TeaAndTorps

Yes, it is a dilemma. As I said above though, players who do hang around at lower tiers for longer than they strictly need to will bank lots of elite XP which they might still want to do something with later. And if not encouraging people into a level of gameplay that they frankly aren't ready for retains more players in the long term, they might spend more money on converting said elite XP later. Moving up the tiers slower doesn't mean not moving up the tiers at all, and if you've got lots of elite XP on your Kirov, maybe it's tempting to convert some of it to research the Budyonny upgrades... But of course this is all speculation without hard data to back it up, so I don't expect it to be taken as anything more serious than that As to why to still buy premium time, farming commander XP, credits and free XP all seem like potentially good reasons to do so. And I wouldn't be surprised if lots of people would still want to get themselves a Yamato ASAP instead of playing hundreds of Kongo games, and still want premium time for that. But yeah. I realise WG's accounts department would (rightly) laugh any idea involving changes to the monetisation structure out of the room unless someone in a position to do so produced some absolutely bullet-proof research suggesting that it was worth doing.

Yes, everyone's going to have different priorities and that's fair enough. Combat missions are the one issue with having dropped back to Clemson/Isokaze/Shenyang for a while to work on my DD decision making before picking Nicholas back up... But I can still use my Furutaka if needed. Personally I'm in no hurry to play ranked, and ops look more fun in a division – time constraints mean I only really play solo atm – but might be good to do once I've amassed enough credits for the Aoba. I hope you're able to get the wide selection of ships you need soon and concentrate on the other aspects you want to I guess the point is that new players should be told without needing to visit the forum that it's fine to spend some more time learning at low tiers (and that higher tier ships do not make you invincible), instead of only being encouraged to advance as quickly as possible, which once they reach T5 can mean getting regularly slaughtered by vastly more experienced opponents if they've rushed T2-4. And people will still choose whichever model chimes with their priorities.

Another thought: I've found the game is more fun since I stopped measuring progress by how quickly I climb the tiers and started measuring it in terms of how well I perform. I've not thought about quitting since then. The official messaging focuses on tier-climbing as the progression model, and given how rushing up the tiers interacts with the end of protected MM, it's hardly surprising if new players get dispirited when following that and leave. While I realise that not everyone will find the same as me and that WG make money from people using free XP and premium time to work their way up the tiers, I wonder if there's something that could be done there to help player retention. People who focus on getting good at one tier still bank a lot of elite XP that they might want to do something with later, after all, and if more of them stay in the game... Or maybe I'm being hopelessly naïve

Yes, agree 100%.

Of course it's entirely anecdotal so not worth much as customer research, but that was the point where I told myself I was quitting PvP/the whole game on several occasions, even if I came back each time. Ofc it wasn't helped by the fact that I had very little clue what I was doing (I still have an awful lot to improve), but I imagine that that applies to most players reaching their first (or second or third) T5, given how relatively few games you have to play to get there. It would indeed be interesting to see stats about this. I might be missing something important that's obvious to more knowledgeable players, but it seems like it would help if the same MM range was applied across the board. I'm not saying whether that should be +/-1 or +/-2, or maybe an initial preference for +/-1 with +/-2 kicking in of it's taking too long (I can see arguments for and against all of them), but it does seem that the cost of protected MM up to T4 is quite painful MM (from a newbie's pov) at T5, when many players are still very inexperienced compared to the company they'll be keeping. I'm not convinced it's a great trade-off. All that said, the last couple of weeks have made me very glad that we don't have the template MM of WoT, which sounds horrendous. So it's not all bad Of course, proper tutorials might help as it's quite a complex game to learn, and it's nice to see some moves in that direction with the Waterline videos. I wonder whether player retention also to some extent reflects the percentage of players who can be bothered to learn a fairly complex game (far more complex than I was bargaining for when I first installed) or, alternatively, are such Dunning-Kruger case studies that they don't think they have to. In which case the question comes down to how WG can make the learning process more pleasant without dumbing the game down. I don't have an answer to that – and any simple answer is probably inadequate – but fortunately I'm not a game designer

Hi everyone. I've been thinking quite a bit about how to improve my DD gameplay recently. Over the last 2 or 3 months I've started playing my Nicholas again in randoms. When I first got it back in October or November, I had an absolutely disastrous run which really showed me it was time to seriously l2p (going back to lower tiers and watching all the guides, commentaries etc. I could get my hands on). Things are going better overall now, but I've noticed that my performance is still way more inconsistent in DDs than in CAs or BBs. I'll do really well in maybe about 1/3 of my games, and then the others range between 'meh' and 'full potato'. When I do well DDs are probably my favourite class to play, but it is frustrating being so inconsistent in them. It still gives decent enough recent stats overall but that's not really the point and it would be nice to reduce the inconsistency. I was wondering if there are other DD players out there who have found the same thing in the past, what they reckoned the problem was and what they did to overcome it? Any ideas would be very helpful! If it helps, I mostly play USN DDs (And like the PAs so far, though my experience is limited); I don't really enjoy IJN torp boats at all! I think part of it might come down to not being overly aggressive, so it'd be good to hear strategies for striking the balance between not being suicidally aggressive and not being so cautious that you're not contributing with spotting, capping and damage. Paying more attention to it is having positive results, but it's particularly hard to strike that balance when your team decides to camp in their spawn, I find...

Yeah, will remember that when trying to git gud in Isokaze. And already done! No idea why it isn't enabled by default, but it's very helpful.

Haha we'll see! Either way, I'm looking forward to the learning curve and hopefully being able to hold my own at mid-tier in time. I've been finding recently that this community really is great when it comes to helping players who ask for it; it's a pleasure to be a part of. It's just great that experienced players will take the time to help a newbie improve, I really appreciate it. Useful points in those other two other threads too. Okay, those sound like helpful rules of thumb – ta. I'm definitely trying to work on my situational awareness too, so I have a better sense of what might be around any island. Minimap every 10 seconds... That'll be my target! I'd not found this bit of the wiki before – that's really helpful! Good to know about KM DDs' AP too. I'm going to be paying much more attention to my positioning in smokes from now on too!

*Grabs search tool* *Begins to understand*

Oh good, I'm glad it's not just me

Pretty please can Shenyang count as a torpedo boat? I get so bored in Isokaze. But, serious again – yes, I should do this. How can I counter torp boats if I don't know how their captains think, after all? I took the Clemson out last night – just one battle before I had to go out – and was pretty happy with the result. Nothing incredible, but effective in a DD's role, I think. I'd far rather be able to do this in the majority of games than be a potato in 75% of DD games and an overcompensating rockstar in, say, 15%. I think getting to that point in Clemson first is the right call. I let that V-170 get far too much AP damage into my broadside, though; I should have angled sooner. Never really thought about in DDs before but I will do in future. Overall it's amazing how much easier it is to make decisions when you feel relaxed and reasonably confident in a ship – just hoping I don't get so confident in Clemson that it becomes a mental obstacle to moving onto Nicholas again! So the plan now is at least 30 more games in Clemson, and a similar number in Isokaze (though can't promise I'll pick up Minekaze or Mutsuki again...) and Shenyang, before going for another 50 or so in Nicholas – but maybe more in each ship if I need it to feel I'm performing consistently and surviving for long enough to be useful in each. I'll see how it goes. And I'll stick Furutaka and my BB lines if I fancy something different, or getting into T5 on other classes. Thanks @EsaTuunanen for the tips on how to stay useful while surviving, I will try to apply them! (And I really enjoy Yuro's 'How to' videos :D) Thanks again for your help, everyone. I'll look forward to maybe seeing you on the high seas at some point

Thanks for this! Yes, I definitely need to play more. I've been quite surprised, since I started paying attention, at how many fewer games I do have in DDs compared to cruisers. And yeah, I don't have many random games... I played a lot of co-op after that initial run with the Nicholas; it (quite rightly) shook my confidence. Tbf I guess I played a fair amount of co-op in Clemson too, now I look back on it, so maybe I should be dropping back to that for a while... My concern with that has been, basically, that I won't get as much out of playing more the Clemson rather than the Nicolas because 1) on lower tiers lots of people haven't realised the need to focus DDs down yet, so (I was thinking to myself) you don't really get to learn how to operate with the certainty of being focused as soon as you get spotted 2) teams seem more likely to sail in all kinds of random directions (especially in T3-4 matches) so you don't really get to learn how to work with your team and 3) Nicholas's guns have the same ballistic properties that you experience all the way to Gearing, so it seemed more productive to practise on that 4) even if I'm new, I felt like having a 10-point captain puts me at such an advantage over most T4 players that it makes it harder to learn how to operate against equally well-tooled-up opposition. But would you say T4 is still the place to get the lessons I need? Wouldn't be surprised if I'd got my reasoning horribly backwards

Okiedoke! I guess I'm also thinking of totally open caps, but if there's island cover I could work I guess ambush torps can become an option? I'll try just keeping them spotted and hitting F3 more, thanks for reassuring me that that is still being useful!! If they're all firing already and so don't need me to spot them, I suppose I could always smoke up and start blazing away myself, while being wary of getting torped in smoke. I imagine gunboating in the open is somewhat less viable with USN arcs (?), but perhaps I just need to try out different combinations and figure out what works when. 'Stepping' sounds like a good system. I had thought about maybe buying the Sims at some point but not before I'm good enough to hold my own in it, don't want to be that guy who buys a higher-tier-than-his-tech-tree-ships premium and then just derps in it!! There seems to be a distinct lack of lower-tier USN premiums, apart from the Texas...

Thanks for the tips, both! Yep, I'll be trying this. I think what's getting to me is not always really knowing what to do in the time between getting the hell out of Dodge and going back once enemies have thinned out. But yeah, if I can manage this after a fashion in my CLs I should be able to in my DDs – I guess it takes more practice. More reasons to play Nicholas quite a bit more before buying Farragut! I guess it doesn't exactly help that the battle I was mentioning earlier was on Strait, where finding hard cover that still allows you to be useful is... Well, I find it difficult. Yes, of course. For all the reasons you mentioned it's never my intention – I just meant 'not even having traded' as a demonstration of how useless some battles can feel!! Maybe I do just need to be even more careful about not suicide rushing... Maybe I think I'm being cautious but actually I'm not being cautious enough... And figuring out how I can be useful while not trying to force the cap, and reminding myself that staying alive is useful! So also, if you see three CLs closely covering a cap, forget trying to push into it unless you clearly have enough support (cos a single DD can't solo them AND an enemy DD)? Or is that too simplistic? Ah yes, have to say that smacking enemy DDs about in my own Furious Taco is great fun. I love that ship, as long as I'm the one sailing it Ah okay. Yes, I am focusing on the guns really. On all my current lines I'm planning on stopping at T7 for the foreseeable future, as I don't have loads of time to play or money for premium time, and as I understand it you kinda need those to 1) be sufficiently competent for the higher tiers and 2) turn a profit in credits. And it seems like up to that point USN DDs are more gun-focused. Does that sound like a sensible thing to fpcus my build on? I know Mahan can stealth-torp, but it has quite a fast torp reload anyway, IIRC? All of which is to say, I'll definitely look at BFT instead of SI. I always run premium damage control party and smoke, and still make a profit. Hopefully that'll continue on Farragut, but it's another reason to not rush getting it. And thanks again! More info is always good, so no, it's not too overwhelming. Really looking forward to trying to put this into practice. It's really good to see some stuff that I'd kinda vaguely guessed at (e.g. captain builds, differences with Germans and Soviets) but didn't actually know in writing from more experienced players

I absolutely mean WR, as the nearest stat we have for being consistently useful to the team and playing the objective well. The frustrating inconsistency comes with the times I die early without getting any cap or even managing to trade with an enemy DD. It kinda sucks feeling like I haven't carried my weight, even in a victory. Wow, thanks for all the tips @Captain_LOZFFVII! Those are some really useful ideas about smoke usage in cap contesting, which I'll try to apply. Hitting T as soon as I got into a cap was a bad habit I picked up on Wickes and Clemson, which I'm trying to avoid now. Going with the flow too... Probably I am too hasty about making a play *now*, when maybe it's better to be less hasty... I'll also try to more actively provide smoke for allied cruisers... I guess telling people you plan to at the start can be a good way of encouraging them to support you too, right? I hadn't even thought about kiting enemy cruisers... Maybe something to practise in co-op/training room, given the bots' obliging tendency to chase you What you did to that Pepsi sounds thoroughly entertaining On captain skills, I'm currently running PM, LS, SE, CE. I'm about 10k XP away from an 11th point, so I'll spend that on PT. Probably go SI, DE, AR after that... (I won a 10-point captain in Raptor Rescue with my Emerald back when T5s were allowed, so guess I'm lucky there!).

Thanks for your reply! Yes, I've heard... We'll, mixed reviews of the Farragut. I played it on the PTS the other day actually, and funnily enough quite liked it, but I guess we'll see... Looking forward to Mahan and upwards, in time, though. But I'll not be getting the Farragut until I feel like I've got gud in the Nicholas. The Russians are looking like the best candidates for my next 'DD' line, depending on what new lines appear. Nice to have confirmation that playing the Nicholas in an anti-DD role is correct. Having thought about my Nicholas gameplay more yday, I wonder if you have any tips on fulfilling that role if you're getting... erm... sub-optimal support from your team? I'm not saying 'I'm perfect, my teams suck' – clearly that's not true –, but working on not playing too aggressively and getting killed is much easier with team support. OTOH, I can't take on a Minekaze, 3 CLs and a BB if the rest of my team on that flank is camping hard. I really don't know how to deal with that... Do you abandon that flank, (the battle I'm thinking of was on Strait, which makes that harder), or smoke up and blaze away at the targets who are blazing away at your spawn-campers (and thus leave said Minekaze unspotted and free to cap), or something else I haven't thought of? Sorry, if I'd thought harder about what my question was before posting I'd have called the topic 'How to cope with lack of support in hybrid DDs?' or similar And again, I know team support's not the major thing holding me back – that's my own gameplay, and I want to git gud at gunboat/hybrid DDs. But I figure having some ideas for how to deal with that kind of situation is also an important part of gitting gud!

Also, OP, if you're finding it hard to dodge torpedoes, this short video might be helpful. I certainly found it was.

Could be a candidate to replace 'nerf stealth fire' or any of the other ones that have actually happened, amirite?

Wouldn't be fun, and would also encourage more camping at the back 'in case I run out of fuel'. It would penalise players who go after the objective; in fact, it would be a direct nerf to the class most likely to contest objectives. And while historical accuracy comes second to game balance, it would make absolutely no sense for ships which would spend weeks at sea to not be able to carry enough fuel for a 20-minute engagement. So it would be counter-intuitive. WG do a decent job of maintaining a good degree of historical authenticity (as distinct from accuracy) within an arcadey game, and this idea would break that.

Have to say, I like the new 'Spotted' ribbons –very good idea!

After reasonably fun co-op battles in my new Wyoming, I decided to take the Nicholas out for a spin. When I first got the Nicholas, I had a couple of major tilt sessions in it where I really should have stepped away from the computer earlier, and ended up with (I think) 3 wins from my first 17 games. That was really what persuaded me that it was time to go and seriously l2p. I've only recently started playing randoms in the Nicholas again, so it's gratifying when this kind of thing happens: Admittedly helped by the second torp hit on that Kaiser causing a detonation, but the rest of the salvo were looking good too ;-) After that I should have probably listened to the voice in my head saying 'That was fun, leave it for today', but I had to play another. T6 battle on Strait, friendly Omaha behind me spent the first minute of the game shooting at me before broadside-suiciding in front of all the enemy ships on our side of the map. That set the tone for the rest of the battle. I screwed up by running into a T22 with support from a Cleveland and a Konigsberg and got a pitiful battle contribution altogether, so I'm quitting while I'm ahead for today and I'm off to clean my fridge!

Exactly this. Everyone can take that approach, no matter how much time they have, and doing so makes the game much more enjoyable.

Yep, absolutely agree. Since deciding to take the time and the effort to improve, this game had become so much more fun too. I think always having stuff to learn and improve is one of the bet things about this game, even as a casual player (i.e. not able to put loads of hours in every week). Hopefully I'll even have some good news to report like OP Soon TM, that would be something

... And if that were my experience of judo or WOWS I would leave, but it isn't, so I don't ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

At the risk of 1) taking this all excessively seriously, in view of the TL;DR, and 2) seeming like a presumptive newbie, there were a few points that jumped out at me that just didn't seem to reflect my experience of WOWS so far... Much of this could be said of unquestionably social, face-to-face e.g. sporting activities 'in real life'. My main sporting hobby, for example, is judo. - The throws, grips and holds you choose to use in judo don't 'say anything about you as a person', except that you find they work for you. That's the same reason for my having played (relative to my rather limited overall experience in WOWS) a lot of Clemson and Duguay-Trouin, and am starting to play Furutaka quite regularly (and anticipate spending a lot of time in Aoba and Myoko too, as I like that playstyle). I just don't see how that affects the level of 'socialness' one way or the other. - I've made a bunch of mates at my judo club, and sometimes we go to the pub after training sessions. There are other social events organised throughout the year (it's a university judo club, which helps). Would I have ever met these people without judo? Would I hang out with them otherwise? Probably not, but it doesn't make that social interaction less real, or that my judo club is anti-social. Same can be said for WOWS-focused interactions through clans, forum, chat, Twitch, Discord, whatever. - If someone throws me for ippon (i.e. flat on my back, they instantly win) I don't think they're being anti-social or an 'unfeeling monster', and the same applies in WOWS. I may be annoyed with myself for having got into a position that allows someone to throw me like that, but my response would mainly be 'nice throw', and then go away and reflect on how they got me into that position, and how I could counter that technique in future or incorporate it into my own repertoire. It's the same approach I prefer to take to being on the receiving end of a devastating strike or a roflstomp in WOWS, and honestly I think both judo and WOWS are better for approaching them in that way. Tbh I like that I can decide how much of a 'social' experience it's going to be. Would I like to play divisions more? Well, in an ideal world, I think I would, but given that I don't have loads of time to play (rarely playing more than 4 or 5 games at a stretch), and am not a particularly good player, I don't really feel like that's a particularly good basis for asking people to division up with me! And if that was a regular thing and I felt like I was obliged to be online at a given moment, I think I'd enjoy the game less. Obviously I try to play my best for the team and am polite in chat etc., but part of the beauty of WOWS is that you don't have to take on any social obligation if you don't want to. And you can make it a very social experience if you want and are happy with any obligations that creates, as others have pointed out. As for the 'logistics', I guess they could be frustrating if your goal is to get a T10 asap, but not if your goal is to learn and improve and enjoy that process. Maybe it's because I'm newish, but the mechanics seem plenty complex enough for it to be fun learning them. And surely the battles provide a core of content around which players can determine their own medium- to long-term objectives. All that said, this... ... is a very good point.