AnotherDuck

I'd call that worthy of punishment. Don't drink and drive.

Edit: No longer relevant.

My phrasing for that rule is, "Your torpedoes, your responsibility."

For guns, I wonder if it wouldn't work to just instantly punish any team damage that's longer than a few hundred metres away from either yourself or an enemy target. It's possible to accidentally hit a ship that's too close to you, or a ship that's too close to the enemy, but anything in between that is pretty much impossible outside deliberate attacks. I dislike saying "never". If you don't know what you're doing, sure, you shouldn't do it, and if you need to watch a video to understand how to do it you certainly fall in that category. However, learning how to torp also mean learning how to read your allies' movements, and just saying you should never do something removes that piece of learning.

On the whole, I don't think team torping is that big of a deal. Sure, it happens, sure, it's annoying when it happens, but that's about it. I don't find it particularly common, and most of the time it's about honest mistakes. Those can happen to anyone. I mean, not that I'm the best player or anything, but of the maybe five TKs I've had, three of them were with torps. One was when I misread the direction someone was travelling while border surfing; one I have no idea what happened during last year's Halloween event (first or second match, and still unused to the chaos there); one because I didn't pay attention to a DD sailing right beside me after having ignored my cap for ages, and just when I decided to torp, showed up, so I missed it. The remaining two were a ram kill (someone suicided against me, and I couldn't do anything about it, as I played a slow BB that match), and the last was when a DD with almost no health decided to ram me just as I was shooting (which I didn't even notice until the post-battle result screen, so I had to check the replay). If there's anything I'd want to change, it's that you should be able to submit support tickets about deliberate TKs, so they can manually give them harsher punishment. I don't trust a system for that.

I disagree.

The only real luck I've had with construction is when I managed to get Yamato and Musashi one after the other while trying to get Bisko.

That it won't trend to a 50% winrate unless you have rather small leagues and you ignore winrate for ranking players. The moment you include winrate in such an equation is when it will slow the trend towards 50% by regulating itself. That said, there isn't any stat that works by itself to determine skill accurately. Due to how winrate is tied to far more variables (mostly the eleven other players in your team), you need a far larger sample size to get a usable number than if you take something like average damage, which is primarily dependent on your own skill. Now, if you only take a single statistic, winrate is probably the most accurate one, if you can get a sufficient sample size.

That's not related to the point I was talking about.

Ooh, I want that. Pick Shima, switch to 20 km torps, target ship out of range, shoot, and get two chances of hitting everything within those 20 km. Awesome.

If WG allows players to use those mods, then it's not cheating to use those mods. Why is that even a discussion? You may argue it should be labelled as cheating, but that's like, your opinion and stuff, so calling other players cheaters for using those mods is nothing but hot air.

In other words, you assume there are statistics other than WR that determines that the player remains in that league? In that case, there's no problem with WR going to 50%. That just means MM is doing its job. That player gets to play with overall more competent players that give more even matches, which presumably means more interesting gameplay.

Where are you pulling those numbers from? Going to 50% WR requires the MM to always consider you to be at the skill you actually are, and ignore that WR. Or are you saying a 70% unicorn with MM matching that player as an average 50% WR player will still get 50% WR? If everyone converges to 50%, then everyone is counted as equal, which in practice is what we have now. And now better players get higher WRs.

But if they then get shunted into the 50% league, they're going to win more than 50%, because they're more skilled than their WR implies. Not that I've done any calculations, but my instinct is that if you do MM that way, WR for all players will go towards 50% by half the distance from it (e.g. if someone has 60%, that's 10% from 50%, so they'll end up with 55%). May naturally change depending on exactly how you go about creating said MM.

I think that's probably has to do with the slow-paced nature of the game. Most games that snowball like that tend to have kills that are far more binary. The higher the chance of killing someone without sustaining damage yourself, the stronger the snowball effect. In WoWs it takes time to kill enemies (most of the time), which means you'll take damage meanwhile and get closer to being killed yourself, and that slows the snowball effect down. Or in more detail, if you have five versus five, and one dies, you don't have a five versus four situation as much as a five with lower health versus four with more health, and it's likely that one in the larger team will die very soon.

Dunno. I've had a bunch of games with only two types of ships, and most of those games turned out interesting. In a game without DDs, the British CLs pretty much take that role. Without BBs, and you'll see far less camping. Only BBs and DDs is probably the most mismatched. Anyway, the problem comes if only one team is lacking a particular type. Otherwise, not really a problem.

Unless you met two of them. Alone.

I'd probably estimate closer to 80% casual players.

So you didn't read the part where I said the best number is three. Gotcha.

Five DDs aren't really better at capping than four DDs, or even three DDs. And instead of that DD, you have a CL, CA, or BB extra. Those are better force multipliers. Why would I expect a CA to cap if there's a DD that can cap?

This is the most useful feature of having long range guns. With longer range, there are more ships you can shoot at, which means there's a higher chance of someone not thinking you're going to shoot them. I've often gotten devastating strikes on cruisers twice the distance away compared to the angled battleships shooting at me. That's also something to do with the back guns if you're bow-on.

People who complain about DD difference are usually under the mistaken impression that more = better. That's simply not the case. If there's only one DD, that DD is extremely strong. If there are two DDs, each one is not nearly as strong as the single one. With three DDs, each one is weaker still, and so on. Their collective strength is naturally higher, but for each one you get, the strength of a single DD is lower. You can compare that with BBs and CA/CLs, which aren't nearly as effected by how many others of their type are in the game. CVs are in the other direction, as they get even stronger the more of them there are, which is why they're so limited. Overall, my experience tells me the optimal number of DDs in a game is three. Technically, two is better, but with three you have some leeway if one dies. If there are more than that, the best DD is a Khaba.

Doesn't the WoWs Kongo begin as a battlecruiser, and gets upgraded to a proper battleship with upgrades? Kind of like the real ship. Meaning most of the time, you're talking about a fully upgraded Kongo, which is a fast battleship. On the other hand, certainly plays like a battlecruiser.

"Get closer" is probably the average advice you should give to BB players, but it's certainly not always true. If you have only one ship shooting at you, you might want to get a little closer. If there are two, you're probably at a decent distance. More than that, and you should have an exit strategy ready. It also depends on how dangerous those ships are that are shooting at you. Some ships you can more or less ignore, some you should be very wary of. It depends on what ship you have and what position you're in. If their fire is more effective than yours, then you should reconsider what you're doing. If you're more effective, you can probably tank them out. Cruisers have a lower threshold for what's acceptable shooting at them. If you can angle and kite, you can often distract a few enemies. If not, you should play more safely.

There's a bit of a shift in the meta in the highest tier battles, since they're more passive than mid tiers. You need to be more careful, since it's easier to get deleted or focused down. In mid tiers, you can get away with a bit of yolo strategies, but at high tiers, you're only going to sink without accomplishing much if you try. However, at the same time, you still need to put some pressure on the enemies so they don't just roflstomp your team. The key is usually to push slowly and with the team. Don't go alone (unless you're either in a stealthy or fast DD, and there are no CVs).