DFens_666

I doubt that he saw me Btw my position is a result in turning the entire ship to shoot him Thats why CVs need to change and not Cruisers. CVs are much worse in countering everything.

Kinda depends on the radar ship. Point is, you can force the DD to be less influential. CVs? Implying that >81% Solo would be fine, while >84% is not Still wont change, that any surface ship would stop at ~70ish % solo WR because the ship is incapable of carrying more. Here an example: Erazer has 81% Solo WR with Enty. if i would play with him, doing exactly what his teammates do on average, id also get 81% WR in any ship. If i play better, id get higher WR. If i play in a division without a CV, i can roughly expect 80% WR. So adding a SU CV player already grants me more than 2 other surface ships in my division. We can expect new ships like Petro and Nevsky to be played by good players and most likely in divs, which results in higher WR. If you get more and worse players to play them, overall WR will drop, also for the top 5% since there will be more people included in that group. And there are apparently some people, who are able to get the maximum out of CVs, so the influence is there - cant deny that. If most players cant do it, doesnt mean that it doesnt exist. But it shows the huge skillgap CVs still have today. Most people are not interested in playing CVs to begin with. Imagine you would get all top players to play them. Im confident if id play them more, i could perform very well, but i simply dont like to play them. And i assume this would be the case for most of those players, seeing that its not rocket science how to dodge flak.

Thats not balance, thats making something useless.

If we get Radar that automatically starts draining the health from DDs...

Thats basicly the issue: If i want to do some of it, im already halfway through with some others, and then you get pressured into "well now you can do the rest aswell" Exactly the reason why i havent bothered with any missions/directives the last few months. Now i felt, playing a bit and collecting snowflakes + see how far i get with the anchorage doing that would have been fine. But then it kept pileing up and its just annoying And i really dislike WGs directives nowadays, which give you absolutely nothing. If you dont want anchorage, doing directives makes 0 sense, which is highly questionable imo.

I dont think that makes for a good arguement, because you could use this for eveything. Especially seeing, how abysmally bad the average player in this game actually is.

Maybe next time try not to score last if you want to make a case against Bots?

Id call it influential. But i dont see a big problem with that. If there would be too many (good) DD players, id simply pick a Radar Cruiser to enhance my own chances. With CVs in every game, it doesnt matter at all what i pick. No, strike that, some ships are worse, all others are equally mediocre, if the CV is capable enough to attack and kill me. @El2aZeR pretty much has a solo CV WR which is better than many 3x Divs? Also looking at overall WR from non-CV ships including divs doesnt mean too much, since they might aswell include divs with CVs

Yep, Kremlin and Soyuz (AL rossiya too? not sure) have 60mm because reason

Russian ironballs? Wait, i meant to say russian BBs

- No other class or ship can reach what best CV players reach - A good played ship x can be countered by a well played ship y. Unicum CV will counter a unicum in any other class without retaliation. Like DD vs radar Cruiser can be quite interesting when both play well. If CV plays well its just how fast he can crap you to death.

Just today ive said: Its too many missions again, i dont feel like doing it anymore. Its like crosschecking: This mission requires ship a, the next one ship b and then you have tiers x,y and z. Anchorage directive + anniversary snowflakes would have been enough. But we also got a new Campaign, Kots missions, Coal missions, another mission for german BBs/ships (one with secondary/MB hits)... did i forget something? Most likely at this point.

Yep, and BB will also start flying to spot target for himself

German Cruisers are probably the worst when its about starting fires. I once had >200 HE hits with Hindenburg and got 1 Fire

Imo the real problem with toxicity in ranked is star saving mechanic, when some people dont play to win but to save their star from minute one. They could balance it by increasing the XP for the winning team to some degree.

Ofc those people who want to win complain about those that dont care... that makes sense. That doesnt mean, everyone plays to win. How is a BB turning around in spawn, shooting HE at maxrange playing for the win? Or a DD suiciding into a Radar Cruiser? A CV not starting planes? A ship actively avoiding Caps despite there being no enemies? You also have to face the fact, that especially the bottom half of the playerbase thinks, individual actions are irrelevant for winning, thus they can do whatever they want and complain that their team played crap. I think a lot of average or worse players dont even watch the game till the end, they might not even realize if they win or not. Search for <50% streamer, they usually leave the game once they are dead. How often do you see people write in chat after they are dead (excluding those that insult their team ofc)? As i said, i accept that it wont change because WG would hurt their income. Doesnt change, that i believe it to be the correct approach to make the game more enjoyable. And if we go by ideas written in the forums and WG implementing them into the game, we are looking somewhere at the range of 0,1% or so. The only thing really coming to mind are "removal" of NTC (which then turned into RB and is the essentially the same) and the re-introduction of the spotting changes 1year ago, which took them half a year to implement when 90% of the playerbase demanded that. Everything else written here is for the trashcan, as sad as it sounds

So are you playing a game or do you work it? The way you describe it, it sounds like work: "If i i dont get XP, i waste my time". Thats exactly the problem, why this game is going down the drain: - People play for missions because they dont need to win. Why win if i can get 1 more torp hit to finish the mission but lose the game? - People advance despite playing good or bad <- This is a real issue imo. Games shouldnt be like that. You should strive to become better so you are allowed to advance. People who have been playing games for decades know how games used to be back in the days. They were actually challenging and you could fail hard, basicly dropping back to the beginning. I remember early console games, where you just couldnt save your game. You started, and if you died too often it was game over. If people would actually care to win, we wouldnt see the stuff thats happening right now.

If they [edited]up as a T8 in TX MM its mostly a slight inconvenience. But put them in a TX ship, you get serious trouble since those ships need to pull their weight. Will it ever change tho? ofc not, thats how WG is making money, but one can dream i guess...

The longer they stay at other tiers than TX, the more chances they have to learn. And dont we all love those people with 2k games whos most played tier is TX?

No, you ran out of arguements. Also feel free to look at my post history, i continously call WG out for their [edited], but whatever floats your boat i suppose

He played extremely poorly. He cant really complain about losing when he accepts the loss before the game even started. Not sure if he told his team, but ive seen players actually claiming that - even if they had a 3x Unicum div on their own side (reason why i know that this is actually a thing). so you think, if you perform like that you deserve to win? based on what? Getting carried?? Apparently if the odds arent stacked against him (in his own mind) he can play properly Why not play properly every game? Why deliberately screw your team to make a self-fulfilling prophecy come true? So if they would be AFK they would still win - gotcha. I mean, nothing worse than being AFK, unless you would include teamkilling.

Certainly sounds like something WG would do, because Credits = money, and XP not. I think the sole reason to make grinding easier, was to force people into buying premium ships/time or straightup credits. Also they get too much XP even in a loss, so they dont really care if they win or not. Id rather remove XP from losing side, so you cant fail your way to TX.

Exactly the issue with atleast Tallinn (i assume Riga too). You get an opportunity for AP on a Cruiser and... nothing

Those stats might reflect reality for the average pleb, but if you want ships that can carry, then its just totaly scewed. Like St Louis is the worst T9 Cruiser OMEGALUL srsly It only shows, the average player is too dumb to use MBRB - and i know they cant. Ive seen above average player fail by not using it properly. Let the same players (most likely above average ones to begin with) who played Riga and Drake, play others instead. I doubt we would see the same we see right now. Infact they wont, since they already played hrough them and there is little reason to keep playing T9 techtree Cruisers if you have Alaska and co.

Once carried a 3x division being AFK to victory ... "Funny" thing was, one of them actually started playing in the end, and he desperately wanted to throw the game by dying fast enough so we dont get 1000 points victory