Admiral_H_Nelson

This. ^^ Plus, I think that the +2/-2 gap magnifies the difference between good, average & bad players. I'm not saying that +2/-2 is a good thing, or a bad thing. There are many good arguments made on both sides IMHO. Personally, as a very average cruiser player, I find it difficult to cope with being bottom tier - especially on open maps when I am significantly outranged by enemy guns. It doesn't put me off playing WoWS, provided that I am really in the mood to play. However, if (such as now, as I post this reply) I am in two minds about starting up the game to play a couple of battles before going to bed, then it is one of the larger factors persuading me not to play.

In other news.... "Dog bites man" "The Pope found to be a Catholic" "Bears exercise bodily functions in wooded areas"

I'm surprised that Wargaming didn't pick up this bug in testing. They DID test it, didn't they?

Nah! He's the spitting image of me! Hey, how can a submariner be an [edited], anyway? The [edited]are the ones in the surface ships, or "targets" as they are sometimes called.

REG: All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us? (Monty Python: Life of Brian)

That's how I interpreted it as well - and i hope that I am correct. ON TOPIC: The stupidest person that I have seen in game Well, sometimes a battle starts with bad weather. The screen goes dark and acts like a mirror. Then I see this [edited] staring back at me.

Typical! I go out for the evening, and when I come home I find that an interesting discussion has been going on. Battleship or battlecruiser. I think that you are right - they look more like battleships to me. I go on armour, not just speed in assessing whether a ship is a battleship. A quick check on wikipedia (yes, I know....) makes the Francesco Caracciolo-class look similar to the Queen Elizabeths to my untrained eyes. i.e. "Fast Battleships" (But I am here to be educated)

+1 I think that this suggestion is fairer, and beter for players, than the current system of crew skills.

TL;DR These ships have got better/worse in the last two weeks. Any ideas as to why this has happened? I took some snapshots from "Warships Today" showing ship performance data for the last two weeks, and "All Time" performance data. This was done because I was interested to see if any ships were performing better/worse recently compared to their overall performance. Well there are some interesting figures. I wonder if any of the more analytical forumites can offer some possible explanations?(The obvious one that springs to mind, is that the buff to Furutaka has helped it significantly) More about the data (if anyone is interested) These ships are the most improved recent performers from tiers 4-10. Ship Tier Type Nation Diff_WR% Diff_Dam Dam_Idx Langley 4 CV USA 6.04% 9,916 140.1 Sims 7 DD USA 6.69% 5,702 130.5 Bogue 5 CV USA 3.40% 5,934 128.6 Furutaka 5 CA/CL Japan 5.09% 3,971 118.8 Ishizuchi 4 BB Japan 4.17% 5,159 118.6 Clemson 4 DD USA 4.74% 3,387 118.0 Blyskawica 7 DD Poland 2.17% 3,987 115.1 Arkansas Beta 4 BB USA 3.56% 5,389 114.7 Gremyashchy 5 DD USSR 5.22% 4,416 114.7 Atago 8 CA/CL Japan 3.61% 4,893 113.9 Hosho 4 CV Japan 2.61% 4,956 112.8 Khabarovsk 10 DD USSR 1.07% 6,682 112.6 Isokaze 4 DD Japan 3.31% 3,010 112.2 Atlanta 7 CA/CL USA 3.57% 2,564 110.7 These ships performance has got the most worse from tiers 4-10. Ship Tier Type Nation Diff_WR% Diff_Dam Dam_Idx Shimakaze 10 DD Japan -1.04% -10,803 79.4 Kagero 9 DD Japan -0.65% -7,423 81.1 Omaha 5 CA/CL USA 0.94% -5,115 81.4 Midway 10 CV USA -7.71% -21,338 81.6 Marblehead 5 CA/CL USA -2.61% -5,122 84.8 Essex 9 CV USA -3.25% -11,111 86.5 Mogami 8 CA/CL Japan -1.42% -4,704 88.0 Hatsuharu 7 DD Japan 0.12% -2,403 89.4 Murmansk 5 CA/CL USSR -0.62% -3,452 90.3 Independence 6 CV USA 0.04% -2,828 90.5 Cleveland 6 CA/CL USA 1.20% -2,732 90.9

I can see the two month figures from that site - and I have captured them, thank you. I would need the "All time" figures from the same source. I'm being thick. I can't see them - can you help please? If i can get the raw data, then I will put it into tables and do the comparison again.

WoWS is an arcade game, so I'm sure that Wargaming will just invent something as an italian national trait. Personally, I would be quite happy if Italian cruisers had the same minimalist armour as the Russians but slightly worse artillery. Their trump card could be to have the speed boost consumable (on top of an already fast ship) to hunt down destroyers. Italian cars & ships have a great heritage of being fast - it's a positive trait to celebrate in the game. Under no circumstances, however, must WG be allowed to do anything to spoil the beautiful lines of Italian cruisers, or I will riot. (I'd rather put up with less AA guns)

Don't be upset with me. I don't hate Pensacola - I just like Indianapolis more! (Only a few games so far but what a ship!) I changed my sig to (reluctantly) drop the Königsberg and Nürnberg from my list of favourites. I can't do anything with them any more. I've tried 60 games in them since Patch 0.5.3 and have to give them up now. I only have limited time to play so I must concentrate on ships that do seem to "fit" more. I don't know what is wrong - bad matchmaking (it has been), more powerful ships such as Kirov & Furutaka to make like more difficult, better quality of players at tier 5, me becoming even worse at the game ....dunno.

I agree with what you say. The sticking point is that Wargaming balance everything by the stats. As I've said before, Yubari owners are their own worst enemy by being good players (I don't own one BTW). They get good results in the ship by using their skills, which masks the fact that the ship is (in the hands of general plebs such as me) weaker than its peers at tier 4. Here are the results for the latest two weeks, to illustrate the point. Ship Battles Winrate Av_dmg Av XP Av_Frag Av_AC Surv% Iwaki Alpha 508 61.02% 36,325 989 1.3 0.8 31% Yubari 3,156 55.67% 25,694 862 0.9 2.7 30% Svietlana 21,946 52.55% 23,141 660 0.7 0.1 24% Kuma 17,804 52.85% 23,004 669 0.7 0.4 22% Phoenix 12,757 51.52% 21,053 708 0.6 0.2 21% Karlsruhe 14,455 49.62% 15,336 556 0.5 0.1 20%

+1 "You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day"

......and this, from the recent Q & A session on the RU forum, translated by Carnotzet (thank heavens that we have him available to help us) "Regarding low-tier IJN cruisers buffs, in 0.5.7., a new module will be available for IJN premium ships with 140mm guns (for now, it concerns Yubari, Katori and Iwaki) called Gun fire control mod 0. It will increase turret and torpedo tubes rotation speed by 20%, secondary guns range by 20%, and reduce maximum dispersion of main and secondary batteries by 40%." Can't wait!

Since you buy flags per battle, and camo per battle then you should buy premium per battle. Simples!

Sadly, since the "Great Cruiser Nerf" of Patch 0.5.3 my effectiveness in the Königsberg and Nürnberg are way down. Checking my stats database I find that damage, kills, a/c kills and winrate are all significantly down. I compensated fine on most of my ships (Kuma, Phoenix, Omaha, Murmansk, Cleveland) but not my German cruisers. I played them again recently and it felt like a chore. It's a great shame. Fortunately I do have plenty of other ships which are nice to play, but still ......

"Regarding module upgrades rework, players won't lose anything (nor modules, nor credits or doubloons). If a module is replaced, players who had it installed will get the new one for free. If it is removed, players will be refunded in credits. They don't plan to remove and refund all equipped modules."A very, very fair move from Wargaming. "Regarding low-tier IJN cruisers buffs, in 0.5.7., a new module will be available for IJN premium ships with 140mm guns (for now, it concerns Yubari, Katori and Iwaki) called Gun fire control mod 0. It will increase turret and torpedo tubes rotation speed by 20%, secondary guns range by 20%, and reduce maximum dispersion of main and secondary batteries by 40%."I like this. My Katori will like this even more! "Work on matchmaker 2.0 is completed and it has passed internal testing. If all goes according to plan, it should be released in the next update."I am impressed at the speed that Wargaming are doing this. Obviously they have given it the high priority that it deserves. Well done WG. "Main battery mod 2 increase in loading time is reduced from 10 to 5%."Very interesting. It's only a small reduction, but somehow I take this option more seriously now. "Cyclone weather was generally well received by players, that is why they decided to expand the number of maps it can occur on. They will also try other weather experiments in the future. This feature will not happen in Ranked battles." I hate the cyclones with a passion, but I am a democrat. If the majority want it then they must have it. I can still play Ranked battles (though I never have played this mode before) since they are exempt, and presumably there will be some tiers that do NOT get cyclones that I can still play?

So what is YOUR explanation for the statistical superiority of Russian cruisers then? I do hope that you aren't going to try to trot out the old chestnut of "It's better players that play them", since by now everybody and his brother have had a chance to play the silver ships - at least to the mid tiers. P.S. I am a strong Russian fan (I get every Russian ship that I can) - and EVEN I think that Russian cruisers are better than their peers overall (counting up to tier 8 - not got to tier 9/10 yet)

Yes, WG are taking Matchmaking seriously. I believe that they stated in a recent Q&A session on the RU forum that they were making a fundamental review of Matchmaking. This is great news. I like the idea of punishing "fail divisions" by giving them less XP, though I think that some of these idiots would go ahead and do it anyway. I am very, very uncomfortable for giving extra Xp for "sensible" divisions, however. I don't think that the solo player should be punished.

I agree with the advice given up thread to walk away for a bit when you get frustrated at a losing streak. There is only one snag. When you have events like the recent GNB (one with lots of grinding) you have a very strong incentive to grin-and-bear it and carry on. Another argument against "grindy" missions.

I often see the Kamikaze R turn in excellent performances in battles. When I check the players stats afterwards they are (in the great majority of cases) very experienced players with lots of higher tier destroyers in their port. Now ....OK....but Wargaming stance on cruiser captains being highly skilled and taking advantage of the Basic/Advanced Firing Training and Expert marksman skills was to publicly disapprove of it and give it as one of the reasons for nerfing those skills (see 0.5.3 FAQ on main website) One rule for DD captains, another for cruiser captains, it seems to me.

Wargaming explained their philosophy for premium ships in the video "Developer Diaries #9: Premium Ships" (see http://wargaming.com/en/articles/news/world-of-warships/dev_diaries_9/) @5:14 Vladimir Grisyuk describing the advantages of a premium ship says: "Just like a premium account, it doesn't give you an advantage in battle, however it allows you to save some time that you would have spent in the game achieving or researching something. Premium ships are very good for power levelling commanders, thanks to the fact that they can be transferred to and from premium ships without penalties. Besides this they're great for earning credits that you can later spend on purchasing ships from the tech tree" (Official Wargaming translation from the original language, my emphasis)

As i posted on this thread several times, I've gained a lot from this event. Even so, it has obviously not been perfect. IMHO It would have been so much better if everything had been made crystal clear in one place at the start of the event. Here's just a 10 minute draft of how the rules could have read Introducing Grand Naval Battles! This event will run for 5 weeks from [From-date] to [to-date] DIAMONDS 1. The objective is to collect diamonds by completing missions. 2. Players can spend their diamonds by selecting from a number of prizes on offer. 3. The maximum number of diamonds that a player can gain by completing ALL missions is 1000. MISSIONS 1. There will be two sorts of missions: "Permanent" and "Weekly". 2. Permanent missions are available throughout the event. 3. Weekly missions are available only in their designated week, which begins at 1 minute past midnight each Monday morning, and ends at Midnight the following Sunday. 4. There will be weekly missions in weeks 1 thru 4 of the event. Unlike the Kamikaze R event, these will not be the same missions every week. 5. Week 5 of the event will not contain any new weekly missions. This week is for the players to concentrate on finishing any uncompleted permanent missions. CARRY OVER FROM PREVIOUS MISSIONS 1. Some missions work on a cumulative basis. 2. For example, A mission requires "20 games in a battleship" and the player actually plays 25 games. A subsequent mission may be "40 games in a battleship". The player will be credited with 25 games towards this new target. Alternatively, if the player had played 40 or more games in completing the first mission, then they will be judged to have already completed the new mission. REWARDS 1. There are three types of rewards: a) Personal rewards chosen by the player by spending the diamonds that they have gained b) Personal rewards gained by the player for reaching certain thresholds in the total number of diamonds they have gained (e.g. 100, 200, 400 etc). These may consist of consumables such as flags, or camouflage. c) Group rewards given for the cumulative total of ALL diamonds gained by ALL players (e.g. 1 million, 3 million, 5 million etc) 2.These group rewards will be available to ALL players in the weekend following the end of the Grand Naval Battles Event. 3. Group rewards will be special missions and/or a "mystery gift" for all players. 4.The missions will be upgraded to give better rewards as higher thresholds of total diamonds are achieved. For example, gaining 5 million diamonds may unlock the mission "Gain 250,00 credits for inflicting 1 million damage in a tier IV+ ship", but unlocking the 7 million diamond threshold could upgrade this mission to "Gain 500,00 credits for inflicting 1 million damage in a tier IV+ ship" The actual missions,thresholds & rewards may differ from the examples given above. SUPPORT 1. A pinned topic "Grand Naval Battles" will be created in forum folder World of Warships official forum → Forum → English Speaking Forum → Forum → Community Area → Contests 2. Please post any questions in this topic. Wargaming staff will monitor this topic at least once daily, and answer questions.

How odd! I have EXACTLY the same problem with Tirpitz. It seems far more deadly to me - when I'm in a cruiser - than any other battleship. I've also experienced this weird situation several times. - Friendly BB and enemy Tirpitz slugging it out at 9/10 km - I approach the fight, and when in range (about 15km) start lobbing in shells to the Tirpitz - Tirpitz stops firing at friendly BB and switches fire to me! I don't want to get a tin foil hat, but it's funny - this is exactly what the bots do in co-op, but I'm talking about Random battles here.