EdiJo

It is more complicated than that. You need to take into account ship class and tier first, when assigning players "by skill". "Extremely good" in a -2 tier cruiser can carry much less than "Good" in +2 tier BB or in a CV placed vs "Abysmal" one. Games became unstable at medium tiers because there is wider skill gap now - many potatoes advanced there already and +/-2 tier added to +/-1 ship in the class, with random skill distribution, along with being messed up by divisioning leads directly to what we see: stompu stompu games which are decided in the first 10 minutes.

PvE should be rewarded the same as PvP - just to attract pota^H^H^H^Hcasuals, and make them stop ruining PvP games. BUT - because PvE is generally much easier, those rewards should not automatically transfer as gain which can be used to accelerate PvP advancing - hence the need of PvP "certificate missions" which would have to be passed to allow joining PvP games with particular ship line & tier. BUT - because Sea Star or Assistant are NOT easy to obtain, of course there should be some nice reward included. Yes, this could potentially lead to formation of "Sea Star hunting divisions", but isn't promoting team play the main goal of this game mode? Also there could be a limit that if the reward is accepted one can't "get the order to use the same ship" even by paying those 75k?

We asked for mission "completion statistics" on many occasions - still it is very rare case when anything is made accessible And having in mind recent revelations about "3% completion rate being the target" it seems that true numbers are not something "general audience" would be comforted with...

Middle of the night? Nope - especially on weekends too many drunk and afk or late loaders. Potatoes still quite numerous. Many seal-clubbing unicum divisions, which most of the time make your game either low-xp win or very-low-xp loss. But morning (6am-10am) is much better - quite a lot of "average-to-good" players really trying to win. Potatoes not abundant yet. Unicums, if present, play solo. Unfortunately for me it is rather "evening time", if at all

Yup, I played one single time in my Independence, and even as I am rather "average" CV-man I managed to be top scorer, got 5* and counted some ~180k dmg. Bot capital ships are easy to one-shot, and the strategy is predictable. US fighters murder bot planes. Although you need T6 carrier to be effective - auto-drops are not enough, I tried Zuiho and even as I did better than most of my "team", one can't carry in T5 cv.

OBS classic https://obsproject.com/download

"Doing good" doesn't matter much, when your fight just is not fair because you have much weaker ship than half (or often most) of your opponents. "Taking seriously" in Nagato can pretty much mean just bash poor T5 with 16-inch guns, outranging and overmatching the WW1 box from every angle. Sure, Konig manages better than some Kirov or Omaha, but still... MM is not balancing anything. +/-1 tier +/-1 nation +/-1 class "rules" often make extremely one-sided match-ups, resulting in stomped games. +/-2 tier MM just sucks, and has to be removed ASAP. "Keep pushing until T10. Then you'll never be overtiered again": L O L.. You'll just enter the Target Area for Harvesting. And WG does everything to make you push there, by making medium-tier playing miserable.

Thx for the effort! I can somewhat understand that unless proven guilty it is sane to assume clan doesnt cooperate when placed on the opposite teams. Playing against own team is obvious cheating. But this statement doesn't concern the case when both clan divisions end up on the same side. Their objective is then to cooperate, and even if there is no common voice channel those guys know each other, play frequently together, may just sit in the same room etc. Chances are definitely NOT low, this happens quite frequently, especially on weekday's nights, like today. I just a while ago had ~10 games and met once 2x2 divisions and once 2x3 divisions assigned to the same team. I don't recall special influence of 2x2, but 2x3 crashed my randoms totally. Also, if it is fine to gang up into queues then still the logical question remains why isn't it allowed to normally create 6-player (or larger) divisions? Hidden clan bonus?

This is interesting. Where can I find this statement? And why then there is still a 3-member limit for PvP divisioning?

So you basically confirm that you abuse MM in hope to get illegal division (larger than triple). Nothing to be proud of... Yeah you paddled those opposite team randoms like "hell". I am sure they loved it and you didn't ruin their fun at all

Let's sum this up. CV players already are drooling at the perspective of cheap detonating those pesky BB for hundreds K of dmg, without devoting much thought to what it brings to game play in general. "Because BB kill cruisers we can kill BB" - and they omit any "details" like what is dependent on BB driver, and what isn't. "Find that teamplay button!" - yeah sure, so imagine because CV are hard to spot we introduce "new mechanics" that CV needs a teammate within 2km or his spotting range is 50km... and go find that button yourself lol. "There is too many BB!" - so let's give big red "DETONATE" button to CV captains, sure that will be the best solution. "There is too many German BB!" - and they skip the detail that ze Germanz deal with AP bombs relatively well, and it is the IJN boats which will struggle. "You can avoid the drop!" - yeah sure, at some lucky specific circumstances, by circling can delay the inevitable for max a minute or so, MAYBE dropping a few planes, and VERY PROBABLY earning cit or two when circling angle becomes interesting for all nearby BB (which, as we said, are overabundant hence are everywhere) Like famous Polish president once said: point of view depends on point of sitting. Basic rule.

Yes BB attracts "slower-minded" players. But it is not true that they can't be one-shot. Triple cit is not rare and you are left with ~20% hp which is less than a cruiser. You can at full HP be focused by HE spam and can die within 1-2 minutes without even reaching next heal. You can get a few torps which at tier 7+ is enough to be instadead. BB safety is an illusion, as learns every BBaby when meeting Kamikaze at tier 4, and then T7 cruisers at tier 5. But still illusion attracts. Anyway, it is not about balance we are talking here. And AP nuking is not nerf to a class, it is nerf to the game.

Really? BB are played too often, what we can do.... ? Yes! Let's make them randomly explode, say once per 10-20 games, when US CV looks at them. That will reduce numbers. And gameplay? Who cares. And limiting BB number would work perfectly if you allow for example 12 BB vs 12 BB battles (+/-1 tier MM is another issue). Most of BB players don't have anything against. Similarly, 12 cruisers vs 12 cruisers or 12 DD vs 12 DD. Or if it is too much mess maybe 7 vs 7 - it would unload queue equally well.

1) in BB we are talking about >minute when turning to avoid bombers (especially that bombers can circle quite long, putting BB broadside to whatever THEY want - good luck doing that in a BB to a cruiser). And another minute to turn back. This is 4-5 times longer than a cruiser and many times longer than a DD. That's the 1st part. The 2nd part is... R N G!!! Yes. I don't say BB are poor, vulnerable and insta-destroyed all the time. They CAN be RANDOMLY insta-destroyed. Please see the difference, and don't argue with what I didn't claim. It is not about "who is powerful" it is about RNG deciding whether you live or die. 2) You are now redefining "overextending" according to your taste. If being outside of AA bubble of at least 2 cruisers or 2 "AA good" battleships (1 is not enough to be safe) is "overextending" - good luck with the camping meta you'll get. Sorry, in random games you D O N O T G E T S U C H T E A M W O R K. And requiring one class to be in a division is somewhat not fair, isn't it? Yes. Read post #103, my reply to Migulaitor. Hello? Yes, cyclone is a special, relatively rare case - there was a thread about it not long ago. But 1) you get a warning long before, so you can regroup/hide/whatever 2) this concerns mostly only those cruisers without torps and without things like punishing close-range AP, and situations 1:1 (which you could've avoided because of early warning). Not relevant to our discussion here. Again, you argue with what I didn't say. Cruiser CAN avoid confrontation with a BB. I wrote a few times, how. I fully agree that overall dmg potential of T6-T8 CV could be improved, and again - you miss my point. I don't want BB to be invulnerable - I am against introducing another skill-independed RNG-based death sentence similar to detonation, but much more frequent. No, BB can not be always "protected" using "skillful team play", not in random games. We are not talking about clan duels - but even there (in important competition for instance) random things like detonation or headshot by AP bombs are certainly not welcome. By both participants and the audience. Nope, I don't think defensive fire dependency can make AP nuking worth introducing. It still makes it depending on a cruiser - and you have zero influence on your random "team mate", so we are back to square one: nothing you can do (apart from stalking the cruiser in his "random" path lol - and HOPING that he will activate his DF when YOU will be attacked lolx2) Anyway: It is not about balance. Most people play different ship classes and I am not a BB focused advocate at all. I am against introducing stupid detonation-like instagibs and it has nothing to do with "class being OP", or "CV being hard and needing more influence". The direction should be: less RNG, more skill-dependent things. Or maybe soon we will have "AP-protecting" flag in the shop for some $$$?

You clearly did not read arguments... Once again, if you can't digest more than few last lines in a thread: BB can avoid 40k salvo from other BB. Cruiser can avoid 40k salvo from a BB. BB can't avoid 40k drop from a CV. Not that he will get 40k every time, but it is all RNG and you can't fight RNG. Is it clear now?

You are not reading, yet replying. Try to browse more than one first and one last post, ok? BTW I have more games in cruisers, so you kinda missed with the irony. Although I see another pattern - US carrier players are quite vocal and ignoring any arguments against adding nice (for them...) "BB slapping" RNG bonus to their boats

The problem is that either you try to win the game - or you don't give a f*k and instead try to have +1000 karma, so congratulate any potato or not potato whatever they do and spam "good luck have fun it's only a game" as often as you manage.

Yup. And if WG's goal is to reduce BB overrepresentation, this will be effective. But also it will draw people from the game, at least those who want/like to have some control over what's going on. Either WG tends to target "e-sport", balanced, skill-rewarding kind of game, or they make some randomized shooter with p2w bonuses to grab money. Can't do both.

Did you read what I wrote? Or just seen "oh, BB whine" and stopped thinking.

By "single AP bomber" I of course meant "single ship using AP dive planes" - analogy to single BB vs single cruiser. And no, it is not possible to avoid the drop. All you can do is slightly delay it, at the cost of turning which possibly exposes you to other threats. And you can't wiggle back as fast as a cruiser (you stay exposed for a long time - ~minute) - so your comparison to DD or cruisers which can turn back in several seconds has not much sense. Regarding "exposing yourself": BB is very frequently in "a position where he's exposed". This is one of BB roles: tanking dmg. Do you really propose to "not be exposed" --> camp somewhere at the back/at the border? You seem resistant to a concept of R[ANDOM] NG... You show your lucky game - and I showed you my unlucky one. How often are you shooting down 33 T8 planes? Why are you concluding from a single game anything about "AA strength"? There are plenty of examples where a CV murders equal-tier BB without losing many planes, and it is quite typical that CV can drop most of the load before planes start falling down. Once again: I don't oppose making CV stronger, or allowing them to hunt BB better. But not in the completely random way! Not by creating some new CV type with undertiered T6 weak planes which either are murdered easily without doing anything or they go through and instagib a +3 tier battleship. Also, absurdly high probability of dealing murderous damage to a lower tier BB is unacceptable.

Yes. Like it is only you and the bomber on the map, and you are always with the rudder ready and fast enough to turn. 1) Typical BB can wait 20-30 seconds before the rudder shifts and ship is only starting to turn then 2) You typically can't turn "anyhow" - broadside means heavy dmg, even in ze Germanz. Typically you're uptiered. 3) Anyway planes at T7+ are always much faster in rotating than a battleship, and this is only a way to make them be in the AA bubble a while longer, not much a defence. Like I said, was in mid-game (cruisers not cooperating, we were losing anyway), random game (sorry, no AA cruiser wanted to rush & die with me), and I had quite AA specced T8 BB + I clicked those "T6" planes when they were closing (one sq longer, other shorter ofcoz). Shot down ONE plane AFTER the drop (RNG, sometimes I massacre such planes), got 48k which killed me instantly (RNG, typical dmg from Enterprise AP bombing a Bismarck is reported as ~15-20k). And that is what I am whining about: R N G. Nope. You can avoid 2-3 BB if you are looking at the minimap. There were voices from some cruiser players on this forum that they actually like more BB to burn... You can angle to some, use terrain, or just go out of range. You can't angle (much) to CV drop, can't use terrain, nor you can't go out of CV range. Reload doesn't matter, as we are talking about defending vs ship which is already "loaded & ready". Yes you roll dice less times with CV, but you have zero defence against that, apart from having a division with some good AA (which is not the case for most players). Again: I am not bragging about BB being deleted (maybe it is needed) - but about it being totally independent on your play. CV just clicks you - and you roll losing 50% hp or just can be gone instantly, without much to say about it. Said a guy who plays >50% of his games in a division. Sorry, not everybody is so lucky to play at constant hours, has option for voice connection etc. And "team play button" on random games ... yes. 404 not found. As you very well know. This was a detonation. Also fun & engaging, but the chance is nowhere even close to that of an AP bomb drop. And you can avoid it entirely by just putting the flag on. Is there any "anti-AP bomb" flag? Maybe T10 can manage. But even T8 are raped quite easily. Let's not talk about poor Fuso which on the YT video was getting 40k each & every time. Again: I have nothing vs buffing CV but - not like this. WG again prefers noob-friendly point->click->delete "gameplay". Unicum player won't squeeze more from the RNG and his planes will have the same chance of hitting (or being shot down by AA) as any Kevin which will get even slightly used to AP bombing. Yes. RNG. You can shoot down planes, but you may not. You may get 0 dmg, or you may get 60k and die instantly. And you have very little influence on that. Just another "player controlled" high-chance detonation mechanics. Is it what we want in this game?

Please tell me that AP (OP) bombs won't make it into the game. This is just another move towards "RNG not skill" direction. Any potato can point & click a battleship, even manual dive bomb drop is not as skill-demanding as a torpedo drop. This is just a "delete" button for most of battleships. Please don't tell me about "you have AA" crap - just today I got 48k dmg in a Bismarck from 2-squadron Enterprise drop. I focused attacking bombers - and shot down .... 1 plane. One. AFTER he dropped. It was my last 48k, so probably dmg could be even higher if I only had more hp to lose. I really understand that there is a need to make BB less overpowered - but this is (as usual) bad direction. The game should reward skill, not just add massive RNG which punishes or rewards by rolling dice. Any threat should have a counter, even if it is a very demanding one. When you lose, you need to know that it was you who sc**ed and not that it just "randomly happened". I have a weird feeling that this whole AP bombs concept is a cruiser lobby revenge conspiracy It is however a bit different situation to headshotting a cruiser, because the cruiser can perfectly fine manage to avoid shots from even 2-3 battleships (or just hide from them), while a battleship can't do (practically) anything to avoid RNG drop from a single AP bomber. The "cruiser problem" comes not from BB being OP, but from simply too many BB in games. You can dodge 2-3 BB, not 5-6.

That would need to be a T9. Do you really want another T9 premium to be "just available to be bought by anyone"? Yup. Either crippled at T6, or it has to be T7-8 (depending on AA and detailed spec). Although to be in "chronological order" WG would have to shift (and strongly buff) Cleve to T7 and make "early-war" Brooklyn into T6...

It seems WG admitted there was a bug, because they report fixing it: [quote name=Fixed a bug that in some cases caused an incorrect amount of battles needed to remove team killer status to be displayed in battle results

WG doesn't keep chronology and inside tiers there are mixed ships, for example in T8 you have one from ~1919 (Amagi) and one from 1954 (Kutuzov). Even if we consider "refits", it is still 1930's vs 1950's = 20 years of difference.