HMS_Kilinowski

I would like to see a dedicated game mode called "Pleb Battle". It would be similar to last years Halloween Event, just without ad-hoc divisions but death match and ofc without the terrible cyber-punk theme. So no cap points, everybody for himself and without a score board. It would be the game mode closest to the mind-set of the community and would increase the IQ in Random Battles over night.

I did not make a statement as to what I deem appropriate. I'm just pointing out the double standard.

@ForlornSailorDon't trigger him on politics. I've been there. I walked the valley of death. I prayed to my god and laid down ready to die. Really, for your sake, for my sake, for the sake of all people on the forum, in short: for the sake of humanity. Don't do it. We all doubt there is perpetual motions, but with Wastee discussing politics it's even beyond that. He generates more energy the more he discusses. We could provide entire cities with electricity if we could just find a person of opposite political views and the same energy as Wastee and get them to discuss for all eternity ... which, believe it or not, they will. And since that was all off-topic: May I remind the OP that we do have female captains. Like this one: Needless to say, a girlie-captain with breasts large enough to feed an entire orphanage is not a violation of WG of their own TOS about sexual content while the mere mentioning of a product related to sex in the forum will result in sanctions.

I concur. Dead-Eye has three negative effects on the game: 1. Good players take it. Their aim is already very good. They find almost the perfect prediction point of where a ship will be on time of impact. Dead-Eye adds the accuracy to that. It makes playing against good players unforgivingly punishing. Also good players got map awareness. They can manage their distance effectively, be close enough to support, while maintaining the accuracy buff. Good players are better with Dead-Eye. 2. Casual players and noobs take it, cause their self-image makes them think they are good. They think they will hit more shells with the skill. In reality their aim gives them a flawed prediction, so they hit an area, that the target is not or only partially in, which is even worse if the target is dodging. This area now gets even smaller with Dead-Eye, denying casual players the possibility of at least an outlier hitting the target. Their damage is decreased, while they blame RNG. On top of that they have spent 4 points on a harmful skill, so they don't get the benefit of a better alternative. Both 1. and 2. increase the skill gap. Personally not a problem for me. But why did they nerf skills like BFT, which gave a linear boost to players of any skill level to then introduce skills worsening the skill gap? 3. The key issue of Dead-Eye is that the skill is triggered by distance: Since most players are average or worse, they cannot handle their concealment effectively. To compensate for that, they hang back. Since most people fall under that category, most BBs hang back. This creates a new meta, which is binding to all BBs. Even good BB-players struggle to play closer to the caps, cause with so many BBs hanging back, they stick out and get focussed. This is terrible for the game, since the whole game mode is designed around cap zones. Now cruisers stick out more, cause BBs are too far back, so they retreat to the back. Consequently DDs are alone in the cap, exposed to CVs. Consequently they refuse to cap. The whole game principle collapses. The only solution is to remove Dead-Eye. One might argue that Dead-Eye should be nerfed. That would only decrease the increase in skill gap. The key issue however is that people want to trigger it by staying in the back. As long as people take the skill, as long as it is conditional on staying away from enemies, Dead-Eye will change the meta for the worse. If you nerf it, you can only nerf it to the point where it is not worth 4 points anymore. But then, what's the point of offering the skill? Removing and replacing it is the only clean solution. An alternative but insane idea would be to nerf dispersion on all BBs. That can never work, since it would break a lot of balanced BBs and would turn Dead-Eye into a must-have skill, much like Concealment Expert is not a skill anymore but a compulsory skill point sink. Nerfing the ship rather than the buff is what killed the Henry and made it unplayable without the propulsion mod. It reduces diversity. Wasn't diversity one of the arguments for this rework? I don't see any reasonable way around removing Dead-Eye. It's fine if skills boost certain stats, but they should support an existing intended play style, like e.g. faster torpedo reload on torp boats. If there e.g. was a skill that would improve armor on all platting by 1mm, that skill would immediately break the game, cause all the armor thresholds would now be messed up. So the take-home message for captain-skills is: Stay away from the playstyle defining properties.

Since I'm about to quote a slight deviation from the topic, I feel obliged to at leat say something about FP vs heals: FP should be used on all survival built BBs. The nature of healable damage is that it is from HE-spam. So either you burn a lot, then it's best to burn less by taking FP. Or you are more the type to not pay attention and get citadelled a lot. Then an additional heal will be wasted, since your damage is not healable and you will not be able to apply the additional heal. In the past there was one exclusion from this: Survivability-secondary-hybrid builds. On them you would skill into the range and accuracy of your secondaries, but take a survivability 3-pt-skill instead of BFT. That worked especially well on the Holy-Trinity (a.k.a. Massa, Georgia & Ohio), because USN-BBs have the rather useless range mod in the 3rd slot, which can be substituted with secondary range, without losing practical functionality. Range is for noobs. On other BB lines that is different, since the 3rd slot means picking secondary range over main gun accuracy, which is a bad choice. Now on the Holy-Trinity you combine secondary mods and survivability mods. The ships are somewhat resistant to HE-spam, since they got better platting and they got the faster cooldown on heals. That makes a heal quite attractive. You got a real chance to use all the heals. Also the heals help farming Dreadnought achievements. But that is old theory. I am currently testing a lot, especially the aforementioned ships. I'm not sure if the secondary accuracy skill is even worth it anymore. I am thinking more towards the maingun buff in brawling situations. Also Priority Target is becoming more optional. It's not about FP vs. heals anymore. Panta rhei. The rearrangement of skills and new skills have made it quite possible to even have FP on secondary builds. tl;dr Unless you got very special ideas about BB-builds, take FP. If the noobs were intellectually able to blame their bad aiming for their misses, then you wouldn't have that problem to begin with. It's a catch. The player, who is humble enough to see he lacks practice and understanding, will make an effort to improve, thus he will not maintain a noob attitude. The attitude of the noob however is to not make an effort and find excuses as to why others are better, e.g. using aimbot or cheats, p2w, luck, rigged RNG, bad teams, ... . As he fails to see the problem originates from his attitude, he will not improve, thus remain a noob.

You shouldn't forget to mention, that due to your long reload your ship went dark after 20s and I had to wait until your guns were reloaded and your next salvo made you visible again. I had the same fire rate until my reload dropped under 20s, enabling me to occasionally get two salvos out in one 20s spotting window. In a random battle you would likely remain spotted and the reload Yami would utilize its faster fire rate much more efficiently. Also I don't get the whole whining about Dead Eye by so many. Ofc you think its OP when you get hit perfectly. People complaining are implying that many BB players got good aiming skills. But in reality most players will just completely miss you now, since their aim is so bad, they are better off with new USN-BBs without Dead-Eye.

I think we just have too many BBs. Not just too many, way too many. Just look at the waiting queues: 6CV, 150 BBs, 10 CAS and 10 DDs. The BBs just dumb down the game, cause, let's face it, the average BB player the least tactical awareness and commitment. BB-players are the worst players in the game. You don't see it in the stats, cause BBs get matched against BBs, which evens out what otherwise would result in terrible winrates. If you match 40%ers against each other all the time, they increase their winrate, so it all looks legit. But if you can't do more than 40k dmg in a T10-BB you should get a doctors prescription for aimbot. For two years BB-players got everything they had on their wishlist, better torp spotting, better dispersion, less fires, inpenetrable armor (Strasbourg excluded). BBs have been dumbed down to a state where a chimpanzee could play them without anybody noticing a blatant deviation from the normal play. BBs are a misunderstanding that hasn't been cleared since the game was launched in 2015, a false promise of superior protection and damage that shines like gold in the eyes of any person smart enough to buy an iPhone for 200€ in the streets of Naples. This misunderstanding was kept alive cause it pays the bills and makes people think there is a reason why a T8-BB costs 30% more than a DD. We need less BBs, but more than that, WG must find a way to buff BB-mains, cause they are at serious risk of suffocating when they have to manage aiming while mouth-breathing.

I quite liked it in 2017-2018, before the rework. People were complaining about stealth-firing even then, but it was a minor phenomenon. I remember that I stayed away from Ranked cause I thought I was not good enough and did not want to be a burden for these already small teams. There was a high level of respect for the game mode and the players who would compete in there. Now I know they are just slaves to any kind of reward.

It's a good thing BBs cannot hit themselves, cause they'd bloody well manage to. Seeing those teams tonight I wonder how they manage to cross streets IRL without getting run over. I'm in Ranked right now and the teams are red. Not yellow or orange any more but full red teams. It's almost like whenever I go some place else on the map I wonder if I can leave the guys on the other side of the map alone or if they manage to mess it up in the meantime ... and they do. I get down an Odin half hp, I think my 2 BBs and DD can handle that while I chase an Akizuki. No, my Asashio now starts torp rushing that half dead Odin and gets torped itself- Wow, that lack of spotting will certainly help, Asashio, not to mention the play. When did thinking go out of fashion?

I fail to see the point. You could make that argument for any ship. Say you spent 500€ on christmas containers to get a Missouri and suddenly it would become available to everyone through a short grind. Would you find it appropriate to be compensated its 1 credit purchase price? Did you buy those containers to get compensated for the ship that dropped from it? Probably not. Did a thing that you purchased given the impression of a certain value, just massivley drop in value? Yes. I mean I can see where this is going. Every time someone argues about insufficient compensation, somebody comes in and tries to play the mature advocat, forcing a fruitless discussion about "you got your value out of it" onto people, trying to make the point that a seller has the right to change his pricing at any point in time. Be that as it may, in any market economy I as a buyer have the equal right to adapt my valuation of the product to that. And I say all ships below T6 have become overpriced by the mere fact they are not compensated as higher tier ships. So I won't buy any low- to mid-tier ships. That btw comes on top of me not buying any premium camos, since they stopped being compensated. I can live with that. I don't complain. But then again nobody gets to complain about me changing my spending policy. Nobody can say "You have to continue buying mid-tier premium ships cause you have no right to account for compensation." What a point is that supposed to be?

What you describe is the normal gameplay. It's funny how we have clans called BANCV or NOCV or CVOUT but no clans called BANBB. The longer I play, the more I find BB-mains to be the least useful players. Maybe bad players should be restricted to a separate low impact class like patrol boats. It would help their overall stats.

But you didn't have those 1200 doubloons before, while you paid for that ship, either doubloons or an equivalent amount of coal.

I bought the Anshan for doubloons. Now I get compensated in credits. Unless T6-premiums and below are sold for credits in the premium shop henceforth, I'm not gonna buy any T6 anymore, as obvioulsy they do not have a value in doubloons. Again, flawed reasoning on behalf of WG, thinking less generosity will yield more revenue. The opposite. You just killed your mid-tier sales. Ask your boss for a raise over those pearls of wisdom. They give out doubloons for picking ones nose in Ranked, so I don't get the point.

The problem lies in the Ranked game mode itself. It's not fun to play. It cannot stand for itself. Without any rewards, hardly anybody would play it. One can see it in you arguing for a platinum or diamond league for good players. Why not an additonal paper and wooden league for the people entering at the bottom? Cause you don't like the idea of less rewards. You find it appropriate to get steel and doubloons for your climb through the bottom league. You need to be rewarded for playing, since the mode itself is not fun enough to motivate anybody to play without rewards. The next problem is you are complaining about something that is not there, "different amounts of resistance". The few good players - and I have been there and seen how few they are - do not constitute different amounts of resistance. The whole bronze league is a joke. So much that I use it as a training room. There is no tactical thinking at all. Good players are hardly even a bonus, cause they are out of position most of the time, just by the rest of the team being out of position and them either overextenfing by definition or being with their team and thus just as useless as the rest of the red bunch. At that level of - I don't even want to call it gameplay - chaos, skill or no skill cease to matter. If 5 min into the game, one team is half the hp of the other cause the people claiming to play the biggest ships cannot do the damage amount of an average DD, that is beyond the impact of a good player. You say you want those kinds of battles, cause you assume you would do better then, but in chaos, nobody does better, it all collapses to chance, which btw is way less fun than getting fairly beaten by a somewhat consciously playing team. If people were to stop demanding WG to design a bite-size experience and would start doing a minimum of homework, they would enjoy the game much more. Oh, no, my favorite ship just got nerfed and now statistically loses one in 300 battles more than before. Let the drama begin. Oh no, my captain build doesn't work as before since the rework. Catastrophe, get the pitchforks. Work on the one most influencial factor that is responsible for 20% of my losses? No, thinking = headache. WG, pls compensate my lack of effort by redesigning the game into a bite-size joke. I'd be happy, to defecate any amount of money into the game for that.

This one is Shokaku season. I am pretty much done with all lines except CVs. Since I play a lot of divisions in randoms, I want to burden my cherished clan mates and friends as little as possible with me learning the basics of a class. Easy solution: I learn to play CV in Ranked. It's a good training room. I get free lab rats and since I can only play Bronze with my T8 CV, the opponents are generally more forgiving than the better players in higher leagues. It's also quite comforting to know that if I mess up, I will in most cases not cost a player a star who deserves to win. On top of that there is technical reasons. Since all ships are the same tier, I do not get overconfident kekking on T6-BBs and also not frustrated trying to make an impossible drop on a T10 BB. It's easy mode and the logical next step after training against bots. It also helps that the new system is a series of sprints. So all in all I am not try-harding too much and my poor team mates are spared the sarcastic remarks. Learning CV costs a bit of karma, but since you can't even buy ramming flags for that, what do I care?

tl;dr Making an effort is too much to ask, so WG please make getting steel ridiculously easy.

I understand that and I want to stress, I understand that WG-staff is often in a tricky situation, expected to defend actions taken by their employer that may not seem in the best interest of both parties. In the current case it will solve the issue that a player is unhappy with his drop. However, talking business interests, the best way would be if the issue did not occur in the first place. People take notice. It creates uncertainty in a negative way, which harms the willingness to spend. An image of being ungenerous, once attained, can only be changed at a disproportionate effort. Not that this is any of my business. I just want to mention it cause it has become a recurrent motif. The idea that someone at Wargaming seems to have is that if you deny people compensation they would spend money on the ressource that has been denied, as if that denial never happened. In the case of this premium ship, the person is expected to not have any hard feelings and just spend real money on getting doubloons whenever needed in the future. That is a naive idea. Not pointing fingers as I don't know whose brilliant idea that was. It was the same with the discussion on compensation for permanent camos, where the idea on behalf of Wargaming was: "If we compensate people, they will get a ressource for free that they would have spent money on otherwise." The truth of the matter however is that these people feel irritated and insecure and will spend less in the future. I am not talking theory. I can give you a real example. A friend of mine had put a perma camo on every T10-ship until the Moskva was turned into a special ship. Considering the game has more than 20 lines and a T10-camo costs around 20€, he must have spent several hundreds of Euros. Then Wargaming decided to not compensate owners of the Moskva perma camo. That player felt cheated. One can argue every which way, justifying any perspective. The fact remains that this player has reacted and not bought any perma camos ever since. Wargaming thought they had generated 20€ of extra revenu, not compensating for that camo. In reality it has lost 65€ of excess revenu from that player not buying the perma camos for Petropavlovsk, Nevsky, Richthofen and Vermont. And that is only the effect on the last 8 months. It will continue to impact the camos of the future T10-ships as well, as many as they may be. In short, sometimes being more generous will result in even greater revenu and is highly recommended from a business point of view, even more so when the compensation is just a bunch of code and thus costless. The reason why I go to the length of explaining this rather obvious link between generosity and revenu is that some day revenues will drop. You might sit at a conference table where someone is trying to explain that the revenues are dropping cause the graphics are getting old. He may argue that players are getting cheap and moving on to newer titles, that the game has run its business cycle, that this cash cow has been milked for all it's worth and is just about to come to a natural end. At that point, feel free to clear your throat, hand him a copy of this post and offer an alternative explanation. If you get a tech-tree ship from a container or through an event, you usually get the copey of that ship and also the part of the tech-tree that is required to play the ship in its fully upgraded version. If e.g. you got a Hipper from the "german"-containers, you will have all tech-tree upgrades unlocked and the grind from Yorck B-hull to Hipper. You will also not need to play earlier ships in order to proceed to the T9 and T10 sips but can skip all ships below T8, unless you want to play them.

It's common sense that an Ägir has a price tag of >60€ or 1M FXP. The price in credits is just a technicality. Otherwise, I got a lot of credits. Here WG, take 3M credits and give me one million Ägirs, Missis and Alaskas. Oops, no you can't cause the price to get the ship is either for money, was for a brief period for doubloons in the armory and still is for 1M FXP, a ressource that you have to pay doubloons to exchange eliteXP into it. But ofc WG takes a point of view in which this 1 credit is the price, refusing the player a compensation it does not even have to pay in real-world currency, but in a costless virtual currency. There we have it. Official confirmation that WG is cheap, a thing that cannot be said about its products.

Naja, alle Gegenstände stehen in irgendeiner Relation zueinander. Falls ein Gegenstand einen Wert hat - sagen wir mal ein Premiumschiff -, dann haben auch die anderen Gegenstände einen Wert, abhängig davon. I ch denke, jeder Spieler der nicht komplett F2P unterwegs ist, ist davon betroffen. Nehmen wir mal das Beispiel FXP. Da hab ich geschrieben: Das ist grob über den Daumen gepeilt und mit ca. 20k FXP pro Gefecht gerechnet. Das ist ein grober Erwartungswert, der auch die Wahrscheinlichkeit der Niederlage und dann niedrigerer Basis-XP berücksichtigt. Für ein FXP-Schiff wie die T7-Nelson braucht man folglich ca. 18-19 Vollbeflaggungen und "Spring Sky"-Tarnungen. Ein T7-Schlachtschiff im Premiumladen bekommt man für etwa 30€. Man wird es natürlich nciht für 30€ kaufen, sondern über Aktionen oder Coupons eher um die 20€ zahlen. Jetzt schließt sich der Kreis zu dem, was ich anfangs geschrieben habe. Mit 19 Vollbeflaggungen und "Spring Sky"-Tarnungen lässt sich ein Schiff mit einem effektiven Preis von 20€ kaufen, also haben Flaggen und Camo einen vergleichbaren Wert, wenn (!) man diese Bepreisung so akzeptiert. Dann hat ein Set einen Wert von ca. 1€. Tatsächlich verkauft Wargaming Container die vergleichbare Signale und Camos enthalten aber deutlich teurer. Worauf ich hinaus will, ist, dass die Preisgestaltung der Produkte untereinander alles andere als logisch und schlüssig ist. Mit der faktischen Teuerung der CXP ist es noch unlogischer geworden. Das ist unabhägig von jeder Schuldzuweisung einfach ein Fakt, den man als Kunde berücksichtigen sollte, wenn das Marketing von Wargaming einem bestimmte Werte suggerieren will. Man sollte grundsätzlich immer skeptisch sein, wenn ein Unternehmen von "Wert" spricht. Damit meint das Unternehmen i.d.R. die für sich besten Umstände. Wert ist subjektiv. Für einen verdurstenden Millionär in der Wüste ist eine Wasserflasche tausende Euro oder mehr wert. Für einen Normalbürger, der vor dem Supermarkt steht, ist sie maximal 0,30€ wert. Egal, wie man Wert für sich definiert. Jedes CXP-Signal ist gerade um 40% im Wert gefallen, objektiv und ohne Wenn und Aber.

Man mag das so sehen, dass eine Verteuerung der Ressourcen dem Spiel gut tut. Ich bin mir nicht sicher, ob ich das unterschreiben kann. Ich verstehe nicht, warum das bei den Ressourcen passiert, die für die Spielhygiene eher unwichtig sind. Man könnte die Basis-XP reduzieren und damit indirekt alle Arten von XP verteuern. So wie es jetzt ist, ist bislang gerade die XP von Teuerungen verschont geblieben. Im Gegenteil, Wargaming hat mit dem WoWs-Premium-Account gerade die XP gegenüber dem alten WG-Premium-Account um 15 Prozentpunkte erhöht. Man hätte den Premium-Spielern mehr Kohle, Stahl, RP oder eben FXP und FXP geben können, aber nein, sie bekommen XP. Dann hat Wargaming die XP-Preise der niedrigen Silberschiffe reduziert. WG hat damit das Gegenteil von dem gemacht, was nötig gewesen wäre, nämlich Silberschiffe zu verteuern. Es ist also sehr einfach, sich auf Stufen hoch zu grinden, die die Fähigkeiten eines Gelegenheitsspielers weit übersteigen. Genau das, dass eben der Spieler in dem Maß gefordert wird, in dem er besser wird, täte eben der Spielhygiene gut. So wie es seit Jahren ist, kommen mittelmäßige Spieler viel zu schnell in die hochstufigen Gefechte, kämpfen ab jetzt aber zusätzlich zu ihrem schlechten Spiel noch mit unvollständigen Kapitänen. Gegenüber den Langzeitspielern entsteht der Nachteil, dass diese CXP gehortet hatten und quasi alle Spezial-Kapitäne mit 21 Punkten nutzen können. Die Spreizung zwischen Anfängern und Fortgeschrittenen geht also auseinander.

Nice topic. First of all a technical remark: You left out the option to use Dead Eye on some BBs, In your poll the choices jump from "not at all" immediately to "on all brawlers". I tested the skill a bit and the option "on some BBs" would be the correct answer. Dead Eye does imo not make sense on any BB with mediocre concealment or gun range. It gets spotted rather early and has an okay but not generous range. That's why it can't make sure it will keep DDs outside of its detection range. If you have ~18km range to enemy BBs, their DD ususally is ~6km ahead of them. Actually I am flattering BB-players, the enemy BBs will sit even further back, due to them using Dead Eye. Anyway, their DD will likely keep you spotted, if you want to be in range of your targets. So there is a range of BBs, that don't benefit from this skills. On top of that comes the irony of that skill: Players pick the skill to hit distant targets better. To trigger the skill they however would need to clear their medium range off targets, which they don't cause their whole mind is set to long range. Their flawed priorities will work against them. They would need to move closer to reliably hit those ships that are spotting them, which would also decrease their dispersion way more than the bonus the skill provides at long range. But the players fail to make that connection. They will likely demand other players to clear their concealment range of enemies rather than doing it themselves. Since they cannot support them in that effort, it will be a lottery if their DD dies in the process and tehy remain perma-spotted, debuffing their accuracy. All the super-heavy shells of whatever type are useless. The bonusses are two small and the shell types are too situational to result in an increased dpm worth those commander points. SAP would be worth it, if it didn't come with the concealment nerf. Concealment however is one of the key features of this game. If all ships were visible all the time, it would kill the tactical element that makes the difference between WoWs and some generic shooter. Dazzle makes sense, if you assume to get spotted, so mostly on cap contesters. It takes a few moments for your ship to be rendered, in these seconds the skill is wasted. Also the guns on bigger ships may be on reload anyway not doing damage until the skill is off. It primarily is effective in gun duels against other DDs, where shooting start immediately. But 4 points for that? Fearles Brawler is what BFT once was, only now one point more expensive and with a distinct penalty, so no, not worth it, only on long range gunboats. The two skills I like are: - Swift in Silence: A permanent speed boost for all torp boats. In the past you could break line of sight with smoke but the chasing DD could rush you and spot you again once he passed that smoke. Now you will be able to disengage. It's a bad skill once your team starts losing, since you need protection, but for a quick cap, to confuse CVs or reposition, it's quite useful. - Top Grade Gunner: useless on kiting cruisers, helpful on cruisers with at least 27mm bow, who fight over caps in the late game. All in all, if you compare the old skills to the new ones, the old skills were somewhat balanced around the idea of an overall 10% buff in DPM or HP for 3 points. Now, if we look at the new skills, those are balanced around 8% buff for a 4 points skill, 10% only with a penalty. So certain skills increasing utility or information have become more worthwhile compared to straight stat buffs.

Vorher und jetzt kann man nicht recht vergleichen. Absolut gesehen stehe ich schlechter da. Die 21 Punkte sind meines Erachtens eine Mogelpackung, da bestehende Fähigkeiten teurer geworden sind. Allerdings ist das für alle Spieler gleich. Meine Gegner haben also auch weniger/schlechtere Fähigkeiten. Es gleicht sich also partiell wieder aus. Da die neuen Fähigkeiten aber eben geringere Boni geben, haben fortgeschrittene Spieler weniger Vorteile gegenüber Anfängern. Gefechte werden also mehr durch Können entschieden als durch Ausstattung. Die meisten von uns wissen ja, dass Sealclubber ihre Stats genau mit diesen Vorteilen aufpolieren. Pack einen 19-Punkte-Kapitän - jetzt 21-Pkt - in eine Clemson oder Kamikaze und die Anfänger mit ihren 4 Punkten haben keine Chance. Insgesamt ist es also fast ein Nullsummenspiel, mit dem kleinen Unterschied, dass ein vollausgestatteter Kapitän jetzt eben gut 65% mehr CXP kostet. Das ist eine verborgene Preiserhöhung auf CXP, die nun auf die bereits geschehene Preiserhöhung der FXP folgt. Man muss jetzt mehr planen als zuvor, kann durch Planung aber auch unnütze Ausgaben vermeiden. Man sollte frühzeitig wissen, auf welchem Schiff man einen Kapitän dauerhaft nutzen will. Den Kapitän während des Grinds zu maxxen war vorher bereits ökonomischer Unsinn, ist es jetzt umso mehr. Man sollte also die Trainingskosten auf ein Minimum reduzieren, mit dem Kapitän auf niedriger Skillung durch die Stufen gehen und ihn am Ende - nach er also auf das T10-Schiff trainiert wurde - auch nur soweit mit CXP hochskillen, wie es eben sinnvoll ist. Skills, die nicht wichtig sind, sondern nur einen Kapitän abrunden, kann man sich erst mal sparen. Das betrifft beispielsweise den "Incoming Fire Alert", den man mehr aus Verlegenheit genommen hat, weil der Build mit 18 Punkten fertig war und man noch einen unverbrauchten Punkt übrig hatte, von dem man nicht wusste, wo man ihn sonst investieren sollte. Jetzt macht es absolut Sinn, sich diese letzten 1-2 Punkte zu sparen. Überflüssige Kapitäne gibt es nicht, gerade weil das Training auf neuen Schiffen so kostspielig ist. Also lieber behalten. Auf der positiven Seite, kann man nun viele Premiumschiffe mit einem oder zwei Kapitänen abdecken. Die Kapitäne sind jetzt der teuerste Aspekt des Spieles geworden. In guten Spielmodi verbraucht man aktuell ca. 100 Vollbeflaggungen und "Spring Sky"-Tarnungen, um sich ein T10-FXP-Schiff zu kaufen. Mit ca. 35 Vollbeflaggungen kann man bereits eine Silberlinie abschließen. Für einen dazugehörigen 21-Punkte-Kapitän benötigt man dagegen etwa 150 Vollbeflaggungen und "Asian Lantern"-Tarnungen. Für ein T9-Schiff, äquivalent zu 1M FXP verlangt WG gut 60€. Ist dann ein 21-Punkte Kapitän drei mal so viel wert, 180€? Das muss jeder selbst entscheiden. Ich für mich kann die Frage ohne Zögern verneinen. Auch bestimmte Premiumschiffe sind jetzt problematisch. Ich spreche von Schiffen wie dem geplanten T10-Commonwealth Zerstörer "Vampire II". Für die wird man einen hochstufigen Kapitän brauchen, den man sich allerdings nicht aus einer Silberschiff-Linie hochzüchten kann. Bei anderen Premiumschiffen kann man ja den Kapitän der Silberschiff-Linie mitbenutzen. Da muss man sich nun gut überlegen, ob man so eine Vampire II haben will, wenn man für einen passenden Kapitän bis zu 3M CXP auf der hohen Kante haben muss. Wichtig ist meiner Meinung nach nur, dass wir diese Teuerung der CXP und zuvor der FXP nicht vergessen. Lassen wir uns nicht mehr von Wargaming vorrechnen, dass eine Tarnung oder ein Signal einen bestimmten festen Wert haben. Tarnungen sind jetzt wertloser als vorher, weil man mehr davon braucht, um das gleiche Resultat zu erzielen. Damit sind Premium-Container jetzt weniger wert, weil deren Inhalt meist Verbrauchsmaterial ist und dieses nun eben weniger wert ist. Also muss man sich überlegen, ob man diesen Mehrpreis bezahlen will.

Was soll dieser Unsinn? Wenn du Werbung machen willst, dann kauf dir ein Werbebanner auf wows-numbers, dann bleiben uns da wenigstens die Neuerscheinungen vom Kopp-Verlag und der kosmisch-energetisch oprimierte Dildo erspart. Das hier ist ein Forum und kein Bazar. Entweder hast du was zu sagen, dann sagst du's mit dem Erstellen einer Topic oder du lässt es bleiben.

I wouldn't say it was a misplay. The Okhotnik and you kept each other spotted. There were 2 more DDs on the flank against that Okhotnik. Your team had more guns on that Okhotnik than our team had on you. So it was a reasonable calculated risk on your behalf that your team would kill that Okhotnik faster than our team would kill you, allowing you to go dark. It just so happened that your team mates shot different targets and so the Okhotnik survived just long enough for us to get you.

Oh, yeah I remember just freshly exchanging hails, when you popped up in cap. I briefly thought whether it would be terribly impolite to shoot you, but then again you were the most prominent target and our Okhotnik seemed outnumbered. So sorry about that BB-spray-and-pray. I can't say I contributed much else. Ofc, I need to mention my div mate @asalonen, who so skillfully defended his flank in his Krasny Krym.