dasCKD

You evidently don't understand the post. Without that premium consumable and camo, I would have lost less than 2000 credits. I sucked on an epic scale that first battle, and yet I barely would have made a lost in any other circumstance. This new economy means that the utterly awful carrier players can go along with barely any loss whilst even the excellent carrier players would be paid like they were mediocre cruiser players. This in itself I wouldn't have an issue with if there was an algorithm to always put those carrier captains on the same teams as whinny BB mains, but there is a second part to this. Yes. "My" class. Fact checking goes a long way, doesn't it? If I played nothing but carriers, I would have no issue whatsoever if incompetence wasn't punished because it means that thanks to mirror matchmaking, I would be able to coast along easily in basically all of my matches because I'd be encountering the type of player who can't tell his ship's bow from her aft. Unfortunately, I don't and I really don't like the 50% chances of being weighed down because WG thinks it's a good idea to basically let bad players get almost the same rewards as a good one.

That is my fault unfortunately. I messed up the image ordering. The higher screenshot for the rewards is the victory match and the lower screenshot is for the defeat match.

I'd play subs just to annoy the people whose whining put carriers in this state.

Just buy the Belfast! She seems like a Flint, but even more disgustingly OP. She's like a cruiser version of the Saipan.

I would give a lot more compliments if I could give them to myself In all honesty, I give compliments when I see excellent or extremely selfless play on either side of the green/red divide. Usually though, I am too busy raging in chat/killstealing from my division mates to normally notice if someone was doing something commendable. I really should focus on the match.

Nope. Both were Shokaku matches. I don't generally post Saipan match results because I'm pretty sure that counts as graphical violence against seals.

I might mess around with the tiers 2 or 3 a little bit, then I'll freeXP my way to the tier 5.

...what? What? WHAT?

Recently, I have been visiting the Forumite in-game chat room to find some division mates. Despite this, the room seems empty every time I visit. Is this just an error on my side, or have the forum lurkers stopped going to that room?

Should have specified cruisers. Who said I was crying about it? Edit:I suppose I'd end up supporting your point considering my two other top ship. Nevertheless, the simple fact is that the Atago is significantly superior to the Mogami and is a premium. The Chapayev is really only an option because of her excellent radar.

Who drives a non-pay to win and non-Chapayev ship in ranked?

So it isn't. I logged on to the wrong room it seems. With the exact same password as well. :S. They really should remove redundancies like that.

You'll struggle to outdamage a Ranger and most likely completely fail to outdamage a Lexington in anything Japanese. A large amount of learning to play CVs involves preventing the enemy CV from doing damage faster than you can.

I'm impressed. It appears that you managed to somehow shoot down 1 plane from a Shokaku...when your AA was obviously turned off!

Can't we just give the Zuiho the Zao's torps?

The concept itself does hold potential. The cruiser mission itself is indeed quite nonviable especially since some games go without even a single target being designated by a single ship in the entire game. For the cruiser mission, it could be something like "remain within x km range for y time to a friendly destroyer who has successfully secured a cap" or "destroy planes within proximity of x km to friendly ships" or even "cause x damage upon your spotting when using radar or hydroacoustics", all of which are the performance of cruiser specific roles which often brings the team victory. As for the carrier missions, option 3 is something that would be better if worked into game mechanics i.e. killing planes that still have payload rewards more XP than kills on empty planes. For the first mission, "aiding a cap reset by spotting an enemy ship" would probably be better as many carrier players have some issues hitting destroyers. Dive bombers, especially the USN ones, are also heavily reliant on RNG smiling upon you that day and so I think it would be better to do something that you can use any carrier to do instead of something that is almost limited to half the carrier player base. It might be good if we give carriers an extra ability to mark a target when the flood or flame up a target, as most carrier attacks will cause a DOT effect that NEEDS to be stopped as soon as possible i.e. flooding, multiple fires. CVs that designates a target after their run have a mission related to the DOT that the allied ships do to the ships in the interim period between the victim's cooldown. Maybe have a large UI arrow that points to a recently attacked target to help the potatoes on the team recognize the target. I'm also quite concerned about the battleship missions. The KM ships are basically brawlers so they will almost always be within brawling range. IJN BBs on the other hand are significantly more accurate but also squishier as so they'll have a hard time on the front lines for extended periods of time.

At the higher tiers the HP pools of the planes converge. Furthermore, bombers gain speed once they drop their bombs which makes them far faster scouts than fighters and it also has the intimidation factor for destroyers. I'll use Shokaku as the example here. Yokosuka: 161 knots Kawanishi: 171 knots Once bombs are dropped Yokusuka 181 knots Kawanishi 171 knots Now the dive bombers can outrun the fighters and outscout them. The thing is AS loadouts aren't useless though many carriers say they are. Bringing an AS loadout into battle is like bringing a riot shield against a handgun that would, in this example, be the strike loadout. You can't protect your team effectively with your riot shield because the enemy can choose anyone on your team to shoot at. The guy with the handgun also won't be there if you aren't there. In the occasions where you are in an AS CV against a strike CV you aren't useless to your team, you are a detriment.

Zao is the traditional answer. Statistics shows that the Des Moinnes is doing quite well lately. There are battleships that are better than the Montana in basically every department. The Shima is carrier bait. Then again, I have no tier 10s on the live server so take my advice for what it's worth.

Everyone, you should really reconsider these numbers you are giving out (i.e. 30000 xp). Right now, you have premium and you probably have the x2 camo and x1.5 flag mounted which is, I think, the thing that is making you give out these numbers. We should take those numbers and extrapolate them to your regular account. I personally make around 1000-1700 base XP by just messing around in randoms on a usual day, so that means that the 30000 XP on a regular day would need about 18-30 games which is something that is a little unreasonably high for a daily occurrence and not really worth playing to fulfill unless the crates, as previously stated, are worth more than the first. Here is what I would personally put as a system: First crate 3500 XP (higher than it is right now, but should be easily fulfilled with some basic effort. Second crate 10000 XP (lowered) Third crate 22000 XP (lowered) This should be possible with 10 games a night, as the first games with be naturally more profitable than later games and we will have to be playing a lot of later games to get these crates.

If draws are back, have them removed. They are possibly the worst thing ever conceived and should be reserved solely for the rare occasions where all the survivors are eliminated simultaneously and the victor of the match is truly ambiguous.

Hey, let's not hold prejudice against certain tactics over others! If all of you charged at once, one or two of you may stay alive for long enough to ram an enemy ship!

The rules behind acquiring epic containers, as far as WG is willing to tell us, is completely random. The issue with the grindfest arguement is that the chances of getting rare ships is currently around the same for a player who plays 2-3 games for 3 days of the week as it is for a player who plays 25-30 games in one day so the premise isn't even one that is valid within the current system. If they made it so that the second and third crates gives more rewards i.e. Crate 1 3 rewards, normal change of getting rare crate 1 reward, high chance of getting rare crate Crate 2 4 rewards, normal chance of getting rare crate 1 reward, higher chance of getting rare crate Crate 3 6 rewards, normal chance of getting rare crate 1 reward, highest chance of getting rare crate Then the argument might make sense. As things stand though, the XP requirements should probably be decreased.

I think the largest issue with ranked battle right now with the rank retention system is that it is often used when it's not needed. I personally usually top the team in XP when I win and I often lose when I screw up and die early. It'll be nice if I could get a token for coming top in XP gain in a game to retain my rank in a game where I royally screw up.

I am a n00b, and I want stuff like credits, flags, and camo and hence I advocate for adding more safe harbors in terms of rank grind. In all seriousness, a long patch of dead space might theoretically keep the n00bs out of the lower ranks, but there's little point in denying that even excellent players have issues when they could grind their way up to rank 3 before a plague of bad teams that just lets them die results in them dropping down to 7 or 8. The ranked system would be much less rage inducing if a patch of bad games wouldn't cost you days or even weeks worth of effort.

The XP and credits rewards from playing carriers is still pitifully small and even with this patch carriers will have difficulty holding their spots in ranked even if they were the MVP. Any word as to when we can expect see changes to this?