HMS_Kilinowski

Abwarten, wie leicht man diese Tarnung bekommt. Die Belohnung ist ja kein T2-Ladenhüter, sondern durchaus brauchbar. Sowas wie die 500 Sekundärbatterietreffer auf T8, wie wir sie für "Franz von Jütland" aktuell brauchen, ist ohne T8-BB schwierig. Ich hab die Cleve-Tarnung gekauft und ich bereue es nicht. Es war einmal die 50%-Discount-Aktion, also hab ich nur 500 Dublonen ausgegeben. Und die Tarnung bleibt für die Pepsi, mit der ich bisher ganz gut gefahren bin und die, wenn man dem kurzen Review von Little White Mouse weiter oben glauben darf, auf T6 nun deutlich mehr reißen könnte. Aber bei der Cleveland ist der Fall doch ziemlich klar. So schlecht kann die fast nicht sein, dass man nicht die geringen Kosten für ein T6-Schiff aufbringt, um ein T8-Schiff zu bekommen. Ich denke beim hochgrinden mehr an die schweren Kreuzer. Da levelt man ja wirklich nur, um ein paar Credits Kaufpreis erstattet zu bekommen.

... wenn die Gegner stur geradeaus fahren. Zwölf Sekunden und mehr sind ja genug Zeit um sein Heck aus der Schusslinie zu navigieren, wenn's nicht gerade ein BB ist.

It is not so much different now. A player who gets pink still can report his victim. Happens very often, when the penalized player accuses his victim of not avoiding the torps at all cost. You are not protected at all, because you don't get your lost credits or XP, you get reported and the pink player you won't see again for a thousand games. But obviously players who give a lot of reports are just too self-centered to acknowledge other players did something good. If I just look at the amount of effort, that is needed to get a compliment and the easiness you get a report, this system is off balance. Good tactical or team oriented decisions are mostly overlooked whereas it is sufficient to be reported to be the last one alive and not get the solo warrior medal. Is there really a difference in opinion on that? This is all very educational but I can think of many situations where it is the other way 'round that players did not behave properly by intentionally navigating themselves into the way of others to get the kill. The system will reward this behaviour. In many situations you need to ask yourself, if players would really act the way he does, if the other player was a friend or they were a real team, not just randomly assembled. And even if I accept the prior that a player's definition of what is "proper behaviour" is universal, I still think it is a hard assumption, that all players want to play the game on an e-sports level. There is no dedicated "just for fun"-game mode, you will get team members upset in any game mode. So it is not the fault of players that they cannot unite in the amount of effort everyone puts in, it is "given" by the lack of the game to offer such a choice. Actually there is a minor choice and I take it. When I know I cannot perform to the best of my ability, cause real-life takes its toll, I just play coop. But even then interuptions happen, so we better get rid of our girlfriends or tell the to zip it, cause Warships are more important. Yeah, women can really handle that. The pink clearly qualifies as a means of humiliation. Think of school kids who were made to wear masks and stand in the corner of the class room. They too could get reinstated quickly by behaving properly. We don't do that anymore. The duration of a humiliating procedure does not change its humiliating nature. Also the pink would not be needed. The player himself is informed about the penalty and its duration. He really is the only person who needs to know. Back in the old days this was different, as the pink player really was a potential danger to his team. Player's kept their distance, watched the pinkie's actions carefully or even asked "what did you do?". Now we come to live with having one or more pinkies in every match and we don't even react to that anymore. So the pink does no longer fulfill the attribute of a warning, it is really just name and shame. Let's put it simple, you're damned if you do and your damned if you don't. If you don't take the shot you will earn some salt for not instantely killing the opponent and you can try to argue in chat - always works out so well - with them as to the possibility that your shot wasn't safe but nobody cares. Whatever way I turn this, to me it seems that we are part of a rather negative and penalizing community rather than a rewarding. I think the new system is a step into the wrong direction and that steps need to be done to promote a mentality of team spirit. @antenociti: Correct me if I'm wrong, but coop is not safer concerning TKs. If you torp dangerously in a coop you get further penalized ... which is okay with me, just putting things right.

Das war schön gesagt, ist aber auch ein Grund warum ich nie eine Atlanta kaufen werde und auch mit der Cleve nicht so warm geworden bin. Wenn man nur Schiffe mit hohen Bogen spielt, wird der kopfinterne Zielcomputer sich über hunderte Kämpfe darauf einstellen. Ich spiel aber immer durcheinander. Mein "Aimbot" ist auf schnelle Granaten justiert. Bei den hohen Bahnen halte ich meist zu wenig vor.

Das sind 19 Forenseiten. Muss ich das suchen oder krieg ich eben den Executive Summary? @alle: Mal kurz noch eine andere Frage, für die, die sich noch erinnern. Der Cleveland wurde doch ursprünglich von Spielern closed beta immer hinterher getrauert, weil sie erst mal einen Nerf bekommen hat. Ich glaube mich zu erinnern, dass die Geschossbahnen früher flacher waren. Stimmt das oder was war insgesamt anders? Ich frage, weil die Idee doch naheliegend war, dass eine Cleve auf T8 nun wieder etwas von ihrer ursprünglichen Charakteristik zurück bekommt.

Ja, das verstehe ich schon. Wenn du die Pensacola freigespielt hast und auch kaufst, zahlst du die 5,5M Credits, die die Pensacola jetzt auf T7 kostet. Dann beim Split, wenn du die Cleveland im Hafen hast, bekommst du eine Kompensation für die Pensacola vermutlich i.H.v. 5,5M. Finanziell stehst du also da, wo du vorher auch warst. Du bekommst sozusagen das T7-Schiff für lau. Das ist die Motivation jetzt noch ein weiteres Schiff freizuspielen, dass jedes weitere Schiff bis T9 quasi umsonst ist. Die Frage die ich gestellt hatte war, ob es wert ist dafür Free XP auszugeben. Das hängt dann von deiner persönlichen Wertschätzung von Credits eierseits und FXP andererseits ab. Premium-Schiffe oder sonst unerreichbar sind die USN-CAs nicht, es geht nur darum, ob man diese Schiffe ohnehin im Hafen gehabt hätte. Einen Hafenplatz kosten sie trotzdem.

Free XP wäre mir da zu schade. Was passiert denn, wenn man nach oben hin neue Schiffe frei spielt? Ist im Grunde nicht anders, als wenn man die hinterher freispielt. Wenn man eben die Vorgänger im Hafen behält bekommt man eine Kompensation in Credits. Sind 10M Credits nun 100k oder mehr Free XP wert? Der Grind nach oben hin wird aber kein Stück beschleunigt. Der einzige wirkliche Witz ist diese einmalige Neupositionierung der Cleveland auf T8, wodurch man sich den Weg über Omaha, und die beiden neuen T6- und T7-CLs spart. Wer für 1000 Dulbonen eine Tarnung gekauft hat für die Cleveland, bekommt vermutlich die Tarnung für T8 geschenkt und behält die T6-Tarnung, was einem Rabatt von 75% entspricht. Das kann sich sehen lassen. Alles übrige ist doch eher für Spieler interessant, die ohnehin die USN-CA behalten wollten.

Es geht ja auch nicht darum, cits mit dem Kapitän zu kriegen. Ich will nur sagen, dass eine Pensacola nach dem Split nicht so schlecht sein muss, wie sie aktuell immer geredet wird und dass eine Cleveland auf T8 auch nicht mehr das Überschiff bleiben muss. Wer bisher einen 19er Kapitän auf T6 hatte, der wird ihn möglicherweise in der Pensacola auch gewinnbringend nutzen können. Es gibt so viele Skills, die auf der Pensacola wirken. Man muss sich eben daran gewöhnen, fleißig mit dem Schwanz zu wedeln. Das ist imo der Hauptgrund warum die Leute mit der Pensacola unzufrieden waren, weil sie halt Fehler nicht so verzeiht. Für T6 -Szenarien finde ich die Pensacola sehr gut. Man kann mit fast jedem Kreuzer Cits landen, aber die Pensacola bündelt ihre 203er-Salve so schön und die macht so viel mehr Schaden, dass gar keine 50 Cits zusammenkommen.

Well at least there is no shortage of credits until you reach maybe Tier 9. Every ship, if played regularly and not skipped with free XP earns more than enough credits to buy its successor. So a player won't need a credit earner for a long time. Also I would not go for high tiers in a hurry. Take the scenic route, try out a lot of different nations and branches in low and mid tier and then, when you feel comfortable you still can go for T10.

I regularly take the survey. And the fact that something is even worse in some place else does not imply it is alright here. ... and, captain, are you really comparing their toy guns with our warships? Their main gun is part of my secondaries. As I wrote, I wouldn't entirely leave it to the system. I am thinking of a combination like "if TD>x and player reported then penalty". There could even be a small pop-up on the edge of the screen, where you can just ask for a kick after TD. Who knows better than the player himself if another player is a bad influence on the game? Yes it is, and isn't it sad, that still players cannot avoid torps they see approaching them for 6km from exactly the direction they are aiming their guns at and after several warnings in chat and manage to hit an entire salvo broadside? Still then, I had matches where I laid smoke for half the team with my USN-DD, went spotting, but the team just did not stay in smoke or shoot at the targets I spotted. It is not enough to reward a player for the team taking the opportunity. A player should be rewarded for just creating that opportunity. Or think about the player who starts capping the enemy base, securing plan B for his team while others go hunting enemies. At the end that player is not rewarded for being responsible rather than selfish. The system only rewards the completed cap, although in many games you can see how exactly an attack on the base is what throws an enemy team off the balance and promotes the win. Another point you make is the frequency you get bad players rather than good players. Still WG allows for the same number of compliments as reports. There is a message implied to that, suggesting you should compliment as much as you criticise. If the idea was that you dont need all those compliments anyway cause most players are bad, why are they equal in number? Maybe there is nothing wrong with stupidity but with releasing pressure. It is a game. Imagine who is playing it. Kids, normal people. Maybe they are not all PhD students who analyse angles and overmatching mechanics and tactics but just wanna hit that fire button and think warships are cool. And if you went through the trouble of watching/reading guides, did your time in the training room and analyse your play style, don't you expect to be rewarded by performing a lot better and consequently by other players doing worse in comparison? For you it becomes premier league and they are unworthy of playing with you, but for a majority of players this is little league and we are just taking things a bit to seriously. I know it can be frustrating to loose because of stupidity, but over thousands of games it evens out. Next time the idiot is on the other team and you got all your flags mounted and get 10k xp and think it was all talent. Still the idea of pink players initially was to warn others, not to publicly humiliate. I mean pink? In the forums you are not allowed to name and shame but in the game you make em wear an "unusal" color. When I think back to how things were in the past, pink was a real warning sign as it is supposed to be. You saw a pinkie, that guy was on his own. Now you hit with a single He shell, accidentally cause a fire and if the guy just used his repair you are pink, maybe even deleted. Seems exaggerated for me.

Why don't you just start telling us, what ships you like and what play style worked for you so far? I am sure a lot of people here can come up with a number of ships that fit your needs.

Die Skillung der Kapitäne wird ja immer mal wieder kostenlos zurückgesetzt auch jenseits von Clan-Battles. Ich bin nicht ganz sicher, aber vielleicht passiert das auch zum Split. Natürlich bedeutet das weiterhin, einen hochgeskillten Kapitän auf der Pensacola zu haben und vielleicht nur einen 8 Punkte-Kaptän auf der Cleveland. Da würde ich dennoch erst mal abwarten und nicht gleich fluchen. Eine Cleveland mit ihren hohen Flugbahnen über die großen Distanzen von T8-10 kann schnell zum Problem werden. Mit ihrer Länge kann sie auch nicht so gut ausweichen. Eine Pensacola mit ihren flachen, engen und schlagkräftigen 203mm-Salven blüht auf T6 vielleicht auf, die durchlöchert Kreuzer-Zitadellen wie nichts. Kann gut sein, dass man mit einem 19er Kapitän da richtig absahnt. Szenarios mit all den klotzigen Bots, die so schön ihre Breitseite zeigen, das wird der reinste Selbstbedienungsladen.

Gravity is given. Program code can be changed, it's not a law of nature. Every developer will adapt his policy to what he feels the consumer's wish, if it supports his financial interests. Therefor, if I feel team damage is harmful to my game experience I can give feedback to the developer and maybe he will change it. Many changes to WoWs over the years are the result of such feedback. The idea to see things as given is not a good starting point for any kind of innovation. Right. I think it is not that hard to write some "if"-conditions. Every now and then I get a survey at the end of my battle, asking me how satisfied I was with the outcome. So it's not too hard. If someone caused team-damage you ask him at the end, if he wants to report that and the player decides if he felt TKed. I once torped a hostile BB at short range and one torp missed and travelled 10 km. A friendly Atago was at a bearing where you would never think it could get into the torp path about 5 km away. You remember how with speed boost you can run in front of airplane torps for kilometers just smoothly navigating out of the salvo? That is what this Atago did just the other way round, it went full speed on a diagonal course towards the end of the torp path, caught the fish. Not intentionally, but these things happen. I just think it is not that hard to write conditions that can distinguish between unsporting behaviour and unintentional events. And if that is not possible you can leave it up to the player's to make that choice. When I look at how many players use all reports but no compliments, motivation seems high enough to me. If I am upset I can go through the trouble of two mouse clicks to get someone penalised. The other thing is compensation. As a player I don't care if someone gets banned, it does not give me the opportunity back to maybe having had a good game earned credits and XP. My cost, flags consumables, premium time and all that still applies. So on the other side if I hit someone I am willing to compensate him rather than him being mad at me. I would not mind giving some credits and XP. Plus there is already enough negative energy in the community. People often seem to play against each other even in teams. The last thing we need is more mechanics that lead to accusations and flaming. People already hate me cause I got aimbot, stole their kills, did not cross the whole map to help them, took the cap when they wanted to wipe the enemy, played CV or just because I am a f****** moron, idiot, noob or had intercourse with a close relative for whatever reason. So I really need the TK thing. It looks like Derzki and Izyaslaw have already been played that day.

@josykay: Ich denke du hast das ziemlich richtig erfasst. Wenn ich es richtig verstehe, werden Duplikate durch ihren Kaufpreis in Silber ersetzt. Worüber man noch nachdenken sollte ist, ob man der Cleveland einen Dauerplatz im Hafen gönnt. Dann könnte sich evtl. eine permanente Tarnung rentieren. Die kostet ja für T6-Schiffe 1000 Dublonen, was doch einige noch mal eben aus der Portokasse schütteln. Für die T8-Cleveland würde sie später 3000 Dublonen kosten. Und weil die Tarnungen ja vermutlich für das alte wie für das neue Schiff generiert werden, sollte man also die T6-Tarnung für die Pepsi und die T8-Tarnungn für die Cleve für insgesamt 1000 Dublonen bekommen. Ob man dafür nun extra echtes Geld hinlegt, muss jeder selbst entscheiden. Aber wenn man die Dublonen sowieso auf der hohen Kante hat, ist das sicher nicht die schlechteste Idee, sie dafür zu opfern. Was kann man sonst schon damit machen? Eine Tachibana kaufen? Ein T8-Kreuzer mit Perma-Camo ist da imo wirtschaftlich sinnvoller.

I am not happy with the new penalty system either. I have not seen an intentional team kill for a thousand games or so. A year ago, when you saw a pink player you knew, the guy really blew it, either being a true team killer or just messing up big time. So you knew to stay away. Now there is hardly a game, where there is no pinkie. I don't even take notice anymore. So what, a guy hit someone, what do i care? This is not careless play in my opinion. In most cases of careless play, I felt it's up to your team to decide. When I get hit or hit someone myself, the first thing to do, is write "sorry" or "sry" in chat. And in most cases the answer will be "np". Cause we know stupid coincidences happen. Still we wanna win the game and have no interest in seeing another player being punished, at least not with mirroring dmg and deleting him from the game, when we actually need every gun to win. Likewise, when I mess up, I feel I gotta make up for it in that very battle and that is hardly possible, when the system mirrors dmg. Why not leave it up to the players? If sufficient damage is done and the player reports the incident, the evil teamkiller can be punished and if he is forgiven, so be it. Sometimes I even find friendly fire highly justifiable. For example I once had this situation where an almost dead BB tried to ram a very healthy BB on my team. The BB was on reload and the only way to avoid the ram was a risky salvo. Chances were I hit both of them possibly setting my own BB on fire and getting penalized. It happened good, I killed the other BB and ours lived happily ever after. But it's a match, sort of peace time restrictions don't apply. I heard this fact once, that in our army during exercise with live ammunition soldiers are not allowed to shoot if a human is within an angle of 30° of where they are aiming. For our special forces that angle is 5°. There will always be players who think that any sort of TK or even dmg is bad play. But then again why do we even have friendly fire? It's not in the scenarios and nobody seems to miss it there. Why insist on such an element that only causes new arguments within teams? It's not like we have a lack of players insulting and reporting each other anyway. And why is there no quick warning command? I mean we got these nonsense "i need intelligence data" shout-outs but no "torpedo warning" or anything like that. I just feel like most player's really try not to hit anyone and it still happens, but if I as a victim could decide, I probably would forgive 90% of the TKs. And if I hit a player, I wish I could send them some credits and XP to make up for it rather than this punishment that does not compensate anyone.

@Stronginthearms: I don't follow. One can discuss the necessity of the mass of ships that are bloating the game without adding any unique element or playstyle. One can discuss why russian navy was in the game before the Royal Navy but it's rather off-topic. Personally I don't think USN cruiser line was needed but at least both branches will differ in playstyle, which I don't see for RUS/IJN DD branches.

So wirklich geht es nicht wieder. Man sieht zwar noch Statistiken aber gerade der Vergleich mit dem Rest der Spielerschaft fehlt. Das fand ich immer interessant. Man denkt ja gerne, dass man mit einem Schiff recht gut zurecht kommt, wenn man mehr als die Hälfte der Spiele gewinnt oder dass man mit einem Schiff nicht zurecht kommt bzw. einfach ein schlechter Spieler ist, wenn man weniger als die Hälfte der Spiele gewinnt. Der Vergleich mit der Gesamtheit der Spieler hat das relativiert. Die so interessanten aggregierten Statistiken zu Schiffen gibt es schon seit Monaten nicht mehr für den EU-Server und seit kurzem sind sie auch für den US-Server nicht mehr verfügbar. Dabei kann man dort sehr gut erkennen, welche Schiffe stark/schwach sind und wie sich Buffs/Nerfs/neue Konkurrenten auswirken. Die anderen Portale können da imo nicht mithalten. Deswegen finde ich diese Entwicklung bei WoWs-Today sehr bedauerlich.

If I read the announcement for the previous russian DD line split, you won't need to worry. As domen3 already said, you will keep those ships at their new respective tier and additionally get a ship for the tiers they occupied before the split. So if you have T7 - T9 you will get the new T6 - 9 ships and you will get compensated for those ships that you would have twice by that rule. In the russian split ships moved up one tier and players got compensated the purchase price of the higher tier, so it is possible, that now that ships are demoted, you get the price of the lower tier, i.e. prices for USN - CA T7 and T8. In your case 5.57M Silver for Pensacola and 8.9M Silver for New Orleans. Although as I mentioned, trading 5.5M for a port slot may be an alternative way to go, if you value real money. It's not about the captains, it's about your reserve slots. If for every captain specialized in one of the old ships, two new captains specialized in the new ships are granted, they would have do be stored somewhere, in case of a full reserve that would mean expanding the reserve. Although, I never experienced a shortage in reserve slots, I give you that. Still some people might feel different and as the idea was to explore any possible way to maximize gains from a split, I think it's worth mentioning.

Maybe my descriptions were confusing. I didn't say you literally get two twins in your harbor and then one is removed. I was just taking things step-by-step where they happen simultaneusly, to make the process more accessible. Obviously I failed. So let my try again. 1. If you had pre-split Cleve T6 you get post-split Pepsi T6 and post-split Cleve T8. Actually Cleve T8 seems to be named "Columbia". Nevertheless if you also have pre-split Pepsi T7 in your harbor you would get post-split New Orleans T7 and post-split Pepsi T6. That theoretically makes a duplicate post-split Pepsi T6, cause you already got it as compensation for the changes to Cleveland, so you get credits instead. That is not my original idea, I am just repeating what appears to be consensus in the forum. 2. This thought carries over from 1.. If you have permanent camo on all USN cruisers and you have at least two neighboring tiers, you then got a duplicate ship that is removed - or never added, let's not split atoms over how to abstract this - with a duplicate camo. That leaves the question: What happens with that duplicate camo? I think that is relevant because many people think about buying camos for their USN cruisers hoping for a free extra camo. So you ask yourself if there is some sort of refund or compensation on those extra camos or not. Otherwise you should only buy camo for every second ship to max your gains, right? 3. Let me give a two-case example: You have a Cleve, Pepsi and NO in port prior to the split. After the split you should have four ships (Cleve T8, Pepsi T6, NO T7, Baltimore T8). If your port was full at the time of the split would get one additional port slot. And you would get a few M credits compensation for the Pepsi that you would have got twice. If however you don't have Pepsi in port prior to the split, so only Cleve and NO, after the split you should again have four ships (Cleve T8, Pepsi T6, NO T7, Baltimore T8). You then would have gotten two additional port slots instad of just one slot but of course no credits as in that case the split yields no potential duplicates. if you want credits, have Pepsi in port, if you want a port slot, don't. 4. I would even go beyond what I have written so far. If you stuff your reserve with captains specialized in NO or Baltimore, each of them should get you an additional 8-point captain. The need to store all those new captains will probably expand your reserve. Although a shortage in reserve slots never was an issue for me personally.

Now that the split is coming in sight, I got some questions and ideas that have not been addressed in this topic yet. I also read the announcements on previous splits (RU DD split and IJN DD split) but the info is somewhat vague. Wondering what your thoughts are. 1. Many of you suggested that players with duplicate ships are compensated. So if you got a Pensacola and a Cleveland in port before the split you would have a pre-split Pepsi T7 and a post-split Pepsi T6 and the Pepsi T7 would be removed and the player be compensated the buyers-price equivalent in credits of the Pepsi plus modules. Is that correct? 2. What happens if I got permanent camo on Pepsi and Cleve? If I only have camo on Cleve, following your theories and previous split info, I will have perm camo on post-split Cleve T8 and post-Split Pepsi T6. But if i have permanent camo on all USN cruisers, do they say "well you had camo on all before, you got camo on all after, so no compensation needed" or will they refund the doubloons for duplicate camos? 3. Is it really optimal to have all T6+ USN cruisers in port at the time of the split? Way I see it, you get compensated for duplicates in credits. You can earn credits by just playing. On the other hand if you leave out a ship, let's say Pensacola, and your port slots are all full, the new Pepsi has to be stored somewhere. Ergo you will get an additional port slot. So the question here is, whether a port slot (doubloons!) is preferable over the purchase price of a Pepsi (a lot of credits)? What do you think? 4. There have been theories about captain compensation in some threads suggesting you get an additional captain for your replaced type ship (e.g. Cleve T8) based on the rank of your old captain that stays with the old tier. However WG-announcements on previous splits specify the new captain's rank will be based on the previous ship tier. So for any captain specialized in Cleveland T6 you will get a rather low skilled captain specialized in the new Cleve T8. In the RU split that was an 88k XP Captain so 8 skill points. In the earlier IJN split however you only got a captain with 10k XP, so only 3 skill points. Note that this is totally independent of your previous Cleveland captain's skills. It could be rank 19 and still you might only get a captain with probably 8 skill points or worst case 3 points. I cannot remember how this was handled in reality, so please refresh my memory. Now if this is all true there is an upside, as i interpret this. The info says you get an additional captain for EVERY captain specialized in a previous ship. So maybe all you gotta do is have some captains specialized in the highest USN cruiser that is going to be replaced and put them in your reserve. A 0 point captain specialized in Baltimore might suffice. Then, based on RU split info, you would get an additional captain specialized in post-split Baltimore T8, with 9 skill points. That is the highest captain you can get, it does not go beyond 9 skill points. Rank 0 to Rank 9 in no time is quite a career, don't you think? So that's it from me so far. Please share your thoughts and ideas. Surely we all like to be on the save side.