eliastion

Having lots of duplicates at the start is bad luck but - unless you make the mistake of exchanging them without first getting enough to finish the collection - it shouldn't make much of a difference in the long run. When people with better initial luck find themselves failing to hit the few remaining items, you'll be still filling the big gaps. Sure it's better to start getting the right items from the very beginning, but the actual impact of bad luck should prove limited... unless you're REALLY unlucky and it persists like this. But that's unlikely.

The skill is ridiculous and unsuited for the game from the moment it first appeared. And I say this as someone who's played A LOT of games in old Akizuki (before 100mm IJN HE change, when she needed the skill to damage same tier DDs with HE) and now plays a lot of Kitakaze (I've already grinded through to Harugumo but have yet to put a captain on her and with that terrible concealment I'm likely to keep having much more fun with Kitakaze). Problem with IFHE isn't the problem of certain ships being overpowered but a problem of the skill being badly designed - and it's made worse when the game doesn't natively inform you what your HE penetration values actually are, making it even harder to assess the actual gains from taking the skill.

Nah. IFHE shouldn't be made even harder to assess viability-wise (and harder to balance - imagine trying to balance damage light cruisers and IJN gunboats do to DDs when they can have or decide against IFHE). With the current state of the game and the way WG handles information both inside and outside of game, IFHE should be removed and all ships should be re-balanced around the assumption that IFHE doesn't exist.

I have, plenty times. In fact I'm pretty sure you've witnessed it too, since when a team gets their sterns handed to them by an enemy CV, it's very often because the friendly CV mishandled their squadrons and fed them to good AA ships. Problem is, you're not looking what's happening to planes - and that's part of the reason why CVs can hurt you badly enough to create this thread and ridiculous poll that literally gives the options "I'm very satisfied and don't want any changes" and "Delete the class of ships from the game" Let me suggest another poll; if someone asked a following question: "Do you think Zlaraki is a good player? a) Yes, he's an awesome, I want him in my team every match. b) No, cut his hands off." Do you think such a poll would be very informative regarding your skill in WoWs?

Well. Technically Minotaur has a torpedo spread as big as the player wants It can even spread across time with some torps of the same spread launched literally minutes after the first one.

Regardless of whether Harugumo is OP or not, your comparison is worthless because you've arbitrarily chosen what strong/weak points are and ignored the rest. For example things like: HP: Minotaur: 43,3k Worcester: 45,4k Harugumo: 25,6k Heal: Minotaur: YES (a superior one at that) Worcester: YES Harugumo: NO AA (enough to deter enemy CVs and at least be a less-than-optimal target): Minotaur: YES Worcester: YES+consumable Harugumo: NO Radar: Minotaur: NO (you've picked smoke Mino so let's stick with that) Worcester: YES HARUGUMO: NO Hydro: Minotaur: YES Worcester: YES Harugumo: NO

How desperate for Credits are you? It's an upgrade that might change and, more importantly, one that might end up not really being obtainable in the future. Even if the chances of a buff were slim - why would you want to sell something like that? Credits are easy to farm in this game.

Event rewarding t10 more is only natural, as I explained. Just stick to arguing against t10 Ranked and CBs, but I'm not sure you'll get all that much consistent traction, considering how strongly people normally b*tch about P2W whenever a Ranked season was at a tier that had premiums. of course now we get Stalingrad, but that's at least not up for normal purchase

There were several problems 1. The TK issue was a huge problem, especially when the ship ended up in hands of people with little to no DD experience (due to WG premium ship policy where the only thing you need to play a premium ship is money to buy her) 2. The ship was unbalanced. And by "unbalanced" I don't mean OP or UP - she was just so strange. She did nothing other than torping and she couldn't even stealth-torp if I'm not wrong... but when she was torping, the sea was full of torps. 3. She was a premium generating unsatisfied customers. People saw all these torps and they felt like they needed her - and then they got her and realized that it's basically a joke ship in most circumstances (see #2). 4. Torpedo soup was a problem back then. As you can imagine, Kitakami's existence wasn't exactly helping

You yourself said it - tX battles are more stressful, mistakes are punished more harshly, it's just harder to play (even if not harder to win since the enemy faces the same problems). What's so strange that an event gives proportionally more rewards? Take Go Navy! The rewards scaled directly with tier. T5 was worth half the points of t10 - so playing a lot of t5 was enough to score big. T7 - the fun tier, as you say - was generating as much 70% of the points so, on average, 3 t7 matches gave you more points than two t10 - assuming being similarly successful. Basically, as far as Go Navy! is concerned, you're complaining that people playing in more stressful, less fun environment were rewarded better than people chilling at the easier, more relaxed tiers. Can you imagine the amount of Kamikaze (R) sealclubbing going on if t5 victories and kills weren't weighted below t10 ones? Now, all that said, Go Navy! had one strange aspect in the rewarding logic - and that aspect SHOULD change. Mainly - all the rewards were decided by the tier of your ship. It shouldn't be like this. The proper way to handle things should be: - victory - this should be decided by the BATTLE tier, not SHIP tier - so if you are a t8 in t10 match, the victory should count as t10 one - kills - these should be decided on case-by-case basis according to the tier of the ship sunk; whether you're in a Yamato or Kagero, sinking that pesky Musashi should give you t9 kill rewards - special missions (get 4 spotting ribbons, score 50 ribbons of any kind) - these are the only ones that could be tied to ship tier (but personally I think even these should be dependent on the tier of battle instead)

Well, I was just reporting what the poll results implied. As for specifics of Khaba upgrade, there's the worry about the rudder shift - you CAN fight at longer range but you might also NEED to do so to keep the ability to dodge incoming shells. At least these were problems Flamu saw afaik - I don't play nearly enough Khaba to worry about these things for a LONG time

I don't have Gearing so take my advice with a grain of salt but... 1. If you find yourself in a CV match without Def A, you're likely to suffer and curse your choice. Still, most matches you won't see CVs. It's your choice to pick the extremely influential but very situational def. AA or with much less game-changing but consistently useful speed boost. 2. AA range isn't something Gearing has all that much use for. Your AA is more of a self-defense thing and for that great range isn't that important. Then again, aiming system isn't too crucial for short-range gunfights (and at long range your main problem is the shell arc, not dispersion) so if you feel better with a bit more AA coverage, go ahead. Obviously the choice only makes any sense if you use AA consumable - without it any AA buffs are meaningless. 3. AFT on USN and high tier PA DDs is useless. You use 4 points on something that doesn't really affect your effective range (these arcs!) but makes you spotted from further away when you fire guns. Not a good pick. If you find yourself with 4 spare points, it's better to pick some 3-point skill. I mean, Gearing has great use of almost all of them - SE for extra 3500 hp - TAE + Fletcher torps to show that Gearing is one of the best torpboats in the game (because why wouldn't the original t10 gunboat be on par in torping with Shimakaze) - BFT gives you pure DPM - SI gives you more smokes - DE is always good on gun-focused DDs because small rapid-fire guns benefit a lot from the seemingly small fire chance increase - even Vigilance, if you find yourself struggling with enemy torps when you, say, peacefully rain fire on people from your LONG-lasting smoke As for t4, on the other hand... Well, CE and RPF seem to be the only t4 skills that are well suited for Gearing. But, as I already mentioned - I've played Chung Mu and some other t9-10 DDs but I never got that high with USN DDs, so my advice doesn't come from direct experience with the ship. Be warned

Yeah, but why did they have to reinforce the dumbest playstyle? Imagine, instead, a module giving +25% gun reload speed and +20% gun rotation speed - huge buffs but in an awkward place (remember that the slot normally gives you torp reload), where you sacrifice some of your primary weapon's potential but instead get guns that are much more viable (it won't make you a gunboat but for those who like to supplement their torp damage with guns it could be a great netto gain - plus being kited by such shima wouldn't be a nice experience for gunboats). But no, we got a module that lets you spam torps more AND prevents you from getting close to the fight - because torpedo-soup-from-afar is exactly the playstyle we want to encourage, right?

I just imagined how coop would look if most bots were normally playing as usual... and every other match there was ONE special bot not conforming to charge-forward-and-die tactics. People would be going mental

We have a nice poll where people say what they think about the upgrades. There's a lot of "don't know" from people who either don't care for a ship in question or are conflicted but it's still quite interesting to look at. https://forum.worldofwarships.eu/topic/105187-the-usefulness-of-the-unique-or-legendary-upgrades-do-you-use-or-strive-for-them/ To sum it up: - Montana - crap - Conqueror - rather crap + Hindenburg - rather good + Henry IV - maybe ok - Minotaur - rather crap - Worcester - rather crap + Khaba - maybe ok - Z-52 - rather crap - Gearing - rather crap - Yueyang - crap + Republique - rather good + Groser Kurfurst - good + Yamato - amazing + Zao - great - Des Moines - rather crap + Moskva - good - Shimakaze - rather crap + Grozovoi - rather good ? Midway - huh? ? Hakuryu - what are carriers?

I wouldn't. Usually you have a stock of things to use - the default behavior should be to resupply from that stock only and then stop. Automatically buying stuff that you've run out of of course convenient - but that option should require player to manually enable it.

Sure, being cautious can help you avoid such situations - doesn't change the fact that an option that auto-drains your real money (in the form of doubolons that can sometimes be achieved as special rewards but normally aren't earned in-game) should NEVER be the default. And yet when you enable auto-resupply on signals, the option that resupplies for doubloons also makes an appearance. This is NOT ok - and I say it from the position of someone who never got "caught" with this. Spending doubloons should ALWAYS be an active decision (enabling this very option) rather than a passive one (failing to disable it). Btw... @MrConway, what's the WG's statement on the fact that options to drain your doubloons get enabled automatically along with auto-resupply? I'm pretty sure it's not really what WG wants - people spending doubloons might mean money, but people who lose these accidentally and feel tricked into spending them don't sound like someone who's going to happily spend much money in the future... I'm pretty sure this doesn't really calculate well for WG long-term.

Depends on tier. When I needed to play coop because I was farming Go Navy! points and couldn't play PvP, I often took my Zao with perma camo and -service cost signals, stripped of everything that would take extra credits... and I was barely breaking even. I mean, I wasn't playing with full focus (if I could I'd be playing PvP) but I wasn't just yolo-suiciding either to quickly get out of the match. If overall I was at around 0 WITH the service cost reductions AND with bots playing like suicidal idiots, winning basically every match... how much money would be going down the drain if a significant portion of these matches were defeats? Anyway. The point is just to keep the economy so that people earn/lose about the same amounts overall as they would've with old bots - better rewards to offset the defeats. That is, of course, assuming that @aboomination is wrong and the bots actually do prove harder to beat rather than just different and more annoying.

It's a good thing that boots are significantly smarter, but I do thing WG should also adjust economy in this case. It's great if coops cease to be an auto-win now but the rewards shouldn't be counted as if the victory was guaranteed either. Coop shouldn't be too profitable but it would be a good idea to tune the economy so that it doesn't lose money any harder than it did up 'till now.

Yes, without that we'd be far from even 400k, nevermind 500. I wonder if that would work. To be sure that the next view is counted you'd need to refresh the page. All these youtube-repeating websites don't seem to necessarily re-download the video. And if there's no query to the servers, the playback isn't counted towards views, I think.

Actually it didn't, at least not in time Although at the end the counter was rising pretty quickly (the Youtube one, that combined by WG is strange) - people were trying to generate views. Now the question is if enough people have enough drive to keep reloading the damned video over and over again until it reaches a full million, since WG basically removed the time limit

The information from Reddit is not accurate when it comes to the third code. The deadline has passed, however... So, basically, go reloading Youtube or something, we need to double the current views somehow

What? It's tX is MUCH clumsier and even a bit slower - and don't get me started on concealment. +25% firepower and bigger health pool - these two are the only advantages Harugumo has over Kitakaze and I don't think I've seen a single person mentioning maneuverability as Harugumo's strong point, seeing how it's one of her biggest weaknesses (she has a turning circle worse than Conqueror...). Anyway, people rarely even compare Kitakaze and Harugumo because these two currently play very differently. You might actually see more comparisons between Harugumo and Worcester or Harugumo and Minotaur... No, this ship was designed to do light cruiser things, so people rightfully point out how much cruiser-like she is. For a DD she lacks in both stealth and maneuverability while also carrying HE DPM that places her as top tier among t10 cruisers. There are only three ships with higher HE DPM: the US DPM monster trio Worcester, Des Moines and Salem. Forget DDs and BBs - even the rest of t10 cruisers are behind Harugumo. When you combine these factors, the conclusion is that while Kitakaze is still a high-DPM DD, Harugumo basically doesn't fit the expected qualities of designated class, it's a fence-sitter that seems to often find herself doing more of the cruiser than DD job. "Being a cruiser" isn't about being OP but about the role in the meta.

The funny thing is that I don't think we really reached 500k and we most certainly didn't by the deadline Then again, WG also decided to pretty much do away with the deadline - it seems like we're going to get the third code if we get to a full million... but that might require conscious effort of quite a few people

There are some IFHE secondary builds afaik for certain ships. But I don't play BBs much so I don't really know the details and viability.