159Hunter

Apart from probalby being a bad ship (I'll go with Flamu on this, he has yet to let me down on ship reviews), it's a bloody Tier VI ship. And well, T6 MM isn't as bad as T5 MM, but it aint good either.

Yes, I'm not sad AS are a thing of the past, what does saddens me is that they took away the choices in different setups. Less choice = bad imo

Voted the third option, just for the lulz. If you do these kind of votes, expect stupid answers ?

What he said really. We don't play to lose, we play to win. And if that means radaring DDs from your own clan to get them killed: so be it

Khaba is the way to go for last stage :) 2 volleys max on each and then play to win. Easy.

Care to elaborate as to why they should be removed?

Removing fighters = removing interaction between CVs So in that case, is mirror MM still needed OP? NB: for me, fighters are 100% a part of CV gameplay.

This thread calls for:

This really. Bad teamplay doesn't always equal bad XP earnings. Small example: two BBs get exactly the same amount of potential damage: a) went in to support his ships at the cap and took the heat there b) sat in the back and didn't take any fire untill he was the only one left and slowly the remainder of the enemy teams gets in position to kill him Both will get exactly the same amount of XP for potential damage, but a got it in early game supporting his team and b got in late game without supporting his team.

The amount of"cheaters" and "hax" Will be enormous.

@Humorpalanta let's division up and split this fee ( say 60 - 40 for you ? )

That is indeed the downside of playing cruisers. Their flexibility makes up for it though. Might as well stop playing the game if you plan to act like a baby. The only way to make more XP is to actually improve your skills, you'll get better results that way: - enable replays; - after you get citadelled and game ends, go back and look at replays; - see who citadelled you and where you were positioned and angled; - see if there was anything you could have done to avoid it; - rinse and repeat after every game you got deleted: any player with half a brain that's not mute to self criticism will learn from this; If in any case you can't find anything, you could make a decent post on the forums ( not like thise one ) and ask people to look at some of your replays to give you some tips and tricks to improve your gameplay. I still prefer a lot of BB when playing BB, a good CA player is way more annoying cause you'll: a) never see him, b) won't have shots on him, c) hardly ever be able to hit him when a and b are not true. And that comes mostly down to skill from the CA part.

Well, as long as the campaign actually makes you play US cruisers then fine, so at least players get a sense of what a US cruiser is. Bismarck campaign was utter fail imo, the overall quality of Bismarck players after the campaign :)

It'll depend on what they do with Salem :)

Play 1000 DM games and you get it. Would love that one ?

Well they might as well review the entire US cruiser line upon splitting it. Still wondering what shennanigans you'll need to do you get a Salem

And a ship is not made of iron and steel alone. So ofc they can burn, and atm fire damage doesn't even have a drawback on your fighting capabilities. Plus, fire is 100% repairable. If 4 shells cause 38k dmg to you then they probably where AP, so then I look at the last line and say: what's the problem? You play ALL TX cruisers and the UK ones are those in which you have the worst stats. So maybe they aren't as straightforward as just smoking up and dakka dakka as you say here? What do you mean by this? a) reduce the damage output of BB b) reduce the damage done to a BB ( by CA/CV/DD, HE/AP, .... )

Play low tiers?

Really, read what you wrote. You want to be exempt from a game mechanic because you don't like it. Most people call that whining. Rest assured, WG confirmed they're not too happy with it either, so maybe they'll come up with a solution for the ENTIRE game and not just for the happy few playing CW. Do keep in mind that some smaller clans cannot field 9 players on a regular basis ( but then again, some can't field 7 either, so ok ). And what will happen, clans will take two caps and make sure the third cannot be capped. Same as today, take one and prevent the third one from being capped. The only way to get more dynamic gameplay is move caps around and add more maps. Or maybe you just haven't found a way to make shima work. It works for our tactics. Also double the mandatory double DM you posted is something I rarely see. In the end, whatever works works. We've tried multiple things and it all depends on your tactics. So what, people are allready too obsessed about player WR and now we need to start the same fuss about clan WR? Statistics 101: numbers prove whatever you want them to prove, it all depends on the story behind the numbers. And as I said, WG will never be able to make a good choice. No matter what they do, making it longer might upset people living in the East cause that's too late for them, starting early will upset people in the West cause they're still at work. This is a loose loose situation for them. ( yes and not win win, as those opposed are always more vocal, welcome to the wonderful world of online gaming ) Read my WR comment above. As I asked you, how would you measure clan strength ( does it mean being able to field 2 teams every day, does it mean being able to field 2 good CVs, .... ) I dont know, what would be a good system for you? Cause saying it isn't good is one thing, at least be constructive and come up with a proposal as well?

Agreed Agreed, but trust me, if people would just be playing for their own stats, clans would just not take them into games anymore. But then again, you can't use this in randoms cause there needs to be at least some incentive to play and not yolo rush/borer hug... In current 7vs7 setup: agreed Agreed and same RNG feeling Disagree, as in any competitive mode, these detonation flags are just mandatory. Put them on your ship and be done with it. DOn't have any? Put the module on for serious reduction and play randoms to obtain them ( would have been nice if they were included in the flags you gained though ). Disagree that 7vs7 isn't tactical, it very much is. Yes if one ship messes up, winning is harder ( but not impossible and it doesn't Always require a yolo push). It does indeed mean that ou as a player need to be more aware of your surroundings and you'll need to be able to adapt because 7 players isn't enough to block every avenue of aproach an enemy team could take in their plays. If you want to go for bigger teams: 10vs10 - 12vs12 or whatever then we'll need to look at the balance of shipclasses again, and it such a case the prohibition of CVs is no longer valid imo. So be careful what you whish for. Disagree, one BB in 7vs7 is more than enough. Get bigger teams and you can add more BB. More caps in current format is imo not viable, you need more players. If you want a more dynamic gameplay they could maybe rotate the cap locations on maps? So there's at least some variations there meaning teams will need to adapt their tactics from time to time? Disagree that one setup is fixed. We've been playing setups with one DD, with two DD, with Montana, with Monqueror ( seen a substantial amount of Yamatos as well, GK not so much ). We've mostly been playing with only 1 DM, sometimes with a Henri, sometimes also with a Zao, with a shima . Honestly, there are still variations in team setup ( but ofc less than in randoms ). Put it this way, if you create a clan now you might start winning a lot of games and quickly rise in the leagues. Untill you reach the league where you'll start encountering teams equal to yours: you'll start losing as well and in the end you won't rise in leagues anymore? Honestly, this all depends on where you live and how your rl looks like. For people who need to get up early in the morning ending it early is better. For people who don't have such constraints it matters less. Cause make no mistake: if you increase the timeslot people will probably play more, so it becomes more of a grinding fest. By limiting the timeslot you get: short queu times (excellent), mostly teams of your league (excellent) and a clear timeslot to allocate in your familytime. Not saying I disagree with you, just saying that WG will never be able to make a "good" choice here. Mirror teams with mirror stats equals temas with same strength? What else would you like to see to judge clan strength, or better: what is clan strength according to you?

Can you actually prove this statement? Or is this just you ranting at T0byJug? I care about MM, but I don't have a problem with tier VIII mm. Please stop pretending you speak for every person who plays tier VIII ships. And you heard of an expression wiht "pot and kettle" in it? You feel you suffer at tier VIII and your solution is to make people at tier IV suffer. How much more selfish can you get? And yet games in a tier VIII where you meet tier X can make you that much more XP cause you're dealing with higher tier opponents. The perfect way to level up lines.

And you'll find a lot more terrible players at tier VIII cause people can just buy themselves a tier VIII ship without ever playing the game... If players are really that bad at tier 10 and you are better you should be able to carry them. If not, then maybe players aren't as bad? I can, it's a great source of XP when in my tier VIII an a tier VIII BB can still hurt my tier X cruisers. The people who play T4 ships maybe? Disagree on this one. Source about your latest statement plz? There you have it, the biggest selection of MM available. You don't like it, play other tiers. Also, nobody is forcing you to play a tier X ship.

Just throwing this in here, but why on earth did anyone actually BUY the Prince Eugen? I mean, it was clearly stated by most reviewers that this was just a premium Hipper. This was actually a premium ship which you could test prior to buying it (by playing Hipper). So you knew exactly what you were getting. I didn't like Hipper, so I didn't buy it. Maybe some people liked Hipper and bought it? But complaining afterwards about the ship is just weird imo.

Now that makes more sense. That's what a forum is about, discussing and explaining. @Xevious_Red ty Sounds logical, but does that make CV as a class OP? Or is it because one BB is just one of a few of that class. So you can compensate for a bad BB with a few good BB to flatten the skill of all your BB class ships in a game? Sure, that's how WG designed them. But there is a perfect counter to it which is called teamplay. ( and for the record I don't care about sealclubbing with IV and V CVs, I'm talking tiers where AA actually exists ). It's so easy to severely negate the CV's influence on a game, but the overall stupidity and lack of communication of the playerbase just makes this very hard. So blaming everything on CV and nothing on playerbase is just a cheap way out. And why does a 30% WR player win? One could say that those 30% are the only games where the team played well and negated the CV effect. A proof that you can counter CVs? Ofc, a potato is way easier to counter than a unicum player. Sure, people still do bring 19p captains to the table. And if people want to sealclub, it's their game. But by removing manual drop and strafe you remove the skill bit and allow players to get used to the ui and the different playstyle. The reason you lost is because AA is non-existent at those tiers, that's why playing CVs at those tiers is easy, you don't need to look where you fly your planes. Making sealclubbing that much easier. Sure they could have done other things, as in limit the amount of captain points, or look at amount of battles played in a tier IV / V CV and when you reach a certain threshold that would allow you to grind the next tier, they'd no longer match you to new CVs. But that only solved part of the problem, the rest of the ships where still affected ( remember, they also need to learn how to deal with CVs). And that's a flaw in the solution WG provided, they should never allow tier VI CV in matches with tier V CVs. Why is it frustrating? Because WG is not helping players, they have to go look on YouTube for Farra's guides to learn something about CVs. Compared to WG, CCP managed to have great tutorials for EVE 10 years ago ( and those were questionable at best). @ForlornSailor pro tip: if you ignore someone, making indirect referrals to post you are supposedly ignoring is kinda dumb. You know, just saying.

Did the shell at least hit you? Or was it a "near" miss? +1 for the apologies, even when I detonate a low health DD I apologize. Just because.