pra3y

You are obviously not making enough sacrifices to RNG Morten. On a more serious note, after getting pass the South Carolina and Myogi, I'm glad if my shells actually land on something. I don't really feel much change in terms of HR from my Missouri after the patch. Heck the other day I citadelled a Hindi that was 17+km away. Granted it was sailing broadside but still you know. When I play BBs as long as my shells connect I don't care if its a pen, overpen or cit. Any damage done is good enough. That said I'm really really really enjoying my Yamato right now

Good ol Avenger, the anti-cv extremist, you always have an excuse do you. a) Not full aa speced, merely half. No manual aa skill and the module for aa efficiency is not installed. b) So CVs aren't OP are they? I mean if they were op then i wouldn't have been able to do anything to his planes, even if he plays like a bot. Afterall what can a poor old tier 9 DD do to a big bad unstoppable Midway? So much for CVs are OP Edit: wording

49 hits in an 11.58 min game. I would say their is indeed nothing wrong with the ship. Just RNGesus and the poor aim of everyone who is complaining about it

They can always lessen the amount of planes needed to be shot down. Either way it is less vague. The fact that it allows other classes apart from CVs to reasonably achieve the achivement is at least a step in the right direction as compared to a percentage system. How would you scale it then Ps: It i you or me? Cause im pretty sure I have more than 1 CA that got clear sky, although I maybe wrong. How do you check?

Like you said, achievements like Confederate and High Caliber are easy to get and scale well. On the other hand, it was/is actually easier to get clear sky at lower tiers, especially when manual strafe was available. On the other hand it's extremely difficult for tier 8 and above CVs or other ship classes in general to get a clear sky achievement. Your tier 10 CVs would have to shoot down at least 90+ planes to get Clear Sky. For other ship classes ie BBs, CAs or DDs, base on the current requirement its darn near impossible for them to get clear sky at all in the first place unless the enemy CV suicide into you now. With the new requirement, at least its feasible and better then the current requirement. You talk about scaling but how would you scale it though? Damage is kinda universal in the sense that there is enough HP to go around that a few people per game can get confederate or high caliber but there are only so many planes in a game. So what? Lower it to say shooting down 20% of total planes in a game? I rather something that is easier to calculate. In fact perhaps lower the amount of planes for Air Defense Expert to say 30. At least its easier to motivate people to help defend allies that need AA since they know exactly how many planes they have to shoot down instead of giving a vague percentage of total planes in a game you have to shoot down. Like wtf, how many planes do I have to shoot down to reach that 20%. I mean look at that Midway game below. Without thinking about it in detail you would think 90 is more that enough. But nooooooooo, its not even 50%. So what? I have to shoot down 95? 97? 104? How many planes exactly? That is what irks people. A percentage system makes it too exclusive already, whereas a fixed amount is much better, like a set goal. You know what you have to do to achieve it. I think a Cleveland has a better chance shooting down 40 planes to get a Air Defense Expert award then shoot down 50% of the total planes in a game and at least 30 planes to get a Clear sky now. Case in point: Midway, 90 planes shot down, no Clear Sky Case in point 2 Nope, see above. At least in my perspective its harder to scale it as compared to HC or C. It'll either be too easy or too hard. A fix number at least puts it at a middle ground that is achievable by everyone in the game.

Ryujo has a 48 plane hanger capacity. At tier 5 onward ships start getting floatplanes. So why would it be wierd? Tier 10 CVs like the Midway have slightly more than a 100 planes. That just mean 2 ppl can get the new "clear sky" award if they try.

To be honest it makes no difference to me whether its the weekends or weekdays, more people or not. I can play on a wed and still have a crappy team that all decide to go to the 1 line while thr enemy team gets all the cap. The skill of the player base and the player base is diverse enough now that it doesnt matter. You can have kids or retired folks who have no idea how to play the game but have all the time in the world play on a weekday and give u a horrible time (not all are horrible, just an example). You're just assuming whatever people said continue to hold through even after so much time has passed. You know, after new people join the game or the skills of people improve that sorta thing.

633 secondary hits

Playing on the weekend? Same as weekdays. Less can be said for all the crazy forum topics though that pop up during the weekend .

Ego? To be frank the one with alot of ego here is you. Essentially you're saying that the victim has no say in anything, just suck it up because it affects the team if the victim punishes the other guy. And the guy who does it? Nothing. A small fine, none of which goes to the victim's repair cost and turning pink for a few games. After that nothing. The victim is not compensated for the damage and is forced to play safe for the rest of the game at best and at worst straight up die from the enemy after getting hit by the friendly fire. I'm not even bothered about those losing silver, just a sorry will do irregardless of what happens to my ship next. Is it that difficult to say sorry or even know how to say sorry? Pretty sure most people regardless of their country at the very least know how to say thank you, sorry and f*%^. If you disable chat that's your own problem. So stuff that self righteous ego of yours. Sail away only to continue getting torped. If I had not allowed the DoT damage to stack and turned him pink I would have died to the 2nd volley of torps he launched at me. That would have been 65 pts lost for the team. Him dying causes the team to lose 50 pts. Mind you this was a guy who reversed to me right at the start of the game just to torp me. Say I didn't do anything. I let myself just get killed, you know for your greater good, what then? He probably would have just go afk and do nothing else, suicide, go to the map border or go tk another ship. By some miracle he helps the team. Tell me how much help can he give to the team against a Hakuryu compared to me? Sure argue all you want about this being a deliberate TK and it doesn't happen often, but what happen if its an accident that lowered me to that amount of health left you see on screen. And that guy just continue it doing the whole game to the other teammates, torping from the 2nd line. That's what I mean by the 1/4 thing. It goes both ways not one. If I get sank immediately in a situation where I could have survived if not for the friendly damage, then isn't the potato being selfish to the team for making them lose points? Perhaps I'm understanding you wrongly but you don't give a thought about the victim do you? It' all about whether you win or lose the game anot. So what if the victim suffers damage? As long as it doesn't affect me I'm fine is what I'm getting out from you. I mean come on look at the example you gave: "If you have someone causing team damage, it's likely going to be a potato or a rare mistake. It's probably not going to be a deliberate TKer. If it's someone whining about you getting in the way (which is by far the most likely scenario) then it's an idiot. It's also most likely an idiot who's aware that team damage is bad and wants to win the game. That idiot is probably still going to be more useful to the team alive than dead. Or dying by enemy fire, at any rate. In those cases, the best thing to do is to move on and play the game. You're most not likely going to gain anything other than personal satisfaction by using the TK system to kill him. You're most likely going to lose a target for enemy fire, friendly firepower, and points." It's incredibly idealistic. Might as well say every TKer out there is trying to train the team to be better players by giving the team a handicap. Frankly it's egotistical to say that its for the benefit of the team. Who gave you the right to deprive the victim of his right if he so chooses?

And that is wrong because? The system is here to punish you if you're a deliberate TKer or play so carelessly that you constantly deal team damage to your allies. Again it boils down to the fact that if a person makes an effort to apologies one way or another it demonstrates that its a genuine mistake. If nothing is said and the potato continues on potatoing then obviously the system isn't working. Plus don't forget team damage can vary. If you get knocked by enough friendly torps and only have 1/4 left ,isn't the potential of you dying a point loss concern for the team as well? The game doesn't punish a deliberate tker or careless player just with a pink label. The way I see it, its the damage reflection that truly punishes a TKer or careless player. Remove it and it'll just encourage even more poor play because now no one gives a f%#$. Sure they sank a friendly, but so what? Its just being pink, play a few games cautiously and tah dah, no more pink.

Eh well I guess I rarely get my rudder or engine broken while playing my CAs as I've mentioned above, so its not really a big issue to me when getting smacked by HE. Hahahahaha I seem to be getting my turrets knocked out more frequently now though for some reason

Usually only on the French CAs, to which I have last stand (odd but yes) and light CAs. I don't really find those HE salvos breaking rudder or engine that often on higher tier CAs often though, that's why I have a good laugh.

This. On a few occasions i see an enemy BB launch a salvo at my nice juicy broadside and go ohhhh damm. Then I see that its actually HE shells not AP and start laughing instead. Jolly kind of them to not nuke me in 1 salvo.

You said that you believe that the careless player/TKer should be punished but not by another player reflecting the damage because its petty revenge that is not better than TKing someone else? Then you went on talking about how its selfish and not playing for the team etc here il quote them: We're not creating an evil strawman. You're the one who is confused. You justify your moral highground arguement by saying that its not right to the team and punishing it. So now when we point out that it's a one sided way of thinking because that careless/tk player can continue harming the team, we're creating an evil strawman? So you're going to just say "for the greater good" and leave it at that? No free pass man. At the very least show me how good or useful a blind 2nd line torper is for the team the whole game because at the momment its unbelievably one sided saying reflecting damage is detrimental/selfish to the team. And please dont tell me it is because of the point loss cause a tker or careless player have just as much potential to cause the team to lose points through their victims. PS: In my earlier post on me playing the Midway and getting purposely team torped by the friendly Hipper are you saying that I should have repaired the flood damage and not let that Hipper die? If i die as a result cause he decides to shoot me or torp me again then what? Sure he'll turn pink but like he said he's fine with being pink no biggie. But what would be the consequance? The enemy Haku would have a field day sinking friendly ships left right and centre. Is that the best for the team? Mind you he'll only turn pink after the game ended and i was torped twice by him. But hey he'll still be punished in the end. Was very selfish of me to punish him and cause to team to lose point right? Should have just damaged con and let him sink me instead. Only the best for the team. What can a tier 10 CV do better than a tier 8 CA Now u see how ridiculous it sounds?

So now we have to sink and allow the guy who damaged us to survive because it would be a grave injustice to the team and morally wrong on our part? This is why it's so mind blowing. I get what you're saying AnotherDuck but do you? If the guy proceeds on to continue doing team damage during the match and cause the team to lose then what? You're considering it only from one side of the coin. What about the other possible consequences? Insisting that the other party not take more than necessary damage because it will "harm" the team and is "selfish" is inherently flawed. Also what is punishing the team? Is it good for the team when that particular teammate constantly torp from the 2nd line throughout the match without bothering if there is another teammate in front? That particular teammate would then might as well be an enemy player given the advantage he is giving the enemy team.

So now, whenever a friendly teammate floods me or set me on fire, I have to burn a repair and potentially get set on fire or flooded again by the enemy and die as a result because it would be a disservice to the team and selfish.

Just to clarify how is it being an even bigger menace to the whole team? Are you saying that I should use my repair and allow an unapologetic and excessively careless player or teamkiller to continue playing in the match, potentially causing even more team damage with his carelessness because it would be a disservice to the team to have one less player? Sure having one less teammate is tough but how is that bad? Your "moral high ground" is kinda mind blowing to be honest. Let's assume that it's not a case of TK but carelessness. You think people will learn to be less careless when their actions have no consequences? Please don't tell me being pink in itself is the consequence. All one has to do now is to not bump into another teammate's ship and do some damage to get rid of the pink color. If they apologies then sure, you know its a genuine mistake and they're not really the kind who would repeatedly torp from the 2nd line or shoot without any awareness of the surrounding. On the other hand if the person says nothing or blame you for running into his 4 km torps that were being launched at an enemy ship 10km away, those people deserve to have the damage reflected back to them simply because they don't care. If they don't care then why should I care or how could they contribute meaningfully to the team in the first place? To be honest, the proposal of removing friendly dot will just encourage more TK and careless play. After all, now there is now no consequence. Just keep on shooting or torping at various teammates until you turn pink then stop. Meanwhile the enemy team will just lol as they pick off at those various teammates. Seriously did you guys even consider that

Well the game needs a way to teach people to be less careless. If you're gonna to shoot or torp without checking to see if your teammate is in front of you and remain unapologetic about it then damage should be reflected back onto you. The mechanic should remain unchanged. Why should someone get away with dealing team damage? Because turning pink is punishment enough? Like Aotearas and some of the others who have commented, I'll repair if the person apologies but if he doesn't why should I? He's a menace to the whole team in any case. I once had a friendly Atago who did team damage to me and another teammate launching his torps at enemies way beyond 10km early game. Unfortunately both of us got sunk by the enemy. The thing is the guy did that the whole match, just dumping torps like nobody's business even if there was a teammate in front of him. Is that even remotely ok?

I think that it's useful in 2 ways: a) you have a non-deliberate TKer who accidentally sets you on fire or flood you. However said non-deliberate TKer is unapologetic or does not even know that what he did is wrong. Said non-deliberate TKer can and sink then for all I care since they don't give an arse about others in the first place; b) you have a deliberate TKer and it helps to get this scum out of the particular game faster so why not? Was playing a Midway game pink and working off the penalty (see we all make mistakes, just have to live with it) when friendly Hipper just started torping me in spawn. Received a few torp hits and just let myself flood and let him take damage. He first turned pink and then die as a result of the reflected damage. And he did all that just because I was pink and said he would be happy to do it again Luckily I didn't die or I'll probably get reported for not providing the team air cover But I digress. So you see in this situation that fits b), it helps everyone with one less scum.

Also show us the stat page. 2 devastating strikes with that kind of damage means that you killed 2 dds or low tier ca? Reward is also more of percentage than actual damage number so you'll get more from that i think. Plus given that u got clear sky as well its not really a wonder.

@RAHJAILARI same here on this map. I always get the special ones who enjoy going to the old "d" area even when everyone else tells them not too Like that game the Bismark pinged E9 right at the start, the Z23 and the Republic & Hindi Div just went there with him for no reason. I just gave up and reported them. Gonna do it now for every single potato that goes there from now on for no reason. We lost that game in any case.

Unfortunately not I checked the replay. Would have been more fun if it was you