159Hunter

Maybe because that is around the start of dinner time... By all means, what do these statistics represent. Explain me. I know plenty good players who are also whales. So this is just your opinion and not a fact.

They are not weak, I quite like the way that line turned out. Sure, some sigma changes left and right, but WG did just that. So all in all, a pretty balanced line.

Comrades. Improved maps otw to accomodate subs. No wonder the teams had no time for new maps. They spent all time building underwater maps.

I was told those people were callef Welshman

Z31. Needed to test the ship.

Nope. Just overmatch/aim for the guns Great: yes Insane: nope 10km: yes True Nope, and even less because you picked sonar Zao has those torps. So zao OP?

So you want to increase the DPM for the same max range it currently has. Because that's what will happen: - you set the range to 16km (need rangemod for that now) - you disallow rangemod, so everyone with a grain of game knowledge fits reload mod. How you think this won't change the efficiency or DPS of the ship is beyond my "first grade" brain as you so eloquently put it. But maybe, just maybe your idea is even less thought out than what a first grader could come up with...

Smolensk is in a good spot now. Before it could get 19 km ranges, unneeded for this ship.

Which is WG's modus operandi for the last big changes (CV, skill rework). Throw a half finished idea on the live server and promise to fix it later on. CV rework: 2+ years later and they still haven't figured out how to get CV - DD interaction right. So they will throw in another wild idea for rockets. Showing once again that they have no idea of the main issues and how to address them. Skill rework: a few half baked changed and a promise of more to come 5 months ahead. But meanwhile they will add a new class and throw in new skills. So what? Do we need to give up other skills to fight subs properly? Do they plan to adjust skillpoints on current skills? Meanwhile community staff keep trying to tell us all is well and the developpers are on top of things. Right...

Well super-BB =/= BB. So....

3 random games in randoms. 3 tier IX. Ship is bad: slow, torps are slower than a brick, guns turn very slow and have a long reload. Concealement is bad when uptiered. What is nice? Gun accuracy. But that's about it.

Which is why WG introduced the concept of soft caps...

About testing in ranked, 7 vs 7 is different from 12 vs 12. As in, very different. - CVs are pretty rare in ranked; - CA even less popular than in randoms; - no +2/-2 MM; - less players on the same map: more freedom to move around; - weird 3 cap layout leading to one kiting flank and one cap to contest; - ... People are already annoyed by potatoes and starsaving. Now they'll add an untested class for testing purposes. I can see how this will improve the quality of ranked games...

For every 200k game (you supposedly get all the time) you need 1,5 0 dmg games to reach your avg dmg. So, no, you don't get 200k all the time.

This week has been horrible Teams just kept throwing games left right and center. After my last game I decided to uninstal the game again. People literally have no clue what on earth they are doing., and with subs coming anyways...

Well, it is the only opinion we have (combined with the discord votes in WGs channel and the reddit posts). And these three generally go in the same direction. Is it the majority of the playerbase? Nope Does that invalidate their expressed opinion? Nope Is it a valid sample? We don't know, but probably not (this sample contains the more engaged players, players that actually follow the game) But what is the opinion of the playerbase? We don't know WG has the largest set of data and they always claim to follow that opinion. HOWEVER, on multiple occasions I've asked them to SHARE the results of all those polls (and the amount of replies). WG REFUSES to share that data. I can only conclude that there is something off between the results and the way WG abuses those replies. There is no logical reason not to share the data of those polls if they support your decisions.... Secondary damage dropped. Plenty of posts on this forum. Accuracy dropped -> less hits -> less damage. Saying: my damage is 20k -40k is: a) useless without knowing which ship (as not all have the same accuracy) b) what the pre cpt rework damage numbers were c) ....

But the skill gap is an issue. Especially if it's about basic mechanics. It shows that WG fails to even explain the basic stuff to the players. Thus it shows that there is a real problem with the game.

Facts? Where?

Look at the sentence that follows the bolded one in the quote that I replied to (the reply you quoted). It just fits his lying narrative of cvs being weak. That's why I wrote that last sentence.

Oh really? Skill gap is not an issue? Flak is a BASE mechanic for CV gameplay. How odd that the only players that die to my flak have miserable CV stats and those that don't get hit by my flak have good CV stats. Or is it your point that CVs don't have influence...

So what, you want an automatic filter to start looking at the context of what you are saying? That's expensive and not worth it. I applaud this strict filter, english is a rich language and doesn't need these swearwords. If you use faul language you pay the price. Ask yourself this: do you think it is appropriate to say after a meeting at work: f**** good meeting? Do the same in game and you have no problems.

with one major restriction: he who uses MMM needs to understand the game and its mechanics. If said player is a potato he: a) can't act on the information b) will probably only read: teams unfair, game is against me, I will lose.

Ok, guess I can get rid of my account now that subs are coming. Bye WG

I believe you originally could get 8 per season. Don't really know for this season ( as I have the collection idc ).