ColonelPete

461 matches is not long term. With that number the real WR can be +/-3%+ points.

Not long term. The highest we had was 91% WR after 1000 games in a hand picked division of the servers best players.

The collection is also expensive from EU. I recommend to keep your money.

Even for the ships alone, nobody can stay at that WR for long, solo. The player at the top of the list has only one solo match in Bismarck, which he lost...

Check if those a solo stats. In the long run, nobody can get that WR solo. 60% is a good benchmark, only very few are better than that. Keypoints are: positioning, to avoid getting focussed too much while being able to support your team high point captain to profit from her tankiness map knowledge and timing to know what enemies can be expected at different locations at what time map awareness to notice which enemies move in what direction and their distance to you, including field of fires on the map

Amagi is a lot more accurate than Pommern... 1.8 Sigma with 10 guns brings quite a lot of shells on target.

If you think that other container give more coal, you can choose them. But compared to them the more ressource container gives more coal...

You get more free stuff now than 2015...

It is a change of the game mechanics, not just marketing. When it is noticeable, you can measure it. In 6 years I have not seen one attempt to measure it, because people know they cannot do it. No. How can I see the difference to bad RNG? Bad RNG is common. Getting bad RNG does not make me spend money or I would need to spend money every three days and then wonder why it is still happening --> realizing pretty quickly that spending money does not change your RNG. Thanks to people like you, there is no boost needed. As I wrote:

No, it does not. To the contrary, it shows that WG has many options to reach their goal.

Because it is easier than ever to get to Tier X quickly. Back in 2015, the time needed to get to Tier X was much longer and people gathered some experience that way. Failing in the higher Tiers was also punished harder and bad players needed even longer to get the necessary credits, keeping the numbers of bad players in high Tier much lower than now.

Good to agree on something, but why bring it up in the first place then? Because it does not make a buck, unless it is noticeable. I find it funny that WG is accused of incompetence nearly every day, but despite that people think that WG is skilled enough to implement an unnoticeable MM manipulation that at the same time subliminaly encourages people to spend more money... I wish people would make their minds up. Is WG incompetent or competent?

Nope. She is nothing special and the Dutch cruisers in general lack firepower.

Which has nothing to do with MM manipulation. Nope. Has nothing to do with MM...

That happens when you bring weak arguments to the table. Make-believe only brings you so far...

If there is no change, then there is no manipulation. And giving the impression of manipulation is the job of you guys. There are probably quite a few people who buy premium because of that, just to make sure. WG should pay you for keeping these tinfoil hat theories alive And THAT is something COMEPLETLY different. One of the reasons WG removed the review of work in progress ships. That people could not complain that ships in game are worse than the version 8 weeks before during testing.

As I said, you can have that frustration with and without premium. What does buying premium change?

CoOp war noch nie ausbalanciert oder wie erklärst Du Siegraten von 90%+? es sollte offensichtlich sein das momentan viel mehr Spieler CoOp spielen als sonst und diese Spieler besser sind als der durchschnittliche CoOp Spieler und damit die Bots schneller erledigt sind wobei UBoote und CV die Gefechte noch immer in die Länge ziehen die Bots in CoOp wurden für eine kurze Zeit stärker gemacht, die CoOp Spielerschaft hat dann gejammert....

You were writing about getting worse results for a time. That is what is called a bad streak. If a ship does not overperform, then there no increased incentive to buy it. Then it is just a normal ship. Your personal experience manifests AFTER buying it. To know that you get better results BEFORE buying it, makes it necessary that this increased performance is noticeable from the outside or in other words measurable.

And how does that make me buy premium time when one experiences streaks with and without premium time? https://proships.ru/stat/eu/p/529243319-ColonelPete/all/ I have premium time for the whole year, still July happened. When my premium time runs out, why should a bad streak motivate me to buy premium time again if that is the same thing that happens with premium time? That is called making ships too strong. There is no need for RNG manipulation. I know of NO ship that overpeformed despite being weak. And I know of NO old strong ship that suddenly performed weak.

Doch, das ist ja das Problem. Er spielt und schaut fern...

How does a losing streak make me buy premium? How are losing streaks possible when WG gifts everyone premium? Why do some players without premium have less losing streaks than some players with premium?

What benefits?

STRANGE PLAYERS!!!! No clue what is going on? No problem! Just make a thread and vent your frustration. Double points when you make something up!!!

When you consider an explanation as contrarian behaviour, maybe you should look up the word first... If that were different, you would have to worry about your own results... I am pretty sure that I have worse players than me on my team in 99.99%+ of my battles...