antean

Another example of misinterpretation about Clan Cross Server Battles (as proposed here) is some (I have seen this)are already speculating that individual players might be able to battle on other Servers - that WG is actually working on 'that'. So, these new proposals can get 'twisted' a bit, in the telling, quite easily. I am sure some individual players would like to battle on other Servers. If WG can offer this to clan players, it is not much more programming code to do this for virtually all the players. What a 'Festival of Mirth' (Comedy of Something) that might be, lol.

Oh sure, Mr 'Know it all', I was on point about lack of communication & I do not need your 'salt'. Salt is or can be a poison. Your salt is likely of uncertain quality.

Would it not be "being nerfed underwater" a more correct aphorism?

I agree & you notice how the anti-CV haters think CVs are 'OP'. CVs can get sunk as easily than any other ship class (likely even easier). I find it quite instructive how other ship classes get whined about how 'OP' they can be too. Nothing and I mean NOTHING replaces Good Teamwork - that is the only real OP ship class in the game.

I only watched the first part of your video - a TB squadron flying around scouting & attacking a bit . Going down to just 2 planes while your CV is barely moving on auto-pilot? This is WoWP squadron play for WoWS while ship AA shoots down the planes. This is NOT CV squadrons being choreographed like how CVs actually had to manage their planes. This rework is a complete joke - a real bad joke. This is just CV play for 'Simpletons'. See many dedicated CV players rush for the Exit of this Burning Cinema Building.

I imagine this is who it was tho I just can't find the specific art image I refer to anywhere. I'm sure it was from the WoT Forum is where I saw it (& I cannot access that anymore - I was a bad boy according to them but you know how 'tin pot dictatorial' moderators can be yet they allow their resident troll zombies free rein). So this image is the one I prefer (at present) … (very pretty, imho)

still not the correct image but this is sort of like it ….

Sorry Aotearas & Zemeritt, it may be the character you suggest but the image was no where near what you offer. It was likely an Anime Tank Girl (I think) & the artwork was a combo of my two submitted images (really busty & blonde). If it's the same character, I prefer the image to be close to what I submitted. I probably saw the 'old' image I refer to, in WoT Forum.

Pametrada prepare to get boarded (& planked)

Incorrect, Senior Chief Petty Officer Linaex. Many are older and the only way we (maybe) even want to look at Anime (just like the 'juvies') is when they are depicted in skimpy outfits (although the pre-pubescent look is 'sicko' and the whole art style is 'infantile'). Is that clear enough for you, you 'Pollywog'?

maybe even less than that best humourous comment here, +10 second best humourous comment, +3

Actually the 'Gal' I refer to is a combination of the following two images. I just can't find the Anime/Manga image (an older one). She had a German style uniform but the image was of her wearing a white blouse and she was very busty. So here are the two that approximate her ….

No.

It did exist, LastButterfly. Check the facts before you blather off about 'CCs' and even 'CBs'. The Royal Navy used BC. It even used the international signal flags B & C to indicate one. Except, in this case, LastButterfly is wrong, lol.

Likely not very great/high unless this 'hider' got reported a lot along with screenshots & videos. Then CS would have to do an investigation of said 'hider'. So, yes, just another way some 'Snowflake' could harm other players & likely will if this intentional 'hiding' isn't happening already (which it probably is *) * I actually saw a T4 BB player, from the beginning of the battle, run to a corner and it stayed there - an intentional 'hider' if there ever was one. ** Also, OP, why is your thread posted in the New Player section - I don't think new players are going to be engaging in this kind of despicable play. I suggest this thread/topic should be in 'Game Discussion' - 'Gameplay'.

Maybe this is off topic (or off colour), however, my favourite anime/kanga/kancolle (whatever) girl is the blonde German Panzer Girl with the twin big 'bulbous bows' (as it were) (lol).

Want to bet …. it was used as an abbreviation by the UK - the flags B & C were flown by British Battle Cruisers to indicate class/type - check your facts Centurion_1711. (btw, nice to see Wolverhampton in the Premier League - Wolverhampton area is where my English Ancestors are from {Underhill Farm})

If anyone who wants to do so, one can check on historical abbreviations for various classes of ship on Google. Just type in a search on 'Naval Ship Abbreviations' or 'Naval Signal Flags & Abbreviations'. You will find, if memory serves correctly, that the UK used 'BC' for Battle Cruiser (long before Azur Lane came along).

BC means Battle Cruiser (to some). OP can also mean Over Powered then there's .. 'Snowflake' a slang term used to signify idiot, complainer, whiner, moron, airhead (you get the drift) also the WW2 favourites ... FUBAR meaning 'F**ked Up Beyond All Recognition' SNAFU meaning 'Situation Normal All F**ked Up' Ships … Note: Ship Abbreviations seem to follow US abbreviations - I think the double letter designation was to make it obvious that these were for ships. Also, if you do a Google Search you will find US & Brit ship Abbreviations for different types of ship classes. There are also other nation abbreviations but US & Brit designations dominate for the obvious reason that these two nations had the most ships. BB = Battleship DD = Destroyer CA = Cruiser (heavy?) CL = Light Cruiser ACC (or AC) = Air Craft Carrier (barely ever used)

I sincerely hope that this new CV play proposal will die a rapid death and never be instituted.

Ummm, is this a 'trick' question? It is near Halloween. The answer, mike324_1 is 'here'.

I have downloaded WoWS from three Servers so I have it in my computer 3X. NA since 2015 (where I am from.) EU & RU in the last few months. EU works, RU does not (Cyrillic translation is horrid). I use the same email & password for NA & EU. Player name must be different. RU - who knows? Same email & password seems not to work.

As the compliments & reports functions - I do use these ..... I report players for what I consider poor play. I will report players for inappropriate chat comments especially if they slag me for my chat comments (appropriate or otherwise). I will always report players who are AFK. It's simply amazing how many of these AFKers, if they respond, say the AFK is not their fault (Sure, we believe you AFKers [NOT]) I do this for either team. I will compliment players who play well (either team). I am trying to avoid bad reports (tho this is very difficult considering the 'Snowflake Blizzard' in WoWS). I get compliments from time to time & appreciate those. In conclusion, WG is trying to keep 'toxicity' to a minimum. This karma system, although open to abuse (from the 'Snowflakes'), is a rather benign function when utilized properly.

I wouldn't be bragging about how 'good' you are in co-op mode. It must take a real special 'snowflake' for this to happen. ROFL. Really? You mean to say there are these 'types' in Co-op? I wouldn't know as I don't play 'kindergarten' mode. My initial comment about the karma system is this - the 'Windowlickers' can't seem to take any criticism of their 'windowlickingness' & WG allows these 'Windowlickers' to cause chat bans.

Very odd that after 5+ years of CVs being played the way they are (at present), WG now proposes to 'Dumb CVs down'. One plane squadron? Cannot the 'kiddies/juvies/ cerebrally challenged' run a CV and some plane squadrons? I have a Taiho (in NA) & I am able to run all 7 squadrons (plus the CV itself). I'm thinking if running a CV & even 3 -5 plane squadrons is too much to handle then these players ought not to play CVs at all. One Plane Squadron? How about the CV just looks for one target to kill instead of, maybe, Scouting or Fighter engaging, as well. Oh ya, that's just too hard for 'widdle bwains' to handle. We all know how OP CVs are at present. CVs get so many Krakens don't they? ROFL A big complaint is that a good CV player will dominate a poor CV player. Well, guess what folks, a good BB/C/DD player will do exactly the same thing. Hence, the anti-CV crowd can drop this 'canard' as it just shows how utterly ill informed they really are. I'm wondering how WG plans to compensate the players who paid money to buy a premium CV and/or to grind to the higher tier tech line CVs? I spent money on this & I can tell you I will expect a refund if this farce of a CV rework is instituted. What about all the present CV Captain skills? How are those going to be changed? What about all the present AA 'anti-CV' ship module builds (& AA Cpt skills) that it may be necessary to alter? How is WG going to handle that? WoWS was begun when …. in 2014 or earlier? The present CV design was there when WoWS went into Alpha testing in 2015. The only real controversy about CVs was the balancing issues between Ijn & US CVs. There is still this issue & argument going on. I have both T9 regular Tech Tree CVs (in NA) and I just play the ship - I don't whine about any perceived 'imbalance' (whether imaginary [the vast majority] or real [a small minority]. I have the Graf Zeppelin. I never engaged in all the complaining ('whining') that went on about it when it came out. I simply played it (w my choice of available planes). It appears the Developers have made some 'attractive' graphics changes (as reported by some posters). Could not some of this be included into the present CV play? Hence, I find this proposal to 'dumb down' CVs really short sighted. I predict a lot of players will vote with their wallet if WG tries to implement this CV rework. I know I will.