Tungstonid

There is a bit of cherry-picking there, don't you think? What about the Yamato? To reach her you just have to play the Amagi or other not so famous ships of the IJN BB line. Which in turn might prove to be good ships so players stick with them. Same goes for the USN BB line. To reach the Iowa, you have to play the North Carolina. And for the FdG case... People play for the Bismarck, recognize it as a good ship and think "Well, if this ship is good, what will the successor be like?". Therefore they progress in the tech tree. So IMO the historical symbol arguments works quite well, even for apparently not so famous ships. And even if not, I think no one argues that this is the only reason that BBs are played. It is rather one that should not be put aside because there can't possibly be another reason for players to play BBs other than that they are dumb/cowards or want an easy mode of the game.

Well, look at the missions and you know why. At stage 1 for example, there is exactely one mission out of 9 that you can't do with a BB because it requires you to use a cruiser. The others can only or best be done with BBs. So no wonder the BB counter of the queue goes bonkers. Maybe for the next campaign or event of this sort WG could introduce missions which either require cruisers or which are easier to do with cruisers, like "Hit enemies 100 times with your main battery in one battle" or "Spot 3 DDs with radar/hydro". This way, the population could be (forcefully) shifted.

You can have a look at the mission details here, if you don't want to to wait.

Just met atomskytten in a tier 10 match. Don't know if he recognoized me. He didn't react when I greeted and later I was busy pushing the enemy team and couldn't care about the chat that much.

A friend of mine reported the same yesterday. He got additional 500 coins although he already spent everything including the coins for the top100. Another mate and I got nothing. Did WG perhaps "mess up" and gave the reward for the top 100 a second time or was there another bonus you could get?

Plus the Kamikaze was obtainable via grinding on ... let's say 1 1/2 occasions. So of all premium ships she should be the last one to be called P2W.

Ah right, how could I forget. But the Indianapolis seems to be even rarer than the Atlanta these days.

The earliest tier you can meet radar ships is tier 5, that is true. But radar is only available for a small number of tier 7 cruisers (Atlanta and Belfast), for regular USN and SN cruiser of tier 8+, the USN BB Missouri and the USN DD Black, of which both are tier 9. RN cruisers do have the option for radar too from tier 8 onwards but they have to give up their smoke for that. So you might have rather been detected by hydroacoustic search which is available as early as tier 5 if I am not mistaken. It does have a much shorter range than radar though.

Sometimes there is no way to satisfy customers.

Why would I want to form a division of more than three players just so the MM splits the division members (if I get your suggestion right) evenly between the two teams? And what advantage does it give compared to the current system where you just could form two (or more) divisions and start into the the battle/queue at the same time. Well, sure, it is guaranteed that you and your mates land in the same battle. But that's it, isn't it? On the other hand you get additional programming effort, additional effort for the MM to create a match and other more negative effects that could become more frequent like coordinated reports, especially if you plan to make the "grand divisions" bigger than 6 players. Not to mention the insatisfaction of solo players because "division/clan players help their friends in the enemy team", be it true or not. You can call me "afraid" of changes all you will. Maybe I am although I have to habit to take changes made by WG and get used to them. However, IMO you have yet to provide any advantage which is significant enough to consider such a change and which is not provided by the existing means.

Which other online games, that are similar to WoWS, do it? I guess you can create bigger parties (or whatever it is called) in MMOGs like WoW, Eve, etc. if you want to start raids etc. But none of them do the battles as WoWS does. Games you could compare it to... Well, the limit for WT is 3 or 4 as far as I know. WoT is 3, WoWP should be 3 as well. Not sure about AW but again, it should be in the same range. This is not just a matter of "But other MMOs do it like this" but a matter of whether it adds something positive (or at least not too negative) to this specific game and the way it works.

I am not quite sure what you mean. I certainly am competitive enough. Would it add something to the game? Yes, certainly. More rage quitting people because random people have to play against an actually coordinated team. But I am not sure if this is something WG should/would support.

you want to have a battle with 12 coordinated clan players vs 12 random players who can barely read the ingame chat? IMO divisions with up to 3 players are fine.

Yes, in general and even without any skills you can mark ships or squadrons with this. Against ships your secondaries will try to focus on the target if possible (plus a minor accuracy buff?). Against squadrons you get a small DPS buff IIRC.

Which will make secodaries only fire at targets you manually mark (CTRL+left mouse button) and they will only fire at one target at once. Just saying, because this is another frequent question.

Fixed that for you. Why should a game like WoWS provide everyone (good and bad player, paying and F2P customers) with enough credits to buy everything they want as soon as they can? This in a way takes away (part of) the motivation to get better or buy premium account and ships which in turn finances the servers. And it would reduce the population of the lower tiers if everyone can play high tier battles without disadvantage which will make it harder for new players to get into a match.

I for myself (and the guys I usually play with) don't mind going first or second line with our BBs as long as we have some sort of support or know that the enemy does not have a significant advantage. The support can be a (bunch of) cruiser(s) hanging right behind or with us, DDs slightly in front for early and crucial torpedoe spot or even carrier planes which survey the area. The thing IMO is, even though some people like to see it differently, you can't just go bow on and throw yourself right into the fray as a BB with less or no support. It might work for one or two minutes and then it is over because you usually have no possibility to retreat or reposition without getting massive damage (be it by over BBs, torpedoe carpets or HE spam) while RNG takes care of your guns. I don't think there need to be more rewards for simple things like teamplay but to me it seems like a player issue, too. A player issue from both side that is. Those who hang back because "I am save here and have a nice campfire going" and those who run away at the first glimps of an enemy ship and leaving the BBs who actually want to push to die when the enemy main force arrives. I don't expect cruisers or DDs to hold back the enemy main force by themselves but it should be possible to take some shots at the first enemy or at least tell other players when they plan to retreat (before they are half across the map).

Depends on a lot of factors like - which ammo did you use - if AP what angle/areas did you hit - your distance to the target - etc A replay would be helpful. You can look at the Taiho's armour in the port.

Well, one could argue that flaming in the chat about "tomatoes" etc. is just the peak of the whole problem. Back when I played WoT some players actually didn't insult certain other players for their stats but went one step further and deemed the battle to be not worth playing because "idiot team" (either because of XVM or because of the display of the win chance), hence they either suicided or quit the game right at the beginning. Or they started into the battle with a negative attitude that they had no other choice than losing - be it the battle or their personal fun. So XVM provides problems not only for chat moderations but also for the actual gameplay. Anyway, one could argue about this all day. IMO there are a lot of good reasons to hide ones stats, others might see it differently.

Oh come on. We all know what it will look like after a change like this.

Reasons? - to not give any website any information it can use to establish a profile of some sort (i.e. in a way controling who knows what about you) - to mislead players who use certain mods to determine the opponent's strength ("Is this top tier BB just some 45% WR player who is hiding his stats or is he actually a threat?") - because you actually have a player group which doesn't care about your stats or how they evolve over time as long as you do your best in the game and you are a compatable member. No one likes to constantly look at other people's pee-pee, even if it is a digital one. - to counteract the "but your profile says" "argument" which in most cases ends in an ad hominum anyway I honestly don't care sharing my stats with other people as long as I have as much control over it as I can and if it benefits the case or discussion. But until now I saw little reason to do so. @Topic: I never had any chat bans as far as I can remember. Yes, sometimes I mark targets, tell other players why I find their ... strategy to be questionable or I can be a troll or a rampaging d*ck in the chat if I want to but usually I try to keep it civil. Not that it really matters to me because I can communicate with the only really reliable people in the game/battle via TS3 anyway. But I can see why it is troublesome for prople who don't have this possibilities.

Not joining the dark side you must. Overcome the temptation you must. I had a quite good run with a mate today up until a certain point when we encountered similar problems (like dying early in the game and still making the top 3... as low tier). So we decided to leave it at that and try another game I told him about which proved to make a hell of a lot of fun.

That is why I put "to a certain extend" into the sentence.

Izumo/Yamato and to a certain extend Nagato. Warspite can be viable with secodary build, too.