eliastion

The idea to make the difference between premium and normal consumables less pronounced is a good one. The problem is: the nerf to premium consumables messes up the balance. There are ship that rely on certain consumable (or a couple of them) to stay relevant. The most obvious "offenders" would be RN cruisers - not every map has islands you can comfortably lob shells over. The smoke is often "not is the time I can do some actual damage" moment for them. I'm pretty sure 90% of them sail with premium smoke. Nerfing premium smoke is nerfing the line. To varying extent the same applies to various other ships - there are some ship-consumable pairs that I use stock most/all of the time, but also some where I don't leave port without paying for the premium version. Ships that have one or more consumables from the second group get nerfed with such changes.

I have some camos and they look nice but I'm pretty much restricted to using them on BBs and CVs since they offer no normal camo bonuses...

...so... somebody took offense at "cancerships" and that's a proof of "BB agenda" AND warrants a separate thread? Seriously, people, what are you smoking?

It's the f-you mission. I play high-tier DDs pretty often and even on 150k+ damage games hardly ever do I witness more than 5k, maybe 10k flooding damage. The real role of flooding is not dealing damage - it's the threat of doing damage that makes people hit "repair" right the moment torps hit them. Then you light them up with HE and watch the remnants of their hp tick away (or hp fluctuating if they had the heal up). Flooding itself? Hardly ever does any significant damage. I mean, ok, it's actually easier to score serious flooding on carriers since airdropped torps have less alpha and you can actually target an enemy under fire from allied cruisers. Then, as long as your prey doesn't go down too quickly, you can score some flooding damage. But the mission has "DD" written on it. But, oh well, I myself am still stuck even earlier - with 8 fires mission - since I don't really play the dedicated firestarter cruisers...

Hey, you're talking a BB player that goes towards some objective - that alone places him firmly in WoWs top half.

If it's strong enough now, doesn't it mean it was overpowered and needed the nerf before?...

No. There is a good reason why they made the change from "repair cost" to "service fee". Whatever class you play, nobody expects you to suicide - it is, however, your job to make the most of the battle. Sniping (avoiding damage at the cost of effective contribution to the team), be it by long-range BB fire or long-range DD torps should NOT be rewarded by lowered service costs offsetting lack of income. The only two problems with this change is that CV economy wasn't properly adjusted and that many people don't seem to realize how service costs work.

This proposition boils down to unintuitive (based on "period" rather than already existing tier system) protected matchmaking system for certain ships... And protected matchmaking is hardly what we need more of. We already have some in place and there are tons of people pretty pissed about that, since any such change inevitably creates ships that end up with much more than expected bottom tier matches. Also, about this specific proposition. It's really, really, REALLY bad. I won't even explain why, I'll just give an example. Hull A Bayern. One of the best t6 ships. If stock: guaranteed top tier, because there is literally no t7 ship that would be period 1. Of course, there would be also some ships in the opposite situation - ships that nobody would play upgraded because that would mean 100% matches being as bottom tier. Such a situation is, to put it mildly, NOT optimal. Now, as for CVs at low tiers. The biggest problem with low tier CVs stems from the fact that high-tier CV gameplay and economy are currently pretty frustrating. There is A LOT of AA, enemy CVs are often competent in making your life miserable and people in ships you try to attack generally have some vague ideas about dealing with aircraft. And then, after dealing with all of these and managing a good game... the XP and credit rewards end up being rubbish compared to what similar contribution would give them in any other ship class. What it means is that a lot of experienced (but less ambitious) CV players seem to have switched exclusively to sealclubbing on tiers where CVs face very little opposition in form of AA. Now, sealclubbing in any class might be a problem - but in CVs the difference in skill is MUCH more pronounced than anywhere else. Experienced CV players, even pretty bad ones - if faced by genuinely new ones - just swat opposing fighters out of the sky via strafing and then proceed to perform basic manual drops on ships with little to no AA, captained by players with no experience in facing CVs. Results: carnage. But the real problem is on high tiers, not on low ones - the CV sealclubbers' club is but a symptom.

Not necessarily. For DD hunting - yes. But for DDs that want to actually stay stealthy? These guys actually get better spotting ranges (so they have advantage over their enemies here) and having RPF gives some feedback to the enemy too. Depending on the map and situation, it's actually possible to find out where the enemy invisible DD with RPF is solely based on the fact that you know you're the closest allied ship to SOMETHING. That often gives you the idea as to where aforementioned something might be. I've actually seen such situation in the very first match I've played on Test Server with new skills - I lacked the skill but I managed to pretty precisely pinpoint enemy's location on the North map just because he did have it. But yes, it's going to be potentially a very important skill for gunboats. ALTHOUGH I wouldn't go as far as to call it a "must have". It's still 4 skillpoints.

THIS. I do believe one of the main reason why the change didn't work was that it was not announced enough. I get the feeling that like 30% or less are aware that you don't actually lose credits by being damaged/sunk compared to ending the battle at full hp.

When you don't have man spec, the guns that can't turn towards specced target WILL fire on whatever they can. Like with AA guns - if you focus a squadron outside your range or outside range of some of your AA guns, those that can't reach it will fire at whatever, as if nothing was selected.

Wait, did you REALLY test this skill? I'm pretty sure that it's making you launch (and launch, not service) aircraft while on fire, but it takes twice as long as launching from intact deck... Did you test it whether you actually have some delays (when not on fire) with this skill?

Well, they kinda can - if said ship refuses to change course for a couple minutes! But that doesn't have much in common with invisifire (other than WG trying to nerf it to the ground lately).

It doesn't. Or the intention is deeply flawed. Basically, the problem with RN cruisers is that there are four scenarios (for the usual situation where you hit smoke while slowing down): 1. You sail too fast. You produce two puffs of smoke and you stop out of cover. 2. You sail slow enough. You produce two puffs of smoke and stop in the cover of the second one. 3. You sail too slow. You produce ONE puff of smoke and stop out of it. 4. You sail slow enough (again) to stop within your one puff of smoke. It's perfectly ok to have options 1, 2 and 4. If you go too fast, you won't get to stop in time. If you go too slow, you won't get to cover as big of an area with your smoke. HOWEVER the option #3 is pure BS. It makes no sense whatsoever to not be able to stop in your smoke because you were going TOO SLOW.

That's not right. I mean, you are mistaken. Yes, they both end on the same day. HOWEVER there is nothing stopping you from finishing GS chain right when the last step becomes available. Note that the mission that unlocks the final step is time-gated - but the final mission of the campaign is not. So while you have until 18th to finish the chain, you can get it done with right on 9th. Leaving you a bit over a week to grind through the convoy missions. Yes, it's a hard grind, especially if you try to do it without premium account, but it's most definitely possible.

Actually, as a CV player (or at least ALSO CV player) and DD main I'd like to say that I don't really see floatplanes as that much of a threat. I mean, yes, it's a skill that will have its uses, but... 1. The torp spotter. That might be where the skill shines the most but the fact is that I don't really notice my torp attacks being foiled by spotter/fighter plane. Most people don't even use these planes unless specifically reminded (say: seeing enemy strike aircraft incoming or being in the middle of the fight against a DD). 2. DD spotter. Once again, it's highly situational and, frankly, I have more problems with planes of dead ships than those of living ones. I hate (with passion) being spotted by some dumb planes that seem to hover over dead ships forever, denying me access to places I want to be to set up an attack or to fire at my prey... Hardly ever have I suffered from being spotted by a plane from a living ship. And planes of the dead ships are annoying but usually not that much of a problem (although I do consider it bad design that they live so damn long after mothership being out of the equation) 3. AA advantage. Now, it would seem that CVs would suffer the most, having their attacks disrupted by two planes instead of one, right? Well, right - kinda. Because the thing is: the skill has a drawback of limiting the speed of the aircraft. And it's pretty common to actually manage a drop without the floatplane getting to engage the strike planes in time. With two of them there's more of a chance that one will be closer but - being slower - I expect them to not be that much more useful. And the cases where actually BOTH manage to attack my planes? If I linger that long right next to my target, it's not the floatplanes I'm gonna have problems with - it's the fact that half my strike force is likely dead from AA fire... Basically, I wouldn't overestimate the impact of the second floatplane. I mean, it's most definitely not the joke of a skill like Expert Loader but I do believe it's usefulness is comparable with PM for example. Or, maybe, IFA for cruisers.

You miss the point. You said that the difference between t3-4 and t5-6 ship (and so the pain of being low tier) is less than between t5-6 and t7-8. That's simply not true. T3 ships especially are completely screwed when faced by +2tier opposition. This is the most prominent in case of BBs but it works for other classes too. T5-6 is, actually, where most lines start being able to pull their weight even when severely outtiered. Kongo is still very fast and its range lets it play the supporting BB role pretty well. Non-stock Fuso still packs a punch. IJN DDs can be dangerous through stealth torping and USN ones - while they do have a harder time - can knife-fight higher tier DDs effectively (as long as the higher tier DD isn't a gunboat too, of course). I'm not sure about USN BBs as I've never played them - but their t5 and t6 cruisers are pretty powerful in their ow way. And yes, St. Louis is a beast at t3 but I most certainly prefer facing t7 BB and CA guns in an Omaha than t5 guns in St. Louis. Basically, the experience of constantly being bottom tier in t5-6 ships is - generally speaking - much less painful than the same situation at tier 3-4. And while I'm not a big fan of too much adjustments like these, I can at least understand WGs thought process behind choosing a LESS painful (though longer) experience at t5-6 (when players are likely to be somewhat hooked already) instead of an absolutely terrible experience of t3-4 that could drive away people who just came to try the game out.

Does NOBODY read patch notes?...

...what. That's more than 10% RPM (and, therefore, DPM and potential fires) for gunboats. How the hell is that NOT powerful? Yeah, it's no concealment expert but denyig its power, really?

I'm not sure what made you think I believe BoS to be good on DDs. I literally called BFT a no-brainer in the very fragment you quoted. And no, BBs don't get anything useful at t1 either. The second floatplane has a bit of limited utility (on some ships) and that's about it. The other choice is PM - and this actually is a nice skill for both BBs and DDs. Those DDs that expect to find themselves in firefights still should invest in engine/rudder never-truly-out skill but I can assure you there is a big difference between having a kinda-working rudder/engine and it being fully operational. Losing them a bit (almost 1/3) less often does make a difference. Not a huge one but a difference nonetheless. The only class that doesn't suffer from "t1 skills are the silly little thingies that might help a bit but won't change your life" is CV - and here it just seems like a mistake, really, since every other class just has to pick from a bunch of skills that are - as is kinda appropriate for the cheapest tier of skills - significantly inferior to choices you get with skills that cost two, three or four times as much.

Well, it is a way they can siphon money out of some people's pockets so the chances aren't zero in this case.

If people on NA server actually do - as some claim - "whine as much as us" about unfair treatment, doesn't that, you know, suggest that SERVERS WANT TO BE TREATED EQUALLY? Like, you know, exactly what we here "whine" about? Wouldn't giving all servers the same prices and opportunities just remove the problem of people upset about uneven treatment?

Oh, yes, you play Atago. Whole 61 games with it, actually. Seems like you like a challenge, though - poor BBs are in such a dire need of buffs... and yet: 1,604 (94.63%) Battleships 11 (0.65%) Aircraft carriers 64 (3.78%) Cruisers 16 (0.94%) Destroyers

The points you're bringing up aren't really that good, though. Yes, BFT was a skill that was useful for DDs. So useful, in fact, that it was a no-brainer for them. So useful that it will still be a must-have for all gunboats. That's the thing - it was a powerful skill at 1 point. The reshuffle intended to make it so that powerful skills are appropriately expensive. They didn't accomplish it everywhere but DDs aren't the only ones that don't have a strong skill at t1. T1 is full of trinkets. You don't get to choose between BFT (amazing for DDs, important for secondary and AA builds) and BoS (important for BBs) anymore - skills you choose from are pretty weak, really, unless you're a CV (they for some reason get one of the most important skills at t1). PM and DSfCA are occasionally useful, IFA and PT might give some information but are mostly useless, EL is a joke. I mean, yes, DDs "lost" a good choice of t1 skill but that's simply because having a good choice of t1 skill is against the philosophy of having a skill tree with progressively higher cost for better skills.

1. Yes, you are right, I think it's 9 days or something like that, in fact. 2. Well, they want to earn money. That's how this campaign was designed from the start: play REALLY hard... or pay for GS bundle to have more time. That's also where the original design of GS sale (expensive bundles first, cheaper ones unlocked as time goes on) comes from: the more time you want/need the more money you need to pay.