Procrastes

I've been wondering about that. In my little brain, any 0.-something version would be some kind of prototype or beta-format, with the first complete product being 1.0. This is obviously not the case with WoWs. Is there anyone out there who knows how these things are supposed to go down? And why has WG chosen to go with version Zero of WoWs for five years running?

I just listened to Flamu's second presentation of the new skill system. The inroad was quietly hilarious as he started on how "there is at least one good thing with the new skill system and that is that we can now specc any one captain for all shipclasses and use him on all our ships"... and then he found out that, no, we can't, we can only use him on all our premiums. Then he went on to comment on the various skill descriptions. But I have to confess, my heart was not really in it at that point. The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away...

Not to take anything away from another player's personal experience, but if tier VI CV:s can in any way be regarded as being less strong than their other-tier brethren - can this mean that tier VI CV:s are almost... balanced?

Funny thing is, I was just ruminating on this hypothetical scenario. Although not applied to the CV:s - since they can, after all, theoretically be run down and sunk - but rather to the incoming submarines...

The real problem with the ARP Yamato? The real problem with the ARP Yamato is not the amount of first-time players setting out on their maiden voyage in a top tier battleship that can be bought with money. Annoying though that can be - and through no fault of those players, since all they did was buy and play a ship that was provided for them - this is but a symptom. The real problem is not even that the legendary Yamato module is part of the package. This is merely WG tweaking the nose of every player who has previously grinded through the missions to obtain this module through regular gameplay. The real problem with the ARP Yamato, as I can't help but to feel, is that it signifies a certain lack of regard, from Wargaming's side, for the future welfare of World of Warships. Wargaming is going for a quick buck instead of prioritizing the long term health of the game. If this seems to go against what I've written in a previous post, namely that the game has survived having tier IX ships available for money for a while now and that it will handle the arrival of the ARP Yamato without particular issue, then please allow me to clarify. Yes, I am quite certain that a number of beginner players appearing in the ARP Yamato on their first day of the game won't break the gameplay. Most of them will either learn the basics of the game real quick, or they will soon lose the appetite for getting insta-stomped in each and every battle and trickle down to meander their way up the tiers like everyone else. The ARP Yamato, in itself, doesn't worry me. What worries me is an increasing tendency for Wargaming to go for a quick buck, even at the cost of alienating veteran players and running the risk of long-term damage to the gameplay. At the risk of sounding like a crusty old curmudgeon,* I think that part of what has kept World of Warships in a much healthier state than, say, World of Tanks, is that the developers of WoWs have been that much better at keeping in touch with the playerbase. And that, by the way, is just about the best compliment I can give to a game developer. But during these past two years, such decisions as - for instance - the insistence on keeping the reworked CV:s beginner-friendly to the exclusion of all other considerations, and the whole sorry Puerto Rico show, has gotten me worried that this grass-roots approach (if I may call it that) is about to be dropped. The fact that submarines are by all accounts soon to be shoe-horned into the game, does not lessen my concern. I may be reading too much into all of this. At least I hope so. It is my sincere hope that World of Warships will sail on into the 2020's with the same mix of gamer camaraderie, historical enthusiasm and light-hearted fun that made it such a joy to be onboard during the first five years of this voyage. Cheers! * Because let's face it, I am a crusty old curmudgeon.

I know! The first time I did this, it seemed hilarious! I am at present hoarding my precious signal flags like a sinister brooding hen on eggs. And Wargaming has stopped selling Victory and Commanders Day camos in bulk. But with the deadline for last-chance-of-ever-acquiring-the-Småland fast approaching, I am thinking of just tossing the whole stockpile onto my ships and sail out swinging...!

You are of course correct. This is such a small portion of the total xp earned, however, that I at least would hardly get anywhere relying solely on this "free" free xp. This is obviously part of WG:s calculations to bring in money from the players, and since this is a voluntary option with all requirements out in the open, I am perfectly fine with the deal. It is basically an equation of time versus money, and an individual choice of which currency to invest.

I agree that Radio Location is a hugely useful skill on any DD. In spite of this, when spending skill points from level 11 and onward I tend to prioritize such skills as Adrenaline Rush, Basic Firing Training and - where necessary - Expert Marksman. This usually means that Radio Location is the last skill I get, if I can afford it at all. Many of the mid-tier non-american gunboats suffer a lot in knife fights without an Expert Marksman on the bridge. Knowing from which direction the enemy is approaching, is less of an advantage if I can't keep my guns trained on him when he arrives. If one specializes in torpedo boats (the IJN mainline in particular), things are of course much different. They sure can! But most of the xp one accumulates has to be converted to free xp before it can be spent on anything other than moving up the tech tree, and this conversion costs doubloons. Or at least that is how I have understood it to be. After five years of on-and-off gameplay, I still find embarrassing gaps in my knowledge of this game...!

Here's what I did. A couple of years ago, I spent about a million free xp to promote my then most-played captain to 19 skill points. He's the commander of several of my ships, so the special elite xp - xp that you earn with any captain who has reached maximum level, and that can be used to level up commanders at no doubloon cost - started rolling in pretty quickly. As soon as I had enough elite xp I promoted another captain to max rank, and then another and so forth. I know that many players are reluctant to spend doubloons - i.e., real money - to level up their captains, and this is a perfectly legitimate choice. It is certainly not for me to have an opinion on how others will spend their money. To me, however, it is often worth it. If nothing else, it will save a lot of time and effort in getting that first captain up to max rank. Once that point is reached and the elite xp start rolling in, promotions will progress much faster. Another thing I'd mention is that destroyer captains are generally more dependent on their skill points than captains of ships from other classes. A destroyer captain with less than 10 skill points, and thus without access to the Concealment Expert skill, is at a painful disadvantage when facing an enemy destroyer whose captain has this skill. I usually try to push my destroyer captains up to at least 13 skill points as quickly as I can manage. Best of luck!

It's not good for the gameplay quality, if that's what you mean. New players should be encouraged to proceed up the tiers at a pace to match their skill level, and having immediate access to tier X ships for money does the exact opposite. But it's not the end of the game either. We've had access to tier IX ships for money for a while now, and the game has survived that just fine. I'll quote Churchill on this one: It's the submarines that have me really worried.

My commiserations, OP. I was absent from the game when this collection was launched, so I also missed the relevant missions. But as long as the containers keep dropping in daily containers, it should be just a matter of time before you can complete your collection. If you already have two duplicates, you only need, what, three more? Best of luck!

I was just curious on behalf of what group of people, if any, the opening post was made. And now I've learned that you speak for "the common players". Thanks for clearing that up.

Who's "we"? Or is this an instance of pluralis majestatis?

I can see why spotting on demand would be a powerful tool in competitive battles. In regular randoms, you are lucky if even one person other than yourself shoots at what you spot before your radar runs out. That limits the usefulness of radar ships with no smoke of their own, I guess. I really should take the Black out for a spin, one of these days...!

I honestly never figured the Småland to be all that strong to begin with? As the happy owner of the USS Black, I'd say that while a 7,5 km dd-mounted radar can come in very handy, it is also quite situational and thus seldom an outright game-changer. In view of this, I've figured the Småland to be less strong and a lot less versatile than her silver sister, the Halland. But maybe I've been wrong about this? I have played the latter, but not - obviously - the former.

It is interesting to hear you voice these concerns, Captain. I have some reflections of my own, that I would like to share. When I first heard that tier X ships were about to be put on sale for free xp, I hoped the price tag would be set to 1,5 million - but I was not surprised when it landed on 2 million. There seems to be an overall trend for costs in in-game currencies to double with each tier. I have no problem with the fact that costs for tier IX ships have gone up from 750 k to 1 million. What with all the special flags and camos that abound these days , there has been a pretty hefty devaluation of the game time value of free xp. But even so, 2 million free xp represents a bigger time investment than any single ship is worth to me. Unfortunately, this goes for the dashing, spinach-painted hunter-killer known as the Småland as well, tempting though she is. Wargaming probably knows this, given how closely they are doubtless monitoring our spending habits.* So now they introduce a time limit before the Småland is pulled from the shop. Not today, not tomorrow - but soon enough that I will shortly have to make up my mind whether I am truly prepared to let her go for good. The clock, as they say, is ticking. Would I eventually have bought the Småland if she'd remained in the shop indefinitely? Quite possibly. Will I buy her now, before she disappears for good? Very probably. Will this experience leave me with a feeling of maybe having been just a little bit manipulated? Almost certainly. I should make it clear that I have no issue with Wargaming trying to make a good sale. That's why they are in business, after all, and I don't mind at all paying for the privilege of playing what I still consider to be the best and most entertaining online PvP game currently available. It should also be said that there may very well be other reasons, besides a wish to push through sales, for pulling a given ship from the shop. An overabundance of the concerned ships on the servers has been quoted as a reason for this particular pull, and that can certainly be a valid reason to remove a ship from sale. A greater variety of ship types on the team lists is inherently good for the gameplay, no argument there. What I don't like, however, is the feeling of playing under pressure. I am well aware of the psychological mechanism known as "fear of missing out". If Wargaming hadn't been so keen on using this very mechanism along with the even more effective "sunken cost fallacy" during that whole deplorable Puerto Rico debacle some time ago, I might have been less suspicious. As it is, I find myself being put to the choice of committing to either a forced grind or a fairly substantial expenditure of accumulated free xp, or lose out on the chance of ever getting the Småland... right before the introduction of a new commander skill system with a higher skill point roof. Right. So forgive me if I'm feeling a wee bit skeptical here. This reminds me, by the way, of two old riddles: Q: What is the tragedy of a puppet that can see the strings? A: It is still a puppet. Q: What is the tragedy of the puppeteer? A: Waking up alone when the puppet has cut its strings. Cheers! * Because they very obviously are closely monitoring our spending habits. Why else would a personal 30% discount coupon, valid for no more than three days, suddenly appear in my account only minutes after I had used up my currently available 25% discount coupon on a purchase of the Thunderer, three days ago? Well played, I do admit.

Judging when to push and when to retreat is one of the hardest things to learn, when playing a battleship. It goes without saying that it is also one of the main keys to victory. I'm still not nearly good enough as a battleship player to give reliable advice on how to handle them. But with that disclaimer out of the way, I will say this: An active playstyle is always better than a passive playstyle, and a thousand times more fun. So when in doubt, try to push in and make a difference!

Ship in Black You wonder why I paint my carrier black, Why you never see bright colours on her back? And why does her appearance seem to have a somber tone Well, there’s a reason for the camo she’s put on She wears the black for those who cling to hope, Who still believe that flak will let them cope She wears it for the AA-cruisers left behind by time, The victims of a meta-changing crime She wears the black for DD:s with no smoke, Who wonder why their little ship just broke She wears it for the battleship who shot one squadron down, And found three others taking it to town She wears the black for submarines, in shame Like her, they will eat salt in every game She wears the black to cover up the fact that she can’t burn - A privilege she didn’t have to earn One reason she wears black is also that She thinks it makes her look not quite as fat She wears it for herself – since, as I’d like to clearly state, She really didn’t choose her reworked fate She wears the black to recognize her fault In being such a constant source of salt She wears it as a message: ”I would like to fight you true!” Which, to her shame, she’s not allowed to do Oh, I’d love to paint my carrier silver white, And tell my fellow gamers she’s all right But as long as she’s an overpowered, noob-enabling hack When she sails out – she’ll be the Ship in Black ___________

The quick turret traverse on the Warspite is also a huge plus in my book. It goes well with her nice turning circle, making her fairly nimble. Well, fairly nimble for a 33 000 long tons-displacement battleship, anyway. But you get the idea.

If I didn't already have the Smolensk and the Kléber, I'd probably go for the Marceau. As it is, I've long been planning to get the Thunderer, partly for much the same reasons as given by DanSilverwing in post #16 above, but mainly because I need to up my BB skills anyway and I've heard so much good about the Thunderer in general. That said, if you don't already have the Alaska, I would definitely recommend getting her if you'd otherwise risk missing out on her. She is hands down one of the best tier IX cruisers in the game, in my opinion.

There is absolutely no excuse for behaving badly towards another player simply because that player has decided to get, and play, a ship that is provided for use in the game. This goes for the ARP Yamato as well as, for example, any carrier that happens to draw ire solely because of its class. (Hate the carrier, love the the carrier player, in other words. ) Poor form, you say? Maybe so - but not on the individual player's side, as I see it. No one should be blamed for simply playing the game as provided by Wargaming. Having said that, you raise a most valid point. Please allow me to elaborate. I agree completely that beginner players should not jump headlong into higher-tier gameplay. Ideally, a player should proceed up the tiers at whatever pace suits him or her best, proceeding from one tier to the next only when his or her personal skills have reached a level to suit the new game environment. How long this may take is obviously very much dependent on individual circumstances, with the main theme being that players should ideally be matched up so that everyone on a given tier can expect to have a good time playing together. When World of Warships was first launched, progression up the silver lines was paced so that no one could reach the higher tiers without having put in a serious amount of game time. And while a thousand games played will certainly not guarantee a high level of skill (yes, I am looking at myself here), it will at least ensure a sound familiarity with the basics of the game. The access to tier VIII premium ships somewhat invalidated this principle, of course, but on the other hand, the system is fairly self-regulatory. I bought my first tier VIII premium, the Atago, on my first day of playing the game - and the first time I took her out (about five minutes later), I got stomped so hard I spent the better part of the next week digging my bruised ego out of the sea bed. This taught me a lot about how I should go about moving up the tiers at a carefully measured pace. At the same time, having access to a few tier VIII premiums gave me the opportunity to occasionally test the waters at higher tiers (pun intended), which I believe was actually good not only for building up my confidence, but also for improving my understanding of the game. So having access to tier VIII premiums right from the start is not a problem, as I see it. No one expects a tier VIII premium to carry its weight in a tier IX or X game anyway. But having access to tier X premiums? Top tier ships that can be bought from day one, and played as the first ships you ever launch? That seems to be - maybe? - a bit questionable, to use Flamu's favourite expression. But while I acknowledge that there may be a problem with having tier X premiums in the game, I must state - with emphasis - that the responsibility for this lies solely with Wargaming. It is up to them to decide whether or not to provide access to tier X from day one of playing the game, and now they have chosen to do so. I shall not even attempt to predict what effects this will have on the long-term development of the game, but personally I am not overly worried. We have had tier IX premiums around for a long time now, and the game has survived that just fine. I'm sure we can deal with a few anime Yamatos as well. So while I would most certainly advise beginner players to take their time moving up the tiers, I wouldn't dream of trying to make them feel unwelcome at any tier. In conclusion to this wall of text, I would like to welcome not only OP:s partner, but also every other player who might be so inclined, to join the fun. Enter freely, play to the best of your ability, and have a good time in the company of fellow gamers!

I'll join the choir: Buy the Massachusetts! She's one of those happy ships that can do well in any situation, whether in co-op or randoms, whether sailed by a noob or a unicum. Unlike the Georgia she can brawl, and unlike the Tirpitz she can trade punches with other same-tier battleships on an even footing (not counting the Tirp's torpedoes, obviously). I have a soft spot for the Tirpitz, probably mainly due to fond childhood memories of war documentaries and riveting novels, but if I were to recommend just one tier VIII battleship in WoWs, it would be the Massachusetts. And while you're at it you might consider going for the Black edition, it it's available. The 'Black Mass', as I tend to call her, is one of the prettiest ship designs in the game. Best of luck!

The best tier X destroyer, in my opinion, is the Daring. She's an excellent allrounder, with tools to handle just about any situation she might find herself in (including duels with carriers and the upcoming submarines). And unlike many other strong ships, her great utility isn't really weighed down with any particular weakness. In spite of this I'd say that she is still not overpowered, since it takes a lot of personal skill to get the most out of her capabilities. This, as I see it, only adds to her charms. I appreciate that the Halland has gotten so much love in this thread. She's an excellent ship, and it's true that she is very well adapted to the current game meta. Even so, she's quite a bit more situational, and far more dependent on her team mates than the Daring.

Very much this, I'm afraid. Any kind of "quick message" or other type of "friendly torps alert" button, would be immediately interpreted as a legitimization of second line torpedoing. Those players who consider forethought and consideration for their team mates to be an unwelcome burden to their play style, would use it as moral justification for continuing to not give a damn.

The basic rule here - which is laid down by Wargaming as the owner of the game, and implemented by the automatic and therefore impartial team killing penalty - is really very simple: When one of your torpedoes strikes an ally, it is always your fault. Blaming your ally for not dodging your torpedo is kind of* like throwing a rock in the back of the head of someone walking in front of you, and then blaming him for being in the way of your intended target. It doesn't work like that. And no, you can't shift the blame by writing "look out for the torpedoes" in the chat, any more than you could by shouting "look out for the rock" as you threw it. This does not mean that it is pointless to write a warning in the chat if you see that your torpedoes are on their way to strike an ally - on the contrary, it is absolutely the right thing to do. What it does mean, though, is that even if you do write such a warning, it is still your fault if your torpedoes end up striking your ally anyway. It makes no difference whether this happened because your ally missed the warning (an easy thing to do in the middle of a battle), or if he was unable or unwilling to comply with it (it is not always possible or advisable to make a sudden turn in an on-going engagement). The fault was yours, wholly and totally, for creating a friendly-fire situation to begin with. And you can't absolve yourself by writing a warning before you launch your torpedoes, either - you have no right to impose in such a way upon your allies' in-game options and choices. No one wants to be boxed in by torpedo walls coming up from behind. As you will have no doubt realized from the preceding posts, your opinions on this matter have met with rather solid and unanimous opposition, myself included. Most of these posters (hopefully including me) have provided valid and well-argued reasons for their point of view. You have made it clear that you still stick to your opinions. You have every right to do so. Opinions aside, I trust that you will still abide by the rules of the game until such time as Wargaming may see fit to change them - which I, personally, hope they will not do in this case. Sending torpedoes from second line and then blaming the ensuing team kills on the victims is not only against the rules - it's bad form, pure and simple. Cheers! *I write "kind of", since this is an arcade war game and friendly fire is a tactical element of the game. Throwing rocks at people in real life is criminal assault.