IanH755

[Co-Op] - Had a really bad run of 15+ god awful games over the past two days where I just seemed to always get focused early on (too aggressive) or just picked the wrong side of the map to spawn on with no Bots, then my interweb started lagging like crazy where usually it's stable at 100ms (playing in Saudi), yesterday/today was constant spikes of 700ms+ which wrecked any chance of a good game so I've called it quits for another week (maybe) but I did manage one good game - Held our Northern Cap against a very heavy Bot push by 2 cruisers and 2 BB's at point-blank range whilst my T6 BB "support" kept about 15km away from the nasty mean pixels

If the offers were "perfectly clear" then no-one would be having these issues would they? So, looking at the actual words WG used in their adverts - WG say "Here's 30% off EVERYTHING" but then say "excluding the following very long list" - So it's not "30% off EVERYTHING" then is it, it's "30% of SELECTED ITEMS IN THE SHOP" - an accurate description would prevent this problem. WG say "Here's 40% off CAMOUFLAGES" but then don't discount all "CAMOUFLAGES" only some - So it's not "40% off CAMOUFLAGES" then is it, it's "40% of SOME CAMOUFLAGES" - an accurate description would prevent this problem. As a native English speaker I realise that, at times, the descriptions given on various parts of the WG EU site may not always be the most accurate as they are rarely written by other native English speakers. However in the examples above the descriptions "as written" on the website (not as what people guess was meant) are written poorly, which has led to the problems described by others i.e. if you say "Everything" that word means "Everything" and that word is very clearly defined in the English Language. If you are not offering "Everything" then you can't use that word without causing some confusion, especially to those who may not be native speakers which, considering it is a EU site, maybe large numbers of people.

What is it with the recent wave of WG "offers" not being accurately described and causing some confusion!! ...geez

Thanks very much!!!

[Co-Op] - Still trialling the Missouri's new AA spec captain (swapped 11% dispersion mod for AA Mod 3) and had a game where the Bot CV, despite having other ships closer, just wouldn't leave me alone - Not that I'm complaining of course but all that DAKKA DAKKA was a slight distraction from the hammering I was giving the three Bot BB's, all of which lead t very tidy profit for a Co-Op match (with camo/flags etc)! As an aside, I have now played around a dozen games since the AA Mod 3 swap and, although it's just "feeling not fact" and the data size range is too small, I can't really notice much/any difference between the 11% dispersion module being fitted or not. However due to Co-Op's very aggressive pushing Bots, I'm rarely firing at PvP range as most of my shots are 13km to 3km where the Dispersion mod would have seen less effect anyway. ***EDIT*** - Just noticed my side bar says that was also my 4000th game, what a game to pass that landmark with!

Hi all, I have about a dozen Captains of various nationalities that I don't really need who all have between 4-10 skill points. However, if I was to dismiss these Captains currently all the various skill points they have earned so far would be lost, so would it be a reasonable idea that, when you dismiss a Captain, all their skill points get removed and added to the Elite Captain XP pool? For example, using the Captain XP chart for the WoWS Wiki page (Here), this is how much you Elite XP would get back when dismissing a Captain - Skill Points Amount of Elite Captain XP gained 4 14,000 5 23,000 6 37,000 7 58,000 8 88,000 9 129,000 10 183,000 etc You're not getting anything for "free" as you've already earned those points and you're having to dismiss a Captain to get hold of them, so I can't see a negative for WG to say no about the idea however what's your thoughts? Have I missed something very obvious or am I genius?

Swapped out the -11% dispersion mod for the AA Mod 3 and haven't noticed any "OMG it's really obvious that the -11% mod was working, I can't hit anything now" stuff - Gameplay feels the same so far but I tend to play at 8-12km so if I took any 20km+ shots I may notice the 30m wider dispersion more but at shorter ranges it's not really that noticeable to me. Plus I've now got a 1200dps AA defence which is nice now Co-Op chucks in CV bots more often!

[Co-Op] - Completing the Cruiser Mission for the Normandie Camo in my Atlanta (maximum Dakka) when I found myself at the right place at the right time! I started off in the South and pulled up behind the island just south of the B cap and had both Bot DD's go either side within seconds of each other and started my rampage by killing both of those. Then using their smoke I took down the Bot Atlanta which was broadside at C. I then turned my attention to the 3 Bot BB's which were also lemming-training in the C cap (chasing our DD) and managed to burn down two just before the game ended. No end screen for this but I had, for a IJN Torp Boat, possibly the worst MM I've had in a long time, with 5 "gunboat" DD's facing me and almost no support (poor BB dispersion and DD's using smoke). I killed 2 DD's (Gaede and Kamikaze IIRC) and the Texas whilst heavily damaging the NM with 3-4 torps before a Gaede got the NM kill to finish the game but holy poop was it a rush! A "Citadel-fest" when a Neptune and an Atlanta pop around an island and meet an Atlanta with AP loaded. When you also include a T9 DD getting blapped for 95% of its health too (dirty kill-stealers ) it makes for a very nice XP score. and then *sigh* the very disappointing fact that some players, even when they're top tier AND in BB's, just like to hide at the back of a map and snipe, leaving the T6/7 cruisers to kill everything (with a little help from me). None of the 3 T8 BB's came with 10km of a Bot on a map which literally forces you into close range battles if you press the "W" key at least once!

They effectively became the Operations/Scenarios.

Hi all, As a Co-Op player it's great to see that WG is making Event missions do-able in every mode (PvP and PvE) but I've noticed a large increase in the number of players completing these events in Co-Op mode because of how "easy" Co-Op is vs Randoms and that made me think - should the Co-Op only requirements (not Ops) be higher than the PvP ones to make it "fairer" for those who are completing them in PvP mode? Now I know that there are some missions in the current Varyag event which either make no difference if you play Co-Op or PvP (get 1000 ribbons) or that are harder for Co-Op (get 2 Million credits) but there are a few (win 10 matches etc) which are very much harder in PvP than Co-Op and I find it odd that WG seem to be encouraging players to jump into the "easier" Co-Op for a few matches before heading back to PvP. So what do you think? Should all the requirements be identical across PvP and PvE or should Co-Op have a few higher requirements due to the skill levels needed to complete them?

I like the idea of a set of Co-Op campaigns (or at least being able to complete a campaign using a single co-op mission per stage) but I don't think it'll happen. I'll admit I've a full 11.3km secondary spec Tirpiz/Scharnhorst and an Atlanta so I rarely have problems with ribbons which may have biased me a bit

Fine for me!

The RNG with ship is amazing - I can have 10 games where I can't hit the side of barn at 5 paces and then the next game goes and does this - 1/3 of my shells are Citadels!!!! I fired only fired 8 salvos during the whole game and got some stunning RNG from the last 4 salvos in the ship which trolls me the hardest! After firing 4 fairly Meh long range salvos at the start against the FdG and Mogami I managed, using island positioning, to fire 2 salvos at the Missouri and 2 at the Musashi (both broadside at 11km) and got 11 citadels with some very tight groupings before ramming an almost full health Montana to death.

In that Op the BB's start where the Bot DD's rush to at the start and end so he may have got a single secondary hit which, on the Nagato, are pretty good but being AP may not have pen'd the DD.

Only the containers XP resets at the end of every day, the ship XP stays forever or until you uss doubloons to convert it.

I pretty much only play co-op now but I still like to think killing 5 ships out of 8 is impressive, especially when you've got 7 other humans trying to kill them too.

Last 3 SC's I got were 14 & 7 day premium and 100 speed signals. I have over 400 days premium already and nearly 800 speed signals so thats 3 "wasted" SC's to me.

Hi WG, I've just completed the BB mission for the Normadie camo which has the following requirements - a: Win a Battle b: Do 40k Damage c: Use a T5+ BB d: Play Random, Scenario, Ranked or Co-Op And I've attached my screenshot of the Giulio Cesear game I've just played which ticks all 4 requirements yet the BB mission hasn't completed like it should do. Is this yet another a bug, server problem or other random crap? It also happened at the weekend with the BB mission again which took 4 BB games (all meeting the requirements) before the mission "completed" like it should have done after the first. Any chance someone could look at the BB mission (all others seem OK) to see whats going on? ***EDIT - Looks like you have to survive the battle too according to the website page!***

Between the Orion and Clemson It's a close thing between what the best T4 Silver ship is but I'd have to go with Clemson! Sank the full health Izyaslav, Okhotnik & Konig and finished off the 1/3 health Svietlana and Zuiho.

Can someone screenshot the In-Game mission requirements (for the Port screen) as the Website has Survive but I don't remember seeing it in the In-Game requirements and it wouldn't be the first time there's a discrepancy? I would look myself but I completed another GC game and survived and completed the mission so the mission disappears til tomorrow but it looks like the website is correct. ***EDIT - Now the mission has popped back up again, yeap it says survive as the first word, no idea how I missed it!***

@Sehales - Thanks for the update, it's very rare for WG to tell us what happened (usually just "server problems") so I really appreciate the more detailed reply!

I wonder if thats modelled in-game?

Just to add to the "arming distance buggy" info - A few days ago I was busy doing a YOLO drive-by against a Tirpitz and, to avoid his torps, made sure I was inside the Torp arm distance (got Tirpitz myself so know the range) and we were so close I thought I might actually ram it by mistake yet his 4 torps, when launched against my broadside (not bow which was outside of minimum arming distance) still detonated against me. Now I've got nearly 4k games played and love torps so when I saw this happen for the first and only time I knew it was an anomaly rather than correct behaviour and it hasn't occurred since so my guess is that there was some de-sync/ping issues going on (I already have 100ms ping due to playing in Saudi).

More Giulio Cesear Co-Op madness - I would be very tempted to say this ship is OP as **** but if I did WG might remove it so instead "this ship is awful and needs immediate buffs!!!!!" I took on 3 BB's alone (Giulio, Wyoming & Konig) and killed pretty much all 3 (the Wyoming was left with 700hp when a CV strike got him) and I still had about 4k HP left! However this ship is most definitely OP as - Those poor BB's never stood a chance! Plus, for fun I tried a full AA spec Neptune with 1200DPS and it turns out it knocks down T8 planes (Lexington) like it's got permanent Def AA However compared to a T10- AA behemoth like a full spec Des Moines with over 2500DPS with Def AA it's still a little behind - also notice that, despite the excellent game I still lost 14k credits! And lastly, while I thought I had quite a good Yamato game the Guy in the GK on the other side of the map must have had a blinder!!! - again notice that with a good game I lost over 100k credits even with ever economy signal allowed! Be warned, T9-T10 Co-Op economy is not for the those who think it'll be profitable!!!

These charts are great! They show the direct link between the number of BB's vs the number of Cruisers across T5 to T7 - When there's lots of BB's there's less cruisers and the opposite is also true to the point they're actually mirroring each other where as DD and CV numbers are relatively unaffected. At higher Tiers it slowly starts to equal out until T10 where it seems very balanced for Cruisers. At T9 & T10 it was the disastrous IJN DD Nerf which paved the way for BB numbers to start to rise and now at every tier except T10 BB's are the most widely played ship class and the game has suffered for this. I remember posting back in Sept '16 just after the German BB release that the large increase in BB numbers was here to stay and, as a consequence, cruiser numbers were going to suffer heavily because of it (compared to pre-German BB times) and those charts just go to prove my point.