TeaAndTorps

@HMS_Kilinowski I hope you don't take this the wrong way, but as I follow this discussion I feel more and more confused about the purpose of this experiment your proposing. Can you summarise what you're hoping to find out in a couple of sentences? Is it what it feels like to lose and possibly get flamed by your teammates, or what? Seems to me that middle ground is available already: play your best, and be generous/magnanimous/tolerant when teammates don't play as well as you would like; you don't know what's going on at their end. Any other approach feels unnecessarily complicated. But as I say, maybe I've just misunderstood your purpose. Re. Supersize Me: there was a clear socio-political aim to that, i.e. to test a certain fast food chain's (more or less implicit) claims to offer a balanced diet. What claims are we testing here?

I think there's a middle ground. I think deliberately playing worse than you can is qualitatively different from not playing well because you don't know how or have a bit of a dim moment. You can play your best without being toxic towards less skilled players; it's the middle ground that is 'socially responsible', to put it that way. I still don't really see what this experiment would achieve – playing badly for the sake of it doesn't get you to understand the mindset of someone who doesn't know how to play better. You'd be better off talking to them. One decent player playing badly isn't going to build wider tolerance for bad play. Idk, I don't see the point of taking time out of enjoying the game in your way to do this. I think the thread is useful as a collection of 'don't play like this' advice but don't see any further positive contribution of this experiment you're proposing.

Tbf it's a kinda anti-social experiment too, but I guess you've already considered that!

Oh, also, just turn on hydroacoustic search about 60 secs into the battle! (idk, when I started I thought it would make it easier to spot the other ships or something. Good grief I'm glad I found the forum and various CCs on YT)

First, a point of order: I think 'bad' and 'casual' are distinct. There are good casual players and poor dedicated ones. Second, I'm not all that sure that playing like a poor player is the best way to understand what motivates them. I imagine players of all levels have all kinds of different motivations for playing the way they do. And your motivation for playing that way is to find out what it feels like, which is not other people's motivation. All that said, some ideas that have not been mentioned: – Launch torpedoes at the grey marker about 3/4 of the time – Rush forward to set up torpedo runs at all costs – Very importantly, set the minimap to its default size. Have it only showing weapon ranges and surface concealment, but don't look at it much. No last known positions, no ship names. – Disable detailed ribbons – Disable alternative interface. It is very important to not be immediately told whether that cruiser is a Fiji or a Cleveland or an Alaska. Shell flight times? What are they? – When playing a BB, pick a line to push and stick to it throughout the whole battle. You read that pushing is better than camping! – Hunting the carrier is a very important objective [Edit] – Play on a laptop, using the trackpad instead of a USB mouse. Play in bed with the laptop at an awkward angle. Spam battles without really considering the outcome beyond the moment you sink. Basically, play like I did for the first few hundred battles. If you want an idea of how that works out, feel free to check my stats on all my RN CLs, Tenryu, Kuma, Nicholas, Kawachi, Bellerophon, Wakatake, Minekaze, Mutsuki (I skipped Isokaze after getting a FXP SC), Émile Bertin, Bogatyr and Svietlana, and every non-premium T2.

Tbh I will probably play fandoms for the first half of the update and then 'mop up' any that I've not managed to win with in co-op. But 'play a game' would be vastly preferable @Crysantos @MrConway

This essay responds directly to the title set. An introductory sentence establishes the candidate's purpose in writing and sets out part of their approach. Some basic attempts have been made to provide a structure. However, successive paragraphs address wildly different topics with little logical connection. The candidate could improve by developing a coherent argument across the course of their submission, showing the connection between one idea and the next. Doing so would eliminate the need to number paragraphs, which would read more elegantly. The candidate has failed to conduct basic research on some of the topics they address, which further weakens the thrust of their writing. This could be a point to improve in future assignments. Finally, I would recommend that the candidate seeks additional support with syntax and punctuation, and proofreads their work carefully. E-

It would be brilliant to have choices about early access missions (fundamentally November Foxtrot flags are more use to me than a Weser...), and to have access to camos (or whatever) that were originally RNG-gated by other means later.

Wholeheartedly agree. One would also have to address the fact that the Allied nations don't exactly have shining human rights records when you look at colonial wars, including the USA's westward expansion. I happen to be glad we don't have swastikas in game and the hammer and sickle is uncomfortable (I recognise that other people prioritise historical accuracy without an ideological agenda though, and as long as we discuss it with mutual respect that's fine) but stuka sirens seem more like part of representing the military hardware of the time, rather than something particularly fascist.

Sorry about your bad luck OP. It's a lottery and isn't set up to take 'hard work' into account. In many ways it's only an issue if you really really wanted the permacamos cos the CVs can now be researched as normal. And that's the important point: it's shoddy of WG to put hyped rewards behind a good-RNG-wall that's designed to make people spend money on premium gambling boxes. Expecting to get the early access missions because you feel you deserve it isn't how this lottery works though. Far better for one's own mental health and enjoyment to take the free stuff you get and simply view the potential for early access as a nice possible bonus, not the main point. Again, though, it's up to WG to not make so many good rewards conditional on early access content. Maybe if they did that there would be less ill-feeling. Incidentally, the only time I've ever spent money on event containers was during the British DDs event, because those boxes contained a guaranteed number of tokens that I could put towards the reward I wanted from the event. That made it easier to view the camos, flags and, especially, early access missions as bonuses rather than the main thing I was buying them for. It's a great shame that that way of setting things up appears to belong to the past. (I'll ping @Crysantos and @MrConway for feedback purposes, hope you'll both excuse my taking the liberty).

Yeah, it's a bit meh but I figured I'd grab some November Foxtrot. If not they convert to credits. It's the goodies from the boxes that are most useful imo.

I think some good kiting lines are IJN and T7+ French cruisers. Maybe Germans too, but I've not played them. I'd have thought that the playstyle you describe fits that kind of CA better than BBs, which generally want to be tanking (sensibly) in the early and mid game. Cruisers become more powerful if they can conserve health into the late game. There may be some BBs that fit that playstyle okay though, but I'll leave it to others to identify them.

Gib Spanish galleons, plz

Thanks all, that makes sense. I was struggling towards something like 'smaller number of good experienced players' so it's good to have it expressed clearly

I'm don't know loads about statistics. People who do, is it surprising that the top of that curve is at about 48%? Intuitively it feels as though it should be closer to 50%, but I suspect there's some kind of explanation that's reasonably obvious to people who have studied any maths past the age of 16. Also, I feel terrified to discover I'm... not that bad in the universal scheme of things?

As with all of these things: whatever floats everyone's boat, and if I can farm some decent expendable camos from it then I'm happy enough.

Pretty much the resource containers are the most reliable way, so probably the fastest too. I guess for something like Thunderer, something of a grind is unavoidable. I'm in a similar position looking at Alaska (although actually I probably have greater need of the FXP elsewhere ) and Yoshino. I think it's a case of keeping up the reliable streams of resource income, checking if (free or actually reasonably priced) event containers/rewards can help and keeping fingers crossed for supercontainers. Enjoy the game in the meantime – there's plenty of fun to be had during said grind, and focusing on that will make it less, well, grindy.

This. With almost any competitive activity, an important part of success is managing one's emotions, especially when things are going badly. Fortunately, in WOWS there's no reason to carry on when you're getting frustrated – just shut down the game, do something else, come back when you're more relaxed and therefore less prone to making mistakes. If OP also stops using MM Monitor, that's another way to avoid getting trapped in a negative loop and ultimately enjoy the game more.

Cheers

Just out of sheer historical curiosity, can anyone who knows more about ship design than me tell me what these things are on top of the Myoko's superstructure? From their shape they look like speakers, but they move back and forth through an arc so I'm wondering if they're some kind of sensor?

Ah, that looks like it. Never knew radar antenna/sensors could come in that kind of shape. You learn something new every day. Cheers

Is this confirmed, or just an idea that's been tested? I'll believe it when I see it in the patch notes

Was it the new German T8, August von Parseval? The new KM CVs have AP rockets that can do nasty things to cruiser citadels, so angling against attack planes is important. On the plus side (from my point of view, as someone who doesn't enjoy playing CVs), AP rockets don't wreck DDs nearly as hard as HE.

The thing I enjoy about DDs is when you can feel that you've made a good contribution even in low damage games. Second battle in Kidd: hunted the DDs and killed them or got them killed, did a bunch of spotting, got all the caps, farmed some BBs with guns once the game was as good as won, got compliments. Pleased with the BXP and other rewards. My happy place.

This all makes sense. Hey ho, I do like Fletchers, from a historical view as much as anything. Maybe I'll just grab the Chung Mu as quick as I can.