BeauNidl3

Hopefully both will reappear with missions to get them, I've completed both so I'm not affected.

I'm firmly of the opinion that a hard cap of 3 (or reluctantly 4) BB's a side would be healthy for the game, BB proliferation has throttled cruisers completely and many cruiser players have swapped to DD or BB. I went to DD's although I have ground all the cruiser lines to T10 now, I play DD much more than cruisers these days.

While the BB AP pen problem is a major pain in the backside as a DD this change would NOT be the right answer, they're trying to overcome what they've accepted is a bug by a global nerf, bad idea. DD's are already fragile this would make them ludicrously squishy to DD and Cruiser shots of all ammo types.

That's a pipe dream, the chances of BB numbers being capped so that dynamic gameplay can happen are as close to nil as makes no odds. They're talking of spoiling Clan Battles by allowing 25% of the team to be BB's.

Indeed, in my Akizuki it's a favourite passtime if top tier, that being said if the enemy DD has support Aki is a bit vulnerable to being squished back.

It was quite good fun, but to be fair the 2 DD's they allowed (other than the Gallant released at the same time) were a bit hmmmm. I enjoyed it and I'd like to see it return.

So true, at T8 the concealment and damage output jumps a fair bit, T6/7 DD's are at a big disadvantage if facing T8 DD's with a driver that knows how to play. As I've already said in this thread the biggest threat to me as a DD player is other DD's, not radars.

I understand your point completely, I just don't agree with it being as desperate as you're trying to portray it, in fact in my opinion you're exaggerating to try to paint radar as being excessively strong. Sure it's a pain in the behind at times, but it's usually my mistake if I die to a radar. I've no idea how many times I've been radared and focus fired in DD's, it's a lot, but it's far from an automatic death as I've learned to adapt and dodge better than I used to, sure I get blapped sometimes, but it's far from a given

That assumption is incorrect and no you won't get to see my stats to provide proof. Some maps do, some don't, the approaches to those spots are typically exposed, unless the radar cruiser totally holds fire getting there and isn't spotted by a DD or plane it's not a stroll in the park to get to those spots, the ability to fire from there is limited as well. If you don't enjoy DD play with radar ships about then there are plenty of other ships you can play. Personally I cope with radars much of the time, sometimes I screw up and get splattered in seconds, but radar is not as grim as you're trying to paint it and implying that 10 seconds spotted in a DD that can dodge pretty well is an automatic death sentence is a large exaggeration. You're also exaggerating the ability of teams to focus fire in Randoms, which is a complete farce in many cases. I'm more worried by other DD's than I am by radars when I play DD and I have every T10 DD other than the Khaba which isn't a style of DD play that appeals to me.

They take a risk just getting to a position to radar and get counter spotted quite frequently, if a DD has any meaningful support the radar cruiser will then face a storm of incoming shells and torpedoes. Even with the radar module a Des Moines radar lasts 56 seconds and I believe this is the longest duration in the game. that radar has a cooldown of course. If the DD has no meaningful support then perhaps the DD driver should reconsider his position, sure sometimes being solo is a good idea, sometimes it's not, as we all know relying on support that may run away at the first incoming shell is a lottery, but that's part of DD play at all tiers. To say there is no counter to radar ships is a significant exaggeration, with the exception of Missouri they're all pretty squishy and to have a Missouri in radar range of a cap is hardly frequent in the early game where much of the cap contesting happens.

Try some reasoned arguments then. So far your posts are just complaints and moaning about stats, you never know, but of course as I have hidden stats my opinion is negligible.

I'm not scared, nor am I your mate, I am however literate and I will be leaving my stats hidden for good. If you bother to read what I wrote I wasn't lecturing, just disagreeing with the post that was made and stating my experience which I believe ties in with experienced DD players whose opinion I respect. This is merely one of many radar complaint threads that have been spawned in the last few days and the opinion that radar isn't an end of the world blight on DD's is one held by many DD players. Again if you don't agree or dislike that opinion there's nothing which can be done about that as reasoned debate appears to be a bit beyond you.

Partially to annoy people like you that feel hidden stats indicates a bad player, should I assume you're illiterate just because you typed there instead of they're? I have a variety of reasons for disliking the stats obsession, but I'll stick with stating that my stats will remain hidden from the likes of you.

That post is one of the reasons I hid my stats long ago, they will stay hidden. The people who behave as if stats being hidden negates any rational point (I've even seen people in game saying "I don't talk to people with hidden stats") really need to get to grips with the fact that some people think that attitude is absurd. I really don't give two hoots what conclusions you jump to about hidden stats. The simple fact is plenty of DD's are played at the tiers where radar is a factor, it takes a little adaptation to cope, it helps if you also play some radar ships to know their capabilities and not just run in fear at the hint of radar.

Why? Plenty of DD players can cap it just takes some timing or persistence. Sorry I can't agree with that, I do fine in Fletcher, ChungMu, Z52, Yueyang, Grozevoi and Shima with 12km torps, I actively dislike the Gearing's torpedoes and look forwards to it getting the Fletcher ones in test, the Shima 20's are utterly useless. I don't know how you play, but if you genuinely feel what you wrote maybe you should rethink playing DD at high tiers. I play as many high tier DD games as I did before, if you can't adapt and cope then it's probably good you play DD less as the team relies on DD's being played reasonably well. The real life argument falls down in so many ways, not the least being in real life radars and hydros are on constantly, all ships could deploy smoke screens on demand and naval artillery hit rates against moving ships was very low. WoWs isn't a simulator and this is yet another thread complaining about radars.

That's my experience too, I'm not bottom tier more in DD's than I am in other ship types. I think @Alzy is exaggerating to try to illustrate that he's not much good at dealing with Radar which is less much common at T6/7 games I play than it is in higher tiers.

Probably better off sending a PM to the forum moderators, at least you will know they've seen it.

Ermmm...... OK, I suppose... Thing is when you do the "I'm outa here for good" thing then reappear it all looks rather silly.

@CLyDeThaMonKeY in his testing Stalingrad while I was getting slapped silly by his teams T10's in my Cleveland on Mountain Range (a CL really shouldn't have to tank 1.5m potential), not much of a game as my team collapsed rapidly, but that's how it goes sometimes.

It's a bit of a shame you didn't play the Roon, true it has one turret less than Hindy, but it's an excellent ship and a little more nimble than the Hindy, I enjoyed grinding it and I'd rate it as an excellent ship, it doesn't struggle in T10 games. I've not played my Kronshtadt much yet, but so far I've had good results with both ammo types.

For all we know missions that are rewarded with Dunkirk containers will be run for many weeks/months like has happened with the Bismarck ones. I've not seen anything to indicate if it's going to be long term or not.

That doesn't answer the questions, please take them one at a time and explain so that I can understand, because what you wrote is basically just a rant. WHY would WG make a rigged MM? What BENEFIT would WG gain by making a rigged MM? What RULES are they using to rig the MM? While I am marginally invested in the game, I wouldn't hesitate to leave if I disliked it or found something I prefer, what I've paid has come out of my disposable income so it's not an investment, I've paid a lot for games I no longer play over the last 30 years. From your screenshot you were playing Scharnhorst so you have an "investment" if having premium ships is what you regard as "investing". Ignorance? Certainly I don't claim to know everything about WoWs and I don't play their other titles, but I think I'm reasonably well informed.

The questions that I've never yet seen answered by anyone accusing MM of being rigged are:- WHY would WG make a rigged MM? What BENEFIT would WG gain by making a rigged MM? What RULES are they using to rig the MM? From your screenshot of the results it just looks like your team sucked something awful and the other team didn't, there's nothing new in that, all it takes is a few people playing badly or flat out refusing to use any kind of tactical awareness including camping and cowardice and facerolls like that happen.

That was from the last patch, a way so that you can see easier if you have the regular or premium consumables, it's a good change as for an absolute age I've used a mod so that I can tell at a glance. If you mouse over the buildings in your clan port or look to the right side of the clan screen you can see the active buildings, as others have said you will never be able to build any buildings unless you're made part of the clan leadership so don't get concerned that you can't upgrade the buildings yourself. The benefits are passive like +% income, exp, discount on buying (also applies to selling) silver tech tree ships, pretty obvious when you have an idea what you're looking at.