antean

These are all observations (subjective & objective) so may be interpreted as con or pro to the argument. Thing is, the amount & number of these are indicative of two things, 1) players post due to wanting to comment & 2) what is being said has validity (in posters opinion). Hence, WG ought to be listening to the more perceptive criticisms if WG actually cares about their product (rather than solely their 'bottom line')

Utter Bull Crap. There is nothing, not one ship or one player that has a serious advantage since there are twelve opposing ships that can make things dangerous to that one player. The concept of a unicum CV player is a falsehood - no more valid than saying there is a unicum DD, CA/CL or BB Try the unbalanced teams made up by the MM. I like how barely anyone mentions this yet this is the main reason for Roflstomps. Real telling how often, at least two or more stupids from one team will run out & die immediately. Real telling how this happens more to the side you are on than to the other side. Again, all 'arranged' by the MM. Very instructive how the MM manages to favour more the one side over the other CVs barely ever get Krakens, so please, quit barfing out that particular lie. Agreed, too many DDs dying early on one side pretty much guarantees a loss - blame the MM for that as the MM is placing the idiot DDs onto the one team Agreed, coward BBs are a major contributor to losses Everything except your last sentence is correct, Aotearas, but then you blow it. The MM is entirely responsible for the 'many', not the few roflstomps. Included in this is your acknowledgment of "all the lucky rolls" (as you put that) except these lucky rolls are anything but. These lucky rolls are, in fact, intentional WG 'arranged results'. WG software decides when you hit or miss, when everyone hits or misses. Other than intentionally stacking a team with better players (which happens) WG can & does intentionally 'arrange' overall battle shot hits & misses which favour one side. Anyone who denies this (that WG 'arranges' results) is in denial. WG admits as much themselves. You start winning too much WG will ensure you start losing.

ya, it has to be the CV. blame that ship class for everything. just like in WoT when the arties got blamed.

Not to worry - management will make sure this won't happen again The Shills will always offer Lollipops for the Suckers I have already made this decision You think? It is obvious to me that they already are messing up some Suckers who can't resist Lollipops may be

entirely due to 'arranged' factors like better players on one side, targeting resolutions that miss (your team) & targeting resolutions that hit (their team). When WG algorithms align these three main factors then you get 'roflstomps'.

LOL.

I'm surprised someone with your titles is here trashing other posters rather than explaining any errors in their opinions. your image is funny So my post is unsubstantiated nonsense? A player can do everything right in a 1v1 battle & still have WG blatantly 'arrange' targeting resolutions. This happens far too often for this to be 'co-incidental'. Go ahead, Cornflakes, you & your forum fellow 'trolls' can try to stifle valid criticisms & opinions that differ from your WG produced 'kool-aid'. Have some more WG 'kool-aid'. Drink it all up. Whatever WG produces 'must' be good. Drink it up, believers. It isn't always the player who lost or died who could/should have done better. Sometimes it's a WG 'arrangement' (to put it politely/respectfully) that is the determining factor. I am sure, Cornflakes, this is one reason why players of all ability (poor to excellent) quit the game. They get sick of the WG bull excrement. This is my opinion. I'm entitled to my opinion. I'm sure my opinion is wrong (at times). I'm sure my opinion is right (at times).

Exactly. It really wrankles, especially, if you know/think you got the advantage. Some of these Ship Handlers are 'that' good. Sometimes, tho, it is the WG targeting resolutions that 'arrange' the result so OP can have his (partially justified) rant too.

There's your answer right there, Fonfalks. You got one of the typical WG 'arranged' results. Enemy was, surprisingly, hitting you all or most of the time while you were barely hitting at all (while the enemy was 'running' away). I am sure you were aiming properly. How to understand this? Easy - it was the blatant WG win or lose 'arrangement'. The WG algorithms were not on your side that battle.

ummm, not quite from the beginning, Danielsama, or you would have the Alpha ship, lol. No matter tho, I too would like to see a Spanish ship or two or three (or more?) in WoWS especially if one could get one via an event/missions. I am sure you would also 'spend' to get one.

me too, play now on both (here as F2P) only newbie juvies say that (in battle chat that is) maybe I was under the impression that this is the English aka Brit posting service pretty much a given in Co-op mode (unless one is really, really 'challenged') sure they are, lol maybe we run into ea other in battle, Sympathy, in Randoms - I do not play co-op at all (unless required to)

100% agree. Lumping everyone together is how the business model gets enough players (the F2P ones) to play with the P2P (pay to play) players. Otherwise, WG products would not even be here. I believe, Nagativvv, this is one of the industry-wide Massive Multi-Player Online Game standard operating models (the other being the subscription model)

100% agree. The Random Battle pool of players is & will remain the main player pool. I ignore Co-op as I don't play it tho a subset of WoWS players apparently reside 'there' (why, I don't know, it's too easy). Sure there will be clan, ranked & special event pools - those come and go. Sure, at least 50% of Randoms (likely more like 66%) will be farce battles due to a number of factors & this is what angers players - these utter Garbage battles. However, there are those random battles, where the majority of players on both teams play well. These battles are what are worth playing & one does not need to be in the top 25% (whoever that is) to participate. As to OP uninstalling - well, I've done that twice myself (my main NA account - like OP, a 2015 join date). I have reinstalled that account. I figure OP will be back - difficult to leave those ships you really, really like & invested a lot of time into.

Where is the Regia Marina? Two ships (with one carrying a beer can) is not the Italian Navy.

Understatement of the Decade when it comes to WG products.

Hasn't anyone figured out that WG keeps overreacting? All these continual 'tweaks' are nonsense. Let's limit what class the players play & we will nerf BBs to account for that latest WG overreaction. SNAFU & FUBAR (again).

It is NEVER unlimited, never. It is clear the farce that is this WG arcade game is becoming just does not care about this issue. Like I said somewhere earlier, do you hear that 'flushing' sound?

If ammo/torps were limited just like in WoT & WoWP (?) then players would not be able to perma - spam ammunition. They (the 'players') would actually have to 'think' more. & we all know (can easily perceive) how that would go over, rofl LOL, see, Pikkozoikum, we have a common opinion, finally, LOL. (but, then, watch all the BB, CA/CL & DD players howl & whine, How 'they' would howl & whine if WG did limited their ammo/torps, lol!)

Then, maybe, WG ought to have a limit on Ammo/Torps just like CVs, at present, have a limit on plane loads.

Wow! So it's not about 'values' at all or about 'balance'? Wow. Nothing, according to you, but a 'mechanic'. Wow, just wow. Let's just bend over & watch the game become some 'mechanical farce'.

Thanks to WG The potential is there Yay. You finally admit that they can do so (there is that potential)

Correct numbers are required to make valid conclusions which (the correct numbers) you admitted you don't have. Mechanics (& explaining) them is another subject. Nice try with your misdirections, again, Pikkozoikum.

If you don't have the correct numbers then your contentions are nothing but suppositions, hence, everything else you say is entirely your assumptions. Therefore, Pikkozoikum, why are you even bothering to post what is, in essence, drivel.

What I saw is a Bat taken to DDs (except for two high tier special cases) in favour of BBs (what a surprise). A second 'farce' (imho) is the creep of 'magic healing potions' or some such arcade comsumables into game play. What was that handle that just got pushed? *edited*

??? I simply corrected your spelling error. I'm not arguing anything there, just trying to educate you. Maybe you aren't educatable? I imagine you answered my question (above). I already told you I refuse to participate in this, imho, farce of a CV rework hence I may not know (what you refer to). My opinion is that this proposed CV rework is totally unnecessary. I'd also say, Pikkozoikum, that a poster who says … " many people are just wrong" & … "while they also play bad" (your words) is a (self opinionated) 'Troll' so you ought not to be throwing out that accusation so cavalierly. There might be one area where some of this proposed rework might be useful. Operative word is 'might'. That is some of the new graphics interfaces/video improvements (so long as these can be incorporated into the present CV play which must & should be retained, imho).