EdiJo

I don't have Minotaur, but I play Belfast a lot, and other RN cruisers too. With CE you often can go first almost as fine as a DD. If you meet lone DD, he is usually dead - you expect him, but at 8km he usually first expects other DD not a cruiser which can smoke himself and radar him in his smoke, and which has hydro to avoid being torped. If there is no CV and there are not many DD it is worth of risk to early (!) sneak behind an island so you don't have to use radar when you're spotted too soon. Try to be more active, don't pretend to be a Kutuzov and you'll do much better in Belfi ;) Sorry for off-top - anyway I don't see any connection with "not moving at all" and "waiting for other players". Why not just go at 1/4 speed to show that "Hi guys, I am active!" ?

Sure, in a fast BB you should. In a "long-range-HE spamming" cruiser maybe too. (but never ever for 2 minutes... ) But if you for instance have a close-support, radar cruiser, you usually have to reach your position near caps before you can be spotted on your way there. If you are a DD you need to contest cap or spot as early as possible (yes, even in a Khaba...). If you are a CV you also need to be first with planes flying.

Why does it take so long for you? I understand that we talk about frequent things here, not some incidental (at least one daily)? Mega facepalm. That "destroyer player" never heard of spotting, contesting, and that defending the cap is much easier than taking it? If it is "sometimes", sure. But I see AFK-ers in every game, typically 2-3 guys start to move more than a minute after the game started. "Usual"? Does it happen more frequently? I really understand that this poll only makes sense if the answers are limited to FREQUENT afk-ing... Incidental issues happen to everybody, and they are not the problem. 30 seconds is not a big deal. Typically snails are starting to move after 1.5-2 minutes. Yup, 30s before battle is normal, because this is the time buffer which WG left for loading. Does the "restart thing" happen frequently to you? Did you do something about it? What?! Why do you need to wait in Belfast or Minotaur? They have the best concealment AND smoke if things get hairy. They can even go vs single DD into the cap easily (depends how much backup that DD has...) So you stay in your Khaba until someone else makes a red carpet for you? Geez. Nope. True reason is that people load late. Guns pointed forward etc.

You are of course right. If we want "fair games", i.e. without random "potato slaughter" we need skill estimate independent from WR. WG worked quite strictly towards XP being such estimate - and suddenly they felt greedy and hid the premium XP bonus inside this number, screwing everything. Anything else, for example average damage, even comparing vs the same ship - will be less accurate. Although there are some attempts to do that, like in wowsreplay.com. Obvious solution is to remove all premium ships&account bonuses from base XP and work on XP awarding algorithm reflecting better player's influence on the battle (dmg tanked, spotting dmg, plane kills, cap points even when not succeeded in capping, average distance from enemy for "some" classes etc.). But to have fair games we also need 1) equal composition of fleets: EQUAL number of ships for EACH class AND subclass AND nation. No more domination with 2xKagero vs Fletcher, Z-46 and Kagero. 2) equal composition of divisions: triple division will ALWAYS have advantage over 3 "randoms". MM should match equal number of divisioned ships in both teams (for example 3x2 vs 2x3 is still not equal, buf fair enough) Sorry, queue times will be longer, but instead of artificially shorter queue I would prefer fair games. Getting rid of +/-2 tier matchmaking would be great too, but this just influences having individual "fair games". Otherwise even when having established "objective player's skill" MM still would have to match good players in similar tier of the ship, because if in a T6-T8 game a unicum will be put in T6 cruiser and in the opposite team "equivalent" unicum will have T8 CV this will NOT be equal setup...

XVM flaming is a problem for chat moderation, it has nothing to do with leaving an option for players to hide their stats. The solution is punishing & making impossible to flame, not punishing & making impossible to check someone's game profile.

I work evening-shift and when I get home I often play until 5am ... when US server peaks When finally WG will LISTEN and make one account for all the servers? "Latency" argument doesn't make sense since a long long time already, because often we have playable ping on "supposedly remote" servers. Other than that - it is just shortsighted greed.

This reminds me of some GO lessons many years ago. They said it is rude and offending to continue playing while the game is already lost... And when is it lost? Usually the better player will know much earlier ;) Also it was said it is rude to hunt for a random mistake of the opponent. The game should be a duel, not a vulture contest... But when too many potatos start to play, it is the continuous streak of mistakes. Yet, if your team makes too many in the first 30 seconds, and the enemy seems to play well, you can assume they are good and you will lose. If all your DD are either sleeping or going nuts at the border of the map in domination mode, and 3 caps already turn red, and if your BB are either not moving or going away from the battle - the game looks pretty much over already, right? Yup. I whined about my Chapa losing streak somewhere on the forum, too. This ship simply is not "the carrying type", and you can influence the game only if there are some brains in your team... Which typically is not the case They ARE divided. Casual are called Co-op, and Competitive are called Random, Ranked, Team! Potatos should be prevented (by game mechanics) to advance to higher tiers in competitive game modes. On the other side - co-op rewards should be significantly increased. Fully agree. But sometimes the DD are retarded and BB are left without screening/spotting/capping. Potatoing isn't limited to any ship class... This level is not very bad yet. Still WTR close to 700-900 in many ships! I've seen potatos with 4000 games and WTR 400-500...

Come on. What "profile of some sort"? That you prefer pixel battleships or cruisers and not pixel aircraft carriers? Why do you want to "mislead players who use certain mods to determine strength"? They just wanna know who can trust and who is too weak to be safe to rely on his actions. If you're trying to prevent "XVM flaming", this is a function of game chat banning system which should filter-out & punish those who bully other players only because they have lower stats. What has having a "group which doesn't care about stats" to hiding your stats for everybody? Weird logic. Why do you think that "your profile says" argument is intrinsically invalid? "Ad hominem" is completely different thing, and again this is a task for chat moderation, with nothing to do with hiding the stats. What "control" do you need over sharing your stats? What is so secret there? Usually you would like to know who are you talking to - as there are too many potatos who don't have bloody clue about the game, yet they are very authoritative and vocal. That's why the stats should be obligatory open. "XVM bullying" cases should be solved in chat moderation. Most of the time when I see that "the guy is not proud of his stats" if I still dig in his older records (for example in warships.today) it can be clearly seen that he really just had nothing to be proud of.

Oh, another good thread about "quality" of the ban system! I hope our forum support will not "close it as non-constructive" (yeah right, we all know this is just venting ) and merge instead. This is quite important issue. As time passes, clueless potatos in PvP mode are becoming the biggest problem of this game, and current idiocratic banning system is trying to cure the situation with a flame thrower and a hammer. ... and of course the other thread just got closed, not merged. Why people bother writing on this forum?

This looks like giving her torps AND secondaries caused some serious buoyancy issues. And maybe too many credits gathered on-board?

Wow. Thanks for pointing me to that. It seems that WG actually tried to explain that a few months ago, I must've missed that thread. Anyhow, still that doesn't compute, as the main issue with "repeating offence" is not quantified (or maybe I'm missing it again). Besides, I don't recall being penalized with 6 games, I'd swear it was 5 In that thread there are also complains that the counter is not decreased when you start new game before the previous game finished... Also, still I wouldn't cross that 10k dmg limit if not the "fun & engaging" detonation thingy... And 19 is not 6+2*n for any natural n - but getting even 18 would mean that it would be the 7th continuous offence before clearing 1 million dmg and previously I should get 16, 14, 12, 10, 8, 6 game penalties - and that for sure was not the case. I typically do 50-90k per game, so 1 million is ~15 games only. Well, certainly too many ship captains are behaving like they would drive a tank Well, sometimes you turn pink for nothing (secondaries hit, being bumped by a 20hp friendly, accidental HE shell + full fire). Sometimes for almost nothing (auto-dropped stray aerial torp, HE salvo, agreed & communicated torping which hits because of your friendly's mistake). Sometimes for something which is a minor error (long range cruiser torp at the smoke and your friendly dd suddenly turns 180 deg and decides to rush it). Etc. And sometimes you are a pink scum which should be banned for life, but those seem to be effectively caught off by server checks, I met maybe a few during my few thousand games. I still see a contradiction here. If it's funny why didn't you do that? From my pinky experience I can say that it is not funny at all. I had some Clemson sh*thead bumping at my unturnable Nassau for quite a part of the game, and certainly a fountain of pink "+260 +250 +270 +290" streaming from your ship at few/second rate is not what I'd call funny. If I recall those numbers ok, you get (and are accounted for) 1k/sec pinky dmg, so 10k is just 10 seconds of that. You are sunk quite fast after such treatment, and even if the damage is lower than I recall, according to "the rules" from above link you will be banned forever if you keep "being funny" even in 1 per 10 of your games. Plus, you can't shoot, because you know what happens if you hit that moron with your shell... What can be funny in that?

Teammate death count = 1, to be exact And yes, you can get this even for dealing "10 or 20HP" of team damage, too - if those are the last one of the victim's HP... You wrote "it is no one's fault except their own that they're pink", which is exactly advocating for the "open season" for them, isn't it.

Well, the pink player is already punished. It is not your role to punish him more - this is abusing of the broken system (which is forbidden by game rules, btw). As you read in this thread, for example I was convicted to quite a long pinky time because of one small error, one stray auto-dropped torp in coop. And you now tell me that it is fine that you can intentionally do dmg to me /basically TK me/, + worse: just for fun decide that I will have another pinky game(s)/ and this is fine & just? Nice logic & ethic.

You get elite cmdr xp on a 19-pointer. Yes, it takes time to train an Admiral, but you only need ONE such guy. Though you evidently want to have Admirals on MANY of your ships? You just would like to pay dubloons and voila, jump jump jump? As you noticed, 19-pointers are not easy to get, so you would meet opponents with less trained commanders... why should you be able to do that, just by paying for camos? I appreciate your urge for competitiveness, but sorry, not all commanders have to be maxed out to make their ships playable.

Yeah... and this is just abusing the #$@ed pinkyness system. By "kissing a pinky" you are basically a TK yourself - because he didn't do anything to you, he is your teammate and you deal dmg to him (+extend his conviction without him doing anything wrong anymore). Not that I didn't have an urge to do that to some pinky AFK-er who tried to "survive" his games but not participate...

Sure, but Stalinium is Stalinium, caliber doesn't matter. And Soviet ships also didn't make 45 knots all their life long, right? Akizuki is much longer, slower, less turnable boat, no comparison to Błyskawica at any of her refit stages... I wasn't thinking about exact balancing here - this is done by WG independently on real ship characteristics anyway. If rearmed as T8 AA, Błyskawica shouldn't be made OP, she just should be comparable to Akizuki, but different. BTW, for me personally, Akizuki is not pleasant to play - because of poor maneuverability and low speed, not because of weakness of her guns.

No. You don't (and shouldn't) move high level captains often. That would be too OP, and making it based on dubloons is just pay2win. Retraining medium level captain is now trivial, if you have at least one 19-pointer working on some premium and generating "elite cmdr xp". No even need to have a "national" premium to train captains, because the elite xp can be used on any nation. 20-30 games is not too hard work if you want to move even a high level captain. But if you want to constantly switch him between your seal-clubbing ships - sorry man, should not be so easy.

Nope. I'm pretty sure "misbehavior in chat" is also a dumb automate. I've been 24-hr banned at least 2 times after doing absolutely nothing except urging some hopeless potatos in quite kind language like "go cap ffs, we are losing the game". You just get your conviction after enough reports, and it seems that the threshold is lowered when your previous ban was less than 1-2 weeks earlier... I'm not very patient with "casuals", afkers or plain potatos, so I started to gather some statistics... Plays poorly = potatoing. In all kinds of meaning of this word. Bot = either obvious bot (sailing in hopelessly obvious manner + engaging only in obvious occasions), or some total potato which behaves like a bot. Also if some retard really angered me he gets both reports. Plus all kinds of idlers get that: total AFK, late loaders (>2 minutes, in DD or CV especially). I would really prefer Bot_6 in my team than a guy which doesn't load or play at all. Chat = this includes not only bad language, spam, moron remarks, but also "shut up, you are dead", "stfu you pinky sh*t" or "stfu, I don't care" when politely asked to follow the team strategy, after he had (and missed) the chance to express his opinion earlier. Generally - useless piece of code, which causes as many frustration as it vents

Are the rules described somewhere in detail? Like I've mentioned - I've been pinky a few times before, I think always with 5 games not more. Are you sure about the "activity" requirement? And regarding the damage I dealt some 70-80k in the T5-T6 game which did not count... so I think that's not it there

Well, why not - actually Błyskawica got Soviet 100mm guns in 1952, Stalin was even alive at the time

You mean, like ARP Kongo/Hiei or smtn? Anyway, it is enough to use camo mod and you can see what you want!

Hm. I just threw an idea. I imagine that the 102's wouldn't be so mortar-like. The shell is heavy, although the initial velocity is smaller than Akizuki's. WG will "have" to solve that problem anyway, with introducing RN DD ;) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QF_4_inch_Mk_XVI_naval_gunhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_cm/65_Type_98_naval_gunhttp://navalhistory.flixco.info/H/80943x53535/8330/a0.htm Akizuki vs Błyskawica1010m/s vs 811m/s14x11km eff, 19.5x13km max vs 18.1kmx11.9km max20-22rpm vs 15-20rpm13kg vs 15-17kg Bofors 120 4.7in 12cm 50cal QF Bofors M34 36900m/s19.5km max10rpm24kg Rate of fire is 1.5-2x faster with 102, and there is one gun more... Plus AA rating should be usable. The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules Also with more (but weaker) torps (although there was a period when Błyskawica had a single quadruple launcher too...), 20m shorter hull, Bofors 40mm AA, still 37-38 knot speed and radar fire control Hm, probably more of that old spirit was preserved there than actually in the country... There was a New Soviet Order in Poland and Polish sailors (and pre-war officers generally) were often spending quite a few years in jail, at least before 1956 when the situation started to settle.

o m g. And now (from experience) I may add that those "30 clean" is like 50-60 battles, if you try to actually play: hide in smoke with other ships, be close for AA, charge together, maneuver. Occasional bumps are frequent - but for pinky it means more pinkness... and often quite a lot of dmg. For now I have like, 3 of 5 "clean" games only. Yup, I don't understand why there are no clear rules, and for example why there is no counter from the previous "pinkness" displayed when I get a new one, with explanation how am I penalized for what. But it seems we've already established that WG can't much into counters Nope, I've been quite a few times pinky before, and I don't recall getting more than 5 games penalty. And yup, some "people" "care" - like I just had to reply in a nearby thread to some guy who generally dismissed what I say "because I'm pinky $@#t". There is quite often bad attitude towards pinkies - what's interesting, the more potato player is, the more he judges others by pinky color. Kinda self-compensation? I'm more liberal than average regarding "second row torping", but still it is very very rare situation. The problem is you can get pinky very easily by one stray shell or torp which finishes a friendly (and that who did 90% dmg to him will not get punished). Or you can become a "team killah" by shot from your secondaries. Or torpedo from auto-drop... Or if 30hp friendly bumps into you Probably you're mostly right. Small addition - for now also the friendly collision is counted towards pinkyness... I can't understand, why. It doesn't cause damage, and it is common in a close range play. Also, secondaries hits shouldn't be counted. And torpedo auto-drops are kind of border-case, too... The problem is, I almost don't play CV I just pushed the Zuiho in co-op because this ship now sucks in PvP... This can be right. But obviously there is a smarter way to limit that, isn't it? Just requirement to be in the game until it is decided and having some dmg done, maybe? Yup. Those undocumented, secret WG "features", backed-up by some "internal" statistics

Oh you remind me quite a few potatos I met during my current pinkness... They were more eloquent but I understand you're afraid of our mod here. Otherwise, I don't think you're much different. They ended at the bottom of the scorecard usually, too. Go play co-op, really.