159Hunter

I do wonder, everybody who is now disgusted by this will boycot this tournament in the future? Or will they keep doing like always: complain like crazy and still throw money at WG ?

Now go play Halland and the CV problem will be finished :) Long live CV matchmaking :D

As for giving bad example, you gave you, I gave one. Also, leased car is still a bad analogy. You simply cannot compare the (absence of) digital law to other forms of commerce who are better regulated. Now show me where WG broke the law with the captain rework.

OP, is this your first game ever?

Yes, you get the right to use a car. But you pay your full contract up front and breaking the contract early will cost a severance fee. If the real world changes ( ban on say fossile fuel cars) the company will honor your contract by giving you a non fossile fuel car. Unfortunately the specs aren't the same. So you will have the option to take the car or you can terminate your contract ( they will not charge a severance fee as a commercial gesture) and will refund the remainder of the contract you payed up front. Now, what is the 'lease' period of your wows ship? Not specified anywhere I believe. So what should be the amount that WG had to refund you? I also believe all specs listed in premium shop are without captain skills. So it's not as if the commander skills rework has an impact on the numbers listed on the official selling page. Deposits are irrelevant here. You did not pay a deposit. You payed an item in full. Now EU law on internet purchases ( dunno how this is now in the UK for obvious reasons ) does state that for such purchases you have a 14 day refund period if the item is not to your liking. Wheter or not this applies to virtual goods in a game: I do not know.

Two follow up questions on this: - is there an eta for this devblog? - if you do not have enough data for said devblog by the time free captain respeccing ends, will this free respec period be prolonged?

So how was the second game in your T7?

Nope, ussr will choose the non violent options (others are nekulturny): - political pamphlet drop: crew of targetted ship will revolt like on potjomkin resulting in a full control loss for 30 Sec. (Before ussr captain skills !); - arctic bomb: will create an icefield around targetted ship, this will make it stop death in the water for 20 sec ( before captain skills), naturally soviet ships with icebreaker will suffer less ( only lose 50% of speed); - wodka spray: making targetted ship more vulnerable to fires and reducing accuracy by 50 % ( drunk gunners) for 45 sec ( before, you guessed right, captain skills ) So WG offers you the perfect teamplayer that deals no damage. Hence, nobody can complain about them, right?

Wrong. You can always throw money at WG to obtain them from Christmas containers

Your car analogy is wrong. You buy an actual car. You don't buy an actual ship. Only the right to play it. You don't own it. Cause, let's say wows goes bust. What then? You want your money back for all the premiums you own? Also, define "as good". Which metric to use?

Cause that's reserved for the glorious soviet union BBs

Wait. So because of someone in the past loosely related to me (by skin color), I cannot complain about racism against me now? That's your line? I really hope you never complain about anything, because with such a view you'll never be allowed to...

So your point being? Racism against (white people) is not an issue? It doesn't exist?

Not for Congo (rare earth materials, fissile material for first A bombs, ...) or the Dutch East indian company. More money was made than it cost. Germany was too late to get real value cause all the goodies were gone. So in that sense otto was kinda right. For most other countries: wrong

I hope you are not implying this is somehow better? And if you don't, what's your point? And so do chinese, today. More subtle but they still do it. Not the killing part, but the industrialization is there. So why do you have to keep going back to what happened in the 40ies? Look at the here and now, that can be changed. The past can't.

Yeah nope. The prime reason the French and British went there was to build an economical empire. Cause don't kid yourselve: the locals had nothing to say. As for Belgians going there to chop off hands? Nope we went there to make money, atrocities happened but they were not the goal. And btw, in that period Congo was the dominion of king Leopold II, not of the Belgian government. So get of your high horse about how good your colonization was and how bad the others' version of it. Both had one fundamental idea: we the all knowing white people will go and teach those poor blacks/indians/... how to live as we see fit (and make a nice profit). Which is the same thing china does today in africa. Only way more subtle by abusing corruption and poverty.

Thing is, changes are in .1 sec range for reload times. If your test is automated, forget my comment, if not: how can you be sure you are actually firing at the exact time your reload is finished? Just a small missclick can easily be .5 sec delay? So your margin of error of the testing method is far bigger than the gains/losses in the reload times you want to confirm?

One flaw: 12 vs 12 deadeye BB = no spotting! ( who will willingly go forward and spot to lose deadeye ) = no damage done? ( good, no more complaints aboit HE spamming island camping CL)

And which HE has more pen?

So all is fine and nothing should change?

To be fair, citadel damage was never really an issue when I played cruisers. What I consider a larger issue is the increasing amount of overmatching BBs.

This is another "don't nerf my fav ships" comment with no content...

So, we have a CV complaining about green DD quality, whilst a red DD with no smoke or AA survived and topped the scoreboard... Anything I missed here?

Or dis:

Because this happend last round of testing. Changing this would assume WG actually listening to player feedback