DFens_666

1. You have a better chance educating yourself how things work in this game, than to change the game to your liking. 2. If a ship moves or not has very little to do with what it can/cant do. 3. You claim you didnt lose because of good play, yet claim, the player was very good because of his high rank. Contradiction much? 4. High rank is no indication of skill. Ranked is not an indication of skill either. You can play ranked or can you not? 5. Game mechanics are not glitches, again, you need to educate yourself. Instead of whine here, should have asked for help, you would have gotten A LOT of people willing to help. But now you came whine here AND insult other established forumites for no reason, who even gave you a decent answer. You just lowered your chances to get advice from others. 6. WG will never change randoms. Everyone is in the same pool, so better deal with it.

Often enough, its players with equal or just marginally better stats than what they complain about. So essentially, they would want to remove themselves, but ofc they claim they are just unlucky with teams or sun didnt shine that day or whatever.... f.e. this If you cant make R9, then you probably arent a good player yourself... edit: like if you are a 55% player (lets just say), what would you say, if all the 60+% players just demand you get out, because now you are the one ruining it for them?

AP bombs, along with rockets, should just get removed from the game. Except the Yamato could just disengage, since those Cruisers need range to pull that off. If you get too close, no dodging in the world will help you to not get hit anymore. What if good DD players could guaranteed hit ~25% of their torps regardless of how you dodge or move? Lets say, good players could steer torps perfectly to hit you, while bad players couldnt. Or If good BBs would always citadel you regardless of angle, since they can maneuver their shells past your armor into the citadel? Or good Cruisers which make you burn on every part within 2-3 salvos because they could? (well, that one is a bit lame, but Cruisers dont really have any comparable feature going for them). Thats how good CV players are. No matter what YOU do, they WILL hit you. If im in a small caliber BB, i cant overmatch some Cruisers no matter how good i am. How about i feel entitled to do it because im good? I want to be able to do it, and most others cant do it because they are average so its still fine. Apparently, its ok if only some people can do stuff like that. Negating flak would be the same as negating armor.

Its a bit like Coop but more fun. And no stress (or less atleast ) just some good old shooting ships stuff without much thinking involved. Its hilarious

My personal preference from "best" to worst when -2: T8 vs T10 T5 vs T7 T6 vs T8 T7 vs T9 I rate T7 vs T9 as worst, because T7 vs T8 is a huge step already. I think the old MM was fine, sure T8 sucked a bit by being lowtier often, but now T7 sucks even more. And T8 still aint perfect Regardless, T5 still stinks because of that CV hell down there, so best tiers are T9-10... Exactly what WG wants i suppose

Thats why ive been just playing a few games on a new account. Its quite refreshing and mostly fun, just plain and simple pewpew gamestyle without anything to worry about. Except those losses above, which pretty much feel like getting cheated...

Ofc, but you dont get to see it every time. So you might know how many planes Bear or El2a lose, but the average players who dont post their screenshots?

Its almost impossible to distinguish for us, since we cant tell if its fighters or attack planes getting shot down. Obviously, the first doesnt mean anything, but many good players lose those because they use them aggressively, while most others just use them defensively and then they dont get shot down. Player A and B both had 60 planes shot down, but player A lost 25 fighters and player B lost no fighters. Player B lost way more attack planes, which makes a big difference. The question rather is: How many plane losses are having an impact on the CV? Here my own example from last ranked Sprint Did those matter to me? No because 18 mins in, i still had basicly full squads, except the rockets, which i just threw at the CV into his fighters to get damage in on him as game was ending. But apart from that, i had full squads all game long. And like 20% of those were Fighters anyway.

So if i can dodge flak, i dont lose planes because continous AA damage is so bad. Finaly we are getting somewhere But its a bit weird coming from someone, who says we should buff our AA with skills to make it better

Id go with Duguay - that thing is just a monster on T4. Less dakka than the others, but 4x2 guns.

If what he claim would be true, he most likely wouldnt even need to ask - he would know it himself

So you are against having some matches which you cant win (~3/10), and rather have all matches be not decided by skill at all. Bad players win more because they are bad, good players lose more because they are good. Really how does that make any sense? Ive done the math lately when someone suggested, my WR would/should drop down to 55% because of SBMM, so id lose 1000 games in a row to achieve that Thats totaly an incentive to keep playing... Also talking about imbalance, ive been playing a new acc lately in protected MM, here some losses for you: You cant even win games with 85% bots in them, because the game decides "hey, your bots suck [edited]while the enemies are super unicum bots raping your team"... GL changing random battles to be more fair. Id even call this deliberate game rigging, even if some claim that it would be "random" to have good and bad bots. In general no problem, if the bots wouldnt be unbalanced between both teams.

Except you just make that up, since that doesnt exist So if anything, it makes everything you say less valid because you like to make stuff and present it as facts.

Yeah, never quite understood that, but for me its wrong. Imagine the outcry if DDs could get that average damage, but lose the capping for it. I think most DDs would gladly accept the trade. And what CVs cant make up for in capping, they do in defending. They are best cap defenders by a mile. And atleast in theory they can cap aswell, the "problem" is, some other ship will most likely do it before them. BBs are also capable of capping, but once again, others have an easier time doing it or will do it before the BB can reach the cap.

Quite frankly, i dont see any reason that CVs are the best damage dealers in the game anyway. Its basicly combining DDs with BBs and get the best of both worlds. If they want to strike and spot, their damage should be like DDs. Remove spotting, they can have BB damage in my book.

Maybe if the CV would need to reposition, then he would need to do something aswell. Its not like, CVs cant move or something. Ive thought about that aswell, and maybe CVs should have some mechanic, that prevents them from starting planes while moving at certain speed. Like, CV going full speed running away from enemy ships couldnt start planes. Would be fairer for surface ships aswell, since they need to dodge attacks from the CV while he is being able to run away at same or even bigger speed than the surface ship. Same for standing still, let the CV move atleast 1/4 speed to be able to start planes. There you have action for plane downtime. You can sit behind an island, but you need to start moving before you can start planes. This would also make the CV need a bit time at the start of the game to be able to start planes, making it easier for other ships to actually move away from their spawn.

What does surface ships do when they cant shoot a target? Fall asleep ? That arguement is irrelevant, same as why CVs can attack <1 min into the game, while for most other ships its like 2-3 minutes.

So how do BBs/non-Radar Cruisers attack DDs? They simply cant. No, relying on teammates is not the same, CVs dont rely on teammates either, but can strike any target. You still assume, that every target should be immune to CV strikes - thats not the case, and i personaly wouldnt say it either. However, i think there would be no issue if the CV couldnt strike every ship in the game. As previously shown, thats also the case for certain surface ships interacting with each other. And while Cruisers can just shoot BBs, doesnt mean its a smart thing to do (or DD shooting a Cruiser). Same could be applied to CVs. The CV doesnt have to consider anything when he goes for a target. Can attack DDs, Cruisers and BBs (and CVs ofc). In a 1v1 situation at the end of the game, the CV would win against every other ship in the game, while all other classes can either win or lose depending on the opposition.

Sadly, that doesnt work really. Back then it was 1 CV waiting for another so the game could start. Now its probably 20 CVs in queue waiting for surface ships to fill the games. Doesnt really explain, why there seem to be too many CVs (obviously they have been sitting in queue for 5 mins i assume). Everyone is playing CV, thats the issue... If the CV queue is so big, that they keep messing up games: CV only games - thats what we need! 24 CVs, why does it matter what they strike? Let them sit there for 20 mins till the game ends, so they stop polluting the queue.

Midtier botgames when?

If he plays alone, he should be in protected MM. No issue, its ridiculous what you can do there, but it might teach bad habits. Atleast till T4, T5 ofc starts normal MM (or after 200 games). You can pen cruisers fine, even overmatch most parts on T3. T4 not anymore. That doesnt change really. Except the Superstructures get bigger on highertier BBs, but shooting superstructures continues even till T6-7. And for german/russian BBs it stays like that till T10 even, unless you are close enough to either reliably hit bow/stern or pen upper belt. In protected MM, its usually a lot of Cruisers and 80% Bots. You can torprush those dreadnoughts. And once you are T5+, you dont have to do that anymore.

I dont think it really matters how much bonus you give for a win, when they can get by / progress fast enough on losses alone. Credits are even excempt from winning or losing, which is bad aswell. People can earn credits by playing premium ships and go on sightseeing tours around the map, because why not. And the XP: doesnt matter for many players. They are simply not good enough to earn a good amount of XP in every game. Its not a big deal if they earn 500 or 900 base XP, because they can still win 4-5/10 games. If they would try a bit harder, it would only bump it up to ~5+ wins per 10 games. BUT for that to happen, they actually have to play longer than 5 mins. I even wrote about speed yolo grinding before: Its better for them, to die in 5 minutes and pick the next ship, than to try to survive and get little bit more XP on average. 5 mins = 500 XP is more than 15 mins = 1000XP. In that 15 mins, they already finished 2 more games with 500 XP each. And before someone answers: no, the average player probably wont have hundreds of flags and camos which would actually make it worthwhile to earn more per game.

If you would have 60% WR on your account, you would have buffed that avg WR to 50,8% - over 1% more than your team had currently So then rather advocate that those players are not allowed to play T8 ranked, or T8+ in general. They have no clue how to play, doesnt make it any better if you try to put them in both teams. The only thing it does, it validate their crap behaviour and playstyle, by artificially buffing their WR higher than it should be. And they dont even deserve the 40% they have right now

We could need the same for hightiers

What did the game look like when it started? TX only? T9-10 or even T8-10? Ever since they changed the MM, so you wont be lowtier constantly, the queue seems to be a bit bigger than it used to. This could mean, not all T8-9 ships were eligible to be put into TX game. Or there were no TX BBs (highly doubt that) to match yours.