Culiacan_Mexico

Why would it depend on the game? Scouting is a primary objective for most DDs.

Not the best way to start the game. You do understand why?

As an owner of a Kamikaze R, I think it should be excluded from ranked.

I am shocked!!!

WG has indicated this is not an option.

I never hated playing against CVs, I usually did hate playing with the CV on my team.

Unfortunately, WG has balanced some DDs around the whole concept of smoke firing; and is unwilling to rebalance these DDs. Then of course there is Harugumo, which would seem to indicate WG still supports this type of game play.

Stats seem to indicate about 4.2 radar cruisers per game... after less than three months. Which is a significant decrease from launch. WG says radar is being rebalanced. What is WG seeing? Or is this a case of new content requiring changes (submarines)? Note: 4.2 per game, not per side, but since WG says they can not balanced the MM with regards to radar ships... This plus the whole near continuous Pan Asian smoke left me 'puzzled', with regards to what WG is thinking.

I believe that long term smoke is used too much as strategic option by DD players (this is by WG design): players smoke up and sit regardless of the tactical situation and try to deal damage. I don't think this is the best game play. Defensive smoke for me falls more into the categories of: 1. Using it to provide temporary relief of allies from receiving damage. Dead allies do no damage, alive ones do. 2. Misdirection. Pan Asian DDs are particularly good at this... enter a cap and drop a smoke and keep on going. The smoke often become the focus of the enemy, including torpedos, while you are scouting and repositioning. 3. Escape. In general, at mid tier, torpedos work better if launched at the near detection, but that also increases the risk of being spotted. smoke become essential at that point. How? I would like to see WG experiment with reducing the longevity of smoke, which should affect smoke camping and the overall area denial effect. What do German cruisers do?

The root of the smoke issue lies, not surprisingly, with smoke. I belief WG should rework smoke, but I am not sure they see an issue.

There are plenty of ways to deal with smoke. So where is the problem with smoke? For me, I think long term smoke acts as a area denial tool, which I feel does not enhance game play.

Correct. It is not a punishable offense. It can be counter though. Different meanings.

You could be right.

WG is reworking radar. I wonder why?

From WGs point of view, Tier X Ranked is a major success.

I did not find it that way.

I applaud your faith in the player base, even if I don't share it. You will note that with regards to CV vs the 'player base' they never really developed much game skill.

I would agree it affects all DD players, but wouldn't be the better players who are able to adapt? Isn't that one of the reasons they are better players in the first place?

...and you want to add more radar? Radar disproportionately affects the less skilled DD players.

I face this situation once. It was not easy, but fortunately the CVs on both sides were evenly matched, and the two ship division on my team was good. I played slowly and save, before I was eventually able to gain position and torpedo their smoke. Two sunk and the last one, plus the CV mad as hornet trying to sink me. The division on my team, plus our CV provided support and I survived. At the end we won on points. Three Belfast divisions are OP, but you have to do your best.

Why do you assume that 'stats', like overall win rate, define who is or isn't a bad player? A bad player is defined by how they 'play', not how often they win. It is not the same. If we can exclude unicom players and just talk about the rest of us nameless masses. In a DD, the difference between a player with a 47% win rate and a 53% win rate can actually be rather small, because there are some minor changes in gameplay that have a disproportionate impact act on win rate. The 53% player may know these tactics while the 47% player does not. Virtually all of us have problems with our game, which limit our impact on the outcome, but that doesn't make us bad players. A bad player is defined by his actions in game: a DD the heads to the board, spends virtually, the entire game making no impact, then sinks the opposing team carrier, and lands top experience vs a DD the scouts, spots, etc for the team and ends up near the middle of experience.... which player do you want on your team? In game, a BB that moves up to a reasonable position to support is something I can work with, someone I can support with actions that increase our chances of winning (team play), while the BB park behind an island in the back... waiting... I can not work with. They may have a higher win rate overall than the BB that moves up, but... if you look at divisions the most OP thing in this game is teamwork. IMO

Data without context is useless. In general, only the player has the knowledge with regards to context, so I believe very little of the stats collected is significant. Certain generalities can be 'assumed' from publically available stats, but beyond that...

Hi, I didn't post that. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Malfuss Report post #572 Posted Monday at 10:11 AM Disclaimer: Although I've read a lot of the thread I haven't read all of it, so apologies if it's already been suggested. What about having it like you used to see in the movies, a rotating line that briefly (2-3 secs) picks up the ship, will mark last known position on the map so you can still blind fire and send torps?

Maybe I shouldn't be, but I am surprised by this percentage.

Most DD actions, if done well, will not have a negative impact on your team. Sure you scout out enemy ships and watch your teammates ignore that information, you screen enemy torpedoes and see ships on your team take no action and get hammered, you can lay defensive smoke and watch a player sail right through it ot their death. Bad outcomes, but nothing you did made it worse. Spotting is different, as it is an enabler of both good and bad play. Your team outnumbered and in danger behind an island laying down fire as you spot... that is enabling good game play. Four of you BBs behind an island shooting at inferior forces because you are spotting... that is enabling bad game play. I would like to say that BB 'hiding' is an extremely rare occurrence... but I can not. When I encounter these types of players, my spotting actually reduces the chances of winning, so I have to redeploy, remove spotting and 'force' them to do something. Enhance your team. My experience... other players could have different experience.