eliastion

Well, him losing to you in the air isn't the fault of AS, though. The problem isn't that AS can't dominate strike carrier in the air. The problem is that dominating the air doesn't translate to being helpful to your team because "a bomber will always get through". And while dominating air is a good thing, you still need that damage to outweigh the drops that do inevitably happen.

Ranked is specific in that smaller (and better coordinated) team can be better protected with fighters AND spotting is even more important. So yes, I'd say that AS might actually be competitive in Ranked. But Ranked is a special mode that's not even available all of the time.

Well, I might PERHAPS use that one upgrade that gives extended engine boost. I think it goes on DDs into the slot that normally is filled with mod that makes steering or engine less resilient and faster repaired. I mean, I have the anti-breaking-up skill AND Last Stand - perhaps a better engine boost could be more useful than a module that gives a bit more of the same? But that's a big "perhaps" - and only for one of the upgrades...

AS is especially nasty of a noobtrap because it gives you the feeling of being useful. I mean, unless you really suck, AS will give you a decent number of shot down planes - problem is, even if you manage to wipe away ALL enemy carrier planes, but do less damage and useful spotting than him, it means that you didn't actually pull your weight. So you can end the match with a strong feeling that you won the air battle while the reality might be completely different: yes, you made enemy CV life miserable, yes, you restricted him to maybe 1-2 proper drops... but these 1-2 proper drops might've still helped his team more than your contribution helped yours. What's worse, it doesn't mislead only the AS carrier! The actual winner who helped his team noticeably can finish the game, look at his low score, look at his plane reserves that run out before the battle was over... and he can come to a conclusion that he actually lost the CV vs CV and got carried by the team to undeserved victory. And what do such a novice player who wants to perform do? Well, next time he tries the AS setup because it seems to work better, right? And I can't really blame them. I mean, it does feel like you're losing when enemy is AS. And it does often feel like your winning when you are AS. Only when you think a bit about the conclusion and the non-obvious nature of CV vs CV, when you notice the pitiful damage you dealt compared to that one good enemy drop that got through despite your efforts - only then you can figure out that that enemy you seemingly dominated in the air all game long... might've actually been more useful than you in the grant scheme of things...

New upgrades are crap. They end up in important slots and while a couple might be of arguable situational validity, I really can't imagine many people buying them for credits instead of the standard ones. Now, that alone wouldn't be that bad - situational modules for select few that find them useful would be ok. Even bad modules nobody wants are, at worst, a noobtrap. But you didn't add them to shop - you're stuffing them into supercontainers. Now THAT is absolutely ridiculous. "Loook, after 3 months of TYL containers you got a supercontainer and it is... an upgrade that you'll never use because it's worse than standard ones!" And don't even get me started on Rankeds. Previous seasons almost every single new Rank gave you something nice - useful signals in generous quantities, useful camos, doublons... Now? After reaching Rank 11 the next actual reward is at Rank 1. WHO WANTS THIS JUNK!? Perhaps it can be sold for credits, but really, I don't need credits and most people playing for high Ranks probably don't suffer shortage of these either. Now, if it was "a new special module of your choice" at one or two of the ranks - that would be acceptable. You play Ranked, you are rewarded with some special module that might be useful in special circumstances (or just fetch a good sale price otherwise). But throwing module after module on people for Rank after Rank, until they have the whole collection of junk!?

Well, they just acknowledge that some signals are better than others. I mean, +50% captain XP is strictly worse than +50% XP... and then there's the ramming signal...

People who DON'T pick credits get shafted a bit, though. 4 flags instead of 5 per stack. Supercontainers more often - but it doesn't matter when they appear once every two months if you're lucky. And TYL containers non-supercontainer rewards took a HUGE hit - 4 signal flags? 2 premium camos? Laughable at best.

It's not really that. I mean, the real physics are most likely not implemented but for the purpose of aiming it's not that relevant because the aiming is based on "where do you want to hit" not "which way do you want to aim your guns". So if firing at specific place in water, you don't counter-lead your speed - you pick the place and your non-existent artillery officers do their magic to have your guns hit as close to where you ordered as possible. This applies to firing at moving targets too - you call where to shoot. And that's why you need to pick the place where the target is going to be after shells' time-to-target.

Yes, such games are common. No, they don't seem to be any more nor less common than usual. Random MM plus snowballing nature of the game (after killing 2 ships you have more firepower so the enemy not only needs to make up for the "points" (lost ships) but do so with less players on the "field"). It's always like that but sometimes someone starts paying attention, leading to him noticing it more, leading to ANOTHER thread about "recent" surge of one-sided games...

To not pick the same ships as last time (when there's still so many to choose from)... this time I'll speak from perspective of an opponent of these ships ;) Akizuki: 21 Kagero: 17 Benson: 21 Benson/Lo Yang (Def. AA): 14 Lo Yang (Mk. 15 mod. 0): 20 Lo Yang (Mk 31): 20 Z-23: 20 Mogami (155mm): 15 Mogami (203mm): 11 Atago: 27 New Orleans: 11 Chapayev: 21 Mikhail Kutuzov: 22 Admiral Hipper / Prinz Eugen: 17 Edinburgh: 21 Amagi: 20 North Carolina: 20 Tirpitz: 21 Bismark: 20+1 = 21 - These secondaries are monstrous. They give me nightmares as DD main and the ship seems so much more flexible than other BBs of the same tier. Shokaku (2/2/2): 20 Shokaku (3/1/2): 20 Lexington (1/1/1): 17 Lexington (2/0/2): 11-3 = 8 - Usually when I hate to play aganst something, that means it's good. AS CVs are an exception. Yes, 2/0/2 Lexi is a pain in the butt for enemy CV but 2 DB squads just don't cut it. If the enemy manages to deliver even one solid strike, Lexi just can't catch up with just the bombers! And let's face it: you can't count on stopping all enemy strikes when you have just 2 fighter squadrons. It takes a total potato to not be able to outplay your air cover at least once or twice in a Random match (with teams spread as thin as they usually are in Randoms). Lexington (0/1/3): 17

The problem with draws was real, though. It was mostly caused by CVs, however. Their ability to de-cap is pretty limited now but was better then (less AA) leading to a situation where a 1v3 or 1v4 scenario was relatively often ending in draws because the CV was able to stay afloat while still being able to slow capping down enough for the timer to run out. Surviving DDs were the second-worst problem, other classes to lesser extent. But the point is: it was just frustrating that the good games (where teams were relatively evenly matched) were ending in draws so often. In my opinion what WG SHOULD have done is not removing draws but rather making them better (if victory gives *1.5 multiplier, a draw could grant some *1.2 or sth - still better to win one and lose one than to get two draws but better than just losing) to remove the frustration accompanying them. But if they were unwilling to do that... then draws had to go.

Yes. Do you know why low tier games seem so enjoyable? That's because most of your opponents can't shoot straight nor can they angle or retreat when needed. They push without knowing how to push and when you push they have no clue how to stop you. In higher tiers more people are capable of shooting straight and this, unfortunately, leads many others to become overly cautious. Yes, it can be fun to go on lower tiers and club some seals but such behavior hardly deserves praise and most certainly shouldn't be encouraged. Better win% for experienced players and easier achievements are more than enough encouragement already. And don't misunderstand me, I do, at times, hop onto one of my ARP Kongo clones or grab a Gremy... Hell, I can even go to t2 to play in Mikasa (damn, she'd be useless if opponents had the slightest idea what they're doing) or that one t2 german DD (that little thing is a beast, and so much fun to play!). I'm in no position to condemn anyone for wanting an easy, forgiving match once in a while. But let's face it - going on tiers 5 and below isn't challenging yourself and your skills, not by a long shot. And it can discourage new players who have little chance of surviving against an experienced enemy in thoughtfully specced-up ship with high-skill captain. That, in fact, reinforces the feeling that one needs to hide in the back to survive - and by the time these guys reach high tiers, boom, camping meta gets stronger than ever. I don't condemn experienced players for playing some low tier games (unless "some games" become "career sealclubbing in low-tier carrier" or something like that). But I don't believe it's a good idea to encourage such behavior.

Do we really want to encourage sealclubbers? Because that's how you encourage sealclubbers... Basically, the very reason for high tier events is to have experienced players play against other experienced players in high tier ships rather than farm newbies in low-tiers.

The upgrades aren't the ship configuration tree - it's these things you put in upgrade slots for the ship. Gun and steering gear modifications etc.

It's already FAR too tilted that way, damage being terribly underrewarded compared to planes on higher tiers. USN AS set-ups often doom their team through lack of actual contribution while still scoring more XP than enemy strike CV that helped their team immensely. I don't want the return of the times where shooting planes gave you pretty much nothing but we definitely don't need more encouragement for what's ultimately a self-defeating choice of loadout and playstyle. The only thing you're right about here is spotting XP, the amounts received seem to be negligible. Figures in the range of 100-200k spotting damage (and not insignificant part of that to DDs that are otherwise hard to pin down) should amount to something - they don't. Not to mention things like torp spotting - now that's something I'd like to see CVs trying to do, I don't think it's rewarded at all, frankly while it can make a significant difference, especially when there are DDs in torped smoke - that extra bit of advanced warning can be the difference between life and death. CV should get some kind of "proxy tanking damage" equivalent for torps spotted by planes that then missed an ally in reasonable proximity (suggesting that said ally might've been hit had he not received the warning).

BBs seem to be in a slightly better position xp-wise IF both them and DDs survive till the end of the game. And I mean DDs that use their guns well, ofc, torping might help with some heavier blows to enemy BBs but these are much less important than farming your fellow DDs with guns... It's hard to say something about cruisers - I don't play them much and they seem to have more potential than BBs, but there's a catch - they need to stay in fight AND stay alive. Seeing how easily they get farmed by BBs, the two become mutually exclusive with the slightest positioning error. I think great players can have great games in them (possibly overshadowing other classes) but average - nevermind poor - players are likely to get less rewards for their efforts than in either BBs or DDs. And then there are CVs. Now here the thing is pretty clearly cut - while other classes' (dis)advantages reward-wise might be debated, CVs are just outright shafted. The rewards for spotting DDs are puny. Rewards from chasing them away from points are non-existent. Rewards for killing them are nice but really require a big blunder on DD's part or lots of luck (torps into smoke that end up connecting). Damage to BBs isn't rewarded much - even if you do cripple the enemy so that he ends up sunk by your allies quickly enough, your main contributiion is that you evaporated so much of his hp QUICKLY and that you forced a broadside-exposing turn. The actual %hp of damage isn't that great. And, unlike BBs, you don't get juicy big % damage on cruisers because they usually have good AA, often AA consumable AND they turn well enough to throw your attacks off. And, of course, CVs can't tank or cap bases - and killing planes doesn't really make up for it. All in all, a CV can carry his team to victory and end up among first 5. I did get 1st spot a couple times but the these were REALLY extreme situations. The situation is sligtly helped by the fact that CVs usually don't end up dead last (it requires an epic f*ck-up to die quickly without doing anything) so the average results aren't THAT far behind other classes. Still, the feeling of just not being rewarded for your effort is really disheartening.

It would be quicker but would it be a good idea? You'd lose any actuall cross-class comparison that way. As it is, we could potentially end up with top 3 made up only of DDs - it would be an interesting observation about the state of the game, wouldn't it? Just like the situation with premiums on t7.

I love it how there are two threads on the front page: - one thread (this one) complaining about standard mode where lack of dominion-like caps mean that aggression isn't rewarded, allegedly leading to "camp mode" - one thread (here) complaining about domination games where playing to the objective can give you quick victory and failing at securing some caps - quick defeat So, well, there you have it, guys. The reason for both modes' simultaneous existence.

I love it how there are two threads on the front page: - one thread (this one) complaining about domination games where playing to the objective can give you quick victory and failing at securing some caps - quick defeat - one thread (here) complaining about standard mode where lack of dominion-like caps mean that aggression isn't rewarded, allegedly leading to "camp mode" So, well, there you have it, guys. The reason for both modes' simultaneous existence.

It's an older game and the enemy team was rather small (precluding a Kraken), but I believe this game to be manly enough for this thread, despite some technical problems I faced when trying to reach enemies in time to help allies while they were still alive!

There is. Have you seen Shiratsuyu? I don't hate t6 Hatsuharu but the difference is HUGE. Akizuki is a big step into whole other direction but, once again, do you have any idea how much DPM it can pump into not-angled ship? I can't say much about current mid-tier IJN torpers but Yugumo is a monster and fun to play. You also seem to underestimate the change certain high-tier upgrades can make - extra camo, extra range... In fact, certain DDs would scale pretty well even if they were literally the same ship only with access to higher tier upgrades.

BBs aren't very likely to run premium planes but you can count on them having Superintendent for more heals - more planes being a side effect. Similarly high tier cruisers are likely to have the skill for heals, radar and other nice thingies in their suite. So we can easily count a +1 floatplane charge for every floatplane-equipped ship of tier 9-10.

That's not true afaik. Achievements aren't time-gated. You can't farm the rewards more than once in 24h period but you can get the achievements themselves no problem. Why would Clear Sky specifically be any different than the rest in this aspect? Clear Sky is broken by the fact that it counts planes that were never in the air - all these uses of floatplanes that BBs and cruisers end the match without using? These are planes you didn't shoot down too! And if I'm not mistaken, there are even ships that are literally unable to launch all their floatplanes if they wanted (the combination of cooldown and duration makes it impossible to run out of planes). And there is some debate as to whether the "2 floatplanes for the price of one" skill actually doubles the number of planes counted towards the total Clear Sky is based upon...

But the explanations for 3-5% winrate drop would require some combination of these three factors: 1. The weekend players are actually better and the all-week-pros get their butts handed to them 2. All-week-pros themselves just play worse on weekends (idk, maybe they are distracted or preoccupied with that +100% first win bonus) 3. Weekend meta slightly differs from normal and all-week-pros are unable to adjust - they play based on their all-week experience rather than what is actually happening in the game The inverted factor 1 - weekend players being bad - works IN FAVOR of good players since the better you are (compared to average level of noobness among your teammates and opponents) the more impact you have on the game and the better your chance of actually winning the match through decisive contribution. And it should be the case especially when you take actual statistics rather than whiners' whining. After all, if all all-week-pros had on average, say, -5% winrate, what does it mean? These victories needed to go SOMEWHERE - so they must've went to these weekend noobs, right? That or actually the average level of opponents and allies did not drop at all, perhaps any weekend-only noobs' influence was overshadowed by the really good players actually having more time in the weekend to go and play, perhaps even form divisions that they usually don't have time for in the week... And they just whipped the butts of whiny all-week-pros who then go on forums to whine how they got their asses handed to them and how it's magically the fault of the weekend despite the enemy team also playing on the weekend and even at the same hour (since, you know, that's how it works in real-time multiplayer games).

People just love to blame SOMETHING. Frankly, I believe the average skill level might drop a bit (people only playing on weekends, people too focused on 1st wins etc) but the difference isn't really big and it most certainly doesn't negatively affect winrate of more seasoned players. When skill level drops, it drops for both teams - you just need to adjust to what's happening and do your best to exploit enemy mistakes.