loppantorkel

Chung Mu is still good imo. YY still a bit underpowered and there's no real reason to play it.

In jest, but it's likely you who changed more than the game. The game is basically the same as before. If you feel differently about it, it's a decent chance it's you.

I mean - would lowering the threshold to be called Unicum matter? 60% will still be better than 57% and the thresholds are probably arbitrary.

Would that matter in any significant way?

You don't remember anything significant happening to you during your trip?

Really?? you can be reported by players who you haven't been in battle with?

Are you talking about radar cruisers..? Everything should have good counters. I suspect you don't find dds OP in general..?

There's some room created after cv-rework for the flanking IJN dd kind of play. The ones that lick the border around the map to kill the enemy cv. These players don't seem to mind being ineffective for the first 10' of the game and probably wouldn't mind being submerged and undetected by planes while doing it. Could be equipped with Asashio type of deep water torps. Could WG make it work? Idk, but it probably would be easier to balance than cvs and they could implement several new ship trees for players to get excited about.

I'll repost this because I think it's a good idea that should be considered. Suggestion regarding the Karma system: Aside for the numerical value of Karma, include a visible gauge at the port, ranging from red -10 to green +5. If you reach -10 by chat reports, you get a chatban and the gauge is reset at 0 (or -5 if repeat offender). This will make players more aware of their situation, of their likelihood of getting a chatban and hopefully motivate the players to restrain and conduct themselves, and maybe even apply themselves to play better to move the gauge to a positive value. It should be easy to understand this system.

I know it's stupid, but the amount of times this actually works out... Names have been called

Yea, the whole idea of selling a branch seems odd to me. People have invested to move through the techtree and just removing it seems like a pretty large threshold for many. It's free to do if you want to do it or not, so it's not a huge issue, but if the end goal is to get veteran players to go back to low/mid tiers, I think there are better ways. I don't see the reason for veteran players doing many low tier games, so it's probably mostly mid tiers which is focused. I already play a decent amount of mid tier games, but it's usually ships I perform well in. Maybe most veteran players use strong premium ships for their mid tier games and ruin them for others. If this is the case and they're trying to get players to grind the 'more normal' ships, I think there are better ways. I'm still grinding a few lines at a very gentle pace and play the ships I enjoy for fun. I'll not delete a line that I didn't enjoy grinding and I'll not delete a line with ships I want to at my disposal for fun games. This Research Bureau won't affect me much and maybe WG knows its playerbase well enough and it will serve the intended purpose.

Could it be done with dual lines for the research? You reset/start over a line for a B-tree, but you still have access to these ships in the A-tree where research points aren't gained. I could grind some lines again, perhaps, but I suppose it would be those I find enjoyable, and I probably wouldn't want to lose access to the ships I enjoy. When the research is done, the lines meld into a single tree again. Not sure if this would go against the concept.

It's an old bug, has happened to me since forever. Very sporadically though, like most other bugs in wows.

I don't remember Bismarck being that OP, but didn't they nerf Bismarck's hydro a bit..? Not sure what to say about that theory of yours...

Yea, it's relevant looking back what peopled argued and how the balancing of Khaba turned out.

Sooo, Khaba was nerfed. This week I'd like to nominate Kremlin. WG pls nurf.

Ohotnik only. Could've bought another ship, but many points brought up in the poll kind of put me off, wouldn't have bought much, but probably something more.

More angling tips. Get surprised by big bb. Drop torps, enter a notch and watch enemy missiles rendered near useless. Reap rewards

Making the game more intuitive would be good for all.

If they can implement them in a good way, why not? Just make them slow paced and give them RL that always point to the enemy cv.

Obviously because Italians should be dehumanized as per standard How about not strawmanning? I don't care about the names of Italian ships. Aotearas said it well - All I can say is the more authentic, the better. I agree.

such as? As long as WG doesn't give in to Italian 'patriotism'.

I appreciate your take on this and it's a decent argument against anyone claiming IFHE is OP. It's tough to know if this is shown in the data - Do most Atlanta captains use IFHE, for example? If not - what does the data tell you? My experience in Atlanta and NO+Pensa doesn't affect the data much, I've never claimed this to be the case and it doesn't matter because the argument I've made from the start hasn't been about whether IFHE or any of these ships are OP or not, just that IFHE has the ability to offset the balance between ships and classes in a way that is detrimental to the game, imo. This isn't found in the stats we have access to. This is where my experience comes in. Regardless of the overall power of ships - OP or not - slapping a captain skill on a ship shouldn't, ideally, make it outperform the counter of the ship/class. It's the third time in this thread I've tried make this point clear now. So, the data provided tells us nothing about the point I've made. In my mind there's some reason to try keeping the game intuitive and consistent. I believe WG is more into putting out small fires here and there, i e focus on keeping the numbers fairly straight, instead of having a big-picture perspective. We'll see.

Thank you for the reply. However, I'd like to point out a few flaws in your reasoning... I can't see the data either, but some things you can and may need to draw from experience. You reason for it in the forum and WG has to decide the ideas merit or check the data if true, ideally. In the case of me getting wrecked by an Atlanta at some instance and it being tattooed in my brain - it's a bit of a trivialisation of my experience in 500 Atlanta games, 250 New Orleans games and above 600 games in former Pensacola. I'm not saying this counts as proof of anything, but it goes beyond being only anecdotal data. On the other hand, creating this hyperbole - the streets are crying for it - is also a bad way to quiet down critique of something you want protected. Why not entertain the idea that WG is trying to improve the game and they've found a flaw in the current mechanic? I've not argued anything about this. Sinop maybe OP, another argument. Another argument. Maybe Atlanta is too powerful. That has nothing to do with my initial argument. The issue for the game is that IFHE Atlanta wrecks the wrong ship - the one that is supposed to counter it. It's counter intuitive and bad game design. That's all. General strength of the ships need to be balanced separately, but keep the game intuitive and consistent. ..well, I got nothing on this.

I will honour this request and leave the thread