BeauNidl3

With a no concealment build (no upgrade module, camo or Concealment) getting un-spotted in the Donskoi would need you to be on practically the next map!

I'd also like the ability to reroll the names and faces of existing normal Captains. As they're not visible in the game and only in the port it can have no impact on the gameplay, it's just a quality of life issue for Captain management.

Indeed, the AI is a good deal better at fighting since the changes as it was under-performing before, this is true for all the operations. They have said they will review the stats and see if they've tweaked it too far or if it's what they want.

The thing with any kind of pen indicator is it wouldn't work in WoWs, mostly because of the flight times of the shells and the ships changing angles. What would be a massive damage broadside or one shot deletion fired at the citadel of a cruiser from 17km can become a bunch of ricochets if the target has turned between the time the shells left the barrel and them hitting the target, that's ignoring dispersion and sheer RNG. There is a lot of useful information available, having the knowledge to apply it effectively is a matter of experience. WoWs is NOT WoT, it has massive differences and comparing the two is simply impossible. As to the popularity of the two games, there are many reasons, not the least being WoT has had time to build a larger player base and there are just more people interested in tanks than in ships.

Looks accurate to me, shame it's only 12 games that punishment. @MrConway anything that can be done about the self confessed blatant rule breaking behaviour of the OP beyond his Orangeness?

Not sure I agree, have come across a thoroughly deadly 3 DD division of GBONA Clan running 1 radar Yuey, 1 Smoke Yuey and I think it was a Gearing, 2 games in a row, they most definitely didn't fail, I've seen plenty of single class divisions excel. Fail Division to me is one that drags a lower tier in to facing a tier higher than it could naturally face with the +/-2 rules.

I've now helped a couple of guys to get their KM kills by divisioning and playing a KM ship in COOP games to ensure at least 1 KM ship to kill, it's no hassle as I've finished the mission and I play COOP for fun sometimes. However for someone that deliberately and cynically leaves battles early would I do that? I'm sure you guess. I finished the mission solo in COOP early morning.

True, it's a fatarse and feels sluggish when dodging, one reason I prefer the Fletcher and I have both in port.

To be fair the Gearing could use a little improvement tweak, it is one of the earlier T10 DD's isn't it? Shima got a recent and needed improvement to its base concealment, Gearing could do with sitting a bit lower in the water and a few seconds off its torpedo reload. It's a good ship, but I prefer my Fletcher overall. I've got the Yueyang researched, I'll buy it as soon as it's discounted or I feel the urge to dump some Elite XP into a Captain.

Stating something is a fact and having actual data to prove it are 2 very different things and yes without proof a fact isn't a fact. At the moment it looks far more like "opinion" or "bias" than fact. I'm not to R10 yet, but I will probably play my Hindenberg a fair bit if/when I get there as I like the ship, but I also like my T10 DD's and other cruisers.

I don't think "Everyone does this", many would consider it a rather lame thing to do. Plus if they manipulate the result being on opposite sides it's cheating. Of course ay mechanic to stop 2 clan members facing each other or being on the same side would have to cope with sister clans and there's no easy way to prevent that.

Indeed, took little real effort, was happy to help out.

I really liked the Donskoi too, I find the Moskva rather boring because it handles badly, has lost the torpedoes and the flavour of the previous ships. Like you I played concealment to allow the freedom to get in radar range, disengage and position, as you said the gun performance with HE and AP is very decent and the range is fine, but played completely open water it's vulnerable to eating citadels from BB's across the map so some sneaky attributes make a big difference, at least to me.

Can always div up with a ship of the nation you need to kill, I've finished it, give me a ping and I'll lend a hand if you like.

It has a base concealment number that high, so that when people apply the effects of Concealment Expert (you really should expect a tier 9 cruiser to have at least a 10 point Captain) and the Concealment System (2m silver) plus a basic Camouflage it has a detection radius that's quite close to its long range radar reach. Using the module and Concealment Expert is what a significant majority of players do, especially on squishy cruisers. Since the RU cruisers are not very stealthy compared to others as part of their national flavour and they have long reach radars I think the argument it needs a rework to accommodate the oddball build to support a gameplay style poorly suited to the ship isn't a strong one.

Not that I'm aware of and the screenshot of stats he posted earlier in the thread has no name on it (I could have missed it, I don't use the sites so I'm not familiar with them).

He has said his main account (with the alleged Donskoi) isn't the one he posts with on this forum. No idea why that would be the case, but each to their own.

Showing nothing appears to be the way they indicate no progress in this type of mission requirement, I find it un-intuitive as well, but I've seen it on other missions in the recent past and got used to it.

Looks pretty bizarre to most of the thread respondents. There's always a way to make weird setups work, but the OP proved in his first post that he can't make it work even if you can.

3 German ships in total PLUS 3 Japanese ships in total (completed from your picture) Any number of games in Random, Ranked, COOP, Scenario games. MUST get those sinkings in Russian ships of T6 or higher.

Yup that mission is a pain in the nuts, not forgetting you need to do those sinkings in a T6 or higher Russian ship, the only up side is you can do the mission in COOP as well so some persistent spamming (with a bit of luck or manipulation of team makeup with a division) makes it less painful. I completed it solo by playing Molotov and Makarov in COOP, it was frustrating.

There is a mod in one of the packs that summarises the information available from the H key as to secondary and AA mounts with icons and numbers, I don't use it myself, but the ability is there in the game client. WG seem to leave this quality of life tweaking of the UI up to the modders for some reason.

Good point, it would attract me to the Vigilance skill more which I don't use on any Captain, nor do I use High Alert come to that. If the existing Vigilance was dropped as 3 points for such a limited benefit makes it rather expensive in payoff terms and the ability folded into High Alert (as I'm implying you suggested) then it would make High Alert more attractive.

Testing things out is great, doing it in a Random isn't, that's where we have the Training room (now with the feature for active firing bots again) and COOP where you don't spoil the game for 11 other people. The system uses the term Unsporting Conduct. That's your opinion of that poster, you're entitled to it, just as he's entitled to believe that @Yogibjoern acted poorly as evidenced by his own posts. Now who's the one being "toxic"? You have zero idea of my motivation for criticising @Yogibjoern and the choices he's outlined in his posts on this thread, but the fun and testing arguments fall very flat when he's doing those at the expense of 11 other players on his team in a Random. His decision isn't unlucky, it's incompetent and inconsiderate to his team members when there are facilities to try stuff out without impacting the fun of the rest of the team. People aren't being elitist (why do you love to throw that accusation about so much?) criticising his choice to use a build that led to rapid needless death, they're pointing out that choice was and is plain bad. An automated system doesn't read intent, but then neither can a human referee without telepathy, from what @Yogibjoern described, a human may well judge it wilful negligence just like the system did..

My experience with the new system from 2 separate games yesterday:- Kutuzov - Firing from my smoke at an enemy cruiser showing a broadside so AP loaded, ally Amagi sails right through my gun line and smoke and I hit him with at least 2 full turrets if not 3 so 6-9 shells, about 3k done to him, no flag from the system, just an Amagi + a bit of extra ventilation in his upper works. Punishment System appeared to be working. Kamikaze - I totally failed to read the position of an allied Emerald, hit him with 2 torpedoes (entirely my fault, I apologised of course) 1st did 11k damage to him, 2nd was reflected back at me and I naturally sank with a -1. Pink for 2 games, complete cockup on my part, Punishment System worked in my opinion. The only material difference is the percentage of the allied ships HP I did in team damage 3k is very little off an Amagi, 11k is a heck of a lot off an Emerald. Neither allied ship sank.