Aotearas

Wouldn't the silent majority per definition not do the asking in an interview though? So the vocal minority that from what I can see from this forum at least by far and large does have a couple points regarding that matter and not seeing it adressed or even put up for a couple thoughts on the side looks a bit odd.

Maybe that's just a case of poorly chosen words and articulation, but that comment right there sounds incredibly condescending and if meant as such would make you the exact same thing you said you detest the forum for. If not: take gekke's advice, because it's exactly as he said and you're more likely to bait would-be trolls as if challenging them to it.

From my cold, dead hands!

Pretty sure that they actually do handle the more severe cases if you provide a chatlog in form of a replay file.

Oh, a BB that didn't need a buff is getting one. What, is it thursday again? Seriously WG, why did the Tirpitz need a buff? Afaik it's performing pretty well already, certainly not something in immediate need of action because it were underperforming or anything. Not that I won't enjoy it on my Tirpitz, just ... why?

How about coming up with an actual argument rather than repeating the same old prejudice? For someone complaining about snowflakes whining around, you're not doing any better job at actually providing constructive comments. Even when I gave you an easy template and actually tried to engage in a fact-based discussion you seem more interested in just whining around yourself.

Don't think you can. Not that it matters much. The only tangible differences are a handful of coins (was it 10 coins per round? So a maximum of 30 coins if one team wins all three rounds), a couple themed camouflages (-3% detectability, +4% max dispersion when firing at you and +100% free XP) and a purely cosmetic flag. Would've preferred a cooperative event like GNB or Project R over something needlessly (and brokenly) competitive like this so everyone gets the same share plus what they grinded themselves and I believe that's more motivating (or say less demotivating once people realize they may be on the losing side), but thankfully the actual difference in loot is very little so people don't lose much (other than faith in WG, but how much of that is left anyway?).

I'd say anyone who registers gets a flag, but members of the winning team get an additional one. Similar to the GNB event sea dog and sea lion flags.

So, are you saying the Khabarovsk (as the ship originally named in this thread) isn't overperforming relative to other ships at its tier and class? Because if you think there's little more to this thread than whining and just manning up is sufficient recourse for handling it, then I can only assume that you believe the Khabarovsk is in well balanced. I'd like to actually see you make some relevant arguments on that matter then, because simply bleating "stop whining and man up" is for one no argument and secondly just the thing you're supposedly demanding others to stop (oh the hypocrisy). I actually do believe the Khabarovsk is in fact overperforming due to its combination of agility (very high speed and good manouverability makes it easy for the Khabarovsk to be where it wants to and evade return fire if need be), durability (good HP plus heal and substantial armour for a DD that makes a good part of its hull immune to DD caliber HE) and its amazing dpm (both HE, fire chance and AP) paired with excellent ballistics (effective dpm is very high due to the ease of hitting your target: hitting a 10km distant DD with Khabarovsk is easy, in a Gearing much less so). Only downsides are the comparatively worse torpedoes (which aren't that bad, just subpar since no one bothers speccing into a torpedo build), no access to smoke if choosing the heal and worst detectability. Compared with other DDs (Grozevoy omitted due to it still being in the tweaking process regarding balance): Gearing has similar dpm (two guns less but higher rate of fire), but much worse ballistics. Z-52 has similar ballistics and good AP dpm, but bad HE dpm. Shimakaze has similarily excellent ballistics, but the worst dpm. No DD compares in durability. Z-52 can get similar maximum HP, but lacks heal. No other DD gets as good armour. Shimakaze has similar, even superiour manouverability, but is slower by a fair margin. Gearing likewise has superiour manouverability, but is slower, especially if it picked Defensive AA over the Engine Boost. Gearing has superiour torpedoes, Shimakaze has more torpedoes and Z-52 has a faster torpedo reload (albeit lowest torpedo alpha weight due to fewer torpedoes and lowest maximum damage). Gearing has vastly superiour smoke and Z-52, though with short smoke bloom and duration will always have access to smoke regardless whilst Khabarovsk may not have smoke at all or ties with worst. Shimakaze can choose between similarily inferiour smoke or torpedoe reload booster for a ludicrous torpedo broadside of 30 high damage torpedoes. Z-52 has hydro-acoustic search. Eagerly awaiting your reply!

Nurf. NURF!!!

Malicious libel.

HMS Ark Royal or perhaps the Prince of Wales?

My my, if that doesn't look like Operation Rheinübung/Excercise Rhine/The Hunt for Bismarck ... HMS Hood as possible campaign reward? I'd take it.

It's not broken. Ships have an HP pool for a reason and people are supposed to use it and their armour to play the objective, not try and save repair costs by avoiding all enemy contact. Everyone pays the same, so the only thing left to do is earn the rewards by playing. Hiding in thr backyard is no longer economically viable and that is a good change. Far too long have I seen scaredy-cats passively camping from their spawn and cite "expensive repair costs" as their excuse to not actually fight.

The Iowa was already special, but that Fletcher really took the cake. 'Sea of Fortune' map, south spawn. I call out in teamchat to focus B and C. I get an affirmative/acknowledgement from most of the team and they turn towards B ... except for the Ognevoi and Kagerou who somehow thought going for A all alone would be agreat idea. I re-emphasize that A is a terribly position to be, especially so when you have zero cruiser and battleship back-up. They continue going there anyway. Writing those two DDs off, I'm at least somewhat pacified by the fact that the Fletcher that spawned with us close to C is making for C ... until he suddenly turns about, puts a blind torpspread into the cap and then proceeds to NOT go near the cap. We ask him to please go C. Not even raging or anything, just asking him to go to C please, we're going to back him up (that would make Freyr_90 in a MK, havaduck in a NC, me in my Chappy plus two friendly Bismarcks that are all hot on his tail). He responded like we were asking for his firstborn ... "never", he then went on to go around the cap, which by the way was completely uncontested because the entire enemy team (except for a Montana and an Alabama slowly going towards B) lemmingtrained to A. No special prizes for guessing what happened to the two DDs that went there alone. So Freyr_90 and myself are capping C in our cruisers whilst that Fletcher is busy throwing torps at the Alabama that is just about to get behind islands (ergo those torps would never possibly hit anything). After capping, we set the Montana and Alabama alight and I leg it towards B where I cap it (again, in my bloody cruiser; I ended up having three quarters of our entire team's capture points!) and block it for the enemy. At this point the enemy team is slowly working its way out of A (which is precisely why A is a potato cap, too isolated, easy to get trapped in and even if uncontested you take your guns out of the fight for too damn long) and we whittle them down in a rather relaxed fashion. Just ... what!? And this has been the kind of teams I've been getting all day long.

So THAT's why there's a 30 member size limit.

Urgh, I've been reading too much ASoIaF lately ...

This is EU we're talking about. If there was such a thing, we'd have to pay for it.

Yes.

I'd somewhat disagree. If we'd look at a normal MM meta (evenly distributed classes, with BBs typically outnumbered by cruisers and destroyers), playing a BB well would require more than just pointing and clicking left mouse button every now and then to get halfway decent damage numbers. Though yes, with so many BBs around to slug it out with, getting big damage numbers is ludicrously easy even for subpar players. What I think is the biggest innate hurdle with BB play is that you don't have those clear-cut cause and effect moments when you did something wrong. Show broadside in cruiser? You get instantly deleted unless you luck out hard. In a BB? Eh, you take 20k damage, but you'll live. Out of position and spotted in a cruiser or DD? You get whittled down fast due to your lower HP. In a BB? That'll take 5 minutes during which you can still do plenty damage.. The only case of instant deletions are getting a torpedo strike dead-on, but even then all a BB player will note is he got instantly deleted by a couple torpedoes that appeared out of the blue (as evidenced by the myriad of "torpedo OP" whines) rather than realize the reason he got hit by those torpedoes was that he was straightlining and being prowled by a DD. BBs are too resilient for an intuitive learning curve. The effects of subpar gameplay (and good one for that matter) are always delayed and that makes for a terribly hard learning experience for anyone that isn't actively trying to learn on their own. You don't drive along and pick things up do-or-die style like with other classes. Same problem applies with CVs in an escalated form, which is the reason why the skillgap between good CV players and bad ones is astronomical.

Yup. Had a pretty experienced Hosho player a couple days back (Air Superiourity captain perk) who consistently tried to crossdrop on my Imperator. I dodged the first drop entirely (lel), second drop was abandoned due to allied CV fighters and the third drop actually hit me with two torps (again after crossdropping, first set was easily dodged, the second squadron landed two torps). I'm pretty sure that were manual drops still a thing, I'd taking quite a beating on the first drop and dead after the last. Alas the worst that happened that game was me being forced to dodge so I couldn't really spend the time labouring my Imp towards the enemy, so I suppose the enemy CV somewhat neutralized me all the same. Short of the story would be: lolautodrops, thx for buffing Imperator again!

Well, I can't see how the rest of the map was looking like, but typically it's a good idea to stop contesting, fall back a bit and work your weaponry from a more effective position, then cap when the situation is more tenable. On many maps it's in fact easier to get good strikes into the enemy once they're in the cap rather than around its outskirts, particularily for torpedo DDs. If something unspotted is contesting the cap, enemies are typically alert enough to evade torps, if you're on the outskirts however, they have a harder time knowing from which direction the torpedoes might come.

Spotting damage is nice, doing damage by yourself is better though. Any particular reason why you didn't attack anything aside from a couple torpedo drops and securing the kill on what must've been a nearly dead GK? I don't see your turrets being permanently broken so I'm kind of puzzled why you didn't actually do more damage than 1166 ... Erm, it is. You get damage done for the percentage of health you dealt in damage. The actual kill only gives a token 15% worth of base XP for that ship iirc, the rest of the possible XP is proportional to how much percent of HP you got on it. You deal 99% of all damage to a ship and someone else gets the last tick of damage in, you still get 99% HP worth of XP for it, kill or no kill. And the guy that got the kill for hitting the last shot gets very little XP precisely because he didn't do much damage to the target.

Dafuq? I can understand the Ognevoi and Lo Yang as both are a bit of a niche playstyle, but the Kiev in its tier VIII iteration is nuts. How on earth do people managed to do consistently bad in that ship?