eliastion

I don't seem to recall such problem. What I know is that torps seemed more reliable ever since I first picked up TA on carriers and that stats in port to show them having 40 knots speed instead of stock 35. Although I can't completely exclude the possibility that pot stats are wrong and I just fell prey to psychological effect: was so sure torps should be going faster and hitting more reliably that I convinced myself that this is indeed happening But I don't think so.

There is also torp acceleration that makes a big difference for torp bombers (the torps have more than enough range and are painfully slow - it's a big boost for any CV that uses torp bombers, even just a single squadron of them. And for cruisers that don't rely on consumables much there is always Vigilance - a precious thing if they happen to sail torpedo rich waters. Or, of course, you can pick High Alert - cruisers (well, those that lack heal at least) have much less tolerance for being on fire than BBs.

And they don't take special precautions in case an ally decides to torp them. World of not taking any precautions, it seems.

I would be very, VERY surprised if they could. This is not just a one-time mission that gave a couple hundred times more free XP than it was supposed to. Well, for now I made my IJN DDs in port pretty (all these camos look the same but they do look nice) but I expect them (camos, not ships ) to be gone pretty quickly... ...together with some poor employee that screwed this up... On the other hand - well. Free sample WG might end up actually making money on this thing if some people sail around with these premium camos for a bit and then have them removed. For now... well, the lucky ones can reap benefits for a while. With how WG EU treats the players, I don't really feel to bad for them and their accidental "try out premium camos for free" event

I wonder. It's obviously a bug but then I remember how hard it was for them to fix things like ARP captains clogging reserve and other things like these... Tracking down and removing every mistakenly awarded camo might be a pretty difficult task, really... especially since you don't really want to piss off people who were actually supposed to get them permacamos! Ok, (some) people who never had any premium camos now do have them. If not a bug, do enlighten us what you think it is

Yes, you're missing Mutsuki. I'm kinda amazed, really, WG EU managed to screw players out of one ship even in line reconstruction that was supposed to be identical everywhere I wonder, did NA get fully researched Hatsuharu or stock, like us? At this point I wouldn't be very surprised if they got it researched... EDIT: Unless.. did you perhaps have an old Mutsuki on NA too? Because you would get new Mutsuki if you had old Mutsuki on EU too.

Wouldn't "transfer from another ship" work in this case?

To the predecessor: we REMOVE 3 points and ADD 1, not the other way around. I fixed your points (Kongo 22, Murmansk 6) Zuiho (1/2/1): 21-3 = 18 Kongo: 22 Minekaze: 19 Fujin/Kamikaze: 24 Gremy: 29+1 = 30 Murmansk: 6 König: 25 Königsberg: 20 Gremy is a beast. These guns, speed, pretty good camo allowing for stealth-shooting. Torps are nothing to write home about - but they work too. Zuiho is... well, ok. And on this tier there's not much AA. Still, CVs at this tier have slow planes, not that many planes, they are just... unconvincing, despite relatively good results.

Not so great as some, but - just last game. So... - in my Nagato, try to shoot into smoke where enemy DD hides; as I was aiming (waiting for fire from smoke to give position away) friendly Scharnhorst got close so that my foremost main battery didn't have a completely clear shot (and I didn't notice, too focused on smoke) I fire... - ...1 shell hits the ally, destroys AA mount, deals 2 k damage and sets fire that then procedes to burn dealing further 10k+ damage. Summed up, my damage to him falls just 100hp short of what my AP citadel hits are capable of. Why can't my guns work like that against enemies!?

The probability of that is inversely proportional to amount of HP you have left and triples if your repair consummable is on CD.

No, no, let's be fair. OP doesn't blame an architect - he blames the old lady that was cleaning aforementioned window and didn't notice the ball although she CLEARLY was in a position to do something: close the window or deflect/catch the ball... She did nothing so she's to blame for the broken window. Something must be done about old ladies cleaning windows without looking around if nobody's throwing balls in their direction.

Hey, I have a better suggestion for the devs! Let's have a "report an irredeemable teamkiller" option on the forums so that people like OP can be rewarded with a proper pink nickname. I mean, it's obvious that he'll keep torping his allies because obviously everyone should always look out for teammates showing torps up their stern - it's too boring to just keep tabs on all enemies that can shoot you... And the OP - well, if he was always pink with damage reflecting on him, perhaps he too would at some point reflect upon his own actions. I'd lie if I said that I never torped an ally. And boy, were that some beautiful torping runs or what The thing is, f*ck-ups happen. But it's pretty important to recognize them as f*ck-ups or, at the very least: a calculated risk of hitting an ally - either way the blame is always first and foremost on the torper. It REALLY doesn't matter whether the ally could've done more to avoid the danger.

Of course not, think for a second. The whole point is that current way of counting damage is UTTERLY USELESS because you learn that you dealt, say, 30k damage. Did you cripple 3 DDs? Effectively took 2 cruisers out of the game? Or perhaps you just made one BB sad (but hardly crippled)? The very point here is that you ADD the % damage dealt to each ship. So... - you took away half of one ship's hp - 33% of another one's - 25% from another - finally 17% from the last one Altogether you took 125% - one and a quarter ship's worth of HP. Despite it being only 31,5k damage - an amount that, if dealt to BBs only - would mean that you didn't even manage to carry your weight damage-wise (since you dealt less than one ship's worth of damage).

These are not ranks, these are account levels. And when they changed THOSE last time, we most definitely got compensation for these changes.

Well, that might be immensely frustrating and might count as bad luck but that's not RNG, torp range is fixed ;)

...hits 2-3 shells of which one causes a detonation.

...nope, there's nothing like that in the patch notes. Minekaze isn't downtiered. It's moved to the side branch, horizontally. What she's researched from and what you research from her changes - but she's still a t5 ship that you (potentially) have in your port. She's not removed from there in the first place - therefore you don't need to "receive" her and there's no compensation for her. She just gets nerfed rebalanced. What the patch notes detail is that if you had it researched, you're going to have Mutsuki 5 researched. The only way to get Mutsuki in your port is by having Mutsuki 6 in your port. At least that's what the patch notes seem to imply. PS: Also I'm not sure if having Minekaze researched (but not in port) would ensure you keeping it researched. Common sense would suggest "yes", but we're talking WG after all... I don't care much since I don't plan on using new Minekaze, like, ever (I didn't even use the old one...) but I wonder if I'll have her researched or will I be left with a gap before Hatsu.

Well, there's no reason why you specifically SHOULD dump Minekaze. You just neither lose nor get anything from that. I mean, other than losing the opportunity to try out the new gunboat Minekaze that has worse torps than the torping Minekaze, but to balance it off - also worse guns

Minekaze does not switch the tier, you are just left with it and its massive nerf rebalance for the new role.

The problem is - Shima was not performing well in the first place. I mean, I never played her but when I look up her 2-week stats... There are currently 13 ships on t10. Shima is: 11th in win% 13th in DMG (and she's a torp-focused DD! Her primary prey are supposed to be BBs, these things that are overabundant currently AND individually have the most hp to "give" to their vanquishers!) 13th in XP 13th in K/D ratio 13th in kills 13th in plane kills 10th in survival % Clearly seems like a ship in dire need of further nerfs...

Retraining for another ship is something I can do with a bit of playing and credits. Where is the necessary skill redistribution for captains that suddenly get brand new ships? Different ships benefit from different builds (and with a skill like torpedo acceleration some skills can actually make certain ships worse) and there's no way around it - either doublons or a need to train a new captain from scratch. I don't need more captains with 5 or 7 skillpoints to distribute - I need to be able to use the ones I have on the ships they will now crew.

That would be because US carriers are rubbish. They have great bombers but using these doesn't really reward skill. They have small amounts of torp planes but with a single drop (that's how much most of them have) of torps that are very close to each other... once again - your skill is mostly irrelevant. It's harder to avoid them than a single IJN drop but if the enemy maneuvers well - there's little the US CV captain can do. Usually he'll score 1, MAYBE 2 hits (this drop is really densly filled with torps, very hard to slip past, esp. in something bigger than a DD) but for more you basically need enemy mistake... Also, even having any torp bombers often means going without any figters at all - a frustrating experience and leaving your allies more vulnerable to the enemy. Of course, you can go for an AS loadout. US carriers have great fighters - but then you pretty much play to make enemy carrier's life miserable... and it's not even effective in Randoms because the fleet tends to split, some people go alone and often if you let even one good strike happen - it's likely that the enemy CV has already contributed that way more than you'll be able with the pitiful excuse for a strike force you get as an AS. Tl;dr version: It's not the power of IJN CVs that makes them preferable over US ones - it's the frustrating and boring nature of loadouts US CVs have available. Yes, they also perform worse but that's not what causes most of the disproportion.

Ok, I answered "no", but let me elaborate. I am most definitely not against great games being rewarded despite suffering a defeat. Your place in the team, however is NOT a good condition. To do that you don't actually need a great game. All you need to do would be doing slightly better than all these (other) potateoes. And THAT might even be a result of your BAD play - a BB snipes, the team crumbles in a heartbeat (and lack of BB on the frontlines is one of the reasons), the enemies chase the last kills and get careless (the game is won already and service cost is flat) so the BB ends up scoring a couple citadels and goes home as top XP. Should such play be rewarded? Definitely not. There are, however, ways to do it better. I have two major ideas for that: 1. One or more of following achievements: Confederate, Kraken, High Caliber. 2. XP among first 3 players from BOTH teams (remember that winners have the *1,5 bonus so scoring in the first 3 means that you outdid 20 other players by a BIG margin) To do one or both of the above you really need to prove yourself. These are truly "should've carried harder" situations that could - and even should - be extra rewarded. You need a great game to achieve any of the above. But just being on top of your team? Well, SOMEONE always is on the top of the team - and most defeated teams tend to just perform badly as a whole, nobody better than the others to the point where I would believe him deserving some extra consolation prize for his efforts.

You can hide your stats and proceed to play a shiny t10 you didn't have to grind. ...not that stats of someone who skipped the grind and jumped into a t10 are going to be any better than what these bots have...