principat121

My Mogami (155 + IFHE + 19 point commander) is still working fine in 2020. Okay, only six games, but more low then high tier, almost 90k average and 1.5 ships sunk per battle are a statement of quite well performance.

I recently found this nice o verview (date: 09. May 2020): I would count 31 cruisers. From which 14 were build. 14/31 = 45.2% (less then half)

Mod updated to prod server client version 0.9.4.0 changed the appearance and name of the "Cap" comic commander at the individual request of @Nutaz new pictures show the famous commander William "Dunkirk Joe" Tennant original mod

You detonated EIGHT times in this game! EIGHT! That is one detonation every 227 games for you or a probability of 0.4%! Wow, what a boomer! WaRgAmInG, lOoK aT mY pRoBlEm

Das ist, wie viele andere deiner Aussagen, grundsätzlich falsch. Die reine Berechnung lautet: PR = 700*nDMG + 300*nFrags + 150*nWins In diese gehen aber die normalisierten Werte ein, nicht die Gefechtsleistungen. Quelle: https://wows-numbers.com/personal/rating

A more general advice: Do not hope that the next tier10 ship will lead you to the desired victories. It is the skillset of the player not the ship. Learn the basics on midtier ships and you will succeed in hightier ships as well.

How about sharing the replay, so everyone can see how you "earnt" your "badge of honour"? PS: It is absolutly fine to just press "space" once between every word.

Go and get the Kuznetsov-Comamnder! He is one of the best Commanders you can get! You can put him almost on every russian ship, no matter what! Be works perfect on BBs, exceptional on CAs and even on CLs.

1.) Welches Downgrade? Das Schiff wurde nicht verändert. 2.) Und hier deine letzten Werte: Rekorde im Januar: Kann also nicht alles schlecht gewesen sein. Und wie oben schon erwähnt hat sich weder am Schiff noch an den Spielmechaniken etwas grundlegend verändert. Die einzig einschneidende Änderung war der IFHE-Change. Der hat aber dazu geführt, dass BB eher weniger direkten HE-Schaden von Kreuzer nehmen, quasi ein Mikro-Buff für BBs. Spiele der letzten Tage: Drei Spiele sind keine ausreichende Basis für eine Bewertung, ob das Schiff besser oder schlechter geworden ist. Im Vergleich zu deinen overall-Werten, hat du hier aber deutlich weniger Schiffe versenkt und Flugzeuge abgeschossen. Was alles Werte sind, die allein dem Spieler anzulasten sind, also dir. und deine Spiele im März: Hier hast du alles gewonnen. Teilweise - wie es scheint - auch ohne dein Bestand. Im Durchschnitt wieder weniger direkten Schaden und weniger Schiffe versenkt. Und da am Schiff nichts verändert wurde, liegen solche Veränderungen wieder allein nur beim Spieler. und deine Gesamtstatistik: Du bist eher im durchschnittlichen Bereich mit deinen Leistungen angesiedelt. Von daher ist es nachzuvollziehen, dass wenn du nicht "im Training stehst" auch unterdurchschnittliche, schwächere Leistungen ablieferst. Das ist normal und nachvollziehbar. Das dies wiederum dir nicht gefällt, ist menschlich ebenso nachzuvollziehen. Da aber belegter weise nichts an den Schiffsstatistiken verändert wurde, es im Gegenteil mit den Veränderungen von IFHE sogar einen Mikro-Buff für BBs gab, ist das Schiff heute genau so schlagkräftig (und OP) wie vor einem halben Jahr oder länger. Die Veränderungen liegen somit nur beim Spieler.

Dont drink and post!

You got (rightfully) reportedfor your misbehaviour in chat. Wanna prove your innocence? Provide the replay file!

You made two screenshots and posted them here. Okay?! Am I right?! Otherwise:

Replay?

Try the russian approach and just say: "Nay!" and leave it as it is! Balans is for weak nations!

Da sich an der Streuung nichts geändert hat, kommt das nicht wirklich häufig vor.

I wrote: What is the difference while the ship is being in testing stage?! Are they per default allowed to be better? again

I can give you some examples. Take it or not. Highly subjective, ofc. (and I relate to the testing stage and the transition to the live servers, as some ships got some more or less game changing nerfs after some months after release): Untouched, despite being performing above average: Stalingrad, Kleber, Bourgogne, Alaska, all russian high tier BB, T-61, Georgia, Slava, Benham, Smolensk Overperforming and nerfed: Exeter, Colbert Nerfed, despite performing below average: PEF, Aegir, Odin, Siegfried, Azuma, Indomitable, Poltava, Shikishima Underperforming and buffed: Thunderer, Ohio, Mainz, Bagration Slava was/is a soviet ship. And that WG didn't want to put any effort into balancing the GZ into the old RTS-gameplay style while they are working on the whole new CV-rework should be obvious. That should be no excuse, but as WG is more on the monetisation approach towards WoWs since the last year or tow, I wouldn't expect WG spent useless money just for the cause. Yes, because there is no binary black-and-white thinking. In some businesses you try to fathom the waters with you actions to see how faw you can go. Esp. in the gaming industry, where you life from the money players spend freely. If you cannot understand this approach, than ask and maybe someone will explain it. Hint: If you want to learn it, look how the buyable camo-packs changed over the course of time in this game. Maybe calm down, read his post again, think about it and then commentating? BB-Meta: What was the situation one year ago? complains: HE-spam annoying BB players conclusion: more camping (from BB players) needs: more accurate guns for the now longer fighting distances And now WG tries to "balance" the new russian BBs to all of these points! The attributes of the new soviet BB fittet perfect the above pictured situation: thick platting to withstand HE spam large HP, acceptable concealment and good AA super fast rotating turrets and very accurate guns, even at longer distances (only above roughly 19km the accuracy drops below the competion) Though, soviet BB are tailormade on purpose to the very specific situation of BBs (meta gaming). And as there is no black-and-white thinking and WG always fathoming the acceptance, the soviet BBs didn't get all to good stuff (i.e. super heal). But still, it should be obvious that the characteristics of the soviet BBs fit perfect the general situation BB are in. And yes, soviet BB do have weaknesses and cannot win every game, that should also be obvious, because - as mentioned - there is no black-and-white-thinking. And nowadays... what do need cruisers? accurate guns and high penetration, with increased pen-angles - russians new cruisers? yes, check! protected citadel from the front (icebreaker bow or parts of it) - russian new cruisers? yes, check! good concealament - russian new cruisers? yes, check! and some nice goodies (fire angles, torp angles, stealth radar)

Why didn't occur such an outcry by the development of the british heavy cruiser line? I cannot remember that there were any loud voices of concern. Why? Because this heavy cruiser line felt quite balanced from the start to the end. Nothing special, but also not weak. Quite contrary to the russian line. Which was straight from the start very strong and sometimes overperforming. Same happend when the russian BB came out. Strong from the beginning. And strong until release. And of course there are voices of concern that these above average performing ships are not balanced for the whole game. And this feeling repeats with new overpervorming russian ships. Because while other nations got their fair share of nerfs, even while testing, somehow the russians are spared. This may be a coincident, but this may also be a shimmer of russian bias. At the end one has to wonder: What are the internal rules on which WG is balancing ships. And please, the answer that they balance on ship performance is utter nonsense. As it should be obvious that WG unnecessary nerfed average performing ships and left overperforming ships untouched. Do you think that Wargaming would have published the Slava if there were no public outcry from the CCs about how unbalanced this ship is? Yes, Wargaming would have published this fine jewel.

I never wrote about such a thing and never would as I concider the Moskva a already strong ship. Please read more carefully.

The very distinctive advantages of the Petropavlovsk are the 360 turrets, the insane AP-pen and ricochet-angles and the ability to stealth radar. That will not make the Moskva obsolete, but the Petropavlovsk will become the new discount silver Stalingrad.

Wenn es ein Träger war, dann funktioniert alles wie gewollt. Ansonsten schreibe dem Support ein Tickets mit mehr Details. edit: Ich sehe gerade, du hast keinen Träger. Ich habe vor ein paar Tagen mein Modul der Moskva freigespielt. Also grundsätzlich funktioniert es also.

I disagree. Nothing I wrote was wrong. Nothing you wrote prove me wrong. Topic of this thread are new balanced russian ships. Go ahead.

We are digressing...

The same can be applied for CVs: These players can also go for damage runs on BBs instead of harassing DDs. Then the chances are high that the enemy DD can roam free. Does this make the CV less potent? No - I guess not.