eliastion

That's a color-blind Kraken! 5 ships sunk - pity that one of them green

That's not true. You see, Akizuki suffersa lot from enemy angling against her. The thing is - who would angle against her if there's a BB in the vicinity? Akizuki is a support vessel - unlike many DDs she doesn't work too well if alone. If she has friends, however, that's a whole other story. Her HE does very little damage and fire chance is small - but she shoots so much of it that she can set fires pretty reliably nonetheless, especially if eupipped with fire flags. Her AP is pretty effective against non-angled targets - and if the enemy is pressured by an ally, she is bound to have some good angles to shoot at. Basically, a good (that is: knowing both his and enemy ship and able to apply that knowledge) Benson player would probably win a 1v1 against an equally good Akizuki. 2-3 Bensons, however, would most likely end up torn to shreds by 2-3 Akizukis. Because it's just not possible to angle against all of them. So, to sum my point up - Akizuki doesn't rely on enemies making mistakes. She relies on enemies not being able to give her their undivided attention. The Akizuki player just needs to make sure to position his ship accordingly - thus it's about him doing something right rather than the enemy doing something wrong (unless you consider enemies fighting outside of 1v1 situations "doing something wrong" ).

Well, you fit in so perfectly - why leave?

I don't usually belong to clans but separate clans definitely sound better - after all, IF someone wants to be in the same clan, there's a big chance that it would operate in all games and he can just join the same clan/people in each of them (just like there are people who are members of the same clan in WoT, War Thunder, WoWs and Starcraft for good measure ). A unification, however, would force people into the same clans. Despite some of them potentially being restricted to only one title - after all if there was a ship-lovers clan Ships: The Fun Unlimited, it wouldn't make much sense for people who join it to automatically be members of the same clan in WoT despite 90% of members playing exclusively WoWs.

I'm not much into USN DDs but that's for the same reason I feel the need to disagree. On most gunboats the three skills are all viable. On USN - AFT not so much. The range sounds nice but USN guns are so woefully unreliable at these ranges that it's not even funny. If you want USN DD to be dangerous at longer ranges - DE will improve your effectiveness at ranges where you can actually land shells on BBs. If you want to focus on Benson's knife-fighting specialty - SE will give you better results (not much use in setting DDs on fire, after all ). But AFT? Better leave that one to Russians, Polish and maybe Germans (no experience with these beyond t2 that's SO MUCH FUN that I found myself stuck sealclubbing... why couldn't they make a higher tier funboat like that t2? ).

Speaking of Carriers - Scharnhorst should have IJN carrier loadouts.

In the meantime - finally! My Yugumo got a 1st win of the day! All I had to do was play one battle where I got caught with my pants down and died doing about 10k damage and not capping anything

Thx, I'll definitely try that next time However! My whinethread worked already! I've broken this cursed streak! ...by losing 3rd in team this time ...well, I guess I could secure a victory going AFK, though? Or getting detonated by 1st salvo, that tends to work with ordinary weekend doubles

Not much of a trade-off on BBs (the primary users) though - as they tend to be spotted more or less permanently if in combat. Although if that meant being spotted through islands and smoke, then perhaps...

Ok, my signature shows my thoughts about WG:EU marketing policies but let me defend them here. 1. First mission just does itself. Boom, done. 2. Second mission is trivial. I don't really play much in secondary-equipped ships so it might be a bit tedious but still - it's just a small bit of grind. 3. Third mission is finally a challenge. Yes, you need a very good game to complete this one, especially if you're playing on lower allowed tiers. HOWEVER the requirements are, in fact, pretty decent. Kill 3 ships and deal 140k damage - basically "do an overall great job". 4 or 5 frags would be frustrating, but 3 on 140k battle? Unless you get it by setting random fires on ships that don't do much, you're almost guaranteed to get these frags! Oh, and 140k damage should guarantee top4 damage too. So, we have a tough but fair mission for 1 mil credits. 4. This is the hardcore one. Yes, 10 torpedo hits are hard and torps love to hit saturated sections so 100k torp damage is pretty hard too. And you need to qualify for top 3 damage - 100k might not be enough (although if you use your guns a bit AND score 100k torp damage, this part shouldn't be much of a problem - though very frustrating if this happens to be the part preventing you from completing the mission). So, we have a hardcore mission (with one slightly questionable but probably mostly irrelevant aspect) for some camos and consumables (geared towards the class you need to complete this stage). This is not a mission for everyone, of course - but it isn't a STUPID mission (like chasing down CVs...). It requires you to play your torp boat as you would normally - and get a great match in it. And if you don't like torp boats, you just end on stage 3, 1mil credits is still a nice addition and you don't miss on some super-awesome unique content, right? This mission chain is better than many previous iterations. If all weekly mission chains were like this one, I'd be happy with general shape of weekly missions.

What a load of bull. 1. Scharnhorst isn't a ship that "can perform well" against especially bad enemies - it CONSISTENTLY performs well. 2. Scharnhorst is SECOND MOST PLAYED SHIP AT t7! It is NOT an exclusive ships that just appears once in a while. In last two weeks there were TWO TIMES as many Scharnhorsts sailing around than Nagatos. Despite it being a premium. And yes, there are more Tirpitzes but it's just that t8 is more populated (not to mention that t8 is the highest premium sip tier so people prefer t8 premiums for moneymaking). Scharnhorst actually has similar % games of her silver sister as Tirpitz of Bismarck's. 3. Bismarck is actually considered BETTER than her gold sister - and the stats confirm it. So, you have: - experienced players saying that Bismarck is as good or better than Tirpitz - GOOD experienced players saying the same - stats showing that Bismarck does, indeed, perform better on average Sure. Stats can be disputed. But seeing how consistent all the above are? I'm pretty comfortable in saying that yes, the stats of one of the most played ships of it's tear aren't effect of only elite players playing it, but rather reflect the simple fact that it's a great ship 4. One personal aspect of the issue. average main battery hit% for Scharnhorst over last 2 weeks: 29% YOUR average main battery hit% for her over the same period? 22% You hit a bit above 3/4 of what an average Scharnhorst player does. How does it happen? Might it be that other Scharnhorst players get some version of the ship with better dispersion or more speed to close in on their enemies? Or perhaps, just perhaps, it's not the ship that's in fault here?...

Got my Taiho for x3 first win and seems like I met Admiral_Noodle in his Tirpitz. He didn't score too well, but I wouldn't risk concluding that overabundance of christmas cakes dulled his skills - after all, the enemy didn't really test us much this time. Their major accomplishments included killing exactly two ships and giving Admiral_Noodle a fireproof

You do know that torps have cooldowns, and smoke has cooldown AND limited duration, right? Also, a DD or a cruiser can rush enemy DD in smoke too, because "endless HE spam" shows exactly where smoke-concealed DD is so it's really easy to approach from stern/bow. Oh, and then there are DD/cruiser/BB torps that can be sent into a smoke that shoots HE at you or your allies - I've lost count how many enemy DDs I've countered like this. "Remove stealth" button is nowhere near the only counter for concealed enemies. Just the one that requires the least thinking.

Being shafted always is by comparison. There's no absolute standard for treating your consumers/employees or anyone else - it always comes down to what is considered acceptable by society and how you are treated relative to other people. Let's say that you have a society where black people are not allowed into "white only" buses and trains and must travel by "colored" buses that are slower, with worse conditions and are never on time (not to mention that there's simply less of them). Are black people shafted, are they discriminated against? Sure as hell they are - despite the fact that they actually get to ride buses and trains. It's a huge improvement over having to walk everywhere, right?

Her HE is pretty bad but it's all about setting fires. It has low fire chance but is the very epitome of "throw enough sh*t at the wall" saying - and she throws TONS of sh*t - and even non-penetrating hits can set fires so if you see a target that angles so that you see lots of bounces and non-pens on your AP? Swithch to HE (it switches ammo really fast) and set the bastard ablaze. Also, as for DDs - it's true that they can give you a hard time, but for now, at least, they rarely do that. You see, Akizuki can be outplayed by angling but few DDs realize that since that's such an obscure situation. So they try to dodge your shells but they don't consciously angle to get bounces. Not to mention that Akizuki scales AMAZINGLY with support. A single Akizuki isn't that much of a threat to enemy DDs (compared to some other gunboats) - but imagine an Akizuki coupled with some other DD (not that hard to achieve when 4+ DD/side matches aren't uncommon due to cruisers being so rare). That other ship might actually be an akizuki too - you can't really angle against the two of them, now can you This ship is... special. But it's not a bad ship.

Well, that's literally THE use of smoke that Radar counters the hardest. Offensive smoke is set up where you choose it to be so you can avoid Radar equipped ships. Getting out of trouble, however? Nope. "Trouble" is when a couple enemy ships get too close (likely because you miscalculated something or got close to torp or something like that). Radar is the very tool that makes retreat impossible in the way no other tool does. Hydro can flush you from your smoke but the range is limited. Spotter planes aren't always directly above you. And when worse comes to worst (enemies everywhere or carrier planes right over your smoke) - you can try sitting in this smoke and scream for help while maneuvering your bow to face in the direction you want to retreat to. Radar renders all that useless. Including solid cover you could jump to to hide yourself from the closest ships - if there's a radar in play, everyone with line of fire will see you anyway. It's THE "today a DD dies" consumable It stops retreats, not attacks (well, directly - because obviously DDs with no way out are less likely to attack in the first place, a nice wall od skill from 10km sounds so much more compelling as long as the sea is full of radar-equipped ships).

I believe see-through-islands complete-stealth-removal Radar to be badly implemented and detrimental rather than beneficial for the gameplay. ...the fact that I just wrote literally one sentence, not a long one even, that's basically just a brief, offhand personal opinion about Radar... And by doing so I STILL got to give better arguments than OP who started a whole brand new thread on the issue... I'm somehow scared, really. I mean, seriously, people. If you have a problem with some mechanics, it's ok to voice your opinion. But, ffs, AT LEAST DO TRY TO GATHER UP SOME ARGUMENTS. Especially if you believe the thing's worthy of making a new topic about it!

No, that's retarded, sorry. It's NOW that the aggressive (but not suicidal) players are rewarded - they get to fight the enemy at sensible ranges (and thus deal damage) AND they win more because if one team mostly pushes while the other mostly camps, the former often claims victory despite not really killing more enemy ships (or, in fact, despite losing more ships, as long as it doesn't come down to whole push crumbling). Campers are burdened with time pressure and are more likely to lose or go fight for the caps eventually - this time at disadvantage since it's the enemy who holds the strategic position at that point. But - what if you remove capping? CAMPERS WILL WIN MORE. Pushing (unless done as a concise team - how often does that happen?) will mean that less of allied ships fight more of the enemy ships, the latter probably retreating (putting them at even more of an advantage). And pushing the enemy away from the objectives, that normally lets the pushing team win or force the campers to turn around and fight? Well, no such things since there are no objectives, right? WHY THE HELL would you want to reward camping and punish pushing!?

No.

That seems MUCH more likely.

Works for me without problems.

The problem - and not only with premiums - is that invisifire is the one thing that gives many ships some utility, as most of them are pretty fragile (being DDs or not-especially-tough cruisers). But I guess BBs don't like invisifiring enemies so invisifire needs to go. After all we still witness some people stubbornly playing other classes of ships. But upcoming nerf to Demolision Expert and the prospect of invisi-fire going away should hlep do away with this problem.

Afaik it was always the t6 IJN ship.

Yeah, sure, since people don't move their butts to fight for the zones that need to be capped (otherwise: defeat), they would DEFINITELY move forward without any such incentive! What you're advocating, OP, is the ULTIMATE CAMP-FEST. DDs have no reason to really push - they'd move forward a bit looking for potential targets but no reason for them to really commit and risk having their battle cut short. Since DDs don't really fight it out, cruisers are not compelled to give them much support and endanger themselves. And BBs aren't pressured to move in any way, shape or form - sitting in the back and waiting for the enemy might actually be a valid strategy since it's easier to camp/defend in force than to push without spreading too much (resulting in effective enemy numerical advantage when the first couple of pushing allied ships have to fight the entirety of enemy fleet), not to mention that - having no strategic objective to defend, really - the camper team can just retreat, taking full advantage of shell and torp travel times that give significant advantage to the retreating force compared to the chasing one.

I'm not really doing the #1 for quite some time (partially because I'm pissed at them) and why would I do the other parts? I never said "I'm going to leave because of mission X" nor did I advise people to do that. I do, however, see a point in feedback - it being one of the reasons to even waste times on the Forums. I'm not doing anything in contradiction to what I say. You, on the other hand, explicitly advised people to ignore the community. So - I'm simply suggesting you stick to your own advice. It's not like people pissed about being treated worse than other servers can do you harm. They could even potentially succeed to some extent, getting you better deals. Or they might get completely ignored with no harm to you whatsoever. So... why are you feeling the need to comment on them, especially since you believe it's best to learn to ignore them? Just do it.