AnotherDuck

The rest of the team supporting a radar cruiser shooting on a DD is not rare at all. Most of the times I've died due to radar has been by other ships, almost all times I've seen someone been killed due to radar has been by other ships, and I've gotten a fair number of kills in non-radar ships due to radar (which is more kills than some people claim to have gotten with radar). I mean, the argument relies on the radar cruiser being ahead of everyone else, and not hiding behind an island. If the balance relies on teamwork not happening, it's a crappy balance.

Cruisers aren't generally afraid of getting close to unspotted DDs at those tiers. They're far more afraid of getting close to battleships. A cruiser who's afraid of getting close to a DD without a friendly DD in front should probably go play BBs. Particularly slow-turning and poorly armoured cruisers could maybe get a pass, but most can handle it. Especially if they're equipped with sonar or a plane that can spot for them.

Have you ever heard the reverse?

Yes. Played a few of those. What of it? Typically the most common type of player who is not afraid is one who's sailing in a DD.

This is probably true.

In place of repair, sure. Switch a defensive consumable for an offensive one.

Which is why it's better to have more cruisers, so you have more ships that can just delete those DDs. Then again, that assumes competent cruiser captains, so fair point. DDs win.

If you have that many DDs, I find it's usually better to have more cruisers to kill those DDs. Of all classes, DDs are the least effective en masse. Sure, a massive coordinated torp wall is dangerous, but the amount of gunfire you can get from a bunch of focus-firing CAs or BBs is far more. And let's not talk about CVs.

I understand that's what you think. You're just expressing it in the hypocritical way I described. I also don't really care for that idea, which I've expressed elsewhere.

This is the kind of crap I was talking about. A radar is a required and realistic addition. Anything at all relating to DD detectability (in the DD's favour) is hax and magic.

I think that's really the only case where it's too significant. With more than that, with each extra DD, you lose a bit in overall firepower. But it also depends on the DDs themselves. In one match where I, in a Kagero, with a Benson, only had a Fletcher opposing us, on Shatter, it was already in our favour, and then I torped him in his smoke within a minute or two. Game over. One of the easiest victories I've had ever.

There's a fair bit of double standard with radars. If you're in a cruiser, with or without radar, and can't kill a DD, you have a bad ship. If you're in a DD and get killed because of radar, you suck.

I find that native English speakers (who aren't bilingual from a young age) are among the worst at pronouncing other languages. Might hold true for other cultures who normally never learn more than one language. Japanese speakers aren't that great either.

I call Bismarck "Bissie" or "Bisko". Potentially "Biscuit".

Sometimes it's amusing.

Oh, I had already capped at that point. I was mostly just taking a break from gunning down other destroyers. Or at least I think it was that game... Should've saved the replay. Edit: Actually, I did mix it up with a different game. It was actually in the Fubuki, which is a larger (I think) and slower ship (although has far better guns). It was at 8 km range, and I took a little less damage than I thought. I was actually re-capping the base, so that point was true. After that one of the Atlantas got gunned down by other ships, and the other got hit by one of my torps, before also sinking shortly after. It was a T9 game, though, so not a whole lot they could do about the sinking part.

Watch out, someone think they're clever by posting a meme gif.

That's not trolling. If I were trolling you, you wouldn't know what hit you. I mentioned Fubuki because while she certainly will end up in T10 matches on her own, you can still put her in a T10 division (which is +2), and MM isn't really that great at handling divisions, so it can throw a wrench into MM's mechanics. At best there's no difference, and at worst, your team ends up with an overall -2 tiers. For DDs, that's not a lot, but if that ends up on the battleships, it could make things turn out a little more differently. I still don't think it's that significant personally, though, but people whine over a one tier difference and say it will completely ruin the team. I'm not really that good of a player. Above average, sure, but not that good. However, Umikaze is far above my own average and my best ship, and I've mostly played her in divisions with T3 cruisers (which until recently got T5 matches).

No, I just meant not having the exact tier of ship.

Yeah, the only places I can see it as viable are in a select few cases. Actually, all of them are about IJN DDs, since they're less tier sensitive on the whole. More specifically, Umikaze, Minekaze, and Fubuki. Umikaze in my experience actually works better on somewhat higher tiers than its own matchmaking (T4-T5 is the sweetspot for me), Minekaze is one of the best ships for her tier, period, as well as being one of the fastest ships in the game, and Fubuki will meet T10 frequently anyway.

It was a response to someone who suggested a +/- 0 spread. Look at the first page of the thread.

I think that while the current matchmaking is fairly good, taking captain skills and researched modules (or whatever they're called) on the ships into account isn't a bad idea. That would weigh someone in a T2 premium bringing an 18-point captain heavier than a stock T2 with a fresh 0-point captain. That would need to be balanced according to actual improvements the modules give, since some are useless (IJN DD C hulls), while others are a huge improvement (IJN BB B+ hulls), but it would overall be based on the actual ship data. Then again, they do have trouble giving an accurate number to the firepower stat for ships...

I once brought a T2 to a T7 match. Sure, I didn't end up at the top of the team, but it was third, I think. That's the only time I've played in a division with more than one tier difference, though. And if you actually followed the argument, you'd realise I was arguing against a forced equal tier, not against a ban on large tier spread differences like what you're painting there.

A lot of high-tier mechanics encourage camping. I don't like camping, so I don't do it. I like to play a far more risky playstyle. Otherwise I probably wouldn't enjoy playing destroyers in the first place. It's even more amusing when they realise what I do different. One time someone called me retarded for a specific thing, calling it useless. Because, you know, it's useless, even though it killed her. Actually even more amusing than annoying the crap out of radar cruisers with invisifire. But overall, radar feels kind of like detonations. Rare, but when they happen (by someone who actually realises a clue isn't something you find in the local convenience store, unlike the previously mentioned Atlantas), they're nukes. That's not good balance. Russian DDs don't have a problem with radar, most of the time. They rely on WASD hax, speed, and comfortable range to stay alive. Long-range trollpedo boats don't have much of a problem either.

That's just low tier. Who said anything about inexperienced players?