HMS_Kilinowski

Ich denke du hast da drei Möglichkeiten. Die erste und radikalste: Vergiss die Zao. Wenn dein Spielstil, so wie er dir in Fleisch und Blut übergegangen ist, auf mittlere bis kurze Distanzen abzielt, dann beschreibt das recht gut, wie man die deutschen Kreuzer spielen sollte. Also warum einen neuen Spielstil lernen und evtl. den bisherigen Spielstil verlernen, wenn das für dich gut funktioniert hat? Natürlich ist das ein weiter Weg, nun die Hindenburg zu grinden, deswegen bezeichne ich das auch als den radikalsten Weg. Zweite Möglichkeit: Spiel die Zao, so wie sie für dich funktioniert. Das ist zwar nicht wofür sie optimiert wurde, aber wenn du deine Spielweise gut beherrscht, wirst du damit auf einem nicht optimierten Schiff wahrscheinlich erst mal bessere Ergebnisse einfahren als mit einer ungeübten Spielweise auf einem dafür optimierten Schiff. Letzte Möglichkeit: Du machst, was du scheinbar vorhast und lernst um. Die Zao ist, wie bereits von meinem Vorredner erklärt, eher auf Fernkampf gedrillt. Sekundärbuilds sind bei Kreuzern grundsätzlich Verschwendung. Die Torps sind ziemlich gut, aber die Nachladezeit ist so lang, dass man meistens nicht mal einen Fächer zu Beginn auf blinden Verdacht Richtung Gegner abfeuern kann. Die haben eher taktische Bedeutung. Die Zao sollte üblicherweise Abstand halten und durch exzessives Navigieren Schaden vermeiden. Selbst sind ihre Salven recht flach und schnell und man trifft die Gegner besser als man selbst getroffen wird. Ausnahme sind die russischen DDs. Die machen das gleiche wie die Zao, nur einen Tick besser, sind dafür aber auch schwächer. Primär schießt man mit HE und brennt Gegner ab. Sind die Gegner abgeschlagen oder keine mehr in Reichweite, stellt man den Beschuss ein und wartet bis die Sichtbarkeit wieder auf unter 10km sinkt. Ist man dann nicht mehr entdeckt, dann ist auch kein DD in der Nähe und man kann gefahrlos wenden. Wenden sollte man also nur, wenn man nicht sichtbar ist. Das ist quasi ein Schlüsselelement. Man fährt eher vom Gegner weg, wendet in Sicherheit, kehrt zurück, wendet noch in Sicherheit und schießt wieder, während man wegfährt. Die Zao flüchtet also eher und ist dadurch auch mehr das Schiff zum Verteidigen der schwachen Kartenseite. Gute Spieler werden sie auch auf Gegner zu steuern und offensiv einsetzen. Das braucht aber mehr Übung, da man irgendwann wieder wenden muss. Da ist Timing gefragt, weil man den Beschuss einstellen muss, warten muss, bis die Tarnung einsetzt und währenddessen nicht näher als 9,5 km an Gegner herankommen darf, inklusive Zerstörern, die man evtl. gar nicht sieht. Weiteres Manko im Fernkampf, idealerweise in der schwachen Flanke, ist die Anfälligkeit für Luftangriffe. Sind selten geworden, aber wenn, dann steht man mit runtergelassenen Hosen da. Die Zao hat, neben dem Fernkampf auch noch einen "Zerstörer-Modus". Das bringt die exzellente Tarnung mit sich. Mit Modul, Skillung und Camo, kommt die Zao, glaube ich, auf 9,5 - 9,7 km Sichtbarkeit. Mit ihren 12 km Torps kann man also stealth-torpen. Mit 10 Torps pro Seite kann man schon mal ein BB zerstören. Meistens wird man sich aber typische Pfade gegnerischer Schiffe suchen und da präventiv seine Aale werfen. RPF gilt hier als recht hilfreich, um Torps sinnvoll zu platzieren. RPF leistet zudem gute Dienste, wenn man einsam Zerstörer jagen muss. Die sehen dich ja früher. Also solltest du zumindest wissen woher die Torpedos kommen werden. Dafür ist die Zao gut geeignet, vorallem wenn sie noch Hydro hat. Mit RPF kann man quasi auf den DD zuhalten, die Distanz verringern und ihn unter Druck setzen. Irgendwann wirft er die Nebelwand und dann wird er mit Hydro aus dem Fuchsbau gejagt. Die Zao kann also recht nah unbemerkt an Gegner ran und sollte damit das Gefecht kontrollieren. Wenn die Chancen gut stehen, geht man in die beste Ausgangsposition und eröffnet das Feuer. Ist der Gegner zu stark, bleibt man im Dunkeln und sucht nach einer Gelegenheit, Torpedos einzusetzen, sich abzusetzen oder eine später hilfreiche Flankenposition zu erreichen. Darin liegt dann ein weiterer Joker der Zao. Da sie die Gegner früher sieht, der Gegner aber nicht unbedingt weiß, dass sie da ist und wo, kann sie sich bis auf 10 km an Breitseiten anschleichen. Die Streuung der Geschosse ist recht gering. Eine gute AP-Salve kann schnell die HP eines gegnerischen Kreuzers halbieren. Dann fallen die längeren Nachladezeiten der Zao-Geschütze auch nicht mehr ins Gewicht. Kurz: Die Zao kann vieles. Gut auf Distanz gespielt, wird sie mindestens so gehasst wie eine Khabarovsk. Sie sollte eine Feuer-Aura für das eigene Team sein. Was in ihrer Reichweite liegt, brennt. Mit bis zu 20 Torpedos kann sie gelegentlich Shimakaze spielen order sich mit einer Shima sehr gut ergänzen, wenn ein Kartensegment mit Torps dicht gemacht werden soll. Die gute AP-Salve und die Möglichkeit, sich an den Schwachpunkt des Gegners anzuschleichen, geben ihr einen recht verheerenden Erstschlag. Wenn man das alles zu kombinieren weiß und RNG dich nicht hasst, sollten leicht Partien drin sein, wo dein Team dich nicht trägt.

well I am not sure if I want to subscribe to that negative interpretation of WG policy. Maybe they are just focused on other things and forget to document their steps. In a way we as customers are responsible for telling them what we want. I often read people pointing out what they feel are shortcomings of the game and its social components. Not 5 minutes later the first reply by another customer is there, just denouncing the legitimacy of that constructivism. I mean "if you don't like it, don't play the game" is not the answer to everything. Personally I feel that this is a view of the game that is too business oriented. It is a philosophy of "take it or leave it but you gotta accept the system and have no right to express alternatives". If WG-staff tells us at the anniversary that we celebrate, that we are a community and that we made something possible, I wonder if these are empty solemn words or if they actually feel that way. Cause if that is the case, that "we all" are WoWs, our ideas should be heard. Hands up, in that survey you get from time to time, who demanded ever more ships? Who demanded even faster arcade game modes? I want to react to what both of you wrote in one paragraph. So please feel replied to below. Yes, it is possible that WG thinks a lack of information is better for business and that they think an intensive player is better. I would say this is a bad business choice. If you persuade people to play more than is good for them in terms of a professional-private-hobby life balance, a moment of personal conflict might occur, where customers feel they cannot uphold the hobby at a level that is acceptable. Their family might interfere, their work might suffer and they will not quit their job or relationship to sail virtual warships. They will lose customers, ironically not the students without lots of money, but the well earning family fathers who just spend 80 Euros for a premium year if they feel like it. The family fathers are like the guys with the gym membership who work out once a week. They don't wear the equipment but pay top dollar. They are your top customers and if you got any sense of economics you want to keep them as customers. A lack of information could be beneficial, if we as players chose to invest more to make sure we get some rewards. The opposite is true, at least for me. With the GoNavy event, the lack of information led to me not buying any premium containers cause I was not aware of the deadline. Now, that I did not know how many sovereigns I can earn, I decided to not go for the Warspite. I might have got it on discount, a ship that is not even in my top 10. I might have bought some crates, if something in the arsenal was to my taste and the amount of crates was calculable. Unfortunately, without info, I cannot do it. I posed the question, it was not answered, so I need to make a choice. And in the face of uncertainty I go with what I know. I know that if I don't spend money here, I won't lose money and will at least not be dissatisfied. I might lose an opportunity to get a ship and WG, as with the GoNavy event, will probably lose out on a few extra bugs for crates. A lose-lose-situation. But this is the consequence of the chosen information policy. If they invest resources and working hours in musicals people don't watch without getting crates for it, rather than writing relevant info, they will find out that musicals don't refinance the pay checks. It is unfortunate. Maybe someone who understands the flaw and is heard can explain to them the principles of rational choice. Reputation is important, for both sides I might add. It is the basis for repeated business. Right now people have doubts and some have announced they will react to lacking information in the past. So if I as a customer want to build reputation myself, I need to react as I announced to remain credible in the future, which means not to get invested into the current event. So I say: Thank you for the Bert Dunkirk and a few flags and sorry I cannot open my purse.

I am confused ... again. I have counted 13 regular containers over all 4 directives, so 65 Sovereigns, plus one premium container. That makes 80 sovereigns. Where would the other sovereigns come from apart from assuming a certain position in the Hall of Fame. Dear @Crysantos, please clarify, how many Sovereigns can be acquired through regular gameplay and without assuming top positions in the Hall of Fame. If WG does not want to share that information, even clarifying the motives would be helpful. We had these discussions after past events, where some users were dissatisfied with the way information was presented and accused WG of intentionally trying to confuse the community. Nobody wants unnecessary misunderstandings, I am sure. Best, HMS_Kilinowski

I find this all a bit confusing. Does it have to be a big secret, how many sovereigns you can realistically get during the event? It is very nice and generous that the events are there and that useful rewards are part of the incentive system. It would however help the community if upcoming events were presented transparent in every respect. Every player could from the start decide what his personal goal is and how to achieve that. E.g. for the Indianapolis Marathon we knew perfectly in advance what all the challenges throughout the marathon would be, how many days we had time to finish them and consequently, which challenges we would skip to balance this out with our professional or private lifes. For me the lessons after some events were more like "had they told us, that ...., I would have ..." and never " ..., I would not have ...". So in my experience having known a certain detail I was not aware of, mostly would have encouraged me to do more rather than resign. This transparency imo would help WG, cause players would decide to complement some rewards with premium containers or even get premium time to shoulder a certain grind. It is just some info on an event, not us asking for a specific line of source code.

One more thing springs to mind: sub_octavian expressed in the stream on CV rework, they did no longer want CVs to one-shot ships, which seems like a change of paradigm. The idea there seems that WG does not want players to be punished by one perfect attack, so with CVs no longer a complete squadron or combo of squadrons can move on one target. How do subs fit into this change of paradigm? They only seem to have a small salvo of single torps. If these are normal torps, one mediocre damage hit seems like a huge give-away of a subs position, a position that has been established with great patience and forgoing steady damage. The sub cannot escape, in the stream it had some 17kts speed. So the reward for all the careful, risky, boringly slow and stealthy approach towards enemy ships must be a devastating strike ability. But then again, if WG don't want CVs to make huge devastating attacks, why is this wishful for submarines? There WILL be angry mails to support, demanding a nerf to sub torps from every BB that gets hit and feels this is op.

Generally, subs may be a good idea and enrich WoWs. I only wish, they would decompose the whole cruiser-BB-mix-up first and introduce a battlecruiser class first. Don't build a new class on a flawed fundament. Every new ship and ship type adds to the complications met with rebalancing. I would not venture into unknown waters if I was not sure I got everything right beforehand. And to what has been said about DDs, I agree. The workload for DDs and cruisers has been increasing over the last year, whereas BB player consider these classes as servants to their needs, while BBs themself do not contribute much to the needs of others. Submarines may imo worsen that development, as they are another threat for BBs that can be addressed by cruisers and DDs. The expectation will be even more for DDs to be in front line and be in the back covering flanks as well. Criticism in DD players is already getting unfair as many players don't see, where they are but only where they are not, not taking into account they cannot be everywhere.

You don't need to sell ships to get XP. You can convert it using doubloons. Selling them will only give you a fraction of your money back.

Oh, yes, good point. Forgot to mention that. Thx for pointing it out. Especially for a veteran WoT-player the opportunity to use the premium time, is a bonus.

By the way: There was this news bit about us still getting the premium container if we keep watching the video: https://worldofwarships.eu/en/news/videos/pinup-music-video/ So some combined effort might be in order. Anybody got an idea how we can come up with more clicks ... not putting someone's parkinson's diseased grandmother on the mouse button?

Well, the Marblehead is as sister-ship to the Murmansk, which is arguably the better twin. Both ships are based on the Omaha, which does not cost any real money. @CircleOfSorrow So you can try it out and see if you like it before investing any real money. I would rather advise against putting down real money. If you think you can buy your way to a good ship and decent game experience, that is wrong. Many new players immediately jumping on the Tirpitz and T8- gameplay can testify to that. So most of all I would disadvise buying a mid- or high-tierpremium ship right now. You need experience and you need practice or you won't have fun. These ships cost some 20-50 Euros depending on what you are going for. That is quite an investment for a game. Might I dare offer an alternative? If you really like WoWs and think you will play it a lot now, take that money and buy a premium account, maybe for a month for 10€. Play the game. With premium time you can grind your way much faster through the different ship lines and see what fits you. Good players with time can do up to 40 games a day. You should be able to get up to 1.5M XP. You will be able to do some missions and campaigns faster, which again give good commanders for certain ships. You will also be getting those ingame containers faster and earn some coal, which again you can reinvest into ships. Don't hurry to make a choice. Don't limit yourself by picking some ship and having to stay with it. Some ship may seem like you like them but then you find out, they don't work under the current meta. An be careful with people recommending certain ships. Maybe they can get a decent winrate cause they blend in with the ship. That does not mean you will be a natural, too. Find your way, take your time.

I see ranked as broken. The best indicator is that it is just not fun to play it. I almost stopped playing it. A few days ago I left ranked battles for some division play and I said to my clanmates I wish WG would give us one day of no TK penalties so I could go into ranked and torp all my potato teammates. I rarely have these feelings in randoms. So ranked just brings out all the bad things I hate about random and makes them more pronounced. Which is why I don't get the concept. The idea behind ranked is that your individual skills are ranked based on your individual performance ... in a team game. That itself is a contradiction. That is why we have teams. When I read some people do not like clans, than I felt, they don't understand the principles of that game. A clan is a team and random teams are not. Nobody tries to determine a soccer players quality by putting him up with any random team. Maybe if that was a 1vs1 duel. When I play ranked I never feel like the win or loss really way that deserved. Sometimes I win and I feel I had to make a mule walk uphill against his will to get there and then again I loose cause a Zao did not read the chat that said "we are ahead on points stay undetected" and went into a shootout with a Kurfürst". It feels like clan battles with a tactically ignorant clan. So what could possibly be the fun in that? If I have to choose between clan battles with an ignorant team or clan battles, that choice is blatantly simple. Please WG, remove ranked, give us more clan battles. Give all the potatoes the steel just for free. They will eventually get it. They got the time and they got the nerve, cause they are used to bad play. That way they at least do not bother the rest of the community with their playstyle. Let them have their Stalingrad for free. Way I see it, they need all the help they can get. Or whatever restrict ranked to having a winrate of 50% or more in the ship used. The whole way ranked works is that a player must win more than he loses to get ahead, if we ignore that "keep your star" thing. Might as well make it an entry requirement. So I could not take my Des Moines into ranked, cause I suck in it. So be it.

König Albert and to some extent Nassau are quite decent and also frequently mentioned when it comes to T3. Oh boy, are you in for a surprise. First of all I had a look at your ships, cause when you say you like a ship best, what else you have seems relevant for that comparison. In your case I don't understand why you like Emden best, when you got a St.Louis in port and most players would prefer the St.Louis. It has a higher rate of fire and excellent survivability. For higher tiers there is no Emden. Technically ships have evolved from the single-mount guns to the multi-gun-turret-design, have become faster and improved in many dimensions. This is the pure difference gamewise. To that you must add the difference in players. Players take their experiences from low tiers and improve their tactics. You e.g write about using shell arcs to bomb ships in cover. It has not dawned on you that this is more of a defensive asset. Nobody can blame you for that. You play T2-3 and it appears fun to shoot targets behind islands. This will radically change to it being you who hides behind those islands and is glad his gun arcs allow him to shoot over his own cover. Instead of them hiding from you it will be you hiding from them. So this part of the fun of enemies being shot at sitting behind islands wondering how the hell rhey take damage right now, will soon be gone and you will need to look for other pleasures. The rapid firing guns seem an advantage, but your total dpm might not be high. On the other side fast shooting guns are only effective when being fired continuosly, also continuosly giving away your position. And their high arcs also mean long flying time of shells and give good players enough time to evade your shots. You won't hit the way you do at tier 2. As already mentioned by others, the US light cruiser line will closely reflect your description. But they are not well armored. They depend on islans to hide and shoot over. That can be very effective, given you know your trade. That however requires you knowing the maps and identifying the islands that give enough protection to multiple angles while still being flat enough to shoot over them. That takes practice, active observation and, you may already have guessed it, patience and resistence to frustration. Another way to go is the russian destroyer lines. They are very fast and nimble. They got fast firing guns, however with flat arcs that cannot shoot over most islands. Their playstyle is staying at distance and spamming HE in open water, protecting themselves from hits by constantly maneuvering. A well played russian DD won't need to hide behind islands cause he dodges most shells and takes no damage. They do use islands but rather to sneak up on Battleships for a fast run with their short ranged torpedos. But quite frankly, these are your current preferences based on a handful of games in some different ships of tier 2-3. Chances are you will find other playstyles more attractive as they reveal in your grind up the lines. Few lines show their high tier playstyle in low tiers. So I would advise trying out as many lines as possible and then, after a few hundred or even more games to pick a line that suits you. Don't focus a line too early. You won't know the alternatives and maybe make a bad call. And you will be inexperienced in comparison to your opponents, frustrating your own team and being frustrated yourself by constantly being killed without having fun.

Ah ja, danke für die Info. Ob die Yubari nun 5€ bzw. Marblehead/Texas 9€ wert sind, darüber kann man streiten. Aber mal 0,90 € für eine Smith ist okay. Hab ich mir gegriffen. Sind ja zwischendurch mal lustig zu spielen, die kleinen Flitzer. Und falls ich keinen Spaß damit hab, bleibt mir ja der Liegeplatz.

@KlopiratHalt mich bitte auf dem Laufenden, quote mich oder was auch immer, wenn du das spreadsheet postest. Ich steh aufm Schlauch. Wovon redet ihr? Was für Schiffe gibt's wo für 90c?

Personally I like my Prinz Eugen a lot. I knew it from library books back when I was a kid and there is something about it that looks well-tempered. It's hard to find objective reasons. I guess in every head there are clichés and paradigms. #if we are asked to draw a car, we will likely draw a sedan in a memorable shape, if we draw a shark it might resemble a typical grey reef shark as we see them in an aquarium. If I think about WW2 warships this Prinz Eugen model just springs to mind. Also I hear a lot of people saying they like the Prinz Eugen, sadly stating that its looks are its best feature. Also I do get positive comments on the Normandie with the ocean liner camo. Personally I think it looks like a fishing trawler with this separated superstructure, not very majestic.

In all fairness the 203mm can do decent AP damage. In my 155mm I struggle a bit getting citadel hits, especially at long range where the shells lose a lot of speed. These davastating initial salvos that the Zao and probably also the Atago can dish out, I don't see that on the 155mm. I would love to have an Atago. I don't, so I can only speculate. The Atago has one torp launcher for each quadrant of the ship, so it can torp forwardish. That is an advantage, as a Mogami can be rushed from the front. Then the Atago has a heal it gives them 62hp at best. I remember having some duels with the Atago. Initially I felt superior when my Mogami burnt them down and I got a much bigger bite from them than they got from me. Then they managed to escape. I thought they ran for good to lick their wounds and next time I saw them they healed a lot of that fire damage back and were ready to go. Well, Toivia, you brought this on yourself being anecdotal and stuff. I am going to your stats. ... What the ... ? You got 42% hit rate on your main guns in the Zao in ranked? Not an expert on typical Zao stats but that seems like insane precision. Wouldn't 31-32% be normal? Do you fight that close to the enemies or are you just such a good shot? So, you complain a ship does not work for you and still you rule in it. Now, @Excavatus, doesn't this guy remind you of someone in our clan? Now to the tactical flexibility. If these actually crazy Salems/DesMos rush your spawn and they do so on your strong side, that should give big laughs. That is what you got BBs for and ranked sees BBs aplenty. Some of them cannot hit anything, but that itself is not a flaw of your ship but of their abilities. If that happens on the weak side, that is expected. So you either got a DD with you for some early warning, cause with that low detection, getting caught broadside by a DesMo, can only happen if a DD leading the charge spots you first. So you see the first cruiser and you know a DD might be ahead, so you turn early. Or, if you are really alone on your flank, you should have skilled into RPF, so you know from the RPF and your knowledge of the map, where the ships are and when they hit your detection range and torp whatever is rushing you before they even spot you. That last one is not my wisdom, it's just what I saw in a Flamu video, makes sense, tho.

@Klopirat Jetzt bin ich aber beeindruckt. Hast du dir das spreadsheet selber gebastelt oder gibt's das irgendwo als Download? Kannst du das bitte posten? In der Community gibt's sicher nicht wenige Leute, die sich den Kopf zermartern, wie sie die ollen Flaggen bestmöglich mit irgendwelchen Camos und Schiffsboni kombinieren, sodass maximale XP/FXP/CXP rausspringen. Ich war kurz irritiert, dass die 2017er Camo doch Vorteile bei Flaggen mit XP-Bonus hat, aber es macht natürlich Sinn, weil die Boni multipliziert werden und man möglichst gleich große Faktoren braucht.

I think it is balanced. Other ships have higher dpm, that is right. But consider your ability to fight at range, which is where you wanna stay. You get a tight spread on target, where they spray all over the place and you dodge most shells. So you effectively land more hits and do more damage. Had a tough duel against a Henry IV recently. The only thing that saved me was my team reaching 1000 points. So I mostly fear ships that master my trade, like Khaba or Henri. It depends on the situation. Just yesterday I debated with a clan mate over the ranked battles and our frustration. There I play the Des Moines for lack of an alternative. This ship can hug islands. Still it is no use when your team cannot maintain a defensive line. Then you quickly get enemies on your open flank and need to run. Most maps don't have a lot of trench lines, they got one. You dig in with your island hugger. Now your team defends that line and you try to abuse your fast firing turrets to the benefit of your team. All nice and good if your team can hold it. In ranked that has become a big if. So you gotta run and you do it from a stationary position behind an island, slowly accelerating out, trying not to hit the island with your rear as you take a tight turn, while the enemy ship - oh hello Monti - gets within 8 km of you. So the island huggers frequently find themself being the closest ship to the enemy, sitting behind an island and having to move. The high mobility of the Zao again is an advantage here, cause when you are spotted, your ship is already moving at 30kts and at least 10 km away. You can decide if you disengage and just leave a friendly warning in the shape of 2x5 fast torps per side or if the terms favor you. Which reminds my of another strength when that Alpha comes together with the mobility. The island huggers are there yes and they can farm insane dpm. Their tactical value is however limited to the ignorance of the enemy. Some of my clan mates memorize every spot on every map where an island hugger/radar cruiser likes to hide. Even I know a few by now. You seldom surprise a good player broadside with you being on the very spot where a ship of your type is supposed to be. The Zao has more tactical flexibility. Nobody can pinpoint its location unless it reaveals itself for the first time. There are vague and mostly correct general ideas, like flanks or in escorting distance to a DD. But very often that alpha strike comes as a surprise, actually so often that on certain maps my initial load is AP shells. The Zao can get pretty close before being spotted and the tight grouping of the salvo properly aimed at tha citadel area can make up for any lack of dpm in the following shootout. And yes, a camping enemy team is not optimal for IJN CAs. I think the key here is the DDs. If you can help taking them out early you get visual dominance. You then can kite towards the enemy, disengage for 20s to go dark before you hit your concealment radius. When no enemy DDs are there to spot you, you can make a turn without much risk. After your turn you can start firing again until you hit your max firing range and repeat the whole procedure. If they ignore you, you can slow down a bit to get more shots out in one cycle. If they start focussing you, you stop shooting and get out. Okay I am flattering myself. Some BB players are darn good shots and can just read my evasive patterns. Still working on that.

I wasn't going to mention islands, but now that you mention them, I might as well do so. I do use islands but not the way USN cruisers do, getting close to them. The trajectories are too flat. But the Mogami is quite fast so if you got an isolated target you can quite easily keep an island in between you and the target and shield against his revenge. That is a good thing, cause I witness people getting quite agitated about being spammed with 155mm IFHE shells. They will try to get back at you even if other targets would be more important. That's a slight problem for you but also an asset for your team, cause your team will get less love. The camping is a problem for the T8-ijn-cruisers. The Mogami is not too good in a pushing role, cause it has to get even closer than it's range to shoot targets moving away. Also it cannot use torps and if spotted by DDs cannot get unspotted without a very risky turn or - in the presence of DDs also risky - slowing down to let the enemy gain distance. I like to play it close to it's role in clan battles, as a defender, rather kiting away. So the trick is to let your team choose where they go and then hopefully go to the weak side that will be pushed by the enemy. Then you choose your position for a good opening and start lighting fires. If you reach your max firing range you can slow down a bit to let the enemy catch up or use your high speed to increase distance and go dark if they are too many. If a DD tries to keep you spotted too agressively, he will at some point be too far ahead to be supported and you can turn and fight him. If the enemy gets too close he risks your torps and as you are kiting aggressively, outturning your guns, pauses you use to drop torps will not raise suspicion

Klingt 25 Container nicht zu optimistisch. 16 Items aus 25 Containern. Da sind sicher mehr als nur ein paar Duplikate drin. Elite sind sie ja erst nach erfolgreichem Grind. Wenn man die Schiffe sämtlich bereits in Elitestatus im Hafen hat, dann ist der XP-Bonus vielleicht vernachlässigbar. Wenn man die aber erst noch durchspielen muss, ist so ein 50% XP-Bonus sehr willkommen. Und natürlich ist XP-auch die Basis für Flaggen. Eine Flagge mit FreeXP-Bonus wirft mehr FreeXP ab, wenn die zugrundeliegende XP höher ist. Die Tarnungen mit reinem Bonus auf Kapitäns-XP und FreeXP sollte man also nicht mit anderen Boni kombinieren, das wäre Verschwendung.

Strange you would mention the Mogami. I just recently got it. To me it never felt uptiered. Not even when stock and that is very rare. The Mogami seems to be a ship that is vulnerable to an extreme that it does not matter much if it gets hit by a Yamato or just the Tirpitz shells. The Mogami, very similar to a torpedo boat is not designed to be hit. If it gets hit it dies quickly. So it should not get hit and if it does not get hit, it is not important how big the opponents are. So I find it strange that you would name ships that are imo very capable of holding their end in any tier. Atago is slightly different with its torp layout and 203mm guns, but it seems quite similar at dodging and has good shell arcs. Personally I would take an Atago into most T10 battles and just be excited about the huge amount of XP I get for burning down BBs. The only thing I fear are Khabas and CVs. Maybe you just play your japanese cruisers in a front runner role, which they fail to fulfill. That you struggle with T8-matchmaking may be a sign that you are using ships, that don't synergize with your strengths and playstyle. Have you tried the heavy german cruisers? Which ships do you generally feel "at home" in?

First of all you realize that you are avoiding my argument cause you know you cannot come up with a 20% player. There is no such player and there would not be one even if the whole world played WoWs. If you claim I say something, please feel fre to quote me. I mean your case is even much simpler. Find a 20% player and prove me wrong. Do I really need to quote you again? Okay, it is increasingly annoying and more of a nice gesture on my behalf, but here you got it: I did not say there is a probability. You said it. I said that, if a probability exists, that very probability does not depend on the number of observations. Whether an event occurs depends on the nature of the underlying distribution function. You can roll a dice as many times as you like, you will not observe the event "7" as the underlying distribution function only allows for the events 1-6. Likewise the distribution of winrates in the WoWs community will most likely not contain an event 20%. Not because of the number of players but because even the worst player cannot consistently hamper his teams success to an extent he could reach an average of 20%. The event 20% does not exist. And all that explanation I gave is just for the luxury of being thorough. It would suffice to point out that the existence of an event "80% wr player" by itself does not say anything at all about the existence of an event "20% player" unless you could prove there was an underlying distribution function like e.g. a uniform distribution. Anything else is pure assumption. And it is one thing to say something false. In the same post telling others to go back to school, suggesting they do not understand basic mathematics and pretend being superior is a bit arrogant. Then going on about it just for the sake of not having to admit one is wrong is getting cheap. I explained myself, you did not, you just tried to cover up with some arbitrary platitude. So I am done. You are wrong.

The argument being that this is inconsiderate to the opposing team cause they have a right not to play against superior players? And that leading to the claim that unicum divisions are obliged to willingly play below their ability to make it fair? For that argument you don't need a division. That means that even a single unicum player is spoiling the game experience of the opposing team. We have ships with guns, spoiling the experience of the others team is what we use them for. It is not the responsibility of the player to generate an even fight, that is WGs job. If they wanna do it by some rubberband matchmaking mechanism, they may do so. You are nevertheless expected to play to the best of your ability. Not more not less. And I agree that you have no right to insult a player just for being a bad player. But I have every right to criticise a player for a specific bad move. Just yesterday I heavily criticised an Akizuki who left a cap 5 seconds before finishing the cap. He went off to shoot at a BB. I literally told him "we don't need your guns, we need you to cap". He then shot 3 opposing ships, won the game with a Kraken. So I wrote him in port "i take it back, well played". So he made a bad call, but it didn't cost us the game and he saw a way to win that I did not see. But then again I had a game where both teams were in each others base and my team would have won, if only that stupid DD-player would have stayed concealed instead of trying to farm damage at a distant BB that reset him. The whole team told him in chat to stop firing. That is just beyond bad play and such a player cannot whine if he gets insulted. I invented that thing of linking a Wikipedia article to suggest a person is uneducated and should read a cyclopedia. You don't get to me. You did not say anything about a distribution You just said that for any 80% there must be a 20% player and that is wrong. I dare you to find one, let's say 1000+ games. Of course for some distributions there is a chance that a 20% player might exist, but first of all you don't know the exact distribution and second it is inherent to the nature of a distribution that the probability of a certain event, in your case a player with 20% WR is, does not change with the number of players. You roll a dice, the probability of the event "6" is 1/6, the expected frequency of the event 6 will be 1/6 if you roll the dice 100 times or 100k times. Of course the chances of observing that event "6" once is much higher if you roll the dice 100 times than if you roll it once, but that has nothing to do with distribution. The statement still is incorrect.

You cannot use hydro. It is considered unsporting behavior. Say you use radar, too, and they lynch you. Got reported for using HE in a Cleve duel. Other Cleve thought AP was mandatory in an honorable duel. Even bothered to point it out in chat. Can hardly see my face in the mirror ever since.