Allied_Winter

A few weeks ago, I sat on roughly 70 mio credits. Then I won some premium time, the Sims and ranked started. I surpased the 110 mio credits mark yesterday. Greetings

In regards to the CV Starcraft controls/UI: I get the impression, that most players wouldn't like such a transition (at least from what I read here and on reddit). Since I never played StarCraft, someone care to explain why the controls of StarCraft don't fit in? Greetings

Maybe. Don't be too hard on yourself! Until I won the Sims, my USN DDs were in a pretty dire state (stopped at the Farragut ages ago). Thanks to the box and the convoy missions I picked them up again and doing quite well in them. Greetings

Sims Ranked player here. Won the Sims on the Santa crates, so I can't compare her to her CBT stats. So far this little lady carried me thorugh 42 of my ranked battles on a strong WR of close to 60% (from 16/1 to currently 8/0). While I do have respect from Lenins and Blys's, I mange to out DPM every DD as soon as I get closer than 7km. I'm able to smoke up allies with great USN smoke and saved quite some team members with def AA (although the less CVs I see, I switch probably over to the speed boost). For Ranked I can recommend this summary on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/5uga09/ranking_in_sims_thoughts_for_a_better_performance/ Greetings

Met Negativvv in a RB today. Unfortunately for me, his Shira torps touched my team in all the wrong places.... GJ mate! Greetings

To be honest, there wasn't that much coordination on our side. Chat was ... not toxic, but a little reserved. Only after my announcement to push for A the team followed. Na it was my last for the day. I lost the previous game, with your CV on my team and (luckily) went for a quick recovery. Greetings

Just met Shaka_D in his Scharnhorst in a Ranked Battle (to 9/0 for me). Although his team managed to sink our CV first, we managed to pull the scores around and won the battle. Greetings

This getting a bit ridiculous now: Patch 0.6.1.1 Content (amonst other little things): So Support doesn't even know about that issue if it's in the upcoming Patch.... at least, this confirms the issue, would be interesting if support denies that fact also. Edit: New customer support answer added to OP. Greetings

We all know, that WG isn't able to track all transactions that happen between the shop, the server and the player accounts (Remember the Kamikaze Free XP "bug"?). But this... ooooh boi. Context: NA Player bought Premiumships way before premanent camouflages for premium ships were added to the game. Got his camos when 0.5.2 went live (like we all did). Currently he's missing the permanent premium camo for one premium ship (does not appear in his port under the exterior tab). He contacted support for clarification. Long story short: Support claims that they have only evidence of him buying the ship with no camo attached (because back then there was no perma camo) and can't provide him with a camo he didn't purchase (To the mods: am I getting in trouble if I post the answer of customer support directly?) despite the fact that he has evidence of his friends buying the exact same package and still are in posession of all their premium camos! Action: So, to cover this blind spot, I'll suggest we all take a picture of our premium camos. Showing the account name and the ships in question. For a current date just play one battle and open the "recent battles result" list, which shows a date. Another option would maybe to play a battle with the ships in question and show the credits result screen with the individually named permanent camouflages. Source: All credit to Lord_Blaze on reddit and the hassle he has to go through. LINK to reddit Edit: And that's how proper customer management looks like: Answer by Sub_Octavian:

Warspite! I love her, but every game feels like hard work to do. It's fun and a challenge but definitely demanding. Scharnhorst on the other hand is like a cruise 80% of my matches. Greetings

While a +-1 division can spwan the occasional fail div, most of the time it's used with the desired effect of people playing together properly. In my last 100 or so battles I remember one "Fail Div" where a Kamikaze div'd up with a Kuma and landed in a T7 battle. The Kamikaze even apologized for this. On countless other occasions however I was able to play with some friends because either of them didn't had a T10 yet (so one T9 + 2 T10) or I had no T9 available (so me in a T8 + T9). Working as intended I'd say. Greetings

BRAIN! FART! Need coffee asap! On the other hand.... imagine the possibilities. 203s with destroyer dispersion Greetings

Interesting part about opinion and such. I'd find the 155s to bring me more fun (even switched back to the A-Hull after researching the Ibuki). The 203s, while huge alpha are just a workhorse to me. Solid, effective, but more relaxed playstyle. 155s on the other hand, are more of a challenge to me (tracking targets and firing, while doing a full turn ...). But always nice to hear other opinions! Greetings

Mogami 203 is just the same playstyle you're used to from the Fubuki Furutaka 203s C-Hull. Not bad, but no stellar change either. Mogami 155 is different. The 15 shell salvos are devastating vor DDs and with IFHE you can wreck even more stuff. The problem is the abysmal turret turning rate, which forces you to play waya ahead. If you manage to work around that, there is nothing wrong in keeping the 155s until you've researched the Ibuki. Greetings

The thing in todays "fake news" era is, that if someone claims to be a "good player" or that others are noobs he should provied some evidence to support his claim. No evidence? No creditbilty to take someone serious! I can understand that some players don't want to get insulted by some "pro" (who actually is mostly only a wannabe but let's leave it at that). Greetings

Glad I'm not the only one. Will keep trying though! Edit: Finally! The 16th attempt worked. Greetings

Yeah right. Just put all the server data (we don't get to see!) into the trashcan and balance this game on how we feel today! Great decision. Judge: You were the patient's doctor? Doctor: Yes! Judge: How come that the patient died, while you attended him? Doctor: Despite the statistics and data I just felt, that this patient needed no treatment at all. 0/10 for the idea. Greetings

Well, I assume, that you assume that they a) counted in and b) used some sort of voice com. But do you have proof? And while it might be more likely that they counted in, there's still the chance that they were thrown in by accident. Until then: Innocent until proven guilty. Greetings

Why should it be not ok? Greetings

Roughly 12.3 mio credits with mainly selling unnecessary signals and some old stock moduls. Greetings

Why not. On the other hand I created the thread with a longer time frame in mind. This probably won't be the last missionset where we players are dissatisfied with. I'll see if I can reach out to one of the mods. Greetings

Well well well, again a new week and again the forum and reddit spawn quite similar posts. Players are somewhat dissatisfied with the conditions that apply to fullfill each mission. Usually it's either a (very) hard mission that one needs to overcome or the mission(s) is/are limited to either a certain tier (e.g. T8+) or to a certain class (DDs only) or both (CV of T6+). Why is/are the mission(s) so darn hard? Please see MrConway's answer below: So basically WG have created themselves the problem of trying to fit skilled players (as in those above average or even close to unicum) in the same mission system as 'three-battle-a-night' casuals. What can we as players and forumites do (other than rage) to improve this situation? I'd say give accurate feedback about ongoing missions and/or provide suggestions on how to improve the missions in the future. Much like MrConway (and others on reddit) suggested. Now one might argue, that if a feature or concept isn't proper tested it shouldn't be rolled out, but some statistics can be onlly gathered in a live environment. Even if it means, that the user has to experience some let downs. How should accurate feedback look like? Look at this post on reddit by LordFjord: 2: any ship T4+, 150k dmg to cruisers, 20 fires, reward: 8 Zulu Signals (+20% Credits earned for a battle) 3: any ship T4+, 20 citadels, 10k base XP, reward: 5x Repair Party II 4: any ship T4+, single battle, 200 ribbons, top 3 base XP, reward: 1M credits 5: any ship, T4+, single battle, 2500 base XP + survive, reward: 30x India X-Ray, 30x Mike Yankee Soxisix, 30x Sierra Mike, 30x Victor Lima + final reward 20x Restless Fire Camouflage Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/5srptt/eu_weekly_missions_a_constructive_feedback_thread/ddhc5mj/?utm_content=permalink&utm_medium=front&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=WorldOfWarships Or maybe a broader feedback: I am OK with some class limitations (e.g. BB of T5+). This doesn't need to be necessarily an entry requirement (as in limit for the 1st sub mission), but as a mid mission (e.g #3 or #4) limitiation that should do the trick. Why? Because I assume, that most casual players have a mid tier BB at hand (or well check your statistics WG where the average casual player stands). I also like the fact that some missions can be done in CoOp as well, would appreciate it more though, if all steps could be done in CoOp. And while I think mission requirements should increase over the number of missions, it should still be doable for the average scrub. A bit less from the 'free-stuff' point of view but more from the 'yay I did all missions' point of view. The way the missions are currently set up, look like a consecutive mission set (and players mostly like to finish sets). Also the missions should be build in a way that they encourage teamplay (since this is a team game. Right? RIGHT?) and not force players to abandon the basic objective (securing caps, winning a game) in favour of e.g. spot 2 CVs in one battle. This brings up a second problem, of some (especially harder) missions to be somewhat luck dependend if you get a battle with the aforementioned CVs. If you remember the ARP Nachi missions, you know what I'm talking about. For the rest: The task of sinking X ships of a certain nation is a bit tricky, if you queue for a battle only to find no ship of the required nation present on the battlefield. What would suggestions for improving future missions be? Again, shameless copy from reddit by Auzor: That's a quite interesting approach. It reduces the amount of 'luck' for a great game required (in case of 2500 base XP), by dividing the mission goals (two games of 2000 base XP). Another approach could be this one: Iirc in GranTurismo or Trackmania, you had a game mode, where you'd race against a timer. You could win bronze, silver and gold. The times needed for each medaille were clear from the start. However, it was possible to earn a fourth platinum medaille of which the conditions where unknown. That way, the requirements for gold were quite doable, while the platinum mission was harder to get. Not necessarily thorugh harsh requirements, but more so due to the fact, that you didn't know what the exact requirements for that stage were. This could be tied to a hint. Lets say you have a BB heavy weekly missionset. And after completing the final known mission (#5), a 6th mission pops up that only hints what is needed to fullfill it. This can be tricky however if the then given out rewards don't fit the difficulty of this 6th mission. Also this could lure player into excessive playing, so this suggestion needs some refinement. Or maybe: Two mission streaks (one for CoOp and one for Random), where the player chooses which he want's to progress. Although I admit, that this looks similar to the campaigns. Disclaimer: I know the discussion can heat up quite quickly, so please keep your calm. If you have a great idea, but are currently still [redacted] about the current missions and fear to rage, go for a walk or a cup of coffe/tee/favourite beverage and come back with a relaxed mind. Try to leave either feedback or a suggestion for improvement or constructive criticism on other posters feedback (e.g mine ) Happy discussion! Greetings

I don't have a problem with missions limited to one class. But why not tell the playerbase in advance (or with the mission requirements) that this mission needs to be done in a e.g. CV T8+? The way we have it now it feels a bit like buying a PC game, where the minimum specs are printed on the back ('can be installed on Mac, Windows & Linux'), but not the specs required to operate said game smothely ('no smooth operation possible on Mac, Windows requires 80GB RAM') Greetings

Smoke works both ways! Were you alone when this happened? Where was your closest ally? If no ally has line of sight to the targets to spot them, you won't see them from inside you smoke screen. No bug, just regular game mechanics. Greetings

Could be. And I got no problem if a mission(s) require at least a T7 or T8 ship to complete it (without having a game in a lower tier ship, where all stars have to align...). But why not tell the playerbase? A bit like when buying a PC game. On the back you'll find the minimum and the recommended specs needed. So in the current case: Minimum T4 (is it?) is T6 (thanks to cro_pwr) but recommended is T8 (below it'll be pretty luck dependent to do 165k DMG in a game; I only managed to do 205k in a Kamikaze once....) Greetings