Allied_Winter

Nope. Unless I aimed shitty.

Zwischen 100k und 250k Credits würde ich sagen. Dafür darf man dann mit einem Schiff 2-3 Runden CoOp (ohne Belohnungen) fahren. Oder falls es nicht möglich sein sollte die Belohnungen (XP, Credits) im CoOp abzustellen, nimmt man den durchschnittlichen Umsatz den das Schiff im CoOp machen kann (z.B. ein T8 Premiumschiff macht ohne Premiumzeit ca. 350k Credits in einer CoOp Runde), dann setzt man 1 Millionen Credits für 3 Runden CoOp an. Und ich wäre auch PRIMÄR für Premiumschiffe. Für Tech Tree Schiffe gibts den PTS.

Ich würde das durchaus begrüßen und sehe auch die Punkte die angesprochen wurden bzgl. Random und so, aber wer von uns erinnert sich noch an die Probefahrten die im Random stattfinden konnten? Wenn man das mit CoOp, Random noch an weitere Werte koppelt (Schiff der gleichen Stufe oder höher vorhanden, dann Random, sonst CoOp), wäre das für mich auch ein gangbarer Weg. Primär weil CoOp und Random zwei unterschiedliche Paar Schuhe sind.

Never. If my team wins, I win. If my team loses, the drama is over quicker. So... if I'd had a guarantee to win 50% of my battles simply by the enemy throwing hard ... where would I have to sign?

Replays are generated automatically and you can then put it on a website like this: https://replayswows.com

Unfortunately that's not the case. Since it's a team game one can play pretty badly (or even go intentionally AFK) and still end up with a WR of around 30 - 35%. Source? Here: https://wows-numbers.com/ranking/?order=win_rate__desc&p=1432 Just sort by winrate and then jump to the last page. And mind you, there are players with a few thousand games and even their highest DMG (close to 200k) in a CV. So while even a sub 40% WR player can have great games in terms of kills and damage, it's the consistency they're are lacking. Or they were simply just lucky with that game.

Since I dipped in this topic last year, I might as well do again: Basically we have two issues at hand: - Insulting, Harassing and/or other stuff directed at enemies or team members. I think nobody disagrees here, that this is a NoGo. End of discussion - Determine the skill of CV players involved in a battle. To a certain level I agree with you @Drone81 You need to have played CVs to a certain extent to understand what CVs are (not) capable off. However: I don't need to play Essex, Midway, Taiho or Hak myself to see that one CV in a TX game is a total tool, while the other is at least somewhat decent. The basics of CV gameplay don't change (or do only very little) from T4 to T10. I'm halfway competent with T6 and T7 CVs but simply can't make them work over extended periods of time (I have trouble working with more than 4 squads at a time ...). So if I see that e.g. the Essex in my team moves all planes in a blob around the map, while the enemy Essex has her planes (at least partially) split up, I know almost from the beginning of the match, that my team will have it harder to win, simply because our CV lacks the skills to support properly. Sure, there's a lot that can happen in the following 15 minutes, but the initial impression get's rarely turned around. And one last word about WR: If a player has a sufficient number of games in a ship, WR does tell quite nicely how good/bad this player is for the team he's assigned to.

If this is a Scharnhorst only captain I'd go for Expert Loader ... Rest looks good.

Kommt drauf an... wenn man die carried ist die eigene Ausbeute aber höher ;)

Ich hab mich daran gehalten: https://worldofwarships.com/en/content/guides/xp-and-credits/ Unter: Base Capture and Defense Allerdings weiß ich nicht ob das noch aktuell ist oder ob sich in der Zwischenzeit etwas geändert hat.

Jein. Cappen ist nur ein XP Multiplikator. Wer also nur Cappt und sonst nix macht, bekommt keine XP (oder nur sehr wenig). Deshalb: Wenn man schon 100k DMG gemacht hat einfach nochmal cappen. Dann klappts auch in der Endauswertung :D

Ein Frohes neues Jahr zusammen! Ich hoffe ihr konntet die Zeit etwas genießen ohne euch zu sehr von den aktuell laufenden Missionen eingeengt zu fühlen. Für diejenigen unter euch, die wieder einsteigen wollen: Hier etwas T4 Gameplay. Bevor wir den Sprung ins tiefe T5+ Gewässer wagen. Viel Spaß!

Möglich, aber eher unwahrscheinlich. WG hat ja schon des öfteren angedeutet, dass die untere Hälfte der Stufen (1 - 5) einfach nicht wirklich relevant genug sind und Spieler WG oft genug Zeichen geben, dass diese Stufen wenige Spieler interessieren.

Sure! Sometimes while playing her, I wondered how I did manage to get through with a turn. And while it would be a welcomed error if her turning circle radius is smaller than displayed, I don't think it'll 'save' her.

Not necessarilly the point. To you the PEF might not be sluggish, to someone else it might. Even if everybody played the SAME ships. Sluggish isn't an objective definition. And regarding the 800m. Wasn't there in the past the error about Moskva's turning circle radius being much smaller than displayed in port?

While your tests are impressive, you do realise that the term sluggish is highly subjective and it's not really going anywhere debating about? Compared to a dinghi a small frigatte is sluggish. But if you take also an oil tanker into that comparison... While I agree that the PEF is fast and has a rather quick rudder, the large turning circle make it ... difficult (compared to other ships, e.g. Warspite) to dodge.

Now, I played her some more. What can I say, she comes down to me being a similarly bad pick than the Dunkerque. I don't like the Dunkek for her rather bad accuracy (or to be more precise: the scattering of her shells over many shots fired). When they do hit however they do OK damage. PEF on the other hand hits (mostly) where I aim. But lacks the damage. I find myself firing more and more HE in her until the enemies are thinned out and I can get closer without worrying for my broadside. On the plus side for the PEF: Since I have mostly HE loaded, DDs are in for a nastier surprise than if I had AP loaded. Against CVs ... well it's still RNG ... I did quite well fending of a Shokaku the other day, but one game alone could be just luck. Still better sitting in the PEF with a CV than in the Dunkek.

Tarnungskampagne?? Welche meinst du da? Mächtiger Prinz?

There is. If you win, you already get more XP. And you think that even MORE XP would solve the issue? No. I've played enough randoms to accept that fact, that in random games, no such thing as reoccuring, permanent teamwork exists. It happens occasionally, and it's great when it does, but if you really want team work: Clan Battles.

So you think that random players will work together if you present them with even more credits and XP to skew the ingame economy?

Silberschiffe: Iowa, Roon, evtl. Buffalo wenn man USN CA's spielen kann. Ansonsten hab ich meine Unheilige Dreifaltigkeit beisammen: Black, Kronshtadt, Missouri.

So ... just to make it clear: You take the ABSENCE of any patch notes hinting a buff as a evidence that a buff has happened? If you can provide me with any WG sources stating that a buff has happened, then I'm gladly believing them. But for now: No Patchnotes, no buffs.

Your playstyle. But statswise: Nothing has changed. Otherwise players like @1MajorKoenig would've noticed preeeeetty quickly.

I'd be all up for (mandatory) tutorials. However that would probably keep the CV numbers as low as they are now (which isn't in anybody's interest) and/or in the long run drive players away (who wants to be forced to do something in their leisure time). Heck WG in form of Ev1n even confirmed that they're pretty bad (and embarassed) about the state of ingame tutorials (and stated that they for quite some time to come they'll rely on CCs to do the tutoring work).

It works on paper. But since players don't want to learn the DO's and DON'Ts of CVs (and in relation to that AA), we are left with what we have. It took me quite some time in the CVs to work up to a state where I'm not a detriment to my team. I assume that this amount of WORK is simply to much to ask for from the average player.