Aotearas

Reads like you came across a division of armchair admirals. Can't do right by them no matter what you do. Even if you drag their afts kicking and screaming to victory they'll still insult people and I've had cases getting flak for stealing all the glamour. Just yesterday @Reaper_JackGBR and myself had a lovely 48% armchair admiral deadset of calling us baddies the entire game long after he died (naturally) despite the fact that the two of us killed half the enemy team by our twosome and did everything possible to keep a chance at winning when most others apparently just threw away their ships for free. Gems included calling me an idiot for not capturing B ... whilst there where currently two enemy BBs right in there, or berating me for having my AA on in a DD and getting spotted that way, ignoring the fact that the enemy CV was parking is aircraft literally over my head and thus having my AA on wasn't making any difference at all. But apparently you're supposed to never have your AA on in a DD, no matter the circumstances. So yeah, self-important people like that exist, they do everywhere, but at least in WoWs I can say they are much less frequent than in other multiplayer games I've played. This community is positively tame in that regard

Good, exploit those CVs as hard as you can. Give WG all their precious data they apparently so sorely lack.

Let's not forget we're talking about player controlled airplanes cruising at well 200 knots airspeed. This wouldn't compare to shooting at a ship going at best 47 knots (plus I doubt I have to say much about how easy it is hit a Khabarovsk that doesn't want to get hit) and only manouvering in 2D. The sheer amount of lead you'd have to give would mean your perspective would have to encompass such a wide angle that any sort of precision aiming would be impossible short of a ludicrously large display with matching resolution, which in turn means you'd have to have a very generous AoE salvo firing mechanic that would at best offer only marginally more player involvement compared to selecting an AA focus sector and letting AA RNG do the rest.

There used to be a noticable dip in gameplay quality over weekends in previous times when the overall skill average of the playerbase was higher closer to the games release, but these days I see no difference between weekends and during the week. Enough badies around to fill all days of the week.

First his grandmother in another thread, now his brother. Guess it's true, multiple personality disorder likes company.

I would doubt they'd make the Azuma a free XP ship. I'd like them to because I have millions of free XP lying around, but realistically speaking coal is the most probable, with steel a distant runner-up because it wouldn't make much sense to release another tier X steel ship in time for the next CB season when acquiring any of them takes on average 3 seasons' worth of steel rewards to get. Even counting in Ranked steel rewards you wouldn't be able to acquire enough steel to keep at pace with consecutive steel ship releases at this rate.

Yes it is. Remember that aircraft can and will come at you from any direction. Smart CV players already fake or even commit to disadvantagous strikes just to force a ship to dodge and present a better target to say division mates, now imagine you'd have to manually aim your AA at a squadron coming at you from the opposite direction of where the enemy is. Suddenly you're going to have no eyes on who might be gunning for you. And you can't exactly just ignore the squadron because if you don't pay attention it will simply drop you when you're not busy manually controlling your AA. Manual secondary control is something I could get behind because in the vast majority of cases you're still going to pay attention at the same direction, i.e.: enemy ships, with the odd DD popping up on a flank every blue moon. But manual AA control in a 360° threat environment simply demands too much attention away from what a player ought to be doing, watching and engaging the other enemy ships and given how freely aircraft can move around the map (and let's not forget that there's no effective fighter zoning anymore) you WILL be dropped from directions that demand you switch your attention away from enemy surface ships. If micromanaging multiple aircraft squadrons in CVs was too difficult for most players even though they typically didn't have to manage navigating under fire and firing mainguns at the same time, how on earth could you get the idea that having surface ships micromanage their gunnery and AA (against potentionally more than one attacking squadron mind you, WG wants up to 3 CVs per match after all and ganging up on a single target isn't the most complex of ad-hoc teamwork you could think of) would be any less of a problem for the same playerbase?

No, but I think you spend thousands of man-hours trying to develop an entirely new aspect of the game, then failed at it and may now be looking at an easy way to ditch what could be a dead end and ultimately cutting your losses with a ship class you've proven to have massive problems with and seemingly no satisfying answer to. The point you should take away from this is that this is the amount of trust I've got left for WG doing something worthwhile regarding the CV rework. I'm not going out of my way to make up conspiracy theories, WG has been acting as if they're going out of their way to make the worst possible decisions in a long-going sequence regarding their handling of basically everything involving aircraft carrier gameplay FOR YEARS! Messy UI that was never improved, ignored balancing feedback from CV mains, utter lack of any effort in trying to make the RTS CV gameplay accessible to new players (instead WG in their infinite wisdom decided to remove essential CV mechanics from the low tiers entirely so no one would even have the chance to learn them until you're thrown into high tier MM!) and let's never forget the "Year of the CV" that got postponed to the point that even WG staff themselves used it as a joke . If you think WG can maintain any sort of customer goodwill after three years worth of that show, then indeed you need more coffee and wake up.

Considering the AA gets changed and presumably the entire AA spec meta (or current lack thereof), it would stand to reason that the captain respec should count for everything, since everything is directly involved with the changes. I haven't followed the rework in too much detail to know what has been promised, leaked or otherwise been hinted at by WG regarding respecs, but it would only be reasonable that it's a flat respec for everyone. So ... I give it a 50/50 chance it's only going to be for CV captains.

For a moment I thought: "Wow, someone who actually followed through when he said goodbye, that's at least worth some modicum of respect." But then he reactivated his account. Wait ... You just wanted to shirk on your round and brought him back! Cheapskate!!!

The only thing degenerating my mind is that mess of a writing. Are you on drugs right now or something?

Oh, we're perfectly aware that WG doesn't agree with feedback. If they did we wouldn't have this mess to begin with but instead the previous three years would've been spend on adressing the various identified problems with the original design instead of being ignored to the point that "Year of the CV" became a meme. My personal opinion on the rework aside, shoehorning it in its current incomplete state into the live servers is just asking for a balancing nightmare of epic proportions if WG couldn't bring themselves to even try with the original CV design. Then again I wouldn't put it past WG to literally set themselves up for failure and end up pulling CVs entirely from the game under the premise that it wasn't well received after its introduction in 0.8.0. The only thing left to say is that refunds for premium ships should be whatever currency was used for the purchase and the exact amount that has been charged at the time of purchase. Not just flat doubloons because that's not a refund, that's store credit.

Considering maps are about half to a quarter the size of those found in hightiers where ships do 30+ knots the higher tiers are comparatively more restrictive and the only saving grace is that ships have a much greater firing range which in turn however also restricts player movement if a BB on the other half of the map can still shoot at you. And what on earth makes you think that a consumable detecting everything within a radiius upon a key stroke someone lessens player impact? If anything the necessity to physically intercept ships means individuals have more impact rather than just relying on pressing one button everyone now and then. Oh please, same as not every fresh newbie sailing around in the low tiers is just straightlining broadside all day long not every BB in the high tiers pointing his nose at the enemy is moving with more purpose than what he's seen other people doing. And that's even assuming they're doing that in first place as opposed to seeing angry red ships on the horizon and promptly turning around and fleeing to the other end of the map. Point is: Not everything that shines is gold just because it's in the high tiers, nor is everything that doesn't shine in the low tiers just a clump pf dirt. Skill is important in every tier. If anything, the general absence of things like fast BBs, ships with long firing range and radar means that positioning can be much more impactful in the lower tiers because it means you can actually make a decisive push when the opprotunity arises. In the high tiers, some bloke in a BB can still shoot you across half the map and then it takes two minutes for fast ships to relocate and cover approaches with radar range, etc. pp.. Lower tiers have a lower skill floor yes, but the more basic rock paper scissors balancing along classes also means the skill ceiling when using the ship to its strengths is much more pronounced, DDs have such low HP that running across a cruiser afoul can cripple them in two salvoes. Cruisers can barely take more than two BB citadels. Battleships can't just bowtank one another for days in a stalemate. If you're looking for dynamic gameplay, the lower tiers match the description much, MUCH better than the higher tiers could mechanically hope to be.

You say that as if it was an easy choice with only marginally rare occuring consequences, but the amount of times people find themselves in a DD brawl means not being able to reliably damage the enemy DD is crippling. Plus DDs angling against AP is hardly a specific necessity, most DD brawls go the way of stumbling upon one another and then turning away whilst shooting at one another (the smarter ones might not even shoot to go dark once out of detection range instead of remaining lit up due to the firing detection debuff) so even players who didn't specifically angle to make your AP ineffective will most of the time end up with the same result by sheer happenstance and then the lack of HE pen can really, REALLY bite you in the [edited]. Nevermind that the amount of times you can expect having active backup from teammates is inversely proportional with your amount of matches played in divisions.

Guys, take a look at the posting date before trying to reply to a 9 month old discussion.

Couldn't help but take a last stab at this after this delightfully conceited nonsense ... Funny you quote that since you quite obviously understood and agreed with that statement last time you adressed it: And then promtly failed to answer the question of how an individual player making choices in high tiers is any different from lower tiers and instead made the absolutely irrelevant "argument" of no radar ships at tier 2-6 as if you couldn't even be bothered to make an actual meaningful answer. I mean, it's okay if you think high tiers is the end all, be all of gameplay and everything else is just newbies flailing around helplessly bereft of all sense of tactics, etc., but the least you could do with such a hilariously biased opinion is not try and pass it around as if it were something that had to be universally accepted by other people and contrasting opinions can be brushed away with "but muh radar". Besides @Saiyko has illustrated quite well why your argument of movement in lower tiers having no meaning is no different from the same happening in higher tiers by the loads of of players that graduated from newbie into n00bs and still only sail around without plans. Something you also failed to adress. So, if you want to point fingers at something, take a look at the mockery you made of your own argumentation first and if you want your points to be taken seriously, the least you can do is make sure you're not arguing based on double-standards and moving goalposts. Until then, have fun enjoying your highly strategic and tactical high tier gameplay where everyone is a competent, thoughtful player and that's for some reason entirely dependant on the existence of radar if someone were to take your argumentation at face value.

I'll go out on a hunch that OP doesn't have IFHE specced on his Jutland captain, nor that he's overly familiar with HE penetration mechanics and the usual hull armour thresholds. In that regard, the Daring sharing the same gun caliber will perform just the same as the Jutland. If you look up HE penetration however, you'll find that with 114mm guns your HE only penetrates 18mm or less armour (can only penetrate armour thinner than 1/6 of its caliber diameter; rounded) and if HE doesn't penetrate, it won't deal damage. Considering that DD hulls at that tier will be 19mm thick, you will fail to penetrate and thus damage them. Only part on hightier DDs you can still damage with that amount of HE pen is their superstructure, though that's not exactly a large target area when shooting at DDs (which explains your sporadic damage count). IFHE increases your HE penetration by 30%, which gives those 114mm guns 25mm HE pen (24,7, rouded up), which means it will penetrate 24mm armour or less. That is enough to penetrate DD hulls. Once IFHE is on your captain, you'll find that the good gun dpm on the Jutland is quite formidable. As mentioned, for further reading on mechanics you want to look at: HE penetration (1/6 caliber diameter default, some exceptions with 1/4 caliber diamater) Armour thresholds (19mm, 25mm, 32mm being the most common; couple more thresholds in between relevant for individual calibers regarding HE penetration and AP overmatching) Overmatch mechanic when we're already here and if in doubt

Did I miss something about the Kronshtadt being send to Gulag?

Get a room you two!

No idea. They checked the connection and supposedly found no issue, so determined the router would be the issue. New one's here, same problem and I doubt the new one I got arrived broken straight out of the box. I already called service and reopened the ticket, now it's waiting again until the techs call back. I'm not expecting a swift solution if the first attempt didn't change anything though, at worst there's some problem with the physical communication lines and tough luck having that sh*t fixed in a timely fashion.

Happened a couple more times than just 2 or 3 times in the past 3 years. And I'd argue that having image files that are long enough to break formatting even on a desktop browser in the first place is the actual error, can't upload brokenly large images if someone didn't make them first. I had already suggested to create a maximum resolution limitations so no one makes ad banners too large to begin with and at least that particular bit of feedback went nowhere. But whatever, let the webpage team run wild all the same, I got my adblocker to fix those issues on my end.

Again, not just a mobile problem as it also made a mess of my desktop browser. Just yet another banner that's too bloody long. The fact that it happened AGAIN just shows the feedback from the forum got tossed straight into the wastebin. As a workaround I can recommend using an adblocker to manually remove the element.

Update on my internet situation: got the new router today, but my connection still broke down in the middle of a game just now so the problem persists. I will obviously not going to participate in CBs with unstable internet. You might not see me playing WoWs at all for the foreseeable future for the same reason.

Oh I'm sorry, I thought we were talking about strategies/tactics and the merits/trappings of formulaic gameplay metas or lack thereof in different tiers, not consumables. Well, if this discussion has regressed to uninspired mockery I'm out.

I have and none of what you said is any different for low or high tiers.