Fat_Maniac

^This^ I know @Dutch_Soldier has put alot of thought and effort into his tree proposal @EwoudK, as it appears have you, well done to both of you. The crying shame for you both, and indeed all of us playing WoWS is that WG don't seem to want to build a Dutch tech tree even though it would seem you have more than enough ships, and options to produce a well balanced set of lines to play.

^This^ The game rewards failure, you can learn nothing and fail your way up the tiers. And not just in BB's although it's by far the easiest class to fail your way up in. @OP I don't think making BB's more accurate overall is one of the answers. What I'd like to see is ..... Change the dispersion mechanic, so that it is not a linear progression from min to max range. Rather make it some sort of exponential progression where dispersion gets much worse the closer to max range you are, and make dispersion worse at max range. This would reward players that pushed or at least moved up and supported their team. Also improve the survivability of crusiers at mid to high tiers, and give them a purpose in the game again. At the moment cruiser play at mid tier and above is very unforgiving, one mistake usually means death. From a learning point of view that's great, if you are prepared to learn from your mistake. The problem is trying to angle yourself against so many heavy hitting enemy BB's. Once you are spotted its very difficult, so concealment modules or skill are pretty much non optional equipment, but they only help to a point. Also fix Hydro and Radar so that they use line of sight rules too. Radar and hydro working through terrain is just wrong, we have LoS for ships spottng each other, apply it to Hydro and Radar, so that players that try to use the terrain to work their way in can, and the strategies of good positioning to control channels and waterways to objectives has a role in the game again. Allowing ships to switch between DWP and standard torps would be problematic from a balance point of view. DWP boats have inferior guns, boats with poor standard torps have better guns (generally). How WG could balance ships that could fire DWP torps alongside standard ones, and shoot guns too, I just don't see it happening

I have an image in my head of a triple Kitakami division dropping a 60 torp wall at the BBabies

More than three in a div in one game would be too powerful. However .... It is perfectly possible to have more than one division from a clan in the same battle. Lots do it and it is a bit controversial. Form two div's and coordinate your clicking ready to enter battle. If you both do it at exactly the same time, there is an increased chance both divs will end up in the same battle, but no guarantee they will be on the same team.

Flamu posted about this somewhere a while ago. He suggested changes to the engineconfig xml file to increase the games RAM buffer for effects.

Because Training Rooms were made part of the standard game install and hence opened to the whole game community, WG had to compromise all the extra training rooms being created on the server cluster taking up resources by removing the bot AI functionality. WG's thinking is if you want to shoot at moving active bots you can do that in PvE (Co-Op) or Operations.

In early 1942, Gneisenau and others made a daylight dash up the English Channel from occupied France to Germany. After reaching Kiel in early February, the ship went into drydock. On the night of 26 February, the British launched an air attack on the ship; one bomb penetrated her armored deck and exploded in the forward ammunition magazine, causing serious damage and a large number of casualties. The repairs necessitated by the damage were so time-consuming that it was determined to rebuild the ship to accommodate the 38 cm guns as originally intended. The 28 cm guns were removed and used as shore batteries. In 1943, Hitler ordered the cessation of conversion work, and on 27 March 1945, she was sunk as a blockship in Gotenhafen (Gdynia) in German-occupied Poland. So yes 15" guns were planned but they never got installed on Hitler's orders.

The game engine doesn't continually check if you or a target ship is detected. I assume this is because the actually logic (coding) is time consuming. So the game engine seems to run a check, every few cycles, maybe every second or so. The result of this is an apparent delay in a target appearing, and in it disappearing after it goes undetected. I see regular instances of enemy ships appearing to blink out of view. I can be shooting them and they disappear for a short while usually no more than a second, only to suddenly reappear again.

Running the game on an SSD helps, as does more RAM, and somewhere Flamu I think posted info about how to modify the games engineconfig xml file to change the ram buffer setting.

I think I understand what you are asking @Antony1953. For you to actually see a ship rendered on your screen, it has to be detected by someone on your team, This I assume you already know. However .... (and I think this is the answer to what you are seeing) The game engine doesn't continually check if you or a target ship is detected. I assume this is because the actually logic (coding) is time consuming. So the game engine seems to run a check, every few cycles, maybe every second or so. The result of this is an apparent delay in a target appearing, and in it disappearing after it goes undetected. I see regular instances of enemy ships appearing to blink out of view. I can be shooting them and they disappear for a short while usually no more than a second, only to suddenly reappear again.

Always wiling to share my limited knowledge and learn from others, so please count me in.

Not that I've ever seen. However you could go over to the HA server or shipcomrade.com and ask Little White Mouse if they have ever looked into this.

Think they might be the same people that think camping at max range is also good.

The detail is all from Little White Mouse, all I have done is copy and paste, as it's so clear hopefully the majority of players interested will understand it!

Nation doesn't matter, its usefulness is determined by gun caliber. Basically IFHE is useless on anything with 203mm or above guns, as you won't be able to pierce the armour of your target. IFHE works best on 150 - 155 mm guns and below. And of course it goes without saying that don't use it on RN CL's that can only shoot AP. This is old but might help explain

The community here is actually very good for an online game. However when somebody comes here and express's their personnel opinion without evidence to back it up, they will eat you alive. If you want to be taken seriously back up your thoughts with evidence.

@Billy_Bligh looking forward to meeting you on Discord

Only thing I could think of is damage saturation http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Damage_Saturation, but if target was fuil HP it doesn't explain it. There are lots of strange things that happen with the detailed ribbons, and there are regular forum reports of things not adding up correctly. This might be another one of these instances. If you have a replay you could try sending a ticket to support, but I doubt you will get any kind of useful response.

Have to say I hate T5 MM. There are some great ships at T5 but they really don't fair well when they are constantly put in T7 matches, especially when you come across T7 CV's. And I can only imagine facing T8's is even worse.

Bet the restriction is down to performance. A training room with lots of bots would take up more server resources.

You do know that when sailing a T5 in a div with T6's, you will always get T6 MM? It's the way the MM works, it takes your division into battles matched for your highest tier ship. I think it's to stop seal clubbing. If you want to sail a T5 and have a chance of facing T4's you need to have a div with T5 ships as your highest tier.

WTF ! I feel like I've just read the response I'd get from a PWC consultant if I was foolish enough to ask him to write me a short report on what he thought of WoWS.

I have to ask, cause I see it said so much..... How do you know somebody on your team is actually a bot? I see lots of retarded play, but nothing that makes me think somebody is a bot. More likely drunk / high / or somebodies 4 year old playing on their account.

The problem with this game is you can fail your way up the tiers. In low and mid tiers you could lose every battle you play and still gain credits and XP to progress to the next tier. Would take you longer but you will get there in the end Simple solution - don't reward failure, cover the service and ammo costs - maybe, but don't award XP when you lose a battle. The only way to progress is to win, and the only way to win is to learn to play the game, and work with your team mates. Or do as I am trying - don't rush up the tiers, stay where you feel comfortable or pushed a bit, learn what you need to do, and then move on up again. I don't ruin anybody elses game by being a little fish in the big pond, and I learn and progress at my own pace, which as a casual gamer, is slower than your avg gamer.

I've never tried ranked, it doesn't appeal to me at the moment, I was thinking cancerous more in terms of the levels of hostility vented in chat about peoples ship choices, or blaming someone for the loss. I'm not confident enough in my abilities to face that. On your second point I could not agree more, it is the relationship between kills and caps and the rate at which each team is building points, that is important, it's that which tells me when to push and when to hold the line or retreat.