El2aZeR

Naming and shaming is not allowed. Also always assume your team is full of idiots in this game and be prepared to do everything yourself. It's true more often than not.

Well, double the amount of 0 and it's still 0. Doesn't surprise me at all.

Honestly she could use a very slight armor buff to not get overmatched by BB shells everywhere. Just make her main deck 30mm like DM's and she'd be fine. Balti is an acquired taste (like the Pensa & NO before her really), but if you can make her work she's surprisingly enjoyable to play.

The hilariously satisfying feeling of brawling a Minotaur to death perhaps? Started the fight with ~15k HP. I walked away with ~4k.

You're aiming far too high as I suspected. Just to spite you I've skipped the Izumo with free exp. Got screwed over only once by RNGesus and didn't get any citadels. (Also fired HE in my first salvo because I forgot to switch) Solution? Git gud and aim for the waterline. A simple look in the armor viewer could've also told you that and saved us the trouble.

That has more to do with KGV being T7. T7 BBs in general have 25mm plating. No idea if the actual belt/deck armor scheme (the thing that is more or less modeled realistically in this game) is correct though as I am not familiar with RN BBs.

Honestly the first time I took her out I got flashbacks to my grind through pre-buff Colorado. Simply didn't enjoy playing her, couldn't even begin to imagine slogging through over a hundred battles to get to Yamato. So I just gave it up after 3 battles.

Think there was a bug that made the flags not work for whatever reason, but that was ages ago and apparently got fixed. Think I even experienced it once. Other than that, afaik a dev Q&A stated that the flag will prevent you from detonating 100% of the time regardless of what other flags you mount.

For some reason she's become my favorite CV to play. Probably because I like the challenge E represents, not to mention her history. I use AP bombs to further extend air control. Cross-dropping with TBs can and will usually wipe out DDs, even if I find myself failing them more often than with an IJN CV. Takes a while to get used to but they'll do the job. Having AP DBs on the other hand puts your opponent into a bind that is unique to the Enterprise. You can pursue two entirely different targets on opposite sides of the map effectively and the enemy CV either has to split his fighters (which leaves one fighter exposed, while you can pull the other flank back) or has to cover one flank with both fighters (at which point you just strike the other one). That ofc requires two exposed targets on both flanks, but since the average player is abysmally stupid that's not exactly a rarity. Not to mention AP DBs give you ridiculous first strike ability if the enemy CV is slow to load or starts his fighters last (or potatoes). Wiping out a BB in addition to a DD at the beginning of a game is a blow not many teams will recover from. Rather situational as that requires both an enemy DD and a KM BB to expose themselves at the start of a match and the enemy CV to [edited] up hard, but for reasons stated above that isn't a rarity nowadays. Also seeing KM BBs finally collect their citadel hits is an incredibly satisfying feeling on its own. As for Karma Git gud peasants.

I actually forgot Kaga even has two loadouts lol

USN T8+ citadels sure are hard to hit. Git gud son.

I would assume that the match result info is saved client side (temporarily, until you quit the game), aka that the server is wiping the results as soon as it has been recorded down into the statistics of everyone who participated. Thus, when losing the connection mid-game and being unable to reconnect, the server cannot tell you anything short of whether you won or not. Imo makes sense considering the servers would have to save a ton of match result data, unnecessarily demanding space and performance, if such things were server sided.

Talking about your Bismarck, which is one of the easiest BBs to play ingame, actually. Unless you want to insinuate that USN BBs are braindead? If yes, please give compelling arguments as to how so. Please note that if you cannot hit the citadel of a NC/Iowa/Montana, you should l2p. Also ironically people playing in CBT were on average a lot better than the average playerbase today.

I realize the playstyle she requires, but I cannot motivate myself to play what is (in my eyes) a worse copy of an NC that also gets worse MM. You know, you can still look up beta statistics, even if they're a bit faulty (I believe they stopped recording those a bit too early). Which would tell you that the last time I was on your level was ~700 battles into the game, in a meta far more hostile to BBs (which were my main class) than it is now. You accused me of playing braindead BB lines (which is partially true, I do play every tech tree BB line found in the game), so I guess from that statement that you assume to be more skilled at playing BBs than me. Yet you cannot make such "braindead" BBs work, so what is it now? Limiting yourself to just a single line will inevitably make you biased. I suggest you play at least the majority of lines within a class before judging both other players and game balance.

For example a Fletcher class destroyer has a length of ~114.8m. A shell leaving a hole not even half a meter in diameter is tiny in comparison and, as proven by real life examples, will not affect the combat capability of a destroyer in any way unless said shell has hit sensitive equipment on the way through. If most of the BBs I'm playing are so braindead, why are YOU unable to make them work? Should be easy for you if you're so awesomely skilled. Also playing Izumo is painful, which is why I quit my IJN BB grind. I don't play too many BBs in general anymore because they're far too easy, thus boring to play in my opinion.

Yamato already survives far more damage and shoots down far more planes than she did in real life. She's actually hilariously overbuffed in terms of realism. Yeah, no. An Iowa class battleship, possibly the most accurate BB ever constructed, was expected to hit little more than 30% of her shells on a Bismarck-sized target less than 10km away. In contrast if you only hit 30% of your shells in this game on a target 10km away you are seriously bad. In fact, ship sizes in WoWs are approximately doubled to aid player gunnery success. That does not even go into the finer aspects of fire control, like the difference between radar and optical systems. Stop pulling the real life card. It does not favor you.

You have just disqualified yourself by stating that two "massive" (in reality seriously tiny holes compared to even destroyers) holes below the waterline should cause flooding. Which proven by real life examples, the most famous one I mentioned above, is just plain wrong. BB overpens already do an unrealistic amount of damage. A realistic amount would be around 100-500hp, because overpens were worthless when they did not hit sensitive equipment irl. If you cannot citadel anything that is not a KM/RN BB then I would suggest you learn to play.

Taffy 3 finds your lack of knowledge disturbing.

Imagine you're in the Sahara desert. You pick up a grain of sand, throw it as far away as you can, then tell a friend to guess which one you picked up. Do that a consecutive 7 times and you have still have a far higher chance of doing that successfully than getting to a high number of games with a good winrate. Source: Winrate has very little to do with luck provided a sufficient sample of games.

He wants the game to change more to a naval simulator because that is his personal preference. That includes removing CVs because it would not be realistic to have CVs included in a surface engagement. Another reason as to why he wants CVs removed is because he is incapable of dealing with them and refuses to adapt. Being skilled at something means you have turned your theoretical knowledge into practical experience, demonstrating that you have truly understood what you have previously only grasped in words. A lack of skill means you have no theoretical knowledge, no practical experience or, in the case of you, simply refuse to apply given solutions to a problem. Either way that makes any argument presented by the unskilled side weaker than one presented by someone skilled. Literally everything you have blabbered about game balance and design in terms of WoWs. If we were to balance around clan battles then I guess CVs are actually weak and in severe need of buffs? You do realize that this is precisely what WG implied? That they do not wish for CVs to continue their spotting role but play a striking one instead?

When you have accumulated enough experience and skill in as well as knowledge about both basic and advanced game mechanics. As should be obvious to anyone. You're grasping at straws here. There is a difference between telling people to [edited] off and telling them to git gud. If they don't wanna do the latter, they are automatically disregarded as a balancing factor.

Not only statistics. That is only one part of what you're judged by, also explained previously. It seems you are truly incapable of reading.

I have answered everything previously. It seems you are still incapable of reading. *Edited

100% increase in service times from ET when on fire. If your squads get wiped you're looking at ~2 mins of service time.