Admiral_noodle

And because the game is balanced around those numbers and it's more entertaining - for the BBs as well - when there are 4 or fewer. It is interesting to see the cruiser mission up. I think that's WGs first attempt at incentivising cruiser play. And it's not a bad idea.

--> or WG can put in cruiser missions... like they just have

This is my damage record - in a tier X game. For once RNG smiled on me despite taking 3 kagero torps at the start when I was on about 40k damage. Citadelled and sank a Yamato. For once I also got the "when to push when to withdraw" balance right with this ship too. The enemy team were compliant to, sailing broadside

Nerfing BBs so they aren't fun to play isn't the answer either. I would release more lines of cruisers and preferably not ones with a "high skill cap"... Or incentivise cruiser play using the economy. Similarly you could make BBs cost more to play.

@Syrchalis - yes. But I don't think this is a problem when there are fewer BBs (2-3 max 4) on the enemy team because you can use your skill by avoiding being in the sights of two BBs at the same time, disengage, kite, go somewhere else. I see the problem as too many BBs per game, not a problem with BBs per se. Although I would agree that BBs AA is a tad too strong and *some* could do with a rudder nerf here and there, but in general they aren't "OP". But when they outnumber cruisers the balance falls apart. And WG know this.

BBs aren't unbalanced IMO. There are just too many in each game. Too many BBs, dds or CVs make the game less fun for me. I prefer it when cruisers outnumber BBs 2-1 in the line up. An ideal line up for me is: 1 CV 2 BB 6 CA/CL 3 DD In this setup cruisers get to do their thing while you really feel special in a BB. The further away from this "ideal" games get the less fun it is for me. In any class.

Actually while I disagree with OP for balance issues, and agree with you (I'd cap at 4 BBs) bb only mode was actually fun on PT. this was when everyone was testing BBs. With no dds to make the bb players scared generally the bbs got close to each other and had brawls. It was quite entertaining. For a while. Then the games got too samey.

The other problem when cruisers are low in number is good cruiser play then becomes frustrating. You can't do wolf pack actions any more and have to be a support ship for your BBs. For many ships that means sitting around not doing much for large parts of the game especially if your cruiser has short range and your BBs want to stay away from each other. That's less of a problem now with Bismarck etc trolling around, you can usually follow one of those around. But I've had games in a hipper before I got the range upgrade where I got no hits at all. There was simply no way to get close enough without unacceptably risking the ship. And we had the caps. So what was the point?

I actually think it's a bit of both. People like battleships because they are battleships! But people also dislike being destroyed in seconds. The problem is you can potato for longer in a BB. You'll be as useless as you would have been in a cruiser, perhaps more so. But people will think they have a better chance of a good game in a BB. And they are probably right because it's a self fulfilling prophecy. As there are more BBs potato cruiser players are increasingly likely to be nuked. Even I'm hesitant to play cruisers because of the annoyance of losing all your health very rapidly. I should probably focus more on cruisers to avoid forgetting how to play them. #capbbstofour

It's not broken it's working as intended. Random. And random means sometimes the potatoes will be more on one side.

All I can see in this thread now is *numbers numbers numbers* I can understand the tier 8 struggles normally - when bottom tier they are the only ones generally without heals. Which is painful. But that's what bottom tier is like. Top tier tier 8 cruisers are great. Tier 7 is where I go to play cruisers generally. They seem to be top tier a fair bit. And I found the Shchorrs brilliant

So the general "quality" of players won't impact your win rate but it might well impact your enjoyment. I find peak time "vexing" because part of my skill is anticipating what my enemies and my team will do. When the game is full of people who play rarely/for a laugh/possibly drunk I can't predict them. Solid plays become errors and actually a complete potato can defeat me 1-1 by doing something amazingly dumb and getting away with it I find peak time more likely to include complete stomps (where I don't get much done) and complete team fails. It doesn't affect my WR overall but it often means games where I personally profit less. Due to my play style I benefit most in close games. So I prefer to division at peak times.

Well - you end up with strange games with strange behaviour and often very one sided games. That's not good when you win either sometimes.

Oh good question. It's actually less enjoyable than when I started because I am now aware of the mistakes I make and am concious of areas where I am lacking. Ignorance was bliss. But it's a lot more enjoyable than when I found out how bad I was before I improved Overall the game is straight up better, and I still love to play

OP is correct Yes Leander and above much better. Keep going.

AFAIK RNG is calculated per shot. Each shot has no memory or awareness of what came before, or who you are. It simply "rolls" whenever you shoot. Obviously it takes into account what you're shooting at because that's how the camo works. Any other solution would be horrific to code and pointless. Totally random RNG is easiest to code and will deliver the best results for the least investment

I regret nothing - bottom tier 70k+ damage stopped the enemy getting A and sunk a tier X monster and finished off a dd too I may have confused my tirpitz with a dd.

Would like to see: - first loser (come top of losing team. No benefits) - heroic defeat (come top of losing team and come top 3 of all xp on either side - some flags) I'm all for more medals though

No. And I'm not sure making divisions more likely to be low tier is a good thing. Usually divisions means playing with friends. Marking them bottom tier a lot more isn't going to win WG any friends. However MM tries to balance divisions on both sides, which is a better way of "diluting" division power. Which is off topic

2000 damage in Bismarck because I forgot Takao had torps... there is nothing worse than being first blood in a BB.

I suspect it's how much damage you do to friendlies vs. How much you do to enemies in a given timeframe or number of games that matters. So there is no magic. It's likely the game recognises the odd mistake and is more likely to forgive you if your ratio of friendly to enemy damage is low. I have done this myself when I shot through my own cruiser I hadn't spotted cutting across my BBs path. Both our faults and we apologised but I did not turn pink. However I took it as a warning to be extra careful.

In my view no. Coming top of the team when losing might be rewarded with some kind of achievement (like first loser or something) - for fun and bragging - but I don't think this is needed. If you have the choice of farming damage and trying to come top of the losers vs. sacrificing yourself for the win - you should be encouraged to do the latter. I don't mind the mechanics as they are. You still get high caliber / confederate etc for individual achievements. There is no need to reward failure from team play perspective

Yes. I for one hope we get more dd and cruiser lines before too many BBs lines. However I am really looking forward to Sovetsky Soyuz in game. It's OP as hell in the tabletop Wargame Victory at Sea. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovetsky_Soyuz-class_battleship

Select leader?? Based on what? I'd want to see "WR in games as leader"! Plus people should be able to opt out of being leader. Then what if no one is leader?

I feel for you. That is unlucky. Although with more than 16000 people logging on each day it's likely happening to a few others as well. Take heart! As others have said however, if you improve your own gameplay (the only thing you can do) then it's likely in a few of those matches you'd have been able to carry your team to a win. And that's what makes all the difference. Sure you'll have lost say 10-12 of those games but say you'd carried 4 to a win - it would feel a lot less bad and you'll be rightly proud of yourself Also: - division with other players especially those who you can learn from - if you lose 3 in a row with a ship take a ship you know and love out for a bit - take a break if you get frustrated - improve your own tactical skills Looking at your stats to me you are an average player. You're not harming your teams win chance but your completely at the mercy of MM randomness to get you games you can win. If you can become a "carrier" of games you'll be able to stop the losing streaks (not all losses though you're one of twelve!) and also see your overall win rate rise. - from someone who had your problem