Syrchalis

Disagreed. Average XP is not 100% relevant, because 1. tier related and 2. not perfectly calculated (sometimes you carry your team hard by tanking damage, pushing etc. but the rewards are tiny and you meet an early death as reward for winning the game = low xp). Average damage is also tier and ship related - I can easily get 100k average damage in most BBs, but in a DD? really hard. Win rate is actually a rather solid measurement - if you take divisions into account AND possible freak factors. E.g. papedepupi who abused being 2-3 tiers higher than everyone due to fast leveling of CVs and so never facing equal enemies (plus he was always with his division slaves).

I am confused by your argumentation. You seem reasonable and try to approach it with logic, so I don't get how you come to this conclusion. I will expand on my original argumentation with an example to illustrate my point and I hope it will help some people understand. My original post: In random battle we have 12vs12. Each and every player, that is not you or your division mates, is a random factor. However random they may be, they are all statistically the same. It's one big pool of players and the game simply throws 12 on each team. So say during the week a lot of bad players don't play. The random player is now on average a 52% winrate person. This means you have 11 players, who are on average a 52% winrate person on your team and 12 of them on the enemy team. Of course you will have 11 potatoes sometimes. But the enemy team will have 11 potatoes sometimes too. In fact, since they have 12 randoms and you got 11, their chance of having 11 potatoes is a lot higher. However, if you are a 45% winrate potato yourself, then chances are higher that your side has 11 potatoes, because one is always there - you. Anyway - my point is, with both sides averaging 52% winrate (this is possible due to the absence of the bad players) you will have a harder time standing out. Imagine you are a 55% winrate player. So still better than the average, even on weekdays. Yet this small 3% difference is not that huge and carrying is hard. Now we take a +200% XP weekend. Say a lot of good players dont want to play and all the potatoes come into the game. The average drops to 48% winrate for a random player. Now with your 55% winrate, your advantage of 3% is more than doubled, now you suddenly have a 7% edge over the rest. This means you should be able to carry a lot more easily. The reason people feel like that the bad players drag them down - which is obviously not the case, the opposite is the case, the bad players make good players shine even more and let other bad players not look as bad as usual - the reason is that due to higher fluctuations in player skill there is a higher fluctuation in luck. Imagine every game is a total stomp for one side. So every game is a coin toss, 50-50. You can get tails 10 times in a row. The chance is 0,1%. Now imagine, 100.000 people play WoWs over the weekend. That means that at least 100 people are this unlucky. Most start complaining about bad teams after 5 games already, even with a win inbetween. We will ignore the win and say 5 losses in a row. 3% chance. So already 3000 players over the weekend with this bad luck. And surely a few of them, say 1% read the forums. Bam! You got 30 people who can absolutely say that MM fucked them over because look, 5 losses in a row! Despite them not being a potato! And this is exactly why people in LoL believe in ELO Hell. LoL has SO MANY players. Amongst 50.000.000 players there is easily 10.000 who can literally not advance in their ranks due to bad luck and by bad luck I mean REALLY bad luck. Without a mechanic to prevent these "ridiculous unlucky streaks" there WILL be these 10.000 players with tons of losses that aren't their fault, losses because someone on their side was afk etc.

Yes, but wouldn't that make you win more? If everyone is a decent player, then even unicums would have trouble carrying. If everyone is a total moron, then you can carry really easily. My theory is that games are just more random during "casual activity times" like these events. And more random means that some people will have really bad luck. And those statistical anomalies show up in the forum and complain. It's always been like that. It's IMO the reason people invented "elo hell" in LoL. If you want me to elaborate, do tell.

CV changes.

I got two as well, 250 prem repairs and 500 doubloons. May I complain? I would kill for 250 flags. 500 Doubloons is such a joke. I prefer like 10-20 rare camos over such a pitiful amount of doubloons I don't need.

So every cruiser got buffed a while back to be able to repair 33% of citadel damage instead of just 10%, because of how crippling citadel hits are. But then why do the RN cruisers, who get citadelled the easiest not get this bonus? Why can they repair only 10% of citadel damage?

Nooooo, I'm having so much fun with Fiji and it's super awesome AP.

Nothing you said is true. I just gave a North Carolina a 10k damage AP salvo in the Fiji. ONE SALVO - 10k Damage! You have torps for BBs. Sure you're a floating citadel, but you can also slow down and speed up better than other cruisers and have good turning circles, plus smoke. You know that you have to aim at the superstructure with low caliber AP? Except if they are close and show broadside. Fiji is probably the best T7 cruiser next to Shchors. The only ship I have perma camo for, if that counts for anything. It's literally a Belfast with superior AP and torps.

Don't get the Belfast. Hear me out why. It's a good ship, no a great ship even. Looking at it on it's own, there is no real reason to not get it. However, there is two good reasons to not get it if we take other ships into account: 1. Tier 8 premiums - they make tons of credits. Sure, if you dislike T8 matchmaking then this shouldn't be considered, but if you really are on a budget and want the most useful ship in the long run, T8 premiums are wonderful. 2. The Fiji - the silver equivalent of the Belfast. It has some disadvantages (less concealment, no HE, no radar), but IMO it's more fun. The ships play very similarly, just that the Fiji uses AP only, however unlike the Belfast it has very very powerful AP. Just today I hit a 10.000 damage AP salvo on a North Carolina. One salvo! It also comes with torpedoes, which the Belfast lacks. You will often find yourself in the need of those, because the Belfast can easily end up close to BBs due to smoke and the enemy advancing. If the smoke ends you are hopelessly dead, because as RN cruiser it gets citadelled from all angles easily. I'm not saying the Fiji is strictly better, but IMO it's more fun and is probably around the same strength. Radar on T7 isn't that amazing anyway, due to limited radar range and less need for it. Another small reason I dislike it is because with 9% fire chance you really really want DE - but that skill is USELESS for RN cruisers, so you need a special captain just for the Belfast or doubloons for respeccing. To summarize - Belfast is great. If you however want to ever grind the UK cruisers, you will probably rather play Fiji than Belfast - or at least you won't be missing out on much if you have the Fiji and don't buy the Belfast. So my vote would go to Tirpitz, Scharnhorst or Kutuzov. Especially the latter is amazing if you want a strong cruiser. I don't recommend Atago because Takao - but if you are horribly offended by the blue Atago, the prem Atago is still pretty damn amazing.

If you are on fire and repair, your repair lasts for a while. Sometimes your torpedo tubes get damaged while your control party is still running and they get instantly repaired - that still resets the reload if they were reloading in that moment. It can look really weird if it happens.

BBs shouldn't get radar, they have too many tools as it is. Soon we have BBs with defensive AA fire, surely that's what this game needs. Hydro on german BBs is already a sin. I mean, why even play cruiser? You get oneshot by BBs all day and BBs have the same powerful consumables you do, they just can absorb a gazillion more damage and dish out a lot more as well. You aren't faster, you aren't more maneuverable, what's the point?

Can they finally split secondary and AA skills? BBs should be forced to choose what they want - DD fighting power or CV fighting power, but not counters against both their counters at the same time. They should also both be T4 skills, they need to cost them.

We need massive nerfs to BBs versatility. They are already too good at everything. If these captain skills are indeed true (which they might not be, this is unconfirmed info) then I fear BBs might just get even more OP.

How bad is you are RNG? What?

You can never ever get players to collectively change their playstyle. It NEVER works. It will never work. What works is changing the game so that players are encouraged to change their playstyle, that works all the time.

Fiji is love. I skipped all RN cruisers T1-6 and went straight to Fiji. No regrets. I probably won't even sell it, ever. Just will eventually need a new captain as the high level one will move on. Fiji can perform with a level 3 captain easily. @Topic - low tier RN and high tier RN is simply two different things. Low tier you are squishy and BBs have no superstructure to shoot and your AP is meh, your range is meh. Higher tier your range is still kind of meh, but you can seriously hurt BBs without torps.

Do a video on me playing Saipan ♥

Careful though, as is the case for all carriers your air detectability is very poor, so the enemy CV can easily spot you with planes. Still you can go closer than with other CVs. *cough* Lexington *cough* most visible ship ever.

My experience with Fiji and SE is this: Fiji has inferior heal which only heals 10% of citadel damage. With SE this doesn't change. There seems to be no special interaction at all with SE.

I think the sniping problem comes from the range advantage of BBs. Not the range itself, just the advantage. As long as torps and cruisers can't reach the BBs sniping from long range, they basically avoid all non-BBs, so they feel like they have to stay that far away. If DDs and cruisers could hurt BBs at their max range, they would feel the need to get closer, so their guns can hit something better. Also CVs counter sniping BBs really hard - thankfully WG nerfed them to oblivion and destroyed their gameplay, so BBs can snipe in peace.

-> Me trying to farm secondary hits -> Dies in Tirpitz, does Scharnhorst while waiting -> Since my mates are waiting, I rush into 5 BBs alone -> Kill two BBs somehow with main guns -> Lose both front main guns permanently -> Rush a Bayern and Kongo -> Torp them -> Die -> Kill both at the same time while dead -> 100 Secondary Hits exactly -> ??? -> Profit

Honestly, I feel very fine with AP only. The lower tier ships suffer from it a lot, because BBs have little to no superstructure and the AP isn't as good, but Fiji and above do really well. Just the heal... pls consistency.

I don't know what game you're playing, but calling Leander broken while Budyonny is out there feels silly. Same for Fiji while there is Shchors and Myoko. Calling any cruiser broken is silly while battleships are in their OP state. Especially since they are the main food for the strongest class. True that all cruisers suffer from this. But think about it for a second. Why do RN cruisers get heal at all? Because they lack range and have no armor whatsoever. That's why they have to be closer. Greed isn't involved. But why would you have a stupid inconsistency in the game for no reason? All heals should be the same. Or will we start giving german BBs a different hydro that gives no torpedo detection bonus?

The problem is that UK cruisers easily get citadelled from any angle by any BB and even some cruisers. Broken? Not at all. Maybe strong compared to other cruisers, but at the current state of BBs all other classes need significant buffs. It's also just bad to have inconsistent mechanics. Better give lower tier RN cruisers the same repair party in terms of citadels than other cruisers than this inconsistent nonsense. You can always nerf something else to compensate.

If a class is incredibly forgiving for mistakes, it will attract bad players. Simply because: If it's really forgiving, then bad players feel better about themselves If it's forgiving enough, players won't learn from their mistakes and stay noobs, because they don't get punished for a mistake - that inflates the amount of clueless players If it's this forgiving, these players won't try other classes, because - obviously - suddenly they die when they do something stupid - so they return to BBs and stick with them Thus creating the "BB only" "never learn" "every other class is OP because I don't play them" player.