HMS_Kilinowski

Are we comparing PEF to Pay2Rico now?

I just remembered you posting a screenshot of a Republique with range mod, which you described as a counter to Yamato due to the range advantage. So I was curious if that still was a thing for you.

I assume I can aim correctly, so getting a better dispersion is better than throwing more ... at the wall. Yes plotting room all the way. ... to the range mod, which you already use on your Republique to kite Yamato at 30km?

A regression really doesn't work if you put the christmas holiday at the end of the time series. Put it at the start and it's gonna look like a downward trend.

You should not go to any line first at all. Grinding a single line will get you into high tier gameplay way too fast. You can go into the highest tier in less than 300 battles at which point you still only know the basics of the basics. You will likely be crushed by the better players before you learn the moves and get frustrated. The better way is to grind several lines parallel, as @Verblondesuggested. Try to understand how the mechanics work, observe the other players and see what tactics work. As you learn, you will get your lines up and understand what is going on hopefully before it hits you in the face. Grinding several lines parallel will also help you understand the strengths and weaknesses of each line. You need to find out what play style works best for you. It's a bit like a buffet, where you taste a bit of everything rather than filling your stomach with a single dish and likely missing out on the best stuff. Watch lots of tutorials. Monitor your stats. Make conscious choices. Good luck, mate.

I don't get why the fact some steel ships will move to coal is automatically positive. Given the current state of information, it's neutral. Whether it is positive will depend on the coal-prices of these ships. Coal may be seen as a less restricted ressource, but it's not by definition less valauable. Coal is restricted as well and there are far more things to spend coal on, compared to the inflow of coal. Getting more ships to choose from will not inevitably mean that you get all of them. Things might repeat themselves. At some point Wargaming might announce they remove the Lütjens captain or the Yoshino or Salem since "they weren't popular", which again only might be due to people spending their restricted ressources on e.g. a Black or a Georgia or the Smolensk. The simple reason is that any serious player thinks about his clan and wants to have options for competitive play. Clan Battles so far mostly were T10. So if there are good T10 ships available that are reasonably used in CB, most players will go for them first. The most active players will manage to earn enough steel for a T10-ship and one of the cheaper ones per year. I get enough for one ship a year. During that year two new ships will appear in the armory. So you never get all the ships. Players need to make a choice. I would certainly get them even for steel, if at some point I could spare the steel. But it's more likely that by that time another T10-steel ship is released that will be part of the CB-meta and which I cannot ignore.

Credits earnings depend on your impact on the battle. If you take caps and damage ships that increases your earnings. Unfortunately, cost is designed in a way that makes playing T8-10 in coop mode pointless. You still can make a profit on these tiers, but it is based on you performing way above average. Since all players have pretty much the same cost, the sum of cost for your team is higher than the earnings from destroying the bot team. So economically speaking it doesn't make sense to play coop at T8-10, since most of the team will either lose or gain little. Wargaming has lowered the cost in coop and things like a perma camo for a ship, using a premium ship and a premium account will allow you to still make money at high tiers. I still would not recommend it. Frankly, you earn more in mid tiers (T5-7). Also, coops have degraded over the years to become a yolo-fiesta. BBs struggle to get into the fight before it's all over. Nowadays many coops end without a single player ship lost and the bots running out of points. That also means that credits you would get for destroying the rest of the bots are lost. If you want to play BBs in coop, you should do so at late night, when your own team is complemented with bots. They tend to die more leaving work for you. Ofc that also means you can find yourself as the only ship left against 3-5 bots, so you should be able to handle such situations. If you are restricted to playing during the day, I'd recommend playing ships with better yolo potential, e.g. Gneisenau, Yorck, Akatsuki. You really want all the coop players to come to random battles cause they can't make credits? Why does it have to be that binary thing "Play randoms and perform or quit"? If this guy feels comfortable in coop games, it doesn't hurt anybody. There are pretty mediocre players in randoms who can earn 100k regularly. I don't see how at least breaking-even would be inappropriate in coop. i'd rather see them do their happy thing in coop than dying in randoms after trading their ship for half an enemy ship.

I generally like the idea. The big question is how to implement it. A couple of thoughts come to mind: Such as system will certainly punish some players while rewarding others. If drop chances increase based on karma, it's going to affect the ingame economy. Good drops will increase, people will get higher value rewards. At some point Wargaming will register players get e.g. more special signals, resulting in higher FXP growth. Players will get more ships out of containers and spend less doubloons on ships, cause you're not gonna buy a ship you already have twice. At some point the economy will get tuned down a bit, resulting in a new equilibrium of inflow and outflow of ressources. The players who do not get the better drop chance, will be worse off than before. Now if you were to implement it, only a very mild bonus would work, since any major rewards will likely result in abuse of the system. Boy, would we all of a sudden see bad players with hundreds of karma points, just syncing into battles with friends or affiliated clans. Likewise the reports for spite would skyrocket. You can hardly get a Witherer medal these days without your karma going down, cause "mimimi". Frankly, I would want karma to mean something, but I am also sceptical, cause I know where karma comes from an how many just and unjust reasons exist in this game to get that sort of feedback. Just yesterday my whole division got reported because one of my division mates played Soyuz. Obviously you are not allowed to play Soyuz and even being in a division with such scum who dares to violate that rule entitles you to negative energy. Not that anyone would go into the forum or contact customer-service and say "WG, I think this ship is too trong, pls consider nerfing it". No, you blame the player. The one positive thing about karma is that in the long run things even out and you see a pattern. So all the negative feedback is usually not enough to neutralize all the compliments one gets, if a player can control his emotional outbursts a bit. I think there should be rewards for karma, but they should mostly be symbolic, like getting a flag in the shape of a yin & yang symbol or something like that. Maybe a slight economic bonus would be okay, like a 2-5% bonus on ressources, not high enough to incentivize cheating. In GTA Online there is some sort of compliment system that grants about 5% better prices for ingame items. I remember we could never get people in the clan to compliment each other. It just was too much to remember for them and the 5% bonus was obviously not worth rigging it. What I would rather like to see, or see on top of that, is a decomposition of karma into the different categories. I don't understand why being complimented for good manners should be evened out by a report for being afk. One thing is an observation of character, the other is one of connection issues. I fail to see how they relate. If anything, the compliment/report-system should be a survey of your actions and you as a player should get a detailed picture of what other players like about your play and what not. Imagine a player with 20 compliments for good play and 20 reports for chat abuse. His karma is zero. Now imagine a player with 20 compliments for good manners and 20 reports for bad play. Also zero karma, but two totally different personalities with very different issues they might want to address. I would even like to know if I was reported by the other team. Isn't that the whole point of the karma system, to provide some sort of feedback? Well if I can't for the love of christ imagine why somebody was content or dissatisfied with my play, how am I supposed to reevaluate anything?

Obviously you are not familiar with the properties of digital products. They take up space. So why would they have thousands of these Flints and Blacks lying around in big rented warehouses, raising cost, when they cannot be sold? Please don't show your lack of education in that manner. Wargaming has huge plants with machinery worth millions printing these ships. Now they want to make these production capacities available for more successful products. It's not like they could alter the properties of all these ships at practically no cost, by simply editing a file, changing a couple of values and subsequently making them "demanded". Please, people, just think before you write.

In case many of the readers are puzzled by the explanations, let me translate that from Wargamish to English: Smolensk was overpowered as hell, which really doesn't concern us. What concerns us is, that, by implication, it was underpriced. So we remove it to offer it exclusively in christmas loot boxes together with the other OP ships that we officially removed for balacne reasons but effectively still sell. Jean Bart, as originally Musashi and Kronshtadt, has become inexpensive in comparison to newer ships, like e.g. Georgia. We are raising prices and that would be all too obvious if the old ships with the old price tag would still be offered. So we give you a superficial reason as to why we remove it, the same reason we gave you for removing Musashi and Kronshtadt. Of course if you guys looked closely, you would realize that Kronshtadt has become such a rarity these days that we would have to reintroduce it now if the given reason applies, but that won't happen, since ... 750k FXP. Flint is unpoular since one of it's major selling points was great AA and that is a contradiction in terms that we really cannot do anything about it, even in the second year of the CV. Black would make us look like .... well make us look bad, since we intend to introduce a ship module allowing for 1.6km ensured torp spotting, which will get Black torps spotted 18s before impact. Creeping torps for some weird reason were far less popular than creeping smoke. Beats me. Besides, a DD with radar inevitably brings to the game the expectation to shoot a radared priority target, which keeps being too much to ask from the average team. And Neustrashimy, yeah, we are honest about that. The reason it has to go really is that it was unpopular. No hidden agenda there. Neustrashimy was based on players ability to disengage targets when outgunned and did not synergize well with the omnipresent yolo mentality of most DD players. Yes it's a long process, but no, two months is not a long time. I doubt there will be time enough for most people to still get one of these ships, unless they already have most of the required ressources. Especially steel has a rather discrete inflow.

I know from painful experience it is hard to accept the fact that half of any random team won't make any effort to do well and a quarter will make an effort but fail. Unfortunately it is how this game is. WG decided not enforce any but the basic rules of sportsmanship. Consequently there are many players out there who can spoil the fun. The best thing a single human can do, is trying not to be one of them. The good players in this game need to stop getting on each others back and criticise each other and rather mutually respect that they are here, that their stats indicate they care and they are not the problem. I often see good players getting into arguments, cause one of them didn't make some miracle happen. Understand that the good players are entitled to make occasional mistakes and that the game was not lost by the specific misplay, but by the masses of players who misplay with every button they do or don't press. Does anyone remember the attempts made to get into the Guiness Book of World Records trying to fit as many people as possible into a Volkswagen? The guys down there seemingly tried that with a square on a WoWs map ... and even doing that, they failed. They obviously were scared to death to be torped by the DDs if they ever made it into the cap. Oh wait...

it's really nice that Wargaming is generous in handing out lots of random stuff. I just got this: Point is I don't have the ship. I also don't have the Blyskavica, Scharnhorst and Tirpitz, all ships that I got some perma camo for in my inventory but that I don't have in port and that I have no immediate plans of getting. The bonusses are identical to the ones on the camos these premium ships are equipped with. So there is no economic incentive of getting these ships to maybe make use of some additional bonus. It feels a bit like getting a Hummel figurine from my old demented aunt in case I ever wanna get a serious collection. As I said, all nice and good, I just can't figure out: Why do i get these camos and what am I supposed to do with them besides getting warm feelings whenever I browse my inventory?

I understand. It's addressing their needs. It's a trojan camo. I go to sleep peacefully and suddenly strange anime captains squealing like pigs climb out of that camo and eat up my doubloons. Well ... thx, WG, .... I guess.

Yeah I love those. They are really helpful as one is grinding the lines. I even get having like three different camos for the Bismarck for changing appearance. It's just a bit weird if I get something I don't need at all while others probably open these containers hoping for these camos and don't get it. I would give them away, if I could. It's got a special look, I can see that might appeal to some players to consider getting the ship. Unfortunately I am mostly a numbers guy. I see, but then again I never understood the idea that these additional camos are as expensive as the traditional ones or even more expensive. The first one is important, since it gives you the economic bonus. But each further camo for the same ship only changing the looks while maintaining the bonus, must be of less value to the player, I assume. It's a bit like getting a burger and the waiter asking you "would you like to order a second burger for the same or a higher price". The "apple turnover" thing seems to not apply here. Actually some of these camos are for silver ships and very useful, since you only need the credits for the ships. Ideally you haven't elited them yet and can save a lot of consumable camos grinding through them. As I said I didn't want to give the impression I was complaining. Color me puzzled by the notion. Wouldn't the smarter way be to offer the camo as a personal assignment to the people who got the ship and advertising it as a feature of some bundle? If anybody values these camos it would increase his willingness to pay for the respective ship, while it doesn't address my needs in any way.

Congratulations. Although Aeroflot is not as save as it used to be back in the old days, when they still used Ilyushin planes, which russian built SAM-radars classified as "friend".

I would not think so much about WW1 as more about the early 20th century. I think one could easily have two tiers below the Dreadnought era. It all would shift a bit, but the basic principle of having slightly more or less powerful ships in adjacent tiers would still apply. Several nations had BBs like the Mikasa and older types in their navy. Ofc one can argue that the play style in these tiers is not exciting, but that's hardly a point. These tiers are not played excessively anyways. It's rather that you can easily find real ships, rather than having to invent alternative history and paper ships in T9 & T10. Mikasa is history, Bajie is an insult.

Der offenkundige Kontext der Umfrage ist eben gerade kein geschlossener Kontext, sondern ergibt sich aus der Fülle der im Hintergrund erfassten Daten. Man müsste den Probanten durch einen üppigen Fragebogen quälen, um mögliche Motive für den Grad an Zufriedenheit zu erfahren und auch dann hat man nur die Parameter, die der Probant bewusst wahrnimmt. Mit einer kurzen Umfrage bekomme ich eine ordinale abhängige Variable. Die kann ich in Schätzmodellen mit beliebig vielen Variablen in Kontext setzen. Über hunderttausende solcher Einzelangaben bekomme ich einen ziemlich üppigen Datensatz. Je nachdem, was ich als mögliche Variablen integriere, kann ich sehen, was sich auf die Zufriedenheit auswirkt, was also, neben dem Offensichtlichen, kausal sein könnte. Ich werde mich natürlich für die üblichen Verdächtigen interessieren, die da wären, Schaden, Anzahl der Kills, Dummies für Überleben und Sieg, aber auch Zusammensetzung der Teams, die Karte, das Schiff, evtl. Uhrzeit und Wochentag. Es ist klar, dass sich Niederlagen, die Höhe des Schadens und die Zerstörung des eigenen Schiffes auf die Zufriedenheit auswirken. Das ist aber erstens unabänderlich in einem Nullsummenspiel, und zweitens offensichtlich, ist mir also schnuppe. Mich interessiert das nur, damit ich deren Einfluss auf das Ergebnis herausfiltern kann, durch sogenannte Kontrollvariablen. Die Karte und der Einfluss der Spielmodi (Standard, Domination, Epizentrum) interessieren mich, weil sie mir gute Hinweise geben, ob die Karten ausbalanciert sind bzw. so wahrgenommen werden, welche Spielmodi beliebt sind. Daran werden sich Map-Designer orientieren, wenn sie neue Karten entwerfen oder alte Karten auf Schwächen prüfen. Das Schiff wird mich interessieren, weil ich ebenfalls Hinweise aufs Balancing bekomme, dies anhand meiner Daten prüfen und nachjustieren kann bzw. die Preise so gestalte, dass ich für Schiffe, die wenig zufriedenstellend wirken, niedrigere Preise ansetze. Spielercharakteristika wie Winrate, Anzahl der Gefechte, Alter, Geschlecht etc. werden mich interesieren, weil ich wissen will, welche Spielertypen besonders sensibel oder unelastisch reagieren. Ich kann auch Daten zu Käufen einfließen lassen, wieviel der Spieler insgesamt im Spiel ausgegeben hat, wie häufig er Premium-Zeit nutzt. Dann wird es für mich interessant. Die Wirkung der Zufriedenheit aufs Kaufverhalten ist für mich sicher ein Schlüsselelement der Analyse. Ziehen unzufriedene Spieler sich aus dem Spiel zurück oder kaufen sie sogar generell mehr, um möglicherweise Ergebnisse zu verbessern und zufriedener zu werden? Oder führt mehr Zufriedenheit zu höherer Bindung ans Produkt und in Folge zu höherer Zahlungsbereitschaft? Strebe ich also Zufriedenheit überhaupt an oder das Gegenteil oder kann ich sie ignorieren? Man sieht schon, Zufriedenheit mit einem Gefecht muss nicht unbedingt nur als abhängige Variable behandelt werden. Ich kann sie auch als Proxy für die generelle Zufriedenheit auf der anderen Seite der Gleichung einfügen und analysieren, wie sie sich auf das Spiel und Kaufverhalten auswirkt. Das ist alles jetzt nur so ins Blaue geraten. Ich weiß nicht, wie genau, umfangreich und professionell Wargaming ihre Daten erfassen, speichern, verarbeiten und analysieren. Bei Erfassung und Speicherung sind IT-nahe Unternehmen i.d.R. recht gewissenhaft. Bei der Analyse wird halt geschlampt. Also kann gut sein, dass die Rückschlüsse weit oberflächlicher bleiben.

And then? There is not even a third ship, so why the hurry? It's not like waiting a year for a ship. There is no point fixating on one particular ship. You do so many things parallel. While regrinding, you will do some competitive and earn steel. The amount of steel you accumulate over time also allows you to get one steel ship per year. And you get 2-3 coal ships per year and 2 FreeXP ships per year. I don't focus on one particular ship, I just play the game and all the rewards come "en passant". All in all I get new ships pretty regularly. WoWs is like a forest. Individual trees grow slowly. But since it's so many, you will always find one ready to chop down. Patience, young padawan.

It takes a long time, but waiting rather than regrinding 5 lines. You wait for your double bonusses and use initial 10k RP you got. For 3 regrinds you get the Ohio plus change. If you used all bonusses, you should have 2 regrinds done by now and the third coming in about 2 weeks. So in about 2 months you can get the Ohio without having spent tremendous amounts of FreeXP.

That depends a lot on how you acquire RP. It's only FreeXP sink if you got FreeXP coming out your ears, which again is only the case if you have played the game for years, finished all old lines, got all FreeXP ships and don'T know where to put the 7-digit FreeXP you still got left after you buy anything as soon as its available. The alternative player type would be someone who seriously spent doubloons on XP-conversion. Manually regrinding lines should not dig into your ressources, as it's no different from grinding any other line for the first time. You will not play the reset line excessively but substitute playing the reset line for your usual routine. The signals you spend during the regrind are the signals you would have spent in some high tier battles anyway, probably way less, since you needn't pull all the stops to match your opponents in mid-tiers. i often only have 2-3 signals in mid-tiers. You might spend a lot of camos. But then I look at lines where I have a couple of perma camos on the way. If you did the christmas event you should have a couple of those T8-perma camos lying around to spend on lines you typically regrind. So you pick a line you enjoy playing, where you got a perma camo for the T8 and T9 ship and then the regrind shouldn't cost a lot of camos. Naturally It will progress slower, since T8-perma camos got 50% XP- bonus, while most consumable camos have 100% XP-bonus. But it's not that big a deal, rather a shift in mentality, that players think grinding needs to be ultra fast. I only wish there was some sort of ship inventory, where the ships were stored that are not researched yet, instead of selling them at an arbitrary -50% sellers price as you reset the line. It doesn't make sense to me, since the idea of the regrind is replaying the ships for XP, not selling an buying them. You keep the modules. They can store those, but not the ship. You keep the perma camos in the inventory. How so? Do they scratch off the paint and store it in a warehouse? But the ship cannot be stored. Horse manure.

I am not making a guess. I just say the color and shape of the islands remind me of the map Ring. Actually considering the shape of the map there is only one area where I would plcae this.

... so this is rather an "academic exercise" than an exploit worthy that name. It only works reliably on DDs using MAA skill, which is only practical for the good AA-DDs, such as Sims, Kidd, Friesland, and even they need their skills for their main role, cap contesting, gun buffs, concealment. Yeah you can do 5% dmg to a squadron, if the squadron stays within a ring of AA greater than your detection, but it's also a give away of your position and I wouldn't sacrifice my concealment for a bit of plane damage.

No, I mean it's obvious that the claim "even a Yugumo" would need to be backed by footage. Even more so, since it is absolutely right, nobody would skill into AA on a ship with weak AA. On a ship like Friesland on the other hand, you have shown yourself, that often the better defence is to let your dps wear down the squadron, rather than go dark and only enable AA when the squadron returns for a second strafe. One simply wouldn't use AA like this on a strong AA ship, cause the squadron will eventually turn into you and you have wasted the seconds of buffed AA to then be strafed while on cooldown. The sniping also doesn't make sense for weak AA ships, since they lack the skills and likely will not snipe a single plane. My guess is it might only work effectively on medium AA ships, meaning such ships with okayish AA but no specific AA-skills, like Jutland or Gearing.

Be that as it may be, wouldn't you agree that using insults to make your case demonstrates a lack of intelligence comparable to the people you feel the urge to insult?

I ran into @Estaca_de_Bares today. First I was puzzled by the friendly greetings, but then it hit me that I knew him from the quiz-thread. I must say: Chapeau!!! I can't remember ever having seen a radar-Mino going into B-cap on Tears of the Desert. Not only did he do that, he survived, supported my DD and even refused to be smoked up. Nice one.