Sybeck

Points 1-3 seem to be problems at your end, have never seen these reported elsewhere. Maybe post your specs and keyboard. As regards your final statement I'd agree about the mechanic but would say that it comes into force around about tiers 7-8 IMO. However, I and others would say that's intended behaviour by WG so as to entice you to go premium and buy doubloons to advance quicker so that they can actually make a profit on the game they provide for free.

Albany = Target practise even for an Eerie.

I do! Especially when the team who could have capped and won decide to chase me or a team member down when they could have won easily. I've then gone from a terrible loss to a draw which equals more XP for me than I should have had - BONUS! People who whinge about draws when they were clearly leading are the kind of people who dig big holes, but forget to take a ladder with them. They work damned hard to get so deep, but look very foolish when it's time to finish the job and go home.

No, that's your team's reward for not capping when you had overwhelming superiority and not remembering what the actual mission was.

I only seem to get delays when I play a map or a ship for the first time that day. After that I'm presuming the data has been cached and is accessed more quickly next time round. And yeah, WoWS file optimisation is horrendous, hundreds of thousands of files more compared to comparable games and texture files for each ship that are 4096x4096 won't help with speedy loading for most without a SSD.

Can't confirm it, but you might try defaulting all your control buttons in settings in case you have set something accidently. Other than that what you describe is indeed weirdness unless this happens after you take damage and the damage has destroyed your turret and/or rudder modules.

What these quitters don't take into account is that the skill level of players on the other side is unknown, they could all be in unskilled, unmoduled stock ships, they could have afkers, they might have disconnects, they might play like lemmings, they might disregard caps to kill all and best of all they might have a TKer. There is never such a thing as a game that is lost before it begins. The most remembered and celebrated battles in history are those won by inferior forces against superior ones through better skill and tactics and maybe a little luck. I get a lot more pleasure in winning these types of matches than just a faceroll that's been setup by a favourable to our side bad MM. If you think you're going to lose then you're a loser at heart.

When you've just been sunk, but had a great match, quite a few sunk, lots of citadel and fire hits, a few base captures and a bucketload of airplanes shot down and your team is ahead and will win easily if they continue to cap and then somebody says, "NO CAP - KILL ALL!" No! You shout in chat as they all leave cap and go chasing that last DD and/or CV...you know how the rest of this pans out.

And, as mentioned above, the Kuma too. In three consecutive matches last night I was firstly killed, then heavily damaged and sunk due to a few enemy HEs afterwards and finally I steered into an unknown and unseen enemy salvo of torps trying to avoid the ones fired by my own side. Of course each time there was no enemy ship within their range and they were firing them off either due to boredom or in the hope that they luck out and catch a stealthed DD. Just to rub salt in the wound not one of them apologised except for the one guy who gave me this pearl of wisdom re. WoWS play, "Never sail in front of a torpedo ship n00b." However, at that time I could actually believe him as I would have stayed alive a lot longer on each occasion. As they say in politics, the opposition maybe in front of you, but the enemy is behind you.

Clickbait title I know, but I can't be the only person to notice this that a lot of times when a match starts half or more of the players on your team on both sides of the map will turn and sail to be on the other side map to which they started. This then leads to a cluster in the middle that TBs/DBs can cause havoc in, meanwhile others are pushing up their starting flanks in fewer numbers and will have to circle back when met by superior numbers coming the other way from the enemy So in swapping flanks you've lost your team 5-10 minutes while reorganising to a new start position and left members of your team n your original flank seriously outnumbered. I can understand that if you're in a division with friends you might want to join your buddy on the other side. So if WG placed division members together as much as possible that's a fix for that. However, for the most part the initial setup seems to have a good spread of classes on both sides to make them effective if played with teamwork so why this flocking to the other side of the map from both sides? What makes people do it? I can understand too that in a map like Fault Line it makes sense to sail along the start line till it's safe for BBs or some CAs to enter through the channels but that apart I don't see why people do it or for what advantage they might be doing it for. It is an excellent military/naval tactic for sure to leave a small force holding or defending a flank while a superior force smashes one flank, but I really don't believe the team sub-consciously worked this out without anything be said in chat about who should swap sides; plus it doesn't explain why people are swapping from both sides of the map. Go figure.

Would be cool, but slow loading players will always complain that they never get a good start position; if there is such a thing.

The complaining didn't stop till the match ended. I was glad for once to be on the right side of this MM. Note fail division probably caused this FUBAR.

I'm talking about the DD that's just popped around the island and is closing in for a guaranteed torpedo hit while at the same time I have TBs closing in on myself and/or the BB/CV I'm escorting. At the moment I'm able to deal with both threats as once a TB is targeted then I can turn my attention to the DD and deal with that and kick in the boost when TBs are at the best range, after a salvo at the DD I can quickly reassess and target another TB and then return to the DD. With this "skill" in this situation I can only choose one option of defence and if my CV/BB that I'm escorting gets hit by TBs or DDs then he'll no doubt blame me for choosing the wrong option. Not to mention that a DD and CV player in a division would be able to trick a player by sacrificing a few aircraft to call a CA's AA boost assured then that the DD will receive no fire from me for a while I wait for my crew to walk back to their gun turrets.

Well first off I can't fire my main or secondary batteries while changing to an AA boost, I then have to wait 10-15 seconds before I can use the AA boost, which maybe too late to be of any use. Meanwhile if I'm being attacked by a DD within 4 km at the same time I have no main batteries nor secondaries to fire at them, which means that my ship is totally defenceless and ineffective for 10-15 seconds. Also if the air threat decided to go attack another target then I'm without batteries for a further 10-15 secs while the crew gets sent back to my batteries, but wait, here come the aircraft from the second CV on the enemy side and I have to turn the crews around again! It's now 45 seconds of being defenceless. Tell me another class that has to do something comparable and be defenceless for 10-15 seconds minimum to use a signature skill of their class? Shall we add a 15 seconds to a BB's reload time while it repairs, stop DD's using torpedoes while they use smoke or speed boost?

Sounds like a nerf that you're proposing rather than a skill, but I see no reason put forward by you why AA should be nerfed and moving a crew from main and secondary batteries to be an AA crew just sounds daft. Sorry, but no vote from me.

I hate Fault Line. If you're a BB then you have to endlessly patrol up and down the start line till it's safe to cross through the middle section without being ambushed by DDs or IJN CAs or a CVs TBs lieing in wait for you to pass through a channel. I do not have a #1 love map, it depends on what class I'm sailing.

Meh, I wouldn't waste a byte of server space on them. They can go play with each other; literally and figuratively.

The fix is to make Blue on Blue = FALSE. Then all these threads go away as well as the ones about n00b torp users torpedoing their own side. Not a move I would agree with, but there's a silver bullet fix if you want one.

I said that I could see impacts and to add if I wasn't clear by that, all other graphical details, such as shells and torps passing through map edge and carrying on. My point though is not about graphics showing, but about hit data. I don't, or rather I haven't, seen damage being registered for impacts that hit the ship that occur outside the map. Most border huggers (the ones who do it intentionally) don't hug it at a parallel, but at 45 - 90 degrees keeping half the ship off the map, logically the bow end. I'm presuming that any ship doesn't have just one hitbox for the entire ship (maybe wrong), but several along the ship for the different parts e.g. turrets, rudder and citadels etc. So you can still hit their midships to stern area for damage, which makes it entirely possible to kill ANY border hugger, just a lot slower unless RNG is on your side; if I'm correct. However, I don't know whether I am correct. I just haven't seen damage showing for a shell that I can see hitting a part of a ship that is outside the map even though I can clearly see an explosion at the impact point on the ship part, which is off the map. All I'm asking for is if other people can confirm that they've noticed this too or prove otherwise. I don't mind being proved right or wrong either way, I'm just curious and who knows, maybe poor-sighted too.

I have raised this before elsewhere, but nobody could answer. However, it "appears" to me that the part of the ship outside of the map receives no damage when shells impact. The only damage I see registering is for shells that impact on the part of the ship that is still on the proper side of the map. I may be completely wrong on that, but that's my impression from what I've observed. In which case, yeah, it would be harder, as 1 or 2 front turret citadels are not available to hit and 50% of your salvo spread is ineffective. Like I said though, I'm using a MK 1 eyeball and my observation may well be wrong.

This whole thing in various threads today is making WG look incompetent and ineffectual. Not only are these people repeat TKers who are habitually and routinely reported by players, but they seem to be doing it on a massive scale that has as yet incurred no appropriate ban (to our knowledge) that fits the scale of their stupidity. A day ban for 133 TKs, seriously? Then on top of that they openly flaunt on WG's own forums how ineffectual WG are at dealing with TKers. Yes the player base is pissed off with them, but WG should be having a good long look at their TK policies because not only are these people putting people off your still beta/showcase game WG, they are also publicly rubbing your face in your own doormat for everyone to see and getting away with it. It's a free to play game, these people have nothing to lose or fear apart from a lengthy ban. Do you really think that people will be put off investing time and money in your game if you announced that TKers will receive the harshest bans if found to be persistent and proven deliberate TKers? Or, do you think they will be put off investing time and money if you allow TKers to rack up +100s of TKs with no meaningful consequences and then openly boast about it on your very own forums? I think we both know the answer.

Newb question, but do you get more points for a draw than a loss? If yes, then draws have probably earned me a stack more points than my team or I deserved because the enemy forgot to cap or went chasing off to find a DD or CV.

Pensacola - it felt like I was sailing around in a paper boat. Plunging fire from BBs seemed to be my usual exit from the game. Although the grind didn't take too long there were too many games when I had to turn and run after just a few hits from a tier 6 or 7 BB left me with 10-15% HP.

I was in the same situation as you, but decided to jump onto the DD line to complete them. It was interesting to play that class for a while and learn them and get experience of what it takes to play a DD, which I suspect maybe the reason why WG gives you these kinds of missions.

Aww you forgot to mention that over 60% of your XP and wins was on CVs, which I believe was the emphasis of your original epeen post. It is good though to see you stroking it a bit harder when challenged to buff it up a bit more.