robihr

was just going to say this

you would need some buffs to make it work on t6. if you compare fuso and kongo...

yes. this game needs more kongo clones. i also want regular(premium) haruna (and whatever other 2 clones are). also add HSF kongo clones also. you can never have enough kongos in your port

is it dd mandatory? cause i think flooding damage with cv could be much easier..

your guns values need fixing

i have seen clan recruitment messages inside clan battles

only way to get so much flooding is to play lower tier dd. so t4-t6. playing higher tiers will just get you frustration..

if it was random wr i would agree with you. but it isnt. same WR from different leagues have different meanings. cause of MM we are constantly being matched against teams such as TWA, OM, OMNI, TTT and all other top 10-20 teams. having 54-55% WR isnt same as having 54-55% WR of some team in gale(silver) league. CB use version of elo system. so if you are ranked better than some team you will earn less points, but if you lose you will lose much more points. example yesterday we won against some gale league team (idk wtf MM was thinking) and we won only 10 points (probably minimum points gained for win). we won OMNI last week and we won 28 points. if we lost against that team in gale league we would have lost 30-40 points, but if we lost against omni we would have lost some 15 points. so you gain/lose points depending on who you are matched against and that gives you more or less accurate result regards to clan standings. if you only watch WR you will get totally wrong picture. imagine team that had 10 battles against top 5 teams and had 40% WR. does that mean it is bad team cause it only had 40% WR?

you scrub, who needs food... just live from air and play CB then how would you rate clans when they start losing battles? OMNI was at one point 12th this evening. does that mean it is a weak clan? no. it just means it had a losing streak cause second or third team was playing to earn stalin and they probably didnt practice or played CB earlier. that seems ok to me cause it represents their strength atm. or do you want permanent fixtures for clans like OMNI in top 5 even though they start losing lots of battles? cause i dont see any other way to show "strength" of the clan.

when scrubs played with first team we were in top10. we won against TWA, OMNI, TTT and some other top10 clans. but we also lost against them. and our ranking showed our deserved position. last week we had second team playing of which most were not experienced in CB and we dropped with our position alot cause they had losing streak. why change ranking when it is already more or less correct? it is already based on elo ( but much more forgiving version), so rankings are more or less correct.

it is not the maps fault for this kind of setups. people take them cause it is ideal setup with island huggers that can radar caps(DM), roaming radar (moskva),flanker/range ca( hindenburg ), smoke dd (gearing) and sonar dd for contesting caps (z52) and also montana cause it is probably best bb against ca. but i have seen setups that worked with 1 dd or even without dd (example twa, home). also saw conqueror, yamatos, henris and zaos and they all worked if you had good tactic.. CB already has bastardized version of elo system. you lose more points against teams with lesser standing than you and you also win less points from them, while you win more points against teams that are better than you on ladder. and how would you measure clan strength? when you have 1st, second and third teams in some of the clans. is that strength of 1st team or is is overall strength of the clan? or how to measure first team when sometimes players in it arent fixed? think that overall CB ranking is good, cause going full elo system wouldnt net you so many teams in platinum league. and wg wants players to get some of the rewards while having competitive battles. overall i would only add one more con. you cant finish campaign/missions in clan battles.

i often took one for the team and from my experience it just leaves bunch of morons in your team with less chance to win. often did it when needed to finish off last enemy dd in situations where we would have dd advantage, or to kill last enemy radar ca or smth similar when we have ship advantage and often my team didnt fail to dissapoint. taking one for the team even if your team has advantage is bad, cause it just leaves one less capable player in your team.

saw title of thread and wondered how??? then saw the date... how the people even manage to find this old threads...

just installed wows on steam to check this. no you cant use normal premium store. there is special premium store ingame where you can only purchase through steam. no other modes of payment. if you want to use wg premium store you need wg account and i think you cant get that with steam (cause you need email/password and from what i see steam only gives you username). so my earlier posts are probably all correct in my assumptions.

think it will be unified this year cause of steam release.. they dont need any more negative reviews this kind of thing would cause...

steam is more than just technological platform, it is also publishing and advertising platform. so they are publishing and advertising wows for free and that is cost if they dont make $$$. $$$ that they could make by actually selling and promoting normal fixed price titles and not f2p. also they make money from various side content (steam market/steam wallet) which are only accessible if you use steam, and not third party launcher. also if i am not mistaken content of the games are on steam servers, so bandwidth and servers are also cost to steam. not to mention all the people they need to pay to make all that running. like i said steam is not charitable organization. it is corporation made for $$$. i could write more about functioning of corporation, economics, customer retention, marketing etc. but i really dont have time. while it may seem like 2-3 days of work from IT, it is actually a lot more complex than that.

welcome to the corporate world. things that seem flawed logic to you are all actually pretty logical. steam is not welfare organization. it is rather greedy corporation that doesnt "promote" games out of the good heart. wg and steam divided their customers and are getting profit from them. wg has 100% profit from existing users and 70% profit from new steam users. so if wg poaches steam users, steam will instead of 30% of purchase from new steam users get 0%. and what reason then steam has for having wows on its platform then? it will only provide costs for no benefit. so of course that steam is losing money here if that happens. same if wows gives existing customers to steam.

it is probably cause of contract with steam. steam doesnt want to lose its customers either. it is f2p game, so steam doesnt earn by selling the game and needs profit from transactions. if wg poaches customers from steam to its platform, then steam really doesnt have incentive to keep the wows on steam.

by some you mean about 70% of them?

i can understand wg. if lets say wg has a million dollars per month income from existing users and all of the users go to steam, they will have only 700k$ income per month. so net loss of 300k$. can you justify loss of 300k$ monthly income to your shareholders? for what? for player convenience of using steam when you already have perfectly workable launcher that existing players used for 2 years? and i would also write review on steam regarding this issue only if i wasnt lazy enough to download this game all over again on steam. this game has issues ingame and if it was negative review about that i would agree. but negative review cause of inability of linking existing account to steam account? #firstworldproblems

i would buy a premium kongo for lots of silver, or maybe a premium myoko. there arent enough of those in my port

clan battles last till 21.12, then you have holidays so earliest ranked should start is january or maybe february.

well nobody is forcing you to play the "TEST" ships

you usually get chat banned by second game you play

and that is marketing. they couldnt nicely say: "we want $$$. giving away users to steam will hurt our revenue. " they went on steam to attract new users that they otherwise wouldnt get, not to give away existing users(revenue) to steam who would take percentage from every transaction those existing players did.