HMS_Kilinowski

Like so many of you, hopefully, I feel, a great forum needs a great exit. So this is it. The rule for this topic is just this: You are allowed one post only, and it must be the absolute last post you ever make in this forum. You don't need to post now, you can come back if you got other unfinished business here. There are no limits to what you may or may not say, at least from my side. You may say goodbye to people elsewhere and just post some funny gif, or make this your big speech. Whatever, just let this be you closing the door from outside. Make it funny, make it sad, make it grateful, make it angry, take your time or keep it simple, whatever strikes you as the final chord in your symphony. Make it count. Got a hunch it will not be that easy to make that choice for myself.

"Is this the final?" Christoph Kramer (World Cup 2014) Yes, it is. Let's keep it as short, as you may have come to expect of me. One of the key features of a forum is structure and this is how I will structure my exit: To the forumites: You guys were the best part of this game. You guys are awesome. The forum was one of the first places I visited, when I started seriously playing the game. Everything beyond the basics of the basics I learned here. I know, sometimes some of you were quite arrogant and dismissive. But the forum as an institution has never failed me. I have posted questions in other games' discords servers and never got an answer. But if there was a serious question, I could always count on people making an effort to give a valid answer. I know some CCs may have criticized toxicity in here. But hey, they were only catering to their paying fans, cause they needed the money. This forum has been honest, even if the answer may have been inconvenient, a value that may not be fashionable in a world of smiles and thumbs-ups anymore. Keep your dedication to details and good arguments and you will always be cherished in any community of humans. This community is about to end or reshape in Discord or other places and will never be the same. So keep us in your memories. Even if our words will be lost in time, your memories of funny moments and good arguments will remain. THESO has always been the forumites' clan. If any of the slightly dedicated people find themselves alone and looking for a tight community, come by our Discord (see the recruitment section of the forum and soon the Discord for links). Even if you just want to be a guest on our Discord, we are always happy to do divisions and make bad taste jokes. Like do you know the one where the pope, hitler and ... yeah sorry, nvm. To Wargaming: Now finally it doesn't matter, right? I can tell you what I think and the worst that can happen to me is a ban from a forum that is about to be shut down in a few hours. The forum rules do not allow any sanctions beyond that. So here I am, for the first time in 6 years, free to tell you what I think, using any profanity I see fit. But honestly, I don't care. The forum has become a difficult means of communication over the years. So often you guys at WG have made your polished statements and from the discussion going on afterwards it became obvious, you were not free to say what needed to be said. This censorship came between us. We asked the hard questions and often your staff would just ignore them and cherry-pick to react to the more convenient yet irrelevant questions. I never felt the forum was the place for exchange. It was a way of publishing information and a firewall for the many pitchfork riots the game saw. It doesn't matter if there is a forum, since you didn't use it. How often did we argue about game-related things, walk you to the epiphany, do the math for you, just for a few thumbs up from the community and silence on behalf of the people at WG making decisions. The forum as a means to provide feedback has been dead to me for years. Closing it down just makes it official. You guys are developing a game, but you are not in the flow. It's been months since I last saw one of your employees (TheSailingRobin) in your game, using your own product. You are trying to understand players needs, but how many of you have e.g. ever been shotgunned by a submarine and experienced the frustration so many customers describe? How can you possibly understand a product you don't use anymore? Who trusts a cook that doesn't eat his own meals? Whoever wants to know how your community management worked and where it may have missed the mark. It's all here, all in the forum, the ups and downs. The suggestions and the reality. Is WoWs a good game? Yes. Is it the best game it could easily have been. Not by a mile. It's better than its competition, which is none. You kept your customer because there was no alternative. But in gaming you get competition. At some point, the old tricks won't fly. And the people lost, won't come back. Some day even WG will awake and realize the game-theoretical economic implications of reputation. A game is a cultural good. The game may belong to WG, but the culture, the anecdotes belong to the community. Much like when original music records got destroyed for all times during the fire at the Universal Studios, records of songs played during couples first dates or other memorable moments, you have a responsibility to maintain the heritage of your game. You have decided to delete one of these heritages now. This game would not have been what it is, without many of the people in this forum. Any of the regulars here you could ask for a valid opinion, unbiased by money or particular interests. These people are the game. One day you and your staff may find yourselves in nostalgia, trying to recapture what was the spirit of this game, and where names of players should pop up in your memory, there will be a black hole. I still remember how I burned Crysantos down in his Montana in my Zao on stream. We will remember all of you. Remember the forum. This is one of the moments where we ask ourselves: Why was there never a reaction emoji for sadness? Final remarks: Before I forget it. @KillStealBoss, chapeau to the honorabru people of Poland who, as the only nation in the world had the courage to name their ships after their national dish, the meatball: Long live Blyskawica !!! Gotcha !!! Kurkele blyadole.

@AethervoxxIt's so sad. The ship is sinking. Nostalgia sets in for all of us. And all you can think of, is mechanically downvoting everybody. You may need help. So, that's it. We from THESO say goodbye to the forum. We got many of our best and most loyal members through the forum. We shall not forget that. Remember us. Visit us on our clan Discord. We hope to see you there. And if this is it, if you are leaving the game now, even if you were one of those stubborn casual players making all sorts of excuses and tinfoil theories about why things didn't work out, we still wish you a happy life. Make the best of it. Find happiness. Find love. Just please don't be on our team, lol. HMS_Kilinowski out.

The forum, like the game is a team effort. So many people contributed to the spirit of the forum. So many names pop up. When I started, it was specific clan tags that always caught my attention, when it came to constructive attitude. Those, among others were DAVY, the clan I ended up joining, mostly because of @Excavatus. But also clans like SCRUB, BOTS, NWP, FUSO, the back then typical Storm League clans, featured a lot of helpful players. Good discussions saw people like @159Hunter, @Allied_Winter, @Aragathor, @Bear__Necessities, @BLUB__BLUB, @CptMinia, @DFens_666, @El2aZeR, @Estaca_de_Bares, Europizza, @ForlornSailor, @GarrusBrutus, @KillStealBoss, @Leo_Apollo11, @lup3s, @MrWastee, Pancake ... I mean @Panocek, @quickr, @Saltface, @Sunleader, @Verblonde, @xxNihilanxx, and, on good days, @Yosha_AtaIante. You will notice I ordered them alphabetically, cause I don't want to praise anybody higher than anybody else. Also there are a few names no longer active that nevertheless helped a lot in my early years. I also apologize for the many names I should have memorized but can't recollect at this very moment. I mean a Discord may be whatever it is, streams and Youtubers all have their unique selling point and purpose. But the people here, in the context of the game, are family. I notice, when I get a CC or a WG employee into a battle. But meeting a forumite in the game, that's something different, like hitchhikers meeting, like being from the same school or neighborhood. This is the hard core of the game. There is this connection that always made us respect each other, even if we differed in opinions. To me, this here has always been the real thing. If you are playing WoWs, but you don't know some of the names mentioned above, you may play the game, but you're not a player. People like Flambass may be streaming to a big audience, but sorry, Flambass, if you land in a battle with El2aZeR and you don't recognize this means business, that is because you were not really in the scene. So in that respect I always appreciated streamers like @SnuSnu_RIP, who at least knew, if you want to swing with the game you need to be in touch with the forum. I especially want to mention and thank @Grandpa_Hulka, who for a long time contributed his reviews on Events for the german forum. I do see these contributions. They are more authentic, because the forumite does it for free, unbiased by subscriptions and money. Ofc, even if she is not EU, I pull my hat for Little White Mouse, whose reviews on ships accompanied us during our emancipation as players. I am humbly honored to even be mentioned here. Thanks.

I think the mods already left, cause WG told them: It'll be a cluster ... frenzy of people not caring about the rules anymore. Just leave them to their pillow fight and we'll wipe it up once everything's locked.

Does anybody know the exact time, when the forum will be locked?

Meine Rede. Ihr habt an der Anzahl der Posts gemessen, nicht an der Qualität. "Guten Morgen aus Kiel", "Alter, wieso hab ich schon wieder Blähungen?" "Ich hab doch gar keinen Wirsing gegessen." sind schon drei Posts. Gemessen an beispielsweise einem einzigen Review von @Grandpa_Hulka, ist der Inhalt aber eher flatulenter Natur. Die meisten von uns sind auch auf einigen Discords und mit beiden Formaten vertraut. Das Forum leistet, was ein Discord meiner Erfahrung nach nicht kann. Der Nutzer hat seinen Raum. Wenn er postet, kann er sich so lange oder kurz wie nötig halten. Es ermutigt, zu schreiben. In Discords überlagern sich verschiedene parallele Anliegen oft im gleichen Kanal, stören sich gegenseitig in der Diskussion. Ab einem bestimmten Spielervolumen ist ein Discord zu chaotisch. Discord ist ein Smalltalk-Format sogar mit einem Zeichen-Limit pro Post. Die Hemmschwelle zu posten ist niedriger, weil die thematischen Vorgaben weniger strikt sind als in einem Forum, dafür kommt der Inhalt oft zu kurz. Bei einem Kongress wird offenbar auch in den Pausen mehr geredet als während der Vorträge. Deswegen käme aber niemand auf die Idee, die Vorträge abzuschaffen und einen Kongress nur mit Pausen zu machen. Es ist also, entschuldige, naiv, ein Format in Konkurrenz mit dem anderen zu setzen. Beide Formate ergänzen sich vielmehr und erreichen unterschiedliche Spielerschichten. Nicht umsonst verweisen Links in unserem Clan-Discord immernoch am häufigsten aufs Forum. Das Forum hat seinen Zweck und macht auch nur Arbeit proportional zu seiner Nutzung. Geht die Nutzung zurück, sinken auch die Kosten. Die Kosten waren eh hauptsächlich Ingame-Währung für die ehrenamtlichen Mods aus der Spielerschaft. Eine Ankündigung ins Forum zu copy-pasten dauert keine Minute. Deswegen sind die von Wargaming offiziell vorgebrachten Gründe zwar logisch, wirklich schlüssig sind sie aber nicht. edit: Alleine diesen Post hier müsste ich im Discord schon in mehrere Teile zerschnibbeln. Dazwischen posten mir dann fünf Leute rein und die Struktur ist im Eimer.

Oh, I missed that. I wouldn't say it's a shame to be second, even more so with only 5 stars difference.

Wir haben aber eben nicht nur diskutiert, sondern sehr viel Informationen über das Spiel zusammengetragen. Vieles davon hat Zeit und Mühe gekostet, die niemand je vergütet bekommen hat. Die Spieler haben das aus Gemeinsinn getan. Nun ist es nicht das erste Mal, das dies passiert. Wargaming hat oft Spielmechaniken drastisch geändert und alte mühsam zusammengetragene Info war obsolet. Man muss WG hierfür aber entlasten, weil Anpassungen des Spiels letztlich dem Spiel dienen und das Spiel wichtiger ist als Info über das Spiel. Aber auch ein gesperrtes Forum macht keine Arbeit und der Speicherplatz für alte Topics ist vernachlässigbar gering. Also macht zumindest die Löschung des Forums keinen Sinn und kann nicht aus den genannten Gründen erfolgen.

Wer wissen will, wie Discord sein wird, der braucht sich nur dieses Thema hier anschauen. Du postest etwas und 30 min später ist es schon 20 Seiten weiter aus dem Blick. Da kann ich mir das Schreiben doch gleich sparen. Auf unserem Clan-Discord ist es bereits eine Herausforderung, relevante Informationen zugänglich und auffindbar zu machen, und da posten nur etwa 50 Menschen. In einem Rauschen von Tausenden, kann man das vergessen. Uploads werden nach bestimmter Zeit gelöscht, auch wenn das relevante Tabellen und Schlüssel-Info ist. Da ist ein Discord das falsche Instrument. Natürlich hat Discord mehr Aktivität, weil ich dort auch einfach nur "Guten Morgen" schreiben kann, ohne dass es am Thema vorbei wäre. Es gibt ja bei Discord kein Thema, sondern höchstens mehrere sich störend überlagernde Themen. Und natürlich, wenn der hundertste Spieler zum hundertsten Mal bei Discord die gleiche Frage stellt, dann ist es auch okay, wohingegen die Mentalität im Forum auch die Suchoption einschließt. Der ganze sinnlose Smalltalk schafft eben Traffic. Aber dieses Phänomen als mehr Aktivität zu bezeichnen, ist schmerzlich gleichmacherisch. Ein gut argumentierter Post im Forum kann nun mal nicht mit einem "Rülpswettbewerb" auf Discord gleichgesetzt werden. Wer den Unterschied zwischen 100 Einzeilern auf Discord und einem 100-zeiligen Post nicht versteht, der war schon immer im Forum an der falschen Adresse. Auch die BILD-Zeitung hatte schon immer 10-mal mehr Leser als der Spiegel. Ist Substanz deswegen obsolet? Und wieso brauchen wir Drops? Hat sich je jemand darüber beschwert, dass es im Forum keine Belohnungen gibt? Wofür überhaupt? Fürs Liken oder andere Dressurpferd-Stupiditäten? Lasst den intelligenten Menschen ihr Forum und den Like-Button-Zombies ihren Discord.

Oh, you mean you see more activity in the medium that WG bribed everyone with free containers to get them to register, compared to the medium, where everybody and their mothers had already registered years ago. I can't understand for the life of me why that is the case. A decision that has been kept away from us for a long time, and that now is not even open for discussion but mere acceptance. WG really learned their lessons from the Puerto Rico incident. So where is all that information about game mechanics, tactics and content going, that we accumulated in this forum for years, that is still state-of-the-art and only one search query away from the interested mind? We gotta assume this happens to the NA forum as well, right? So all the reviews of Little White Mouse, with the meticulous analysis of ship performance, the penetration graphs, in short, months of voluntary service to the community, where is that going?

I'm not sure this is the case. When I was new to the game, I would also be offended by criticism. I certainly did not run around with a big sign saying I was "seeking help". But still I took notice of criticism. I reflected on some of it and tho it may only have had a minor influence on my play, some stupid criticism by stupid people happened to be valid and improved my play. How do they say: Even a broken clock shows the correct time twice a day. It all depends on the recipient being able to reflect on the criticism. All that matters is whether the piece of advice is correct, not whether it was made by the right person for the right reasons. Even if a person on a superficial level is rejecting your criticism, it may still be affected by it. That's a choice they must make for themselves. Maybe it helps if I say I might be one of those players. Maybe the topic is describing my behavior. Not really, but occasionally, sure. Currently I am trying to figure out why I suck in Delaware. It's not all black and white. I am certainly not a person launching planes during a drive-by, but even I have to reflect on in which situation I should refrain from using planes, even when they are ready. It's a trade-off. In a hybrid you constantly revise your decision, when to use which weapon. Am I using the planes now to find that DD, or has it already launched torpedoes and I need to be in direct control of my ship to dodge? So yes, while a topic may not entirely describe my tactics, it may be an inspiration. This is your take-home value. So instead of arguing whether the OP is entitled to have that opinion, which is a waste of time, just take it as a primer for a valid discussion about those shades of grey that make the difference between 50% and 70%.

Wait, you wrote this and now you are telling me, you still care about those people denouncing you, those people that you feel are not entitled to an opinion and whose opinion you do not take seriously. Shouldn't a person of your experience be perfectly able to immediately distinguish between unsound criticism and valid observations and consequently dismiss the people blindly pointing fingers? Why does that still bother you after ~15k battles plus alt accounts?

Yes and no. The question, whether he tries to improve is not part of the topic. There is a common fallacy in the community where pointing out a possible mistake is immediately seen as a personal attack. It's the reason why we fail to improve, cause the recipient of criticism might feel offended. So the person noticing the mistake is under social pressure not to reveal their insight. The WoWs-community is acting like people proof-reading their own texts. Common sense is that proof-reading each others texts is way more efficient, since people are blind to their common mistakes. We rely on each others neutral perspective to get better, each and every one of us. The one and only thing that matters to me, in a very selfish sense, is whether the mistake pointed out is an actual mistake, not who observed it. And given again how shy people are to point out mistakes under the given social pressure, we should be grateful for every bit of criticism we get. It's free and it helps us, no them.

Do I get this right, you are saying that whoever has subpar results himself is not entitled to complain about any kind of misplay, because their stats indicate they misplay themselves? That doesn't make sense to me. Say players are very good at skill A, but bad at skills B, C and D. Their weaknesses will lead to subpar results. Yet they are still qualified to talk about the skills they are good at. Think about it the other way, about players who excel at all skills but one. Should they give advice about that one skill that is their weakness. Are they more entitled to complain about team mates who make that mistake that they themselves are prone to, just because their results are superior and their other skills are mastered?

Aus einer bestimmten ökonomischen Sicht ergibt das auch durchaus Sinn. Das Geschäftsmodell sieht nun mal vor, mit sympathischen Lockangeboten die Kunden auf das Produkt zu fixieren, um sie dann, wenn sie genug Zeit und Geld investiert haben, zu nicht mehr so vorteilhaften Bedingungen zur Kasse zu bitten. Wir hatten ähnliche Phänomene mit den frühen Prepaid-Mobiltelefonen oder auch der Drogenmarkt funktioniert ähnlich. Moralisch oder emotional mag man davon halten, was man will. Ökonomisch ist solches Verhalten opportun, ... ... mit einem jedoch erheblichen Designfehler: Wargaming betreibt nicht nur World of Warships und will nicht nach dem Ende von WoWs' Produktlebenszyklus aus dem Markt für Computerspiele aussteigen. Nun sind die einzelnen Spiele auf Teams verteilt, die eigenverantwortlich ihre Spiele zu vermarkten scheinen. Anders lässt sich die damalige Maßnahme nicht erklären, als der WoWs-Premium-Account dem Wargaming-Premium-Account und damit der Finanzierung anderer Teams das Wasser abgegraben hat. Die einzelnen Teams sind also hauptsächlich mit ihren eigenen Umsätzen nach oben verantwortlich und agieren gegenüber anderen Teams egoistisch. Dadurch passiert es dann, dass ein Titel in seiner Cash-Cow Phase gezielt massiv die Kundschaft auspresst und dabei dauerhaft negative Reputation und Antipathie für das gesamte Unternehmen billigend in Kauf nimmt. Was hat Wargaming davon? Kurzfristig höhere Gewinne und langfristig einen schweren Stand seine künftigen Titel, angesichts verprellter Kunden, erfolgreich zu vermarkten. Den Entscheidern im WoWs-Team wird das freilich egal sein können. Nach meinem Spiel die Sintflut. Ich hab meine Prämie bekommen und wenn die negativen Folgen das Unternehmen treffen, hab ich längst bei einem anderen Unternehmen angeheuert, das mich, dank meines Erfolges bei WoWs, mit Handkuss nehmen wird. Moral Hazard nennt man dieses Phänomen unter Ökonomen. Im Volksmund reden wir davon, "den Bock zum Gärtner zu machen", klingt aber nich so schick.

Ich vermisse @Grandpa_Hulka. Der hat solche Aktionen immer so erklären können, dass es selbst der letzte Bildungsversager kapiert hat. Ich möchte, in seinem Andenken, das Angebot hier sehr kurz beleuchten: Ein Schiff gegen ein anderes gleicher Stufe zur Hälfte seines Preises "in Zahlung" zu geben, bedeutet nominal bereits ein saftiges Minusgeschäft. Wenn ein Schiff objektiv nur halb so viel Wert ist, wie sein Preis, warum hat Wargaming es dann für das doppelt verkauft? Dieser paradoxe Widerspruch sollte jedem aufmerksamen Kunden zu denken geben. Die genauen Details der Aktion kennen wir ja noch nicht. Ich vermute aber, dass ich, angesichts der üblichen dreisten Dummheit ihrer Ausgestaltung, wieder herzhaft lachen müssen werde. Wenn man solch ein Tauschgeschäft noch irgendwie argumentativ retten will, kann man nur noch mit rein subjektiver Wertschätzung argumentieren. Vereinfacht ausgedrückt: Es gibt zwei Möglichkeiten: 1. Es muss ein Schiff zu kaufen geben, dass ihr so sehr liebt, dass ihr es, unter Zuzahlung des halben Kaufpreises, gegen ein weniger geliebtes Schiff in eurem Besitz eintauschen wollt. Jetzt seh ich mir die Liste der käuflichen Schiffe an und muss feststellen. Viele davon sind ohnehin käuflich. Keines davon ist besonders selten oder stark. Gäbe es da Missouris mit Kampfauftrag oder Musashis oder Kamikazes abzuräumen, könnte ich den Wert des Tausches verstehen. Aber ein Schiff hergeben und dafür einen 50%igen Nachlass auf ein anderes normal verfügbares Schiff bekommen, das ist kein Schnäppchen. Mit eurem Geburtstags-Coupon bekommt ihr ja bereits 25% Nachlass. Für weitere 25% gibt man doch kein Schiff auf. 2. Es muss ein Schiff in eurem Hafen geben, dass ihr persönlich so abgrundtief hasst, dass ihr es, unter Zuzahlung des halben Kaufpreises, gegen ein anderes Schiff eintauschen wollt. Allerdings, im Hafen stört es ja nicht und fahren muss man es auch nicht. Und wenn man es verkauft, zieht man es demnächst aus einem Container, möglicherweise an Stelle eben jenes Schiffes, das ihr gerade für Dublonen eingetauscht habt. Also ja, unter dieser hier diskutierten Bedingung "abgrundtiefer Hass", kann man so ein Tauschgeschäft rechtfertigen. Ökonomisch sinnvoll ist der Tausch aber nicht. Ich will mich in deine laufende Diskussion ja nicht einmischen, aber wo du schon den Ökonomen herbei gerufen hast: Ihr redet, so scheint mir, aneinander vorbei. Ja, ökonomisch gesehen gibt es einen Zusammenhang zwischen Aufwand und Preis, also wenn du mit Aufwand die Produktionskosten meinst. Für bestimmte Produkte mit hohen Kosten und geringer Zahlungsbereitschaft kommt halt erst gar kein Markt zustande. Es wird also nie was gehandelt. In den Dimensionen, in denen die Produkte von Wargaming sich bewegen, sind die Kosten aber vernachlässigbar. Eine T2-Tachibana Lima wird ja für einen Euro verkauft. Wir müssen davon ausgehen, dass dieser Euro mindestens mal kostendeckend ist, sonst würde WG das Schiff ja gar nicht erst anbieten. Und dennoch sind das 3D-Modell und die Parametrierung dieses T2-Schiffes nicht weniger aufwändig als bei einem T9-/T10-Schiff. Also muss ich zur Schlussfolgerung gelangen, dass auch ein T10-Schiff sich für 1 Euro pro Nase herstellen lässt. Wargaming will dafür aber 240€ und selbst für ein T9-Schiff noch stolze 62€. Da müssen wir dann auch wieder @Aitvars recht geben. Im Produktportfolio von Wargaming hängen Preise eindeutig nicht vom Aufwand ab, sondern alleine von der gewinnmaximierenden Zahlungsbereitschaft. Und da gibt es keine Grenze nach oben. Wäre empirisch gesichert, dass WG am meisten Gewinn macht bei einem Preis von 1Mio. € pro Schiff, dann würde niemand bei WG intern argumentieren, dass dies möglicherweise sittenwidrig sein könnte. So funktioniert Kapitalismus . Allerdings, und das scheinen Neuankömmlinge der Marktwirtschaft in ihrer Kinderstube nicht gelernt zu haben, hat auch ein Kunde eine Würde. Nicht umsonst fühlen sich reiche Menschen beleidigt, wenn man von ihnen höhere Preise für gleiche Leistung will, nur weil "sie es sich doch leisten können". Wenn jemand von mir einen aus meiner Sicht unfairen Preis verlangt, fühle ich mich nicht respektiert. Das kann zu einer irrationalen Trotzhaltung führen. An dieser Stelle hat Wargaming über die Jahre viele Kunden vergrault, vermutlich ohne den Grund hierfür korrekt eingeordnet zu haben.

It's about two things, the maximum multipliers that can be mounted and the expectation of a result. The best multipliers are less valuable than they used to be, if there are no game modes that reliably yield good baseXP. What good are battles with 2000 baseXP or more, if I cannot predict their occurance? So I mount my best multipliers and end up in some steam roll battle, where I'm in the middle of the ranking. Apply a red booster to 1200 baseXP and it's a waste. This is the complement of the issue. Even if someone argues the current boosters are not bad, when do I mount them? My Random Battles baseXP on average is around 1160, so that game mode is out. In the past you could use early Clan Battles. But nowadays the casual clans have abandoned CB, cause WG gave them the rewards for dying themselves into Ranked Gold League. So even in CB you have a considerable risk of going home with 250 baseXP and wasting the bonus.

The thing is that a faster grind through the tiers never was an objective need. It only produced people unfamiliar with the game fighting way above their weight class. Objectively that doesn't constitute a value added. So it's nothing to charge extra for and nothing anybody should pay for. Same goes for EliteXP. EliteXP is a ressource that benefits only Wargaming. I don't know anybody who ever converted EliteXP. For the same reason mentioned in terms of faster grinds through the silver lines, you don'T need EliteXP and even more so. When it comes to bonusses, my records show that we got lots of low level bonusses, but pretty much none of the red ones. The red ones however are the equivalent of stacking old signals and camos to the max. In the old economy, over a typical year I got ~60-80 of the rare camos, those being Mosaic (+400% XP), Asien Lantern(+200% XP, + 555% CXP (?)) and Spring Sky (+200% XP, +777% FXP). In the same time I collected ~120 full sets of dragon signals. So over a year I could mount the maximum bonusses (equivalent to the red bonus today) on 60-80 battles. I could also switch to the Type 59 or Midnight Streamer camos for a reduced revenue which was still way above the current blue bonus. So yes, I would also say we get much less valuable bonusses now. If I had to take a guess, I would say they did not just inflate prices, they also want to take away the possibility to exploit loopholes. If in the old economy, some game mode was accidentally very lucrative, i.e. it yielded a disproportionately high amount of baseXP for the effort and time invested, players would immediately leverage that opportunity, mount all their hoarded maximum sets over a week and farm that game mode before it got removed. With the current economy, Wargaming can go easy on those modes. Even if accidentally a game mode is designed too generous in their perception, the worst that can happen is that people use their extremely rare red bonusses, they most like paid for, or use their blue bonusses that work way slower. So in short, I maintain the Battle Pass is more and more substituting the Premium Account. The Premium Account has become almost mandatory, since the lines now end with ships costing 50-60 M credits fully equipped. So the players need roughly double the credits than before.

Mind, this topic is not intended to discuss karma or comment on it in any way. There are countless other topics for that, if any of you feel the need for that. This is The Karma Memorial Karma has been an odd companion to many of us for years. We never quite knew, what to make of it. It was just there. Some of us never had any. Others got occasional points, just to see them vanish after a short period of time. Few ever got notable amounts of it and basically only CCs, WG-staff and very popular people got 4-digit-levels. Now for quite some time, I and many who used to get more and more of this strange metric over years, see a constant decline. The game seems to have moved into a different phase, where good play is less appreciated and every slightly critical or funny remark hurts people's feelings. So my guess is, we will see the end of karma. Not as a removed concept in the game, but as a number different from zero for pretty much everybody. It's only a matter of time. This is fine, as I said, it never meant anything anyway, apart from some rewards that apparently were associated with it on the US server in the very beginning of the game. Just the fact that karma was there and that each point denotes some positive action or interaction, makes the loss of it nostalgic. I can say for myself, there is nothing I can possibly do to keep this number up, even less so anything worthwhile. So if something was there in the game and is fading away, the community imo deserves some sort of souvenir. This is it: This is the Karma Memorial, for all of you who still have some significant number (I suggest 50+, just don't keep posting pics of a few points). Take a screenshot of your currently high karma and post it, just to document it was there. Once it has reached zero, take another screenshot and let us know how many days exactly it took to reach zero. If you have more than 200 karma, you can also post a screenshot each time you lost 100 karma. Let's see how fast it vanishes. Of course I need to clarify this topic is not a contest on how fast to lose karma. It's not about bragging or anything. Just share your karma milestones, preferably uncommented.

The irritating thing about the BP is, that the Premium Account seems to have been absorbed by Wargamings increasing prices. If I may remind you. Initially Premium Time was 50% extra XP. We then practically gave up on our right to play other WG-titles for an extra 15 percentage points. Meanwhile the CXP-price for fully trained commanders had increased by 66%. FXP has been rendered almost worthless with the removal of FXP-ships. So today we are paying for our premium accounts to get what F2P-players got for free 5 years ago. So it seems like the Premium Account is almost expected by WG and if we want actual extra value for our money, we are expected to pay for this new subscription on top of the subscription we already have. Then this new super-subscription called Battle Pass has moved on from giving their buyers actual value like a ship, to giving them a bit of a discount on the Summer Sale lottery and now again some generic contiuously depreciated ressources. Can anybody still explain why the game offers three different levels of subscription and why they are worth their price tag?

From what I saw, the mines are designed to suit a rather narrow-minded play style. Initially I had liked the idea of mines, cause I was under the wrong impression, the mines would be few in number but do significant damage. So, in my mind, the players would have needed to make very accurate assumptions on where the enemy will be passing through. Instead the mines now are a "spray and pray" design that allow their simpleton-users to just spam minefields and deal damage with a high probability. That is balanced out by low damage per mine. For the enemy, the location of the mines is obvious as they are dropped visibly right in front of him. Such a concept is unappealing to "the thinking man", whose action game this initially was intended to be. If mines are introduced to the game, I want them to be a risk, not a certainty. I want them to be a chessboard thing, that both sides have to spend some "I think that you think that I think ..."-thought on. The minelayer should be required to lay mines in a very specific location, like e.g. bottlenecks, early on, with a long action time on the mines and the drop being hidden from the enemy. In return, the opposite player should be forced to make correct assumptions on where mines likely are placed. Also there must be an XP-reward on detecting and clearing mines. Otherwise our increasingly selfish players will not care about mines that could potentially harm a team mate. Although this is slightly off-topic, yes, I find the Asymmetric Battles also quite nice. This is what Coop Battles should be like, a bit more challenging.

Yeah, strange mechanic. I initally thought the mines would do way more damage but be way fewer. more like a trap for inattentive players. The way they are in the video, they slow down the game a lot, which is not entertaining. They require little brain and don't reward smart placement that much.

I exactly don't like that. I don't like WG trying to artificially create a gap in the play style to squeeze in submarines as a logical addition to the game. DD-torpboats were there first and for good reasons. Now WG seems more and more determined to further reduce the workload for BBs, by taking away the threat of torpboatsm keeping DDs busy killing each other. And then, when they have "outlived their purpose" they can be pushed aside by BBs finally finding their guts and pushing in a selfish race for XP. No no, I want DDs that can be relevant the entire duration of the battle and that at least dev strike to most stupid of players, BB players too busy scratching their lower body parts to maneuver.

When it comes to new lines, I tend to envision them with a set of unintuitive traits. Usually that guess is disappointingly close to reality. The first step is to think about what properties are most useful for doing your job in a DD. And then you take them away from the concept. Let's say you want to talk DDs for example. You want a DD to contest caps, survive til late game and spot. As such you want a DD to have good concealment and smoke to prevail in caps. So the new line must have at least mediocre concealment and no smoke. Since you got no smoke the least you need is semi decent AA. So the new DD can't feature any AA worth mentioning. WG loves to give DDs DefAA, so they can mention it as a feature, while nerfing its range and overall damage so AA is average even with DefAA and outright non-existent when its on cooldown. Then you want to have at least a last resort torpedo alpha damage sufficient for a devastating strike on BBs. So the new DD must have either low damage or a low number of tubes. To have a fair chance against shotgun attacks, you want a very tight turning circle and good rudder shift. So, no, the DD can't have that. And finally, for those many boring battles, where your team entirely fails to do damage and you need to do that on top of spotting, you want guns that pen 30mm deck armor or have decenbt fire chance. So likely a new DD will have low caliber and fire chance. Maybe WG even twists the knife and gives you guns that will require IFHE to do either fires or pen 25mm, but never both. Now add some gimmick to claim the line has a new flavor. You can mount either a torp reload booster that at the same time gives a penalty on gun reload or a gun reload booster that gives a penalty to torp reload and, unique to the line, you have short range guns and a spotter plane or short range guns and a long range radar. tl;dr Don't expect any new DD-lines that fit the job description.