Taliesn

That has to be one of the most dishonest quotes ever to grace this forum. Firstly, the snowflakes event showed that the only reason veteran players were willing to play many different ships was simply the need to collect steel (I played all my tier IX-X ships and even bought back some) Nobody went back to Izumo just because he/she wanted to enjoy her again. And secondly, you ARE the game. You ARE the ones encouraging to play tier X ships almost exclusively through CW, Ranked and grinding Campaings/Events. Please do not treat your playerbase as if we were stupid. And desist. Just desist.

I'd rather you do nothing AT ALL than the whole bunch. NTC is the stupidest idea you could possibly come up with (I'm hoping eh? please don't treat this as a challenge) in terms of balance. Low point captains, not-fully researched ships and may be lack of flags are handicaps enough for the new players, absolutely no need to give the 20 battles a day crowd a gameplay megabuff to some ships. Not a single gameplay buff tied to grinding should even be considered. Please desist.

Wow. You can't beat stupid. Let's see how this ends.

There is a limit (if only in resources needed to implement them) to the number of Legendary Modules out there. But as importantly they could potentially be a nightmare to balance if you expand them to every tier X ship, let alone other tiers, and that is probably one of the reasons WG is thinking of discounting them. Also, just a handful of those that exist are really interesting, most are meh and a few are useless. Up and downtiering a ship is also a no-no. You would end up meeting Scharnhorsts with ships ranging from tier V (IIRC tier IV ships could not meet a Scharnhorst downtiered to tier VI) to tier X (if uptiered to 8) WG already has huge problem balancing tiers and ships as it is to start thinking about complicating it even more with the endless possible combinations. And remember: Every player with ONE Flagship of The Fleet is still 25,000+ Flagships out there. I suspect they are not going to gift even more coal/free XP since economy balancing and currency inflation is also an issue. It sounds like a nice sort of roleplaying idea but unless it is very vanilla it will turn out to be a huge source of issues. And of course if it is very vanilla then most players won't give a sh$t about it.

There is also Coop for the easier experience and... well, the fact that you only have 117 battles. Nothing every new player has not experienced. You are also probably overstating the skill of the playerbase at lower tiers (occasional sealclubber notwithstanding) and ships are the same for everybody (odd not fully researched ship aside that will as likely be in the red team as in yours)

Hindenburg, 427 battles. Followed by Missouri (285), Alabama (261), Scharnhorst 251) and Moskva (246) but I hardly play the first three anymore.

Poor cammo? Not even sure what you mean here. Guns are accurate enough. It is a BB, not sure what you are expecting. Particularly when you have already experienced FdG. Secondaries are useless in just about every other BB. Even heavily secondary-specced BBs are more fun than useful builds. And about the last thing I would want buffed from a usefulness point of view in the current meta. Mediocre AA? Seems good enough for me. Can you please give some comparison to other tier 9 BBs (and please, not only Georgia/Iowa) Range seems enough for me. You are not gonna hit a lot from 20km+ Hardly the end of the world. A nice addition, nothing else. As someone has already told you, all tier 9 BBs burn exactly the same. You are not spotted instantly. Only Lion has a noticeably better concealment than SS. Iowa's is slightly better. Musashi's, Izumo's and FdG's are worse, Alsace being almost identical. So no, middle of the pack there. Most tier 9 guns are shitty at long ranges. You want a consumable to shoot from further away, which kinda gives an indication of what you are doing wrong with this ship. And others: Your WR for your tier 10s is bot-like (admittedly with not a lot of games) It is not much better at tier 9. Your PR is not that good either. As @ColonelPete has said, the problem is with the way to play those ships, not the ships themselves.

Flags, camos, permanent camos... For the buff/nerf option we have the Legendary Modules (although there won't be more of these apparently) Any straight ingame buff is a big no-no. I wouldn't mind the Flagship of the Fleet concept to give some XP/FreeXp bonus, but that's about it.

I gave up after reading the requirements and doing a vaguely educated guess of what was needed. On top of hating these steampunk/futuristic stuff.

You are a rare breed indeed. Congrats!

Chances were, you didn't need to look at his stats to get a general feeling. Let's look at some of his comments: Doesn't know what the end match report displays. Damage is certainly a very big factor but not the only one. 1 Doesn't play randoms, only Coop (well, almost exclusively) and then rages about people not knowing what to do in Randoms and Ranked. Must be a charmer in chat also. 2 His stats show (yes, I finally looked) he shouldn't have moved past tier IV/V yet there he is, flaming about the inability of others to play the game at higher tiers. 3 Pay to win so he can carry his team. The first bit should be a no no, the second, about his carrying the team, is just hilarious stuff. Physician, heal thyself kind of special. 4 Pay to win again. 5 Teamkiller Honestly, we have one of this every other week.

Must... resist... looking... his... stats... Damn, someone did. No surprises there.

Dynamic. Changed shortly after I started playing wows and I've never looked back.

Not so much a map screenshot but an after match one, and yes, the third best player in our team is a Shima who has only managed to kill one of our own...

Could very well be, you are a better man than I am, I couldn't be ar$ed to calculate it. I just made an educated guess based on his comments, and the post below kinda corroborates it: There is a very speshiul kind of poster that not only lacks any sort of self awareness about how good or bad he is as a player but to add insult to injury is also prone to get caught lying stating things that can be easily checked. It's mindblowing.

In Randoms? Sure. We're talking Ranked here though, and he's claiming 8 out of 10 times he ends up amonst the best 3, usually top spot. After 567 battles and 48% WR I call BS. It doesn't add up.

Ohhh how I wish we could have a look at the full ranked stats, including stars saved. I would hazard a guess what you have posted is mathematically impossible. Dunning-Kruger at its finest.

What @Aotearas said. To be honest I enjoyed Jutland, a lot, but found Daring pretty underwhelming. In other words, I took her out for a spin a few times, sucked big time and she got relegated to the port ever since. I have rpf on Z-52 but you can't have that and IFHE on Daring (on top of CE unless you miss on SI) Also, bear in mind Daring's hydro is for defence only, great to evade torps but that's about it.

There is my boy She was once (and very briefly) top of the chain at capping. The number of radar ships keeps creeping up though, limiting her usefulness and as a torpedo boat or gunboating from smoke she is poor.

I must have missed this. If you are referring to events like the british destroyers Directives and the like, those are still and in essence a massive grind at the highest tiers (where accumulating points is easier) and not necessarily a test of skill. The RP based star system you propose has its merits, certainly more than the star saving one based on XP so heavily tilted towards damage farming, but I can see a lot of confussion and arguing around how PR is calculated and more importantly the mother of all rages from people who have won the battle (irrespective of the fact they may have done sweet f.a.) yet have not managed to advance at all. And those are (mainly) the ones keeping the game afloat by making up the largest part of the playerbase. WG cannot and will not put a hard limit to progression or reduce significantly the chance to get to rank 1. Cue rentals. They are trying to get people in. Ranked as a top players competitive mode is as good as dead (if it ever was alive)

Torps are very meh though. The usefulness of having the strongest AP on a DD is debatable. Hydro is fantastic, mind. @_Teob_ go get him!

Text-book lack of self-awareness also. You don't need 567 battles to rank out if you are very often the top-one.

No surprises there. Nearly half my battles with Z-52 (72) and a 62% WR didn't take me as far as Conqueror's 27 (70% WR) thanks to the stars saved because well, damage.

To be honest I'm not sure and I was wondering myself. I think I've seen them counted as IJN somewhere and wows-numbers has them as Japanese but official confirmation would be great.

Spot two ships when on a Moskva. It's usually the other way around you FFS. Funniest is the "use 6 consumables on a match". Tier X game in Hindenburg, no CV, just make sure you live enough to hit Def. AA every 2 minutes.