El2aZeR

Most of these players will report you for being too good or playing a specific class/ship, too. So that's a bit of a moot point. That would imply it had any value in the first place.

Any bad player normally gets way more than that. Should be enough of an indication but they'll usually just brush it away with "OMG I PLAY FOR PHUN!" or a similarly pathetic excuse ofc. As such they most likely don't even if they're given all possible signs. Some reports added on top is thus a result of their toxic gameplay and rightfully so. Whether they win or lose is irrelevant.

Then you don't deserve to be successful. They days when games were all sunshine and rainbow are long gone. Deal with it. Then how come there are others who are consistently much better than you? As for RNG, it is scientifically proven that the chance of getting good stats purely by chance is astronomical. You have a billion times better chance to win the lottery jackpot.

Because learning from mistakes even when you came out on top in the end is complete hogwash after all.

By knowing how you've aimed and being confirmed in where your shells landed. But hey, if you don't want to improve feel free to continue failing. Just don't complain about it, you've clearly forfeited your right to do so.

1. salvo completely off, prediction practically nonexistent 2. salvo (for which you switched to HE against a full broadside target lol) too low for a ship turning away 3. salvo without lock, too high anyway (again against target full broadside) 4. salvo not predicting the turn whatsoever, off target 5. salvo too far forward 6. salvo behind 7. salvo too high 8. salvo too high (9. salvo ignoring the full broadside Nelson because LOL HE) 11. salvo far too behind 14. too far forward 17. too far behind Basically out of 17 salvos you missed 10 due to bad aim. If that isn't terrible I don't know what is. AP obviously. Still deals more damage if you go for superstructure hits. Besides, you've consistently ignored broadsides as well.

No wonder. Your aim is terrible. Also LOL HE.

Mandatory

If a German BB is turning towards you shells have a chance to pass below the belt armor and hit the poorly protected citadel directly.

There are only two ways to go about this. You're either extremely ignorant or deliberately ignoring simple, hard proven facts. Either way the discussion always finds its end with you, not me. You try to bring in facts which are just outright lies, spread misinformation at every turn (as you have done again just above) and when called out on it you try to either weasel your way out, often via "omg you're toxic" excuse (as you're doing now), or go silent about it entirely. Every time you have assessed the current state of balance of reworked CVs it was full of . You tried to pass even testing iterations as perfectly balanced. As such your opinion holds no value.

Damage numbers don't matter. Planes shot down matter. In no instance do the new AA mechanics prevent more strikes than just normal AA. Your attempts to sugarcoat it are laughable, especially when considering that instant damage is applied randomly. It doesn't matter how many players wished for it. It matters who did. Average statistics are irrelevant when it comes to reworked CVs as the vast majority of their playerbase is outright terrible. The current state of AA is very easy to tell. We're extremely close to 0.8.0 again in terms of DPS numbers. As such balance is about as bad as it was at release.

The nerf was wished for by potatoes who failed at playing CVs and continue to do so as proven by their laughable belief that 0.8.7 is an AA buff. The burst damage is literally insignificant. Tests have proven that. In fact in a couple of instances not using the sector reinforcement yielded more planes shot down due to it weakening the other side + attack immunity period. In all other instances it shot down the same amount of planes as not using it. It's literally a worthless mechanic. And again, considering what you've so far based your experience on it cannot be trusted to say the least. Hard numbers prove that AA has been globally nerfed. This includes some weaker AA ships. In no instance did it actually get significantly stronger.

Proof that devs have no idea what they're doing with CVs. Among other things. Doesn't change their stance on premium ships however.

Then she'd just be a worse Chapayev. And as a cash premium she can't be directly nerfed anyway.

Most T10 AA ships don't even possess half the AA they used to have even if you combine DPS numbers. Meanwhile weak AA ships barely changed. Heck, some of them got even weaker. That's objectively a pretty big deal.

.....the previously posted video is my recording.

Being skilled doesn't mean having a good match once in a while. It is about consistency. I have no high horse to get off of. Perhaps you should wake up and accept reality instead. "I'm not bad because I can have a good match once in a while" is just as flimsy of an excuse as "my stats suck because I get bad teams so often".

I don't. And I literally have no idea what you mean with what you've just written.

Kutuzov is very strong, if not overpowered. GC outright outperforms ships two tiers higher. Iowa is plenty powerful. She just requires more skill than the average BB to play. And quite frankly your own experience is irrelevant. Every ship would be terrible with your statistical basis.

Yes, this is a game. So what? Does that mean we should not tell players who actively ruin it to jog on? To treat them with courtesy and respect when they themselves don't do the same with their toxic gameplay? Gimme a break. These players deserve far worse than a bunch of useless reports.

If you bring up the mouse in a CV there is a chance that it will stick on the screen. However both mouse and keyboard will become completely unresponsive, aka you need to kill the game via task manager and restart. So as a workaround you must never use the mouse. Aka never bring up the menu, never use auto pilot, never press Ctrl, etc. And this is far from rare.

You completely missed the point, didn't you? A bug, if it even was one, made you lose fighter duels. The above demonstrated bug in the rework however completely prevents you from playing the game. Tell me which one you prefer. And the funny part about this is that isn't the only bug out there that outright prevents you from playing in the rework. I can think of at least 2 others. So no, objectively speaking even the bugs in the RTS iteration were better which is extremely laughable.

Funny thing is they haven't actually done that either. The boost in flak damage is solely due to DFAA. Meaning that if you don't have DFAA your flak damage has stayed the same while your DPS got murdered. In fact because flak now stops spawning once planes are within 3,5km you could argue that flak got nerfed pretty hard too. So AA as a whole is just straight up garbage if you don't have DFAA. If you do have DFAA it kills potatoes and does little else.

@MacArthur92 Please tell me again how the bugs in the rework are less decisive than in the RTS iteration. "Losing bunch of fighters to obscure bug no one has heard of before is a lot worse than being unable to play the game at all." LOL

That'd be a question of whether the rework will be successful someday. To which the answer can only be a resounding no.