggest, for your own good, that you stop now and pray that this entire exchange gets forgotten quickly.

I'm sorry, what? This makes literally no sense whatsoever. So how did I do it? By starting at T10 and learning the game before going to T4 to get decent stats? Do you even think before you speak? How did I get to 12000 battles without first having 1200 or 120 or 12? We were ALL new to the game once. We ALL had to learn. Do you seriously think I had 12000 battles before I played the Myogi? Or the Kaiser? Or do you think I am wrong when I say that changing course and speed constantly makes it harder for a DD to torp a BB? It's not like changing course and speed is a difficult concept to wrap one's head around. If I'd started a new account and used those stats to make my point then there might be some sense to what you have written but the fact that I have the green "Beta Tester" tag on this account coupled with the fact that there is literally an ARKANSAS BETA shown in the screenshot demonstrates for all but the hard of thinking that that is not the case. Seriously I despair at the level of intelligence of my fellow humans sometimes.

Like aim would come into it with the dispersion on T4 BBs. You don't get decent win rates by sitting on the map edge "just farming". Be serious...

The solution to this is simple and, in fact, it is one that most other games use but unfortunately it is about as popular here as a turd in a swimming pool.

This is not true, mate, in fact the reality is that if you can get the hang of not getting torped at those tiers then you can avoid getting torped at all tiers. As you can see from my T4 BB stats I got the hang of it with the first BB line I played - look at the difference between my USN BB stats and everything else. Once you get used to constantly changing course and speed you need never fear DDs again.

Just to reiterate this, having played with the guy I can honestly say, hand on heart, I have seen far worse play from far more experienced players. He's not bad, he's just new.

Yes it was, but a bit too late. (Well a lot too late but I'm trying not to criticise). The reason you took so many torps is because they came from two separate angles and you can only turn nose in to one set, however, had you popped radar much earlier you would have known the position of the enemy DDs and could have chosen to not put yourself in such an untenable position. Incidentally this is the analysis I would have done of my own play if I had been in that Missuori. I would have looked to see what I could have done better for future matches. This is an important practice to adopt for players looking to improve in this or any game but, human nature being what it is, it is often easier to be critical of others' behaviour or blame "game mechanics" rather than face up to our own mistakes.

I didn't want to come across as being nasty and critical so rather than take an approach like... "You're crap, you should have popped radar" I just tried to put the idea of what you could have done better into your head in a less confrontational way.

Looking at your screenshots I can instantly see that that entire situation could have been avoided if only WG had chosen to give your Missouri radar...

This pains me so much to read. Really it does. You may not recall, you may not even have noticed but you were on my team last night on Neighbours in your Colorado. I was in the Emil Bertin and I recognised you straight away from the forum. I spent the first few minutes of the game chasing the CV planes that were operating nearby so as to disuade them from dropping you and then, when they went off to operate on the other flank, I spent the rest of the game trying to keep the DDs away from you and running hydro to ensure you didn't get torped as you were one of the few ships that stayed with me on that flank and didn't run off to do the usual clusterphuq in the islands on the other side. Teamplay does happen in this game but unfortunately, as you have demonstrated, people just don't notice half the time. Incidentally you didn't really push in that match until close to the end when me and the couple of cruisers that came to join us broke through to their base BUT the way you played was the right way to play under the circumstances. In fact I even asked you to turn back and defend our base as the only way we could lose by then was by being outcapped.

What somebody should or shouldn't be doing at any given moment is not determined by the players it is determined by the flow of battle. Some players can read the flow of battle better than others and so understand what needs to happen at any moment. If somebody points this out to a player who, for whatever reason, is ignoring the flow of battle and instead just doing their own thing then there is nothing wrong with that (other than the fact that it should not need to be said in the first place). This is a team game and it could be argued that one waives the right to do one's own thing the moment one clicks battle and thus agrees to take part in a team game. A more pertinent question would be put to the player in question - "who are you to thwart the efforts to achieve victory of eleven other people by playing solely for your own enjoyment and disregarding the enjoyment of others?" The players in question are more than happy to take the bonus XP and credits when we win the game for them (despite them) but they should be immune from responsibility when they lose the game for us? Yeah, no! That's not how the world works.

The changes to Concealment Expert certainly didn't help. Who knew that when BBs would be spotted from further away they would hang back even more? WG have tried over the years to make changes to encourage BBs not to hang back but the problem is that WG aren't particularly good at what they do, especially when it comes to design decisions. With Subs on the way we will one day look back at these times with fondness because we will remember these days as the days when the game was actually dynamic. Worse is to come.

While you are most likely right you can never be too sure. Remember when WG said; SUBS WILL NEVER BE IN THE GAME !!!!!

While this is a great argument as to why they should definitely appear in a Naval History BOOK it does not translate to the game space. Just because something existed irl does not automatically warrant its inclusion into a game particularly if its inclusion creates any form of imbalance. As has been said countless times before - gameplay always trumps realism.