GarrusBrutus

Dying each time after three minutes gets kinda repetetive i guess.

It is true that she is dependant on mm, but so is for example the asashio albeit in a different way (double cv= Rip). The main selling point for me to purchase massa was the unique playstyle she offers.

Yes, smaland wont come back so get her while you can. The Siegfried you can get at any time later on.

"mUhH I aM aBoVe YoU oN tHe ScOrEbOaRd GiT gUd."

If i could perma ban pieces of sh!t like this, who's only goal it is to grief their team, i would. But CVs are not more influential on the match outcome than any other class. Nooooooooo. /s

Because T3 isnt full of potatoes?

@StanleyHTweedle Just out of curiosity: Why have you blocked these gentlemen?

I know, I know, was just referring to the "Too popular in competitive." part. Just another shot in the foot by wargaming to not ever nerf premiums. Sadly they suffer the same fate as f.e. Enterprise. Blessed if you were able to get the ship, screwed if you didnt/couldnt.

Petropavlovsk anyone? Popular in KOTS and CBs.

Way to turn a probably lost game into a certainly lost game.... You'd be amazed how much you can get out of a match that you're losing at first glance.

The Lions are purple! Join now!

How is this ad hominem, beste vriend? His stats are public, for everyone to see and analyse. As you know very well, we Dutch are simply frank in our communication. Besides, ive given @optimal_909 more useful advice in this very thread than you ever will, so spare me the adhominem crying.

So you're saying that your previous stats are just down to luck then? You do not get 60% wr in a ship after dozens of games by sheer luck. I am also not suggesting for you to min-max, but clearly you care about your winrate. So to be satisfied with your winrate it can be helpful to change the way you currently approach things as they are not working (anymore). What do you want to hear? It seems you are not looking for advice, tips or whatever. I've only seen you complaining about how the warships universe is being unfair to you. Yes, we get it, the game sucks when you lose more than you should. Either improve your own performance, div up or simply take a break.

What if i told you that staying alive and farming damage yields a better winrate than a risky playstyle to gain early radar coverage/dmg? For example my Worcester results: I never go for early radars on caps, simply because i wont take the risk to get deleted for possible damage on a dd. It is more profitable to use your excellent dpm to grind ships down and use radar later in the match. I think my solo results speak for themselves: I am sure you fought hard in those battles you nearly won, but how many of these battles, where you were sent back to port early, could have been victories if only you played more conservative? Flamu's latest video is possible the best advice for you right now, since it applies to almost ALL cruisers but especially light cruisers such as worcester: youtube video Pro tip: When you want to perform better in a certain ship, simply message some top leaderboard players for tips and tricks. Most of them will be glad to help out.

I am sorry, but looking at your results you simply have some ships you arent yet proficient with. This is normal and with some help you might be able to get better results. Maybe you play them wrong, maybe you have them specced wrong and maybe you're just really unlucky. Grind your wins in coop mate, its infinitely more easy that way.

WoWs playerbase in a nutshell. Luckily there are examples of players not suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Ah, the classic "When I win it is me, when i lose its the team". Well, if it works for you... See you in two weeks.

But that is the thing: Even if I am using the correct tactics and play my cards right, it still depends on the OTHER player how much damage i take. That isnt the case with any other class. Because of this, most top players despise carriers. To paraphrase Gaishu (top NA player): "CVs introduce a guaranteed, incontestable way to provide quick, on-demand spotting for their teams. CVs introduce guaranteed damage. These two factors together create a significantly less complex match, where vision control doesn’t have to be played for and the removal of concealment as a tool forces lineups to either revolve around long range trading or heavy pushes. There is little to no skill input from the surface ship player when they are being struck by the CV. Planes always have engagement control over surface ships. There should be more room for skill expression on the surface ship players’ part than a few button presses." ps. If you're interested to read the whole thing: link

Yeah, i think it is inherently in the game design that you have these kind of games. No respawn mechanic, slow paced and mechanics like detonations and LOTS of RNG involved means it is a bit like balancing a tube of water on your finger: Once the balance is off to one side, the water floes to that side and it falls of your finger. It is the same with WoWs. Once a team gets an advantage over the other team its more likely that the "winning" team increases the advantage than for the losing team to overcome the odds. For example: The only DD on a flank gets dev struck or detonates. This will most likely lead to a collapsed flank and ultimately a collapsed team. How do you recover from that as a random team? ps. you can multiquote in one message. ;)

Prove what? That those kind of matches are unwinnable? That those kind of matches happen 1 in every 20 matches or so? Fact is that where some players give up when they deem their team's disadvantage too great to overcome, other players keep on fighting to the last second, sometimes even crawling their way back into the match. Such matches often turn out to be the most fun to play, win or lose. Unfortunately this is a rare occurance since most of the time you simply lose the match due to players giving up. But in my opinion going down fighting is far more desirable than the "GG" in chat when you lose two or three ships early.

So when some pepegas on my team rush to their deaths I am punished even more by not even being granted the opportunity to turn the match around? That's a bad idea imo. How about give the team that loses a teammate a slight buff like in arms race? If you lose a ship first you get 5% faster reload for example. And it increases as you lose more friendlies, while it decreases as you close the gap. That would give the losing team a chance to come back into the game and perhaps less one sided games.

Please tell me you are not one of those "Camper pu55y! Come out and fight me like a real man!"-kind a bb captain.

I like it, but you do realise that this would mean an increase in difficulty level of the game. Since more than half the playerbase can't even distinguish HE from AP, let alone this edition of radar(counters).