Shirakami_Kon

Not all of them, Montpelier has a bit more HP than Cleveland, and trades 0'5 seconds slower reload for marginally improved sigma. HE shells are also Helena's not Cleveland's, so again, marginally difference in slower shells than what you'd expect on a Cleveland, but just ~1 extra second flight time at worse. Littorio is a 1:1 clone of Roma I think. Sovetskaya Rossiya is a stock hull Sovetsky Soyuz, but with the upgraded range and maneurability of the upgraded hull. Gun mounts have double the HP but turn very slow. Also has american battleship dispersion formula, not the Soviet one, so at 15-ish+ range starts getting more accurate, but doesn't have that tight soviet dispersion at really close ranges. Someone better than me at DDs surely will be able to point out Yukikaze's differences better, she has torps that hit like a truck tho compared to the usual at tier 8 though iirc. The current Aurora and Azuma are 1:1 clones.

While that kinda works a lot of people would like that there's an option of just "hide rental ship" without having to do these really annoying extra stepsm and just adding an extra filter shouldn't be that hard or time consuming for WG either. Would there be any way of still push the suggestion forward to them?

Since camos are only just going to be a visual aspect, for people that REALLY like how a camo looks on a ship why not make them cost something like... I don't know, pay 1 million credits for a camouflage of your choice, but it becomes permanent instead of this that no one will ever use because it's just throwing credits away for no reason whatsoever.

As I said earlier, just check the usual winrates and sometimes the absurd low number of games played of the average submarine player. Most of them are really bad players or pretty much brand new. Add to that what you mention of the game not roviding any explanation on the game mechanics surrounding submarines (or any ship class for that matter to be honest) and that's why you have this clueless players on a submarine who's greatest achievement is getting spotted and sunk with 2 minutes, or you see them submerged for no reason whatsoever until they run out of battery.

If you dive at maximum depth an enemy ship needs both sonar and being withing 2 km right on top of you with hidro activated, so it isn't that hard to avoid being spotted. In case an enemy doesn't have hidro or is on cooldown in fact you can be just under him within 2 km of it just below periscope depth, having him permaspotted because of the assured spotting distance, but WG decided that under periscope depth the submarine doesn't get spotted you back, so you can just be there chilling in his face, light the ship for your entire team to shoot and just sit there waiting your torpedos to reload, surface just behind him, launch all torpedos and dive back, ship dead.

If players know what they are doing and understand how detection and spotting works they won't have any issues in finding their way of sailing their submarine in complete stealth up to 2 km of your ship and shotgun you with torpedos point blank without even needing to ping you to alert you. Problem is that WG has given access to submarines to every single player, and while experienced players have found submarine playstile mostly utterly boring and didn't bother with them every single new player who has been given free access to jump into tier 10 for free, no questions asked with submarines has done so, thus 95% of the ones you'll come across performing as bad as they do.

Idk if to laugh or cry...

Actually I agree with this one, after reducing the distance at which the new wake effect when a submarine pings appears from the submarine it's ok-ish, but I think the ping trail should have remained as it was at the same time.

I mentioned this in another topic already, but I'll add it here too. Create a section where the game modes Arms Race, Convoys, Dirigible Derby, Epicenter and all these different unique game modes we had over time (or the ones to come) rotate on a weekly basis, just like scenarios work currently. That way, instead of having them in randoms, where players may not understand how the game mode works, how to play it, or simply it's a generally disliked game mode like Epicenter don't find themselves thrown into it when playing randoms, where these game modes don't really fit the regular game modes there anyway. On the other hand players that do like those game modes have the oportunity to chose and play those gamemodes with more people that joins to play them whenever they are available instead of having liked gamemodes like convoys and dirigible derby removed, without even knowing if or when they might be back or not. I think that just like scenarios have their playerbase that enjoys them these game modes would work pretty well in a similar fashion.

Yeah... That mention that they won't change the ships appearing in operations but they'll make them work to fight against tier 8's they'll allow in operations is... concerning when you consider that they are basically saying that they'll pump up some Tenryuus and Kumas to fight you in a... idk, a Mainz. Yeah. But we'll see I guess.

Even if you do that and check to display everything except the rental ships they still show because they fit some of the other filters you allowed. The problem is that you only have the option to allow to show rental ships, we need the option of NOT display them between our ships for it to work. Rental ships should have their section to hide them just like halloween, Azur Lane, spaceship camos and all that.

While certainly annoying when this happens to you I'd say we've seen worse. At least we're currently not having deviating torps or ships that eat citadels from being shot at the engine funnels.

No need to thank me.

Seems like it's time to whip out again this hell of gem he came out with to remember what to expect (or actually not) from him.

I actually doubt that the main language of most of the regulars here is actually English (my case included) in which case some errors here and there would be ok. Which I don't really notice either, so have a bit more confidence in your English, it's decent. As for the topic, agreed, if there's something that's been carrying the game lately is art department.

Because this is basically WG's approach to ramming submarines into the game no matter the cost or means in a nutshell.

Cruisers are running into a problem for long, and the more cruisers we get it only increases that. Besides Large Cruisers deserving it's proper own recognition in MM, to which I agree, another issue I see getting worse and worse over time is the commander skills for cruisers. Giving each commander dedicated skill trees for DDs, cruisers, Battleships, CVs and subs was a first step in the right direction, credit given where credit is due, but you can't limit ALL cruisers in the game to share a unique limited skill tree. There's too much variety within cruisers to be able to fit everything in a single common skill tree, every single type of cruiser is missing skills they would need acording to the specific type of cruiser you're playing. WG can't hope to have a good skill tree for "mini light cruisers" (CLs with caliber below the normal for CLs, basically CLs with DD guns, ie: Atlanta, Smolensk, the upcoming San Diego, Austin...), regular CLs, regular heavy cruisers, large cruisers and battlecruisers in disguise with a cruiser tag because god knows why (Siegfried, Sevastopol, the new French cruiser split line...) with a single skill tree for all of that at the same time.

Edit: Test ship, + being a CV, + russian, + actually broken to this day? I bet you didn't get reported even more because you got in a match where everyone was low on reports already.

What I don't understand is why WG doesn't put Epicenter, Arms Race, Dirigible Derby, convoys, etc. in a separate mode that rotates weekly, just like scenarios. Because a lot of these game modes can be fun, and there's players that enjoy every single one of them. But adding them to randoms, where either a lot of people doesn't even understand how to play said game modes because they are so different from your usual normal game, or you end up in something like Arms Race when you queued into randoms with a random ship to have fun that's not adequate for the game mode sucks. Also, again, scenarios show how it's possible to have a bunch of different game modes rotating and at these point we have enough unique game modes to have a decent rotation of them weekly for example like in scenarios, where you can join knowing what you get into, and there would be enough players willing to get into these game modes just like people loves those to justify adding them apart without screwing randoms.

Come on, is like you guys pretend to not be having a blast with the current insane amount of fun you get in the game. How could you beat peak entertainment like this? It's impossible.

That's a question that interests me too a lot lately. I'd also like to add to the question, just for personal understanding, what are mods supposed to do in a forum when a specific user just comes to spam his "thoughts", spends an entire week being argued by the entirety of the forum explaining and discussing one by one why every single one of his arguments is wrong, but said user is the definition of stubborn, keeps spamming his made up interpretation of how things are against all proof of him being wrong blocking every single topic it gets into from advancing and keep being constructive. Should I add too the fact of for some reason that user himself providing a replay of him purposely rigging a ranked match for his team? You know, like the last 3 topics that were closed because of a certain specific someone. Maybe we could get some answers @SkipperCH @floribe2000 @Arty_McFly @SnipingCat?

Nah, it's not that. It's just that morale hasn't improved enough.

As they handle everything. At ramming speed towards the nearest island.

WG saw how the average playerbase doesn't grasp how to handle a simple gimmicky mode like Epicenter and hates it. So they decided to replace it in high tiers by an even more gimmicky and convoluted mode. Classic WG if you ask me.

What part of this argues with my statement again?