Capra76

Your post was about WR% and why Smolensk should remain whilst Belfast should never return, when I pointed out the ghastly flaw in comparing WR% in ships with 60 active players against ships with 2,000 active players you started throwing insults around and are still at it. Or perhaps you think Eastern Dragon should be buffed up to ARP Myoko levels?

But if the pistol is still the choice of 50% of players, why would it need to be more viable?

Pretty much every post you've made in this thread has been along the lines of "I know what I'm talking about, you don't" but strangely you never demonstrate your knowledge or understanding and in fact, to the extent that you've tried, what you've demonstrated is ignorance and misunderstanding.

Now you're just using evasion, what was your point in posting the charts if it was not to (wrongly) highlight the WR%? And in terms of you understanding the data and "an effect", everything you have posted so far appears to suggest the contrary, but feel free to demonstrate otherwise.

So what is it about if it's not about WR% (and note that your list is ordered by WR%). BTW, MapleSyrup lists solo battles only, hence about 48% - 49% is exactly what you'd expect to see for such a widely played ship (look at Bismarck, Shima etc if you don't believe me).

Unbelievable that you're still posting raw stats without even attempting to understand what they show. 1,770 players and 31,000 Smolensk games last week, I think the 3rd most played ship in the whole game (Bismarck and Shima 1 & 2), this means that the odds of having them on both teams is very high and thus the WR% is obviously going to tend towards 50%. 60 players and 1,059 Belfast games last week, the odds of 2 of them finding themselves on opposing teams must be vanishingly small so much wider variance in WR% is possible, and since the average Belfast player will have been in the game for at least 3 years he's going to be a lot better than the average T7 cruiser player, hence why the WR% is so high. Still think that I messed up?

4,500 players playing 300,000+ games at T10 compared to 250 very experinenced players playing 25,000 games at T7. Is that what you were driving at?

I don't recognise the distinction between "more viable" and "buff", but whatever term you wish to use why does a ship representing 50% of all T10 DD games need a change?

Ahhhh, okay, the extra 1 knot makes all the difference and is totally worth losing the ability to strike DD.....................................not. Edit: A more important question: Why does a ship that makes up close to 50% of all T10 DD games need a buff?

Which Shima torps? Type 93, worse detection and much slower; Type 93 mod 3, same detection but slightly slower; Type F3, same detection but much, much faster.

Since you've already got captains in the T7 ships, why not just buy a permanent cammo for the 2 ships and just stay there until you are ready to move up to T8+?

So if you ignore the players for long enough so that they give up and go play something else that's makes the mechanics fine and healthy. Delusional.

It works against torpedoes indirectly, if the number of ships targeting you ticks down by one for a few seconds then back up then that's a big clue that torpedoes are on the way. To counter this I used to keep my DD in torpedo mode until I wanted to use my guns.

True, however since the aim of the change is to get more players using the module, it seems reasonable to assume that WG will keep buffing it until it's as popular with BB players as CE is, if not more. Torpedo protection buff up to 20% perhaps, mount it on a Yamato and watch a full salvo of torps land for perhaps 20,000 damage, I wouldn't be surprised if we end up there.

One point not mentioned is that it depends upon the tier that you are playing at, it's much easier to maintain a high WR% at T4 - T7 than it is at T8 - T10.

Okay, I won't bother posting any more bug reports etc then.

Check the damn server populations, if players of a class representing ~50% of all games played are asking for buffs it's a whine, if the class represents maybe 15% of games maybe they have a point.

Erm............... That's like 1,000 games in a 4 day PT window, is that reasonable? What's going on and what's the point of Test 1-2 if Test 1-1 is impossible?

Well, I guess there's a couple of problems: WG want to move players away from concealment and towards anti-torpedo detection, if this doesn't work expect more buffs to the skill; the "serious" players aren't the ones straight-lining into torpedoes, this is a buff to the players who are; do DD really need more nerfs? Maybe they could just lower the detection for those torps? I mean it was only raised to that level in the first place because WG wanted to control the number of IJN DD in the game, why introduce a global change that reverses previous nerfs to one line and nerfs every other line?

I thought the collab with ARP ended a long time ago, have WG started a new one, if not do they have the right to sell the ships?

Can't get into the armory, it just stays in the loading screen until you esc out of it.

The normal reason they're removed from sale is because they're overperforming and that tends to make them quite popular ships as well, but I don't think the numbers of those ships were anywhere near those of Asashio so she's a much bigger problem that perhaps needs more urgent attention than usual, also the fact that the overperformance is directed against WG's favoured class is not going to help her. On top of that the smoke firing penalty change was significantly driven by Belfast/MK so it's not as if WG don't have form in this area. The effect on DWT and Asashio in particular is so obvious that I can't imagine that the developers haven't noticed it, and it would be easy to add a 1.0 km DWT rule so presumably the effect is intended and since the PA ships can be nerfed directly the logical conclusion is that Asashio is the target. Maybe I'm wrong but there's not a great deal of sense in the changes unless this is the intention. 4 players and 58 games in that ship last week; I don't think the comparison is much use.

Being cynical for a moment, is it possible that this change is a direct nerf to Asashio dressed up as a "global change" and WG are just happy to throw other DD lines under the bus as collateral damage in the process. 8,500 games in her last week on this server, compared to the other known problem premiums (Belfast - 2,000; MK - 1,500; Kamikaze sisters 3,500) perhaps she's too popular to just be removed from sale.

Do you think that the DD population is strong enough to take another nerf? I mean the data sites typically put the DD population at below 20% of games played at the affected tiers, and that population is still dominated by the IJN Shimakaze line (Shima frequently is around 50% of all T10 DD games), so why would you want to nerf lines that collectively account for less than 10% of games at that tier and at the same time potentially buff the one line that is still somewhat alive? We can't see a problem isn't a good reason to do something, and the module is either going to remain unused (why bother then) or will hammer lines that are already at a very low population, I don't see the logic behind that.