Jump to content

HMS_Kilinowski

Players
  • Content Сount

    258
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    7593
  • Clan

    [DAVY]

1 Follower

About HMS_Kilinowski

  • Rank
    Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia
    [DAVY]

Recent Profile Visitors

289 profile views
  1. HMS_Kilinowski

    Clan Battle Season "North"

    My impression to the current CB season is that for one it has become much harder to proceed. Maybe that new system that should allow clans to advance or be demoted into another group does the opposite of what it is supposed to do. We have seen a lot of known top clans struggle to quickly make their way through squall and gale league. As these clans struggle, they get matched against less competitive clans and the stickyness is passed on top-down. The clans should by now be more divided into the leagues and the actual competition within the leagues should have started. It however feels more like a race in its starting phase. Thanks @Aragathor for that quote: That actually is a bit puzzling. My initial thoughts, concerning that aforementioned struggle, were that we now have a harder competition within the leagues cause more clans are participating. The opposite seems to be the case. In another topic I already expressed my concerns that certain burdens keep players from participating. Excluding clan battles from certain assignments, missions, campaigns, tasks and whatever label you put on basically the same "to-do" stuff, is putting people off. Players tell themselves: "If I do CB now, I won't be able to finish my missions in time. I risk not getting that Dreadnought, I might not finish that "show a flag"-mission and whatnot." Initially there was the chance of getting rare ships. That was reworked to getting steel, which players can trade for rare ships. Now that carrot is made available through campaigns and the snowflakes. That's a comparably easy way to get that ressource. So why participate in CB? Well, for fun of course. But that seems not to be a sufficient motivation. That is why players are attracted with ressources, much like the clan bonusses. What a poor reason to be in a community just to get some ressources. But that is just a side note. How representative of the community can CB be, when not even 10% of all clans even participate? CN season North is in its second week and already we played against some clans for the third time. We need more participation, we need a higher awareness of that event. Bloating that season with other competing events, missions and excluding CB from counting towards them is dampening the resonance to this fine event. That is tragic as the solution is rather obvious and without side effects. Towards the Stalingrad my impression is that it indeed provides their owner's clans with a certain advantage. I dodged a lot of salvos in this season so far. Some are easy to dodge, some are hard to dodge. Some will hurt a bit, some will hurt more. So far we have cruiser salvos that are hard to dodge but hurt less and BB salvos that are easy to dodge but don't dare to dodge an instant too late or let go that rudder. When I personally am shot by a Yamato, my attention is towards that Yami. I will not miss that black smoke and immediately try to avoid all shells. For cruisers that procedure is a bit looser. You need to acoid being full broadside and you are fine. No need to follow the cruisers every movement, just wasd a bit. I know that when I am shot by a Stalingrad, my attention is on that Stalingrad and that alone is a strong indication of its power. Stalingrad salvos are hard to dodge and will hurt. They are the best of both ship types and that is scary. I know the blatant weaknesses of that design, we torped Stalingrads that thought they could push alone, we burned them down. They are anything but omnipotent and when played wrong, they are easy prey. But still they are way too powerful for my definition of balance. They sit in typical spots for Moskva or DesMo and those are not spots that can be shot at by the entire team. It's the whole definition of a Moskva spot that it provides some cover against flanking. So the Stalingrad is not exactly HE-spammed from the start but it starts picking off enemy ships as they move into its angle. One Stalingrad is still managable but we saw battles with two of them and that firepower is just overwhelming.
  2. Funny how so many people complain about the content of their boxes. Not providing you with the full details of that purchase, not giving you the information needed for a rational choice, is not a matter of impossibility on behalf of WG. This is not the recipe for Coca-Cola. The lack of information on the boxes is intended, basically tells the whole story. Still some can't figure it out. Let me help you. If the value of the boxes was way bigger than the price of the boxes, there would be an economic incentive to let you know the probabilities of all drops. Assume rational behavior on behalf of WG. Basic maths, not patronizing, just saying. If someone wants to sell you a lottery ticket for 10 bugs with a probability of 10% of winning 1000 bugs, why would he not tell you the probability that in that case is so much in your favor? Knowing that probability is, what convinces you to buy the ticket. Whoever could offer such a big deal, would be well advised to be very open about it. He would sell more of these tickets than if he kept it secret. In case of these boxes the case is literally that simple, cause the content is of digital nature, it has no "cost per unit". They can "print boxes" for free. So the logical conclusion is that the value of the gift boxes must be lower than its price. How could the value be lower when the boxes can be printed for free? The valuation is basically a number in your had. You will either accept the regular price tag in the premium shop and base your valuation on a discount factor that comes with the boxes and guessed probabilites, or you will be totally independent of that. Then you just give a digital product an arbitrary price, much like the people in WG marketing did. Forget the idea of production cost. A Missouri is not harder to design than a Mikasa and therefore not more costly. The price was based on a concept of willingness to pay rather than production cost. A ship that yields more ingame ressources and/or wins more games and/or is more historic must have a higher value to the customer. Long story short. If you knew the probabilities on all potential contents you would probably see that their expected value is pretty much the "retail price" minus a mild discount, okayish but not spectacular. You would probably not buy the boxes but wait for some discount on the product itself in the store. Now you might think, I forgot something. There are potential contents that cannot be bought for money, like that almighty Missouri. Well, behavioral science has found the human mind cannot value extremely low probabilities correctly. If I tell you you get 10 bugs with 10% probability you will correctly see the value of this gamble is 1 bug. If I tell you that you can get one million bugs by buying a ticket for 1 bug,* you might find that the chance of your life. Don't think about it. What is one bug compared to the chance of being a millionaire, driving a Missouri? The chicks will love it! Whatever the odds are, you will find it appealing as the price is what you spend in an instant, whereas the jackpot is of another world. That is the whole psychology behind people playing lotteries. So why should it be different here? You even get people who will confirm your greed by posting things like "I bought one box and got a Belfast". So you switch off your mind and open your purse. I am not judging you who buy these boxes nor WG who offers them. All I want to point out is, you know it's a gamble, you know there is no guarantee of getting anything worthwhile, no matter how much money you pour in. The odds are kept secret and that suggests they are not generous. If you want to make sure, you are not disappointed, don't buy them. If you go for it anyway and lose, don't complain. The mere emotion in this post testifies to the absence of rational thinking. Your government did not make that law in a vacuum. It likely reflects the stand of a majority of the belgian people on the issue of gambling. So you might want to curse your "stupid MF"-fellow citizens or, if your parents vote and are against gambling, take it up with your "stupid MF"-parents. *Probability of winning is 1 * 10-7 .
  3. HMS_Kilinowski

    Warships Premium Account

    What are you saying, that both options will remain active as long as the current subsciption of premium account does not run out? My read on this was that you get a one time subscription of both accounts for the duration of the premium account active at the time patch 0.7.12 gets rolled out. If I extend my premium time after patch 0.7.12, I will have to decide which option I want. Right? If you get a free day of premium it might be for both options but I think it is probably only for WoWs premium. Otherwise that raises the question if that combined premium day is active immediately or, as with an extension, at the end of the current period. Don't stone me, I just think too much.
  4. HMS_Kilinowski

    clan battles vs xmas events...

    I want to stress that the suggestion made is not just one of these "some players want more cause they always want more" things. There is a rationale to that that is beyond players time restrictions. Wargaming and the WoWs community want an active community. So one of the means is to introduce clans into the game. The reason to have clans is not so you can give players clan bonusses. Some clans only exist because of that but that was not the aim. The bonusses are an incentive to create clans cause clans serve a "higher" purpose. They are a means to dedicate players to the game, cause they got friends to play with and that raises expectations and obligations to be there when others are online. So clan players play more than they would if they were not in a clan. That results in higher revenues business-wise. Clans promote a word of mouth news flash that helps getting relevant game info and commercial info to their players. I hardly miss any sales in a working Discord channel. Clan-members help each other with troubleshooting, so customer support gets less tickets. Those are the motivations for the business side of a game to have clans. To give clans any meaning on the customer side, you need to introduce competitions. Clan players want a social component and 3-player-divisions can hardly give you that. So you got the Clan Battles. That is where it all comes together. Now not only do clans play in teams, they also interact with other clans. So we know a couple of clans from playing against them in CB. Now the social aspect of the game goes beyond the clan. It tightens the community. I see a player in the forum and he is no longer just a name but someone who shot at me in CB. That promotes respect and helps the community being less toxic and selfish. Consequently you hardly ever read any taunts/rants/accusations in CB. It is by far the most sportsmanlike game mode. So there are a lot of good reasons to have clans in a game and promote their existence. It is noteworthy that nobody ever said "give us XP-bonusses for being in a clan". Was that necessary to motivate people? I don't know. All I know is that someone at Wargaming felt it was necessary. So there was a reason. For that very same reason, Clan Battles should not be treated secondary to other game modes. Removing wins would only be half a solution. You still would need to play at least 6 battles additionally to clan battles. That is another 2 hours of time. Then again 1000 - 1300 base XP are frequently gained in a battle, they are not guaranteed. It still could take you more than 6 battles. If players had no jobs or no studies or no homework or no family, 6 hours of gaming might be possible. Most players will have one or more of these "duties". So I think the easier, more consistent, way is to acknowledge winning is important and clan battles are not a secondary game mode but are "the cream of game modes". So whoever plays CB knows he will likely get his Daily Missions done along the way. Now I am going a bit off-topic: I can understand your general concern. Still, I think winning as a condition is a crucial condition for many missions. A success in a game must be defined. Since we were playing board games in childhood, winning the game was the key goal of the game. Fun was the motivation to play but every game must have an end. That end needs to be defined by a condition that ends the game and grants victory to a player or a team. That is the whole concept of having players perform to the best of their ability. WoWs has difficulties establishing that goal among the player base. That is based on the rewards and achievements that are still very much damage oriented. We see lots of players who either do not play to win their battles or are not aware that winning is the key objective or are unable to determine what actions must be taken to promote victory. You are mildly complaining about clueless players. I take it, you, as most of us, still feel that motivation to win your games. In the best case that will be independent of missions. But, and that is my point, if you took winning completely out of any mission/task/assignment, that imo would not help the community. Players would not play better. The motivation to to win would be even lower. It might be that good players would be less toxic towards bad players if winning became completely irrelevant. But then the game mode would have to be different. You would need "last man standing" or just "highest XP wins". The game would rather be a deathmatch than a team domination mode. I am not saying that is unreasonable, I just say game mode and rewards must reflect the winning condition. In our current game mode that is winning by gaining 1000 points, pushing the enemy below 0 points, destroying all enemies or having more points after 20 minutes. I personally want players to unterstand that winning is key. So I think having wins as a condition to accomplish a mission is valid.
  5. HMS_Kilinowski

    Holiday Lottery 2018 - Try your luck !

    I want to join the lottery. Free lunch. What's not to like?
  6. HMS_Kilinowski

    clan battles vs xmas events...

    Come on, there are no pitchforks. You know how salty suggestions can be around here and we are presenting our case in a rather civilized manner. ... Oh you mean that pitchfork behind my back? No, big misunderstanding. That is just cause I work in the fields today and what might appear to be an aggressive look at your crotch is mere admiration as to the perfect symmetry of your testicles. I just would like to emphasize what @Loran_Battleas well as me earlier tried to bring to your attention resp. to the attention of WG: The Daily Missions are even more restrictive than any event. You only have 24 hours to complete them, so they cannot be postponed but must be done on the very day as the CB session. That is not realistic. There should be a strong argument against it and I can't see one. One might fear that normal missions could interfere with the goals of CB. As I said earlier, that is unlikely, but for the sake of completeness, let's assume that could be the case. The Daily Mission is mostly about getting a certain amount of experience in a win. Now we did not define a win in CB was worth 2500 base XP but WG did and that obviously reflects the effort of winning. It is not about individual achievement but a team effort. So that is not a shortcut, it qualifies for the first requirement of the Daily Mission. The second requirement is to win. Whoever wants to get the Daily Mission done, will be motivated first and foremost to win the battle. The objective of Clan Battles also is to win. So both motivations are superimposable. Consequently there is not need to exclude Clan Battles from the Daily Missions. So please give our suggestions to whom it may concern. Please open up the Daily Missions to Clan Battles. Clan Battles are struggling as it is. I would guess only 10% of all clans are motivated to participate at all, 90% of the clans don't bother and only a minority of players has joined a clan in the first place. Any hurdle that can be removed to promote that game mode will serve the community and WG's interests.
  7. HMS_Kilinowski

    clan battles vs xmas events...

    I would say that is one of the key points to make. There are missions and tasks that simple cannot, should not and would not be done in CB. No clan is going to allow a Kurfürst or Mino into their team just because there is some mission to get 200 hits with secondary/primary weapons in one battle. But the Daily Missions are hard to do. You can have a losing streak and it takes you way more than 6 battles to do them. Also they can only be done that very day. Now that I can fully understand. Why should someone spend time to tailor requirements for missions individually? That only increases the risk of missing out on something. It's perfectly reasonable to categorise missions and not spend any thought on what events are up in the near future. Missions should in general be open to any PvP mode, some even PvE, if their character is not one of a heroic achievement. It's okay if you want a mission to be hard to finish and it is restricted to a high tier and PvP, like e.g. the Honorable Service Campaign. But the ones of everyday difficulty or simple accumulation should be doable in any reasonably tasking game mode.
  8. HMS_Kilinowski

    clan battles vs xmas events...

    @wilkatis_LV: Funny they would put it this way. I would put it another way. Any kill or hp of damage you do anyway in CB is one you don't have to worry about having to do in Randoms AFTER being a bit worn out by 4 hours of CB. In our clan we really like our CBs and we certainly wouldn't skip on that to do some missions. I cannot speak for other clans but I am sure that in our clan nobody on the roster would think even one second about how to get one missing mission. It is absurd. If you do CB you would normally fulfill most mission requirements just as you play along. Now you see, you got it wrong. In Ranked you play with a lot of players you don't even know and would not need to care about. Of course you would dedicate your life to the team effort. We have seen plenty of Ranked Battles where players selflessly rammed an enemy player, not to be top of a losing team but trying to turn the game. Whereas in Clan Battles, you know these guys, their bad charakters and their individually plentiful flaws. So naturally you will play selfish there. @Salentine: The same goes for the Daily Missions. They, too, don't count clan battles. I got the first Daily Mission chain today only cause I got some of us to do a few more games. Frankly, the people were tired and although quality of play was still high you could hear that in their voices. Not trying to be the big drama queen here. I mean really. The Daily Missions are about winning. CB is about winning. There's exactly zero conflicting interests. Please, Wargaming, reconsider allowing Clan Battles to count for any regular mission. Clan Battles are not less challenging than Randoms, they are way more. The wins don't come easy. Whoever cherishes his clan and plays in CB has done his part for the day and should not be "punished" by having to get another 6 wins in randoms on that very day. Also please don't forget that not every clan has enough active members to rotate players during a CB session. Some people really play the whole 4 hours. There is no indication that players would neglect the team effort to get a certain mission done. If they did, in any reasonable clan, the field commander would ... how do I put it nicely and without violating board rules? @Excavatus What would you do if in CB someone went shooting at a BB instead of a DD cause he needs a BB kill for a mission chain?
  9. Recht polemische Antwort. Ein respektvollerer Umgang käme deiner Außenwahrnehmung zugute. Wenn jemand einen Drucker kauft, dann ist der Preis der Patronen auch ein zentraler wertbildender Faktor und wenn dann der Hersteller hinterher die Preise für die Tinte kräftig anzieht, dann kann man nicht sagen, hier sei von Anfang an mit offenen Karten gespielt worden. Mitwettbewerber werden hier wegen unlauterem Wettbewerb klagen. Oder ein Discounter verkauft eine schicke Kapsel-Kaffeemaschine und bietet die Kapseln sehr günstig an. Und dann nachdem jeder Haushalt so ein Ding bei sich stehen hat, kostet die Kapsel plötzlich einen Euro. Was die Kunden sich da "zusammenrechnen" wird dann sicher schnell das juristische Problem des Anbieters sein. Für die Täuschung ist nicht relevant, ob irreführende Informationen aktiv gefördert wurden, bereits das Aufrechterhalten einer wertsteigernden Information gilt als hinreichend.
  10. Das würde übertrieben dargestellt. Die Missouri hat ihren Besitzern mehr Geld verdient als sie ausgeben konnten. Dieser Mehr an Credits ist wertlos, wenn man nichts dafür kaufen kann. Die späteren T9-Premiums haben weniger gebracht, aber immer noch genug, um nie von fehlenden Credits im Grind gebremst zu werden. In diesem Sinne ist die Missouri auch nicht mehr Desaster als andere T9-Premiums. Man musste eben zwischendurch weniger Spiele mit der Missouri machen, um Credits zu farmen. Aber wenn man sein T9-Premium gerne spielt - und das sollte bei 750k FXP in die Wahl einfließen - dann hat man auch in der Musashi genug Credits verdient. Der einzige Punkt ist, dass die Missouri sogar Spielern mit Standard-Konto das verlustreiche Spiel auf T10 gegenfinanziert. Ist halt fraglich, ob die sich nun ohne Missi einen Premium-Account zulegen oder einfach die T10er im Hafen lasen und weiter in rentablen Schiffen fahren. Wenn letzteres der Fall ist, hatte WG mit der Missi keine Einbußen. Mal Hand auf Herz, mir könnte Geld zu allen Körperöffnungen rauskommen und ich würde nie Credits im Shop kaufen. Das halte ich für juristisch nicht unproblematisch. Schließlich hat WG große Flaggenpakete im Shop verkauft, die XP- und FXP-Boni geben. Deren wertbildender Faktor ergibt sich nun mal u.a. aus der Möglichkeit, mit FXP ein Schiff zu erwerben. Die Flaggen sind rein ökonomischer Natur, also kann das Kaufargument auch nur rein ökonomischer Natur sein. Der Kunde sieht diese Flaggen und er überschlägt im Kopf, über wie viele Spiele er welche zusätzliche Menge an FXP akkumuliert. Er vergleicht diesen Wert mit den Preisen käuflicher Schiffe oder dem Preis eines Premium-Accounts, für den im Wesentlichen das Gleiche gilt. Basierend auf der Rentabilität trifft er seine Entscheidung zum Kauf. Dann erhöht WG die Preise für Freemium-Schiffe und wertet damit diese Flaggen ab. Ohne davon persönlich betroffen zu sein, erfüllt dieser Umstand, nach meiner Einschätzung, den Tatbestand des unlauteren Wettbewerbes. Es wurde ja der Eindruck einer höheren Wertigkeit vermittelt, die nun vorsätzlich reduziert wird. Wären Käufer bereit gewesen den gleichen Preis für die Flaggen zu bezahlen, hätten sie gewusst, dass sie dafür nun weniger bekommen? Ich denke nicht. Falls die Pakete überdies zu einem Zeitpunkt angeboten wurden, als deren geringerer Wert für WG absehbar war, dem Kunden aber noch verschwiegen wurde, könnte es zudem ein Fall von arglistiger Täuschung sein. Das ist dann das nächste, dass FXP zwar abgewertet wird, ihr Tauschwert aber gleich bleibt. Damit werden in der Konsequenz auch Dublonen abgewertet, da immerhin eine Tauschoption nun deutlich unattraktiver ist. WG wäre besser beraten gewesen, den Erwerb von FXP nicht weiter zu erleichtern und damit seine Ingame-Ökonomie nachvollziehbar und wertkonstant zu halten. Und das vorgeschobene Problem mit der Musashi ist hausgemacht und hat nichts mit deren Preis zu tun. Wenn ich für FXP nur Schlachtschiffe und Schlachtkreuzer anbiete, muss ich mich nicht wundern, wenn die Nahrungskette nicht mehr stimmt. Man hätte längst einen Zerstörer oder einen "echten" Kreuzer für FXP anbieten sollen. Viele der Silber-Kreuzer sind Durchhänger und werden mit FXP übersprungen. Ist doch nur logisch, dass eine Musashi hier dominiert. Mit dem CV-Rework kann sogar das Gegenteil eintreten, dass Schiffe mit schwacher AA keinen Spaß mehr machen und Spieler von allein der Jean Bart den Vorzug geben. Ist eindeutig: Wer die Ressourcen hat, ist gut beraten, die Schiffe jetzt noch zu kaufen. WG kann, will und wird für die höherpreisige Alaska und Jean Bart und was noch alles kommen soll keinen Mehrwert bieten in dem Sinne, dass diese Schiffe nun wieder Missouri-Einkünfte bringen oder OP wären. Sieht man an der Jean Bart ja bereits. Die ist ein relativ gut ausbalanciertes Schiff, ein bisschen besser als die Silberschiffe aber nicht übermächtig. Im Schnitt erzielt die Community knapp 70 XP mehr Base-XP in ihr als in der Musashi. Mit optimierten Flaggen lassen sich damit etwa - wo hab ich mein Spreadsheet? - 70XP * 575% XP * 1527% * 5% = 250 FXP mehr pro Gefecht verdienen. Ob das 50k Kohle mehr wert ist, muss jeder selbst entscheiden. Auch die Alaska ist jetzt noch etwas aufgebohrt, damit gute Reviews und Kaufanreize generiert werden. Spätestens zum Erscheinen ist sie auf leicht überdurchschnitlich generft. Sind die neuen Schiffe den Mehrpreis gegenüber den älteren wert? Allgemein gesprochen, nein. Im Einzelfall, ja, gegeben ein Spieler kommt mit Kronshtadt/Musashi nicht zurecht und weiß, dass die Alaska/Jean Bart genau dem individuellen Spielstil entspricht.
  11. Exakt das wird, nach meiner Einschätzung, passieren. Zwei Schiffe verschwinden, also muss auch wieder ein Kreuzer und ein BB nachrücken. Außer JB und Alaska ist nichts spruchreif und somit werden wohl beide für FXP kommen. Einziger Wehrmutstropfen ist, dass wir uns wohl von den 750FXP-Schiffen verabschieden müssen. Ab jetzt 1M aufwärts. Das hängt doch sehr von den individuellen Stärken ab. Ich kenne ein paar Leute, die die Roon behalten haben. Selber fand ich sie auch nicht schlecht und würde sogar ie Ibuki behalten, hätte ich eine Camo. Ansonsten scheinen Ching Mu und Jutland mehr als brauchbar und die Alsace macht ihrem Besitzer auch keine Schande. T9 ist durchaus okay, eben weil man viele entscheidende Neuerungen hat, wie etwa Reparaturen, und weil man wegen der höheren T10-Schiffe meist viel XP und Credits bekommt. Mit Schiffen, die schon fast T10 sind, wird das noch deutlich attraktiver. Und weil man im Clan eh immer jemandem beim längsten Grind des Tech-Trees Gesellschaft leisten muss, also viele T9-Kämpfe spielt, ist es wirklich eine feine Sache, dabei wenigstens gut Credits zu verdienen. ... die zu bekommen so wahrscheinlich ist, wie im Rhein einen Haifisch zu sehen, der von einem Blitz erschlagen wird. Nein, ich übertreibe, jeder wird jemand kennen, der jemand kennt, der in einem SC eine Missi hatte und dann deren Wert in Silber ausgezahlt bekommt, weil er sie schon hatte. Ich hab in den letzten 6 Monaten mehr Kohle und FXP verdient, als ein Schiff kostet. Mit einem brauchbaren Event à la "Sunray in the Darkness" und dem nötigen Stapel Flaggen, sollten sich die nötigen Ressourcen zur Not verdienen lassen.
  12. HMS_Kilinowski

    Kraken im Coop

    Nein, "Kraken unleashed" existiert nur in Randoms. Mit den Auszeichnungen sind Belohnungen verbunden in Form von Flaggen. Es ist zwar auch in Coops nicht so einfach, 5 Schiffe zu zerstören, das liegt aber daran, dass es im Coop nur 8 Schiffe gibt und das Team nicht völlig tatenlos ist - meistens. 5 Schiffe zu zerstören, die von Menschen gesteuert werden, ist deutlich schwieriger und die Auszeichnung und die Belohnung sollen das widerspiegeln.
  13. HMS_Kilinowski

    750k Free Xp Ship Question

    The Kronstat has 25mm deck armor all over. That alone makes her anything but casual. She is a huge ship that gets seen from the moon and HE spammed by Seattles at max range. Even 380mm guns can overmatch her bow. She is fast but not very dodgy. So the speed that can get you out of trouble is also the speed that can get you into trouble, if you are not aware of your position and overextend and then your slow turning rate will make sure you are broadside long enough to get your citadel shot multiple times. After browsing through the posts I feel inclined to support most of the scepticism presented to your idea of getting a T9 premium ship by converting Elite XP. The big question is how regularly you will play WoWs in the future. You see for the doubloons you got right now you could get a year of premium account. That premium time will provide an average player with enough XP, FXP and credits to get a T9 premium ship without putting down extra money and at the same time you can use the credits and XP-bonus to grind the tech-tree. Of course you can get that T9 ship right now, but it does not help you in grinding new lines as much as a premium account does. Another problem is that you are getting ahead of yourself. You will see it already in your results, that you struggle in higher tier games. If you take a look at your Texas and New Mexiko, you got more average XP on them than on your T8 ships. So how do you plan to earn a lot of money in T9, when you get shot to bits before you can contribute to victory? Maintenance cost at higher tiers will be higher, so you would at least need to get to balanced 50% wins to make it worthwhile. Remember, there is no more Missouri. I know it sounds so easy, that you get a T9 premium and all your economic shortages would be gone, but it all is based on winning, taking caps and doing damage. My prognosis is this: If you get a Musashi now, you will probably have a 45% winrate, do around 800XP average. Your net earnings won't be much better than in T5-6 BBs. You will feel frustrated soon, cause you cannot have an impact on your games and other players will start blaming you for losses in rather offensive words. Nobody will cut you some slack cause it is T9 and all players are expected to know the mechanics. I would not pay real money for such a game experience. If you decide to get premium time: You will stay at the tiers you are good at, ~T5, until you feel you are ready for bigger challenges. You will know cause you win a lot, survive a lot more, do a lot more damage, abuse more of your enemies mistakes and get more compliments and less negative chat. Then you gradually move to higher tiers as you closely monitor your success. You should get higher XP per game, resulting in more credits and all in all better yield. Now that is all true if you plan to be rather active in the game. Cause right now you have played 1100 battles over 3 years and - frankly - premium time is a waste of money if you only play a game a day. But then again a T9 ship is not a good idea either cause you will continuously lack the proficiency to gain satisfying results in T9, which most of the time will mean T10 games. T8 ships also get matched into T10. So maybe an attractive compromise would be to stick to your FXP for now, identify a playstyle that works for you and that you work for and then, after getting more familiar with the tactics and mechanics, get a nice mid tier premium that helps your casual play. At some point, when you got 375k FXP, the Nelson is certainly a good choice.
  14. HMS_Kilinowski

    Rigging Matchmaking - Allowed or not?

    That is a very "strong" opinion and I feel I cannot leave it uncommented. Basically @Excavatus has already explained how your impression differs from reality. First of all, sync-dropping actually is not allowed if you do it to manipulate results. WG has clarified this in recent topics on similar subjects. From what I understand, there have been cases of players trying to promote results of clan mates in Ranked Battles. Two players, one at an irrevocable rank and one trying to get ahead would sync their Ranked Battles. When on opposite sides, the promoting player would give away positions of his team and play so that his mate at least killed his clan mate and came top on a losing team. Other players saw right through that, not too hard. They sent replays to WG and the players have been sanctioned. This is how I heared it. A completely different story is playing in a competitive and fair manner with your clan mates in synced battles. When we in our clan do so, there is no favorism. It is quite the contrary that clan players priorize each other as targets. We love the anecdotal kill so we really get on each others back. Most of the time the divisions even move to different Discord rooms to not accidentally give away relevant info to the other team. Sometimes we choose our ships to counter ships we assume to be in the opposing division. Personally I never experienced a case where a clan obviously tried to manipulate results. It can happen that both divisions end up on the same side. That is more or less likely based on the ships in both divisions. If both divisions feature a CV, you are almost guaranted to end up on opposing sides in the same battle. If both divisions feature 3 DDs or 3 BBs, it is also very unlikely you will end up in the same battle on the same side, cause that would mean 6 BBs or 6 DDs matched against 6 ships of the same type. Apart from the likelihood the argument remains if clans gain an unfair advantage if they end up in the same battle on the same side, effectively creating divisions of more than 3 players. The anecdote presented by @Excavatus actually was pretty interesting. You would imagine that 8 players of the same clan in one team are extremely well coordinated and thus very overpowered. I was quite surprised, we totally blew it. Appearantly we got so overconfident, relying on our clan mates to compensate individual risky play, that we all messed up as a group. We just didn't take a random battle seriously. That imo is the point. If a clan tries to get an advantage by getting on the same side and coordinating tactics well, unfair play is possible. Most clans will however not go to the trouble of establishing clan battle tactics and structures in a random battle. Our Field Commanders are just regular players in random battles. The whole focus, the dedication, the concentration is different in a competitive environment, at least that's how I feel. A clan battle evening can be exhausting. You need to be very alert, restrict your communication to relevant details, sometimes go against your instincts if instructed to do so. It is fun and enjoyable to be part of a working team, but it is not relaxing. Random Battles are still supposed to be casual. If you were trying to rigg games to manipulate your stats you would put too much pressure on your performance and that cannot be enjoyable in the long run. And finally, when you are in a clan and you know the guys, you come to dislike the game is so restrictive. On some days you got a dozen players in chat and then they all go to separate chat rooms to play in four divisions. The idea of a clan is not to have a pool of players from which to pick two guys for a division. I want to experience the "Esprit de Corps". The game does not offer a lot of possibilities. A few weeks of CB every 3-4 months is not enough. So clans come up with the synced divs. But then again HMS Kilinowski is the only RN ship with a perma camo featuring +200% flag mounting time.
  15. HMS_Kilinowski

    30 % Coupon??? Hahaha

    Geht das? Naja, ich hatte die 10 Guineas schon. Hab mir jetzt die Texas gekauft. Die war bereits auf 9€ reduziert, kam mit Gutschein auf 6.29€ und das ist für ein T5 ganz okay. Einziger Negativpunkt ist, dass T5 halt oft in T7 gematcht wird bzw. dank Ranked mit Oktobers und Cesares überschwemmt wird, die beide überlegen sind.
×