_Teob_

I had a 62% win rate this season and a 66% win rate last season in ranked which is very much in line with my solo win rate in randoms. I am not sure where you get the 60%/55% ratio from. I just explained to you why it's grind mode only for people who are not very good. Check this table out if you want to have a look at win rates vs number of matches etc. I totally respect your feelings and anyone else's on the matter though. I get that you or others might simply not like the game mode. That's fine. I was just saying that for me, it's a fun game mode and I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with it. Edit: And I don't think TTT is a top 3 clan. We are top 10. That means we're good but we're not the best. And I bet you that lots of the people getting to rank one are in lower rated clans than TTT. The clan itself or its competitive rating doesn't necessarily mean that you will do well in ranked.

Depends on the DD I am fighting. I mean I tend to stick to HE because yes a perfect AP salvo will net you more damage but if the target angles, you will end up doing 300 dmg. And t8 DDs are all quite nimble. I tend to do the first salvo with AP (as they don't know I am there) and get like 4k or so then stick to HE as I want to break their engine and torp launchers/turrets. But yeah, if the DD I am shooting at it stationary or they can't angle, then I will AP. Don't discount the fires that HE causes though. They do % damage so having a fire or 2 on an enemy DD means that the dmg starts racking up quite fast, with the added benefit that it increased their detection range a lot.

It's pure grind if you're not very good. If you're not very good, you can still get to rank 1 but yeah, it will take you 1000 matches and that I would agree is cancerous. Most people will reach rank 1 in under 250 matches or give up. I have a clan mate that ranked out this season in 90 matches so there's that. I think that takes quite a lot of skill in fact.

Depends. It's not a straight answer, is it. It might be enough to outright win the match. It might be enough to force the enemy into an unfavorable situation or it might not be either of those things. If you're asking about the point gain rate then the wiki does a good job explaining it. Action Random and Co-Op Battles Ranked Battles Clan Battles Game starts 300 points 300 points 300 points Capture a control area +3 or +4 points +9 points +3 points Control one of two areas N/A +9 points every 10 seconds (for each area controlled) N/A Control one of three areas +3 points every 5 seconds (for each area controlled) N/A +3 points every 4 seconds (for each area controlled) Control one of four areas +4 points every 9 seconds (for each area controlled) N/A N/A Control one of four areas (Northand Northern Lights only) +3 points every 6 seconds (for each area controlled) N/A N/A But they will definitely not last very long if you start losing ships because you panic due to being down a cap. Because losing a ship is a pretty big points swing. Ship Class Random and Co-Op Battles Ranked Battles Clan Battles Reward for Killing Penalty for Death Reward for Killing Penalty for Death Reward for Killing Penalty for Death Destroyers +30 points -45 points +40 points -60 points +40 points -60 points Cruisers +35 points -50 points +40 points -60 points +40 points -60 points Battleships +40 points -60 points +40 points -60 points +40 points -60 points Aircraft Carriers +45 points -65 points +40 points -60 points N/A N/A

I think ranked is quite enjoyable. The only people I see complaining about ranked are the ones that struggle with it. I quite like the whole feeling that you are actually achieving something. I like the increased difficulty, the frustration when you lose. It feels like there's something at stake, as opposed to randoms. Also most players don't understand the relation between kills and caps. That's one of the main ways games are lost. People look at the caps and go "armahgerd, they have 2 caps!!!11oneone - we have to do something!" all while happily ignoring the fact that we have a 300 point and 3 ship lead. They then proceed to throw themselves at caps, losing their ships and said lead in the process. Sacrificing ships for caps is almost never worth it. People are obsessed with the objective for no reason whatsoever and they forget that ship kills = points.

I used those as well for a while. I can never make up my mind between the two. I really miss the extra range but the damage on the long range Lo Yang torpedoes is terrible. When I played the Kidd, I regularly charged their smoke/hydro - take one torp on the nose for 7k dmg then proceed to beat the snot out of them. because 5 guns + BFT = a lot more firepower and you heal a decent amount as well. Aki, weirdly enough, fills a similar role to the Lo Yang, to a certain extent. That is to say "this is MY cap" and nobody can do anything about it unless they bring friends. The Lo Yang does it through hydro + smoke, the Aki does it through sheer DPM (no other DD can stay in a cap against an angry Aki). Additionally, the Aki can get into uncomfortable positions and wreck enemy BBs. The Aki torps are fast and they hit hard (20k) and the guns set loads of fires on top of the insane AP dmg that they can do. I finished quite a few matches at over 100k (at rank 5 and above so against people that know what they are doing). As a BB if an Akizuki has your broadside, you have to move or you die in a minute or so. If not to AP then the Aki will BBQ BBs to a crisp. That's why, in this role as an opportunity predator, RPF is less important. As a side note, with the Lo Yang you do rely on your team quite a lot for damage. The Akizuki doesn't need anyone else to kill anything. I remember doing a 1v1 against a Chapayev that rushed me and getting like 8 citadels in the first 2 salvos. He was quite salty in chat as he was slowly sinking. Hotspot C cap is a dangerous place to be if an Akizuki is around.

This is my build for it for both randoms and ranked. I find I don't need RPF that much since DDs mostly have to go for caps. It's a very powerful tool, of course but I can do without. And for ranked especially Yamamoto is phenomenal.

This thread is pretty funny. It's one of those cases where when other people yell at OP telling him in less than ceremonial terms that they think he's crap they are both rude and right. But on the other hand the OP is also right when he complains about people insulting and throwing abuse his way. What a paradox.

I beg to differ. I actually found it to be one of the better DDs this season and I ranked out in it (in the end). I had gotten stuck in the Kidd and I dislike the damage output of the Lo Yang so I swapped to the Aki at like rank 5 or 4 and it was a breeze to get rank 1. I regret not playing the Akizuki and spending that much time with the Kidd. I wasted time and I would have ranked out in less than 100 games had I played it rather than the Kidd. I would rate the Lo Yang and Akizuki equally in first place, then the Benson and Kidd in second and then all the other DDs (with varying degrees of viability). The reason why I think it's so good is because quite often DDs only get spotted for a short amount of time. So the fact that the Akizuki can reliably do 10-15k dmg to other DDs in the 20s of radar, from any range up to around 8-9km, is a massive advantage. None of the other DDs can do that. It's also quite tough and no other DD can gun fight it. Even the Kidd needs to disengage and heal otherwise the Aki will eat it alive. Disclaimer: I may be biased because I love this boat to bits. I also, for some reason, do really well in it.

25 from account leveling + 80 from the actual detonations means you had at the very least 105. Then you must have gotten some from other sources (crates, ranked, operations - something) because everyone does. I think you are underestimating how many you used. Regardless, this still doesn't really answer the three main issues I have with detonations which are: 1) Individual players might detonate in only let's say 2% of matches, but the percentage of matches affected by someone detonating is much higher which in the end means they affect everyone much more than I think we realize 2) They don't affect all classes equally. There's no reason why DDs should be detonating more than other classes as far as I can tell 3) There is no reliable way to get Juliet Charlie (anti-det) flags. You should at least get 10 flags each time you detonate instead of only once every 24 hours. And some other way to accrue them would be nice as well. Maybe have the option to buy them with credits or something (that way it's not really p2w)?

Akizuki is one of the most powerful DDs afloat. If you have IFHE and DE it's a monster. That's the catch basically, it needs a high level captain.

I am not making the same assumptions you are. I got a bunch of flags in crates. And my contention is that at the very least in competitive (ranked, team battles) they shouldn't happen. If we must have them, could we at least have them just in randoms?

How many of those games did you have the anti-detonation flag on?

One huge overlooked aspect of detonations is that it's not about how often a single person gets detonated. The discussion should be about how many battles are affected by a ship detonation. Because that's what's important: how much is this random terrible mechanic impacting games. Also, I do think that detonations don't affect all classes equally. Unfortunately I don't have any hard evidence to support this - only my experience which is obviously anecdotal. I may have chuckled a handful of times because of a detonation in my 9k battles but the vast majority of detonations were either infuriating (when I detonate) or deeply unsatisfying (when an enemy detonates). It will always be mind boggling to me who thought that detonating from full health at the start of a match could ever be anything other than rage inducing.

I quite like ranked I only missed one season (season 2 or something) when life just got in the way. But I find it a very enjoyable experience overall. Don't kill me, please?

Not me, friend. I rarely go below t7 so I am rusty when it comes to detection values. Everything else you wrote though is right on the money.

I don't think that's it. Several people reported similar weird behavior with torpedoes yesterday on Reddit. And Sub_Octavian said a fix is in development.

You imply that your clan was better than Omni. That's both unfair and unsporting because like I said, WR is not the only indicator of performance (because of the teams you run into). Everyone can have players lose interest or be unlucky with maps/spawns and I am positive all top teams had similar unlucky situations. It was very very close in the end but suggesting you were more deserving than them is questionable at the very least. I think all three top teams were equally deserving of the top spot and it came down to the wire. Like I said, I don't think there's a big difference between TWA, OM and OMNI as far as performance goes and the dice just happen to fall this way on this occasion. It could have gone either way.

I think that's not a totally fair representation. Don't get me wrong, you guys were great. But the points system is meant to fairly represent the difficulty of opponents faced. I am not sure it's perfect but maybe Omni won more against the top teams. I mean WR on its own doesn't quite tell the whole story and I do think you are being a bit of a poor sport here. For what it's worth I think that TWA, OMNI and OM were pretty much in a league of their own this season with very little difference in skill. It was fun.

I get that and honestly we can only guess what the real reason is. I just said what I think is going on because I don't quite buy the official explanation. They also don't have to be that forthcoming with information. Maybe they are trying to move away from the whole not nerfing premiums narrative so they don't want to reinforce it by putting out something like what you described. Maybe they simply changed their minds about the Missouri concept in general and they are not comfortable with a BB with radar anymore. But think of it this way, do you not think they would make more money in the long run, with the Missouri if they would just keep it in game? Not like it's not selling well. And I am positive there are still people buying free xp for it. We could speculate endlessly about the reasons, but I can't believe we don't all agree that removing a ship that is clearly overperforming, is a good thing. It really is a really good thing regardless of their reasons for doing it and they should be commended. I mean just look at this thing.

Maybe but unless the Musashi has radar then I don't see it being as OP as the Missouri. I genuinely think that WG are well intended and they don't want to sabotage their own game. They want to make money but if they kill the player base with crazy P2W then they will be out of a job in the long run. I am positive they are aware of this and we at least have to give them credit for taking steps to remedy ships that we all considered over the top. I mean I know that bashing WG is what the cool kids do but it's only fair we give credit where credit is due.

Well they still removed them. I am pretty sure they would make more money if they just kept them on sale. Not like Belfast wasn't selling well. And I am pretty sure the MK would be selling really well also right about now. I for one have some hope.

I think they are removing the Missouri because it's quite OP. This is just a way of doing it in a somewhat elegant way. I totally approve of this and good riddance as far as I am concerned. Maybe, with the removal of the MK, Belfast, Missouri etc. we will at some point stop getting OP premiums.

Dude, never mind the on topic discussion, that gif in your signature with the falling dudes is hilarious. I love the subtle detail, like the 60% dude, is basically a ninja, the 55% dude, is pretty good but slightly more shaky, the 50% dude sort of knows what he's supposed to do but his execution leaves a lot to be desired and the 45% dude faceplants but is obviously enthusiastic. That gif right there is WoWs in a nutshell.