tocqueville8

That's the season, not the sprint. Each sprint lasts for 2 weeks, the first sprint of the season is almost over, and the rewards reset with each sprint. On the EU server at least, the new rewards are now up for grabs As you can see, the second sprint just started, so you have 2 weeks to get those rewards. Then you'll have 2 weeks to get them again, and again...

True, but the Yamato has considerably better sigma (2.1 to 1.8). Frankly, Musashi was my nemesis when I played a lot of Jean Bart, but I'm not sure how competitive she is anymore, in a meta with super-CVs, a lot of subs and a lot of DDs, and just fewer BBs or CAs/CLs to shoot at.

Well, I just saw they announced another lighthouse auction, so at least you'll get some coal...

Imho no. You gain about 5% gun reload, which is good, but the torps have just been buffed to 12 km, so they're more usable than ever, and that penalty will hurt sometimes. It might be a good trade, but not by much and not worth resetting a line or two. Also: holy 1.7 billion credits, Batman!

Not too shabby considering most enemy BBs were Tier 8...

What captains skills did you take?

They're still a mystery to me. I had a game in the Rupprecht where I landed 5 hits with the plane-dropped ones, and took half the HP off a Tier 8 sub, and I had DD games where I basically needed to teabag the guy with 15-20 of them to get a kill. I mean...not all depth charges ate created equal, but I guess it also depends upon the depth the sub's at. The thing is, whatever the mechanic is now it could still be changed later, so I'm afraid I would learn a bad habit

Honestly, with that avg dmg and battle count, it looks more like a good player who got some unlucky MM. Or at least a good damage farmer...

I saw a Hornet in Silver who started with a very suspicious "B-C" message. I checked...and yes, 40% in Ranked. He parked on an island pretty close to the enemy, which is good, but not entirely behind the island, so he wasn't with us very long...

By far the most toxic player I've ever come across in almost 30k battles was a unicum in Gold League two days ago. Of course, he didn't say anything in chat all game, probably because he was chat-banned. Just a lot of sarcastic pinging when the game was already lost and his plan, which he naturally didn't share with us, didn't work out. Once in port, just a barrage of rage and hatred, stat-shaming, projection, etc. I tried to explain my positioning and movements (I didn't exactly ruin his carry: we both ended up with about 750 XP), but I shouldn't have bothered. The people who div up with me regularly know I'm very self-critical, but honestly I still don't think I screwed up that match or anything...not that it would've justified that attitude. I think he was mad from losing 5 Ranked games in a row, but it was pretty disturbing Other than that, Ranked has been a breeze, particularly once I got the Rupprecht and grinded the Schlieffen in the Gold qualifiers and beyond: I still think the line is a bit broken in this mode, but I don't feel bad about it because I waited several seasons before using them against the general public

Aristotelian-Ptolemaic system: the Universe revolves around the Earth Copernican revolution: the Universe revolves around the Sun The Angry Admiral: the Universe revolves around my gaming experience!

She doesn't. She burns the same as every other Tier 8 BB. And for god's sake take Fire Prevention... Because that'd be boring and lazy. Premium ships are supposed to be a bit different, especially if they came before the tech tree line. The dispersion is fine. It's not the Stalingrad's dispersion, or the Slava's, but it's fine. Standard Tier 8 dispersion, with fast shells that leave the target little time to turn. To lurk around the middle and slap broadsides, then maybe push if there's an opening. Something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5eC0CISNiE Or this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJrFJLgEqXs Or this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTnZ_9I6es8 (better players are going to do even better)

Doesn't she have the same dispersion and sigma as the Bismarck? Or is the vertical dispersion different? is that info even public?

Frankly, I'm more annoyed by cyclones than Epicenter: - Epicenter can be frustrating if the team doesn't coordinate, but it can be played in any ship - cyclones are good for secondary BBs, which I appreciate, but also CVs and radar cruisers, who really don't need it

The guns punch pretty hard from Tier 8 on. The dispersion is also very reasonable, even if you take, as most people do, the secondary module in slot #3.

Actually, there's a pretty strong consensus in this community regarding subs, which makes them the opposite of "contentious" and "cause for much debate". Words have meanings...

Well, naturally: they don't wear any underwear!

I needed a kraken for the dockyard directive, in order to avoid a 42k xp grind in cruisers. So I picked the obvious choice... I was stopped at 4 in the first couple of tries, and fizzled in few more games, but then I had this very entertaining loss As a result, I got her spiritual successor: The Brazilian dub is very jolly, which is nice And after a few games... Only a 10 pointer (Adm. Pedro Max Fernando Frontin, who unfortunately doesn't even have enhanced skills or anything...), but this chunky bote has potential.

So what's the problem? The Musashi player is better and/or tries harder, so he wins more games. You don't, but you're playing for fun anyway, so what are you complaining about? There's also the simple case of a player not being very good, trying to improve, and not succeeding. Or someone who's so good they're better than people who try harder. Once again, other than a long-expired complaint about CVs in Ranked, and some ramblings about Marxism, I don't understand what's the point you're trying to make. I think I'll stop it right here.

Sure they do, if they put in the hard work to improve. But you and five other average players beating the team with the unicum Musashi didn't happen because you chose to do it anymore than they chose to lose, i.e. not at all. It happened because in one game it can happen, and indeed anything can happen. One game is random, many games are not: they follow patterns. The pattern is that that Musashi player is better than you, probably because he chose to put more hard work into improving, while you are playing for fun. I mean...in one post you say that the measure of a good player is how well they do in that battle. But in another, you say good players are recognized by their consistency. How is that not a massive contradiction? Communism might've died out in Europe, but statistics and logic are still there...

You asked who said it was ok to have CVs in Ranked, as though no one was. Well, I am, as long as they're bottom tier. That's that. Nope. Ranked is different than Randoms because it gives more influence to each player, and it's a bit competitive because there are requirements to reach Silver and Gold, but it's in no way "high end competitive" like KotS. The argumentation that it's okay to falsely misrepresent the very reasonable "good player are more likely to find a solution to the problem of winning" as the very unreasonable "good players will always find that solution (and succeed)"? Fascist? Criminal? Murderous? What on god's green Earth are you going on about? Yes, you can "beat the odds", as in "winning when you're the underdog". But that's already factored in the odds: unless you're actually becoming a better player and increasing your WR, the odds are going to beat you back in a few games. That's how odds work, or they'd be someone else's odds.

I'm ok with CVs in Ranked if they're guaranteed to be bottom tier. I pick Ranked Bronze/Silver. Small teams, and by no means "high end competitive". Would you prefer it to be 20v20, so that anyone's merits would be completely diluted? I think you mean "cut to the chase". And no, saying that "good players always find a solution" is the same as "good players are more likely to find a solution" is just intellectually dishonest. Keep the extra 3 words, and keep the actual meaning intact, if you please. How often does anyone buy a high tier premium to "circumvent the protected MM", i.e. to reach high tiers before 200 Random games? I mean...it happens, but much common are people with thousands of games who still have no idea how to put up a fight at high tiers. If posting only one endgame result, with the unicum Musashi losing (albeit at the top of his team) and you, a below-50% Ranked player this Season, winning (top of your team, too), isn't "cherrypicking", I don't know what would be. Over enough games, teams have no influence on anyone's solo winrate, and Ranked is all solo. I'm not "implying" it, I'm stating it. Your performance, this Season, is 65 wins over 137 games. Your PR is also in line with that WR, so I wouldn't say you were particularly lucky or unlucky, either. That's not a prediction, that's a fact. It is somewhat predictive of your future average performance: that's how things work. That's not an "assumption", it's an observation. It's "back off" and I'm not your pal. And please don't write "capisci?". I'm Italian, not an Italian-American mobster.

1) The team lineup is just as big in Silver (where you're at) now than it was before. So what's your point? 2) "Arguably high end competitive": what does that mean? 3) What is "the current state of the game"? It's one of those expressions people throw around when they want to express dissatisfaction, but at what in particular? No one ever made that argument. The argument is that "a good player is more likely to find the solution than a bad or average player". It's supposed to make you feel wrong when you say that "WG has frakked up Ranked", when CVs have been in it a bunch of times before, including the last Season. And again, they don't exert more influence in Silver than before, as it's again 6v6. You want qualifications to get into Bronze? Look, if they were easier than those for Silver, 45%ers would still pass them. If they were harder, you might not pass them, or it might take you forever, anyway. 1) How do high-tier ships "circumvent MM"? What does that mean? Do you mean skipped the mid-tiers? Because otherwise I'm at a loss. 2) I also find it a bit odd that someone around 45-48% WR at Tier 8-10 complains about "the state of the playerbase", particularly if his point is that it's too easy for bad players to get there: if that's the case, why isn't he stomping all over them? To me the measure is his performance over many games. The alternative is cherrypicking. Other than the smaller teams and a different player population in Gold, maybe Silver in the first sprint, I don't see it. I mean...there are differences, but so there are between Randoms with or without CV, top tier or bottom tier, at Tier 4 with a bunch of bots or Tier 10 against purple divisions. I still don't understand what's preventing you from having fun, in Ranked, this season compared to the last. That there are again CVs but 1 fewer player per team in Bronze, but not in Silver? It seems like hardly anything has changed. That you can't play Tier 6-7 in Bronze? You have no shortage of Tier 8-9 to try, if you want variety. That bad players made their way to Silver, so it's less fun? 1) You're almost one of them, at least this season, 2) without them, your numbers would be even worse. You're telling me you'd have more fun winning 43% of your games than 47%? So to sum up: you admit you "play for fun", so not to win (right?), and yet you want stricter rules? Stricter rules to keep out...the people who play for fun? I don't...understand...the point of this paragraph.

39% of the time, he loses: this was just one of those games. Maybe one of the many he couldn't carry no matter what, maybe one of the few that he couldn't carry, but a 65%er could've, somehow. Still, he saved his star... What is it supposed to prove? That better teams can lose a game? That unicums don't win 100% of the time? That winrates don't always predict the outcome? We know all that... Didn't you? CVs were included during the last season. So what? At least now they're always bottom tier... And what's the problem with the promotion rules? It's easier to get into Silver, tougher to get into Gold. You can't seem to win 50% of your games...yet you complain about "potatoes" being bumped to Silver more easily? You mean you? Also, some convoluted argument about smaller teams giving players less battle influence...when it's the opposite. Not that it matters: it was 6v6 in Silver last Season, too. And if "potatoes" are being promoted too easily, shouldn't that make it easier for you to carry in Silver? Assuming you're much better than them, that is: but unless we put the cutoff much lower, say at 42% WR, it seems inaccurate. I don't mean to be rude, but what I see is someone who's played 20 Ranked matches a day since the new Season began and isn't having a good time, so he blames the mode instead of...I dunno, his selection of ships, or his tactics or whatever. I've read the whole thread three times, and I still don't understand what you're complaining about You're in Silver, but you don't think you should be in Silver? Is that it?

And Umikaze, I think: on the A hull