Deckeru_Maiku

T8 battle. Me in Mogami. 148k damage 5 kills, including a Bismarck and a Tirpitz Our team was behind ~150 pts or so (with two caps each taken) when the last of my allies got sunk. My Mogami was at ~50% HP Enemy had a 60% HP Tirpitz, a Bismarck with 50%+ HP and a Benson (I think...) with also ~50% HP. I had more or less solo defended a cap for a good part of the battle, and now, as the last man standing, I tried to continue that. Got spotted by the Benson without seeing it myself. Dodged shots from the Bismarck and managed to get an island between us. And when the Bismarck saw me again, it was a bit surprised by a spread of torpedoes - Boom... one gone, two to go... Couple seconds later the Benson spotted me again and now the Tirpitz had managed to get a lock on me. And again I managed to slip behind an island - this time in the cap I deffed - to not get shot at. The Benson got a bit careless... Guess it was trying to spot me, but I was close enough to sink it with a single salvo... two down, one to go... I had taken a couple secondary hits by then and HP were down to maybe 15%. Tirpitz advanced into my general direction and started a plane. I got spotted behind my island, before my AA took the spotter down. My own spotter staid up long enough to see where the Tirpitz wanted to pass the island. Torps were ready, so two launchers spit their eels into the way the Tirpitz would have to come from... Too bad that Tirpitz captain was a cautious one... he had slowed down when I had lost sight of him, so the two spreads passed him in front of his bow.. I had done a 180° turn to get the torp launchers on the other side of my Mogami into action and had fired it - only one remained, the second was out - also blindly... and now, with the Tirpitz slowly coming into my sight from behind that island, I could see that all four torps would hit it... Too bad that the Tirpitz was able to give me a nice beating with it's two front turrets... Boom... End of Battle... In the Result List, I ended up at the #1 spot... for both teams. 2000 base xp or so, with the surviving winner Tirpitz at the #1 position of his team with 1900 exp. Ah well, at least someone gave me +1 Karma for my struggle Fun Fact: Enemy team had two Tirpitz's and a Bismarck in a Clan Division... 2 of those three I did sink Our team had a clan division of three Kii... 'nough said...

Usually it's easy to notice him, due to the pink colour...

But T10 players are supposed to be sooooooo good. Shouldn't he be able to carry a battle at low tier all by himself, especially, when he manages to do soooo much damage? The player in my example - the one you faced in battle - has 3 T10 BBs (and was in a BB in that battle) with a combined 300 battles in them. And a total of 2500+ battles in BBs. And still he seems to be unable to carry a battle at low tier? And it seems, You consider that as normal? Maybe Your statistics also don't cover the fact, that different ships - even in the same class - often need a totally different playstyle. And some players seem to be good with some ships and suck royally with others... I know from personal experience that this is so. But okay... You stick to Your statistics and I to my personal experience from 8900 battles, which in most cases lets me detect potatoes within the first 5 minutes of a battle, by just seeing where they position themselves on the different maps.

And again to show winrate, damage and number of battles done do not really allow any conclusion for further battleresults: Between the 14th October and the 18th November I played 20 battles in my Bismarck. Of these I won 13, which makes it 65%. The average damage I did in these battles was 66k My full stats for the Bismarck are: 192 battles, 55% winrate and 60k average damage. And my stats for all ships are: 8926 battles, 55% winrate and 38k average damage. Looks quite fitting on the first look, right? Too bad, that my Bismarck results are more of the Jekyll & Hyde type... one day it's 120k damage, the next it's 40k. So in the end, the statistics won't tell my opponent what kind of a battle I will have. And like that it is with most of my ships... or at least with most of the ships I still play. 'Cause that is another flaw of the "all time winrate/damage/battles" theory: it does not account for the time many of us spent as potatoes when we started playing the game or when we started playing a new class or a new ship or nation or whatever..

Okay, I checked the stats of one player (not telling which one, due to naming and shaming) of your enemy team and it shows a great flaw in that addon You use. This player is shown as having decent Winrate, average damage and more than just a few battles experience. Yet in the ship he was using in that battle, he has only 39% winrate, yet he does in it damage at unicorn level over the course of 23 battles. So although he did enormous damage and sinking an average of 1.78 per battle in that ship, he lost 14 battles and won only 9. I would think, that he does play that ship way too defensive, doing a lot of damage near the end of the battle, when the battle itself is already lost. What does that mean for his total playstyle? In the same class he played in that battle he has a total of 35 ships with more than 10 battles (each) played. His winrate low is ~36% and the high is 73% and the average damage is above server average for most of them. So usually he seems to do well in that class... alas, he isn't that good at T10 with that class... only a 46% average winrate with the two ships of that class he has at T10 So... now you can guess which player is the one I described? Remember, he was in the enemy team shown above... And when You think you identified him, try to remember his performance in that battle...

Shards is fine. Potatoes are the problem... South team going for A is utterly stupid, but 90% of the time the "team" still goes for A and ignores C... Nah.. don't remove it. Just put Ocean in it's place... I'd LOVE to see Epeencenter on Ocean at T8+ (when I play a DD of course...)

Which stats did lead You to that assumption? Winrate? Solo? 2-man div? 3-man div? For that ship or total? All or recent battles? Damage? Solo? 2-man div? 3-man div? For that ship or total? All or recent battles? Survival rate? Solo? 2-man div? 3-man div? For that ship or total? All or recent battles? Kill/death ratio? Solo? 2-man div? 3-man div? For that ship or total? All or recent battles? And at what times did You play to make that assumption? Early (before noon)? Noon to afternoon? Afternoon to evening? Evening to late evening? Unless You can provide a valid data base, you running some stats software proves nothing. It's just another personal opinion. And therefor not more valid than the opinions of (more or less) experienced players, which are built by personal impression of what they see happening during the battles. I am one of those "average players" I guess... solo winrate of ~55% over the course of 8900 (or so) battles. Some days I get Unicorn stats, on others I suck and most of the time I manage both on the same day. When I am put in a T10 battle I see failure all over the map. Pussy Wagons hiding behind islands, as if they had not 9 tiers to learn that this won't win them a battle. BBs and cruisers broadsiding around... or even sailing straight for a couple minutes. If that would be rare examples, I might agree with you. But it isn't. It's the majority of players acting as if they would just play their first battle. And of course do most potatoes end up at T10 and stay there. They died their way up for months and months and now they finally reached the top! Endlevel! The final proof that they are good players, because they own a T10 ship. Why should they ever play anything else again - they have sold all other silver ships of lower tier anyway, because, hey, got a T10 now - and RNGesus beware, why should they try to change any part of their playstyle, as it has carried them up to the top of the hill! T10!!! Well, as playing T10 would suddenly magically enhance Your skill exponentially and with You not playing T10 ships, You have to be a skillless potato of course. Like me.

Well, that would be really a reason to fix them IJN DDs...

The battle that felt best for me today was with my Yubari. 45k damage done, six kills including a doublestrike and surviving the game - and we did win! The only thing that buggers me is that I didn't shoot down a single plane, even though a Hosho was on the enemy team

well, those couple times I managed to sink an ally - usually by torping like a potato - I managed to write a "sorry, my fault..." in the chat and took the TK penalty like a grown-up. Mayhaps that is something You could learn from me?

8909 battles in total - 33% of those in DDs. So I'm no "DD main" but I guess I play my share of DD battles. So even when most of those detonations happened while I was playing DDs, that makes 88 detonations in about 2900 battles... that's once every 32 battles in a DD - holy RNGesus... that is too much... NOT Maybe the reason why those many, many, many detonations aren't so much of a problem for me is, that I don't take this game (!) too serious. I ain't that much of a competitive person, that such a minor annoyance would bother me. Yes, I play to win. But if RNGesus decides it is time for my DD to explode, then so be it. Feces happens. And I can just pick a different ship and go into the next battle, so what? There's quite a few other things in the game mechanics which annoy me a lot more than detonations...

A 64 % winrate and an average damage of 54 k done in my MOO (Master of Orion) do support that claim. In fact, among all my BBs with at least 10 battles played, the MOO ends up as the #4 when avarage damage is chosen. Behind Bismarck (60k), Gneisenau (57k) and König (55k). Ahead of Dunkerque (53k), Iron Duke (52k), Fuso (51k) and all others. So yeah, the MOO is utterly OP. More OP than even the Nikolai or Prince Albert could ever be. And even more OP in the hands of a player who knows how to play it - 'cause I guess there's many players with even more ridiculous damage done than me...

Considering that I don't use the anti-detonation flags regularly on most of my ships, with the exception of DDs who usually get them, when I have them, I don't seem to get detonated very often at all. Stats say, my ships get detonated once every 101 battles... compared to that I get a killing strike (the one for sinking an enemy with a single salvo) every 7 (seven!) battles. So people should have way more reason to whine about normal damage mechanics that allow them to get sinkered by a couple torps or shell hits, than to whine about the extremely rare occasion of being exploded. edit: fun fact - the OP has a 92 to 7 relation between fetting detonated and single striking an enemy himself... and still he whines...

You get something different from me: If You don't LTP please stop to play, as people who are not even willing to learn how not to TK are really the worst.

Typical potato check on "Two Brothers"? Type in chat: "let's all go through the channel" and watch which ships change course to do so. Those are the potatoes...

Oh, look... another one of those utterly useless "waaaaaaaaaahhhhhh..... I got detonated" threads.

I never use WASD I always use the arrow keys

and did You sink him? Don't say "No, because we were on the same team", 'cause that is no reason NOT to sink him.

Just met @Freyr_90 in his Myoko while sailing around in my FU-buki. Even not divisioned we ended up as #1 & #2 in a quite onesided win. Enemy got a bit scrubbed, it seems to me.

Of course the game gets harder with all those T10 potatoes around. The more powerfull the ships, the higher the influence of potatoes. If You're in a T5 battle with the basic team build - 5 BBs, 4 cruisers, 3 DDs (or so...) it doesn't matter much, if there's 1/3 (= 4) total potatoes in team. The other players can get along by just playing a bit better while hoping the potato percentage (P%) on the other team is about the same. But when in a T8/T10 battle just two T10 BBs are played by potatoes, it gets very hard to win the battle. And considering, that in quite a few of my T10 battles I end up among the Top 5 when playing my Bismarck, with all T10 BBs behind me, getting T10 BB Potatos isn't such a rare occurance. So sure, T10 battles are much harder than those at lower tiers... because of P% having a much higher influence

What do you mean with "crap"? Absolute normal T8/10 battle MM. Usually it's me in one of the T8's

I don't know... sitting behind islands trying not to be seen isn't really a result of map size, imho

For me it feels being exactly the opposite. I usually play < T7 most of the time. And yes, there are many inexperienced players around. But there's also quite a few veterans around. So in the end, usually the team with more experienced players wins. Whenever I end up in a T9 or T10 battle with my T8 ships (which I only play because of the Yamato campaign...) I pray to RNGesus that this time I will end in a team of players who know what to do... For me it feels as if there are more inexperienced players in low tier - but a lot more potatoes in high tier battles. An inexperienced player still can be playing good and be eager to learn. High tier potatoes are just that... no chance to ever get better, because even when playing as potatoes they managed to "reach the top" - why should they even try to get better... they see themselves as successfull and perfect. Nah... I rather stay at sealclubbing tiers, thanks... ...especally when there's sealclubbers (Gremlins, Nikolais etc) to club

Fun fact: You do not have to play higher tier battles. Nobody will make you do it. You can just play at the tier that feels good to you, be it 3, 4 or 7 (or whatever..) I play since beta and still have no interest in getting to T10 - apart from somewhen getting me a Yamato, because, Yamato... - but I enjoy playing anywhere from T3 to T7

Well, it kinda was for me in the 10 division battles I played. The two we lost were lost because of a T8 division ending in a T10 battle with 9 potatoes at their side... 8 of 10 battles won... no teamspeak... nearly zero communication in chat... me having played 8500+ battles before not in division Hmmmm.... doesn't look that problematic to me somehow... And using stuff learned in competitive in random battles doesn't give better chances for a win. Sometimes it's quite the opposite... In competitive you (usually) play with 6 (or so?) other people of good skill who you can expect to know what they do. Even in a 3 man division inn random you might end up with 9 potatoes in your team and 12 unicorns in the enemy team. So when those 3 division players use "competitive tactics" it will help them nada, as 9 people will just potato around.