Saltface

Dear All, I think it would be better if all stopped pointing fingers at each other. It is not constructive and doesn't add anything to anyone. Nahhhh who am I fooling now its the Internet.

Dear All, @Admiral_H_Nelson, Dear Friend, you need to add a third option c) read the package of the product you are buying to learn what the contents are. Don't be a blind buyer. But, for argument's sake let's concentrate on the company practices and not the player's uninformed purchases. Let us make the assumption that WG indeed follows these marketing practices that are described in the posts of this thread. Let's also accept that DFens_666 is right and they are intentional. However, we should also note that the Market is a cut-throat place. Increasing the hype for a product is not a new practice. How many films have you seen the trailers long before they hit the screen? How many interviews with the cast members, the director, the producers. And then the film is just a flunk. Well the trailer never told you that the film is a flunk. Nor did the cast, the director or the producers. Same here, they show "trailers", "interviews" call it whatever. The problem is not with the practice of WG. They are in business for money. You should expect them to do whatever it takes to increase their sales. As a matter of fact you should be angry at them if they did not do so. Because this would mean that the game we love and want to play is in jeopardy as the company that runs it doesn't do what they have to do in order to make profit. And, you know, no profit (or small profit) for the company - no game for you and me. The problem is with the gullibility and the credulity of the player base. Who told them to rush and see the film on the first day of the release? let it play a few days and read the rotten tomatoes. Same here. Play against the ship a few games. See how it fares as your opponent. Let the updated reviews come out. Do you really need to buy the darn boat on minute 1? As if you don't live on planet earth in the western world and you don't know what marketing is. It is my fault if I buy a junk boat. Not the seller's fault. Unless, the seller misled me. But then again it's my stupidity for not looking into the subject a bit deeper. But that's only my opinion. Regards Saltface

Dear @Bear_Necessities that was a controversial post, and, like everything controversial has supporters and foes. I find the "parabol/metaphor" rather weak and provocative given the sensitivities (that we may not fully understand in Europe) of the Americans. I couldn't agree more We are only human. Moreover, "it's the internet, stupid". (please read note at end of post before you think I am offending you) In what regards our game, and the way dislike towards CV players is expressed, I would say we should all chill. As I said in an older post "If you like it, play it - If you don't, then leave it" And to make myself even more specific: if you are F2P why are you complaining about something that is free, you didn't pay money so you can leave at 0 cost to you. So leave and let the others that like the game play it. If you are P2P then you have the right to complain and the right to stop spending your money. If you continue paying then you accept the terms and conditions so quit complaining. If you stop paying then you become F2P. Guess what? Point number 1 applies. So, in brief, it is good and constructive to express your opinion about the game. It is not good or constructive to whine, vent, huff, puff, become a drama queen, and, most importantly blame everybody else because YOU are not having fun. So I agree with you, we should all cool down a bit about how we speak about/to CV players. Or any other player for that matter. On the same note I don't find CVs make the game unplayable or fun is less. I find that bad players in all classes do that. And just to be the odd man out again, with all this going on I took up DD play. Now I ll take up CV play. And I will have fun receiving all those "hate" chats and posts. And I will answer accordingly. And in kind. (taking the fifth here) Note for those that want to be offended: "It's the economy, stupid" is a slight variation of the phrase "The economy, stupid", which James Carville had coined as a campaign strategist of Bill Clinton's successful 1992 presidential campaign against sitting president George H. W. Bush. The phrase has become a snowclone repeated often in American political culture, usually starting with the word "it's" and with commentators sometimes using a different word in place of "economy." Examples include "It's the deficit, stupid!"[4] "It's the corporation, stupid!"[5] "It's the math, stupid!"[6] and "It's the voters, stupid!".[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_the_economy,_stupid Regards Saltface

Same here

@Lady_godiva_s I strongly suggest you delete this post. It is naming and shaming. If you think there has been some hacking, which a seriously doubt, go and open a support ticket with a replay of your game. (the replay of the game is in the replays directory) WG will deal with it. Do not post names here because it is "naming and shaming" I urge you to edit your post and remove the name. Regards Saltface

@Procrastes I am just speculating so please take with a grain of salt. Usually one getting tossed out of the game is due to loss of connection. Even if this loss is very short in time when connection is reestablished one gets a new IP address. Maybe and just maybe, this could be at the root of the problem. When one logs in to the game one's IP might be registered (very plausible as the server has to send data directly and only to the client). If mid game said IP changes a transaction error occurs as there is some conflict between the registered IP and the new one. This is also compatible with the remedy. Just restart the game. The game restarts, registers the new IP and no problem. I repeat this is speculative. Regards Saltface

I fire only torpedoes OOPS wait, you are talking BBs not DDs Uhmmm sorry your letters are two doors down the corridor LOL

part of that sig has a lot of topic

still laughing, almost choked

Tirpitz and Tirpitz B are identical ships, right? If I am not wrong with the above statement how come they have this difference in the table above?

I remember a nice Indianapolis that flashed the Radar (upon my request !!) for me to check if any "thing" was approaching the cap I was contesting. I was about to go in from north and he was a bit south and east. He lit up a good 10 Km. Nothing. That was a carefree capping. After we took the first cap he lit a smoked Belfast on the second one I was trying to contest. The easiest torpedo kill ever. Note: "thing" = Destroyer. Anything bigger I can see from far away. Those "things" sneak onto you. OOPS I sail a Kamikaze.

Dear All, I have 2,845 battles (1,764 in Random) What I can say with a degree of certainty is that during the last couple of hundred battles I started really understanding the game. Every new battle I play I discover how much more I need to learn. The game has depth and it is a "multiparametric equation" that has to be solved for any decision a player makes. I would suggest you go a bit easy on fellow players that make mistakes. On the same note, I have to point out to all of you that if I know anything about the game I learnt by being mentored on the forum by some people that had the kindness to spend their time and effort to give me advise. So maybe it would be better if those players that make mistakes (which most probably most novice players do) would be given advise and not, lets put it mildly, be given "risen eyebrows". I can imagine some reactions to my post. However, just to preempt you, not all players are the same. The ones that don't listen to advise and think they know all are lost cases. If they learn it will be a miracle. But the ones that will listen to advise will be the biggest "gain" for the game. They are the ones that will make the player base better. So next time you see a "wrong" action, don't scold. Give advise. Don't be "salty" - that's my privilege = be a bit patient and tolerant. Oh, I should not forget, if you have the time and patience write a primer. For example - "How to use radar" or "How to use Hydro". I for one would read it attentively, Regards Saltface

The following wiki links contain the "official" info on this subject: http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Economics http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Economy Note: these pages have been updated January 25, 2019. From what I can read in the two wiki articles it seems there is no benefit related to time and no reward (other than what you see in port in the honor to heroes tab) for achievements. Potential damage taken is rewarded. Edit by Saltface: Please read bullet 5 - It might explain why you earn less. There is a certain amount of ambiguity but it could provide an explanation For ease of reference read excerpt below:

No it is not manipulated. P.S. The earth is flat

@bushwacker001, oh my !! you kiss and tell

Dear @Shaka_D I have no intention to patronize nor wish to display any arrogance. If my post came through as such I am really sorry. Please be kind enough to trust me on that. The post you have quoted merely clarifies what I stated in my original post and explains why a yes or no answer can not be given to the question that was posed to me. And I was very polite. Regards Saltface

Well my dear @NothingButTheRain, your tone and language is rather that of a spoiled brat and not of a "mongoloid or something" to quote you. Your reactions also indicate that you seek to find insults where there are none. Very snowflaky for my taste and drama queenish. Be well Saltface P.S. I think that I used easy words this time. By the way English is not my mother tongue either.

My dear Friend, I will complain that you are a bit lazy to read my initial post. I was clear that I reject the claim that Missouri does not earn more. Now, I do not know if the Missouri has a higher credit multiplier. These values are not published by WG. Therefore, I cannot give you a straight yes or no answer because I do not know. What I know from my experience is that it earns more. This is also all over the forum and in various reviews. But I think my dear Friend that we have exhausted the matter. Lets let it rest. Warm regards Saltface

My Friend, I am afraid that you will lose your time. However, the choice is yours. Before you embark or your quest to bring proof to support a claim that most (obviously not all) have rejected based on evidence (and my Missouri earns me a lot of silver) read the following: (attention to the bold text) Good luck Sincerely Saltface "All premium ships have a higher base credit income rate; some premium ships are better at this than others." Source: http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Economy Credits Cr  = CrB · At · (1 + Σ MCr) + Z Where: • Cr - Total credits earned from the battle • CrB - Base credits earned from the battle • At - Account type: 1.0 for standard; 1.5 for either type of Premium • Σ MCr - The sum of the modifiers to credits earned, such as: o Use of Signal Flags, e.g. Zulu  +20% (0.20) o Use of Camouflage, e.g. Revolutionary  +30% (0.3) o Awards for the completion of Combat Missions / Events o Use of certain non-national flags, e.g Military Month Contributor +5% (0.05) o For a premium ship, an unpublished value. • Z - Direct award of credits from missions such as Daily Chains Source: http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Economics

You cant beat the tin foil hat P.S. The earth is flat

Hitchens's razor is an epistemological razor asserting that the burden of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who makes the claim, and if this burden is not met, the claim is unfounded, and its opponents need not argue further in order to dismiss it. Hitchens's razor is actually an English translation of the Latin proverb quod grātīs asseritur, grātīs negātur ("What is asserted gratuitously may be denied gratuitously"), which was commonly used in the 19th century.[4][5] It takes a stronger stance than the Sagan standard ("Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"), instead applying to even non-extraordinary claims. Therefore, as it was asserted gratuitously that Missouri does not earn more I deny it gratuitously. Should evidence be provided I shall change my opinion. A few words for your vocabulary: Believe – verb - accept that (something) is true, especially without proof. Argumentation and Evidence (source: Wheaton College Writing Center - https://www.wheaton.edu/academics/services/writing-center/writing-resources/the-argument-types-of-evidence/ retrieved 01 March 2019) In most papers, the writer’s aim is to find a topic and make a claim about it. This claim is better known as the writer's argument. With it, the writer attempts to win the reader over to his/her view of the topic, or, at the very least, to show the reader a new perspective about the subject discussed. If the writer is going to make some headway with an argument, however, he/she must be able to give evidence to support the claims the paper will make. There are three main categories of evidence that are essential to gain the audience's confidence in the writer's assertions. These categories are Fact, Judgment, and Testimony. This page explores the types of evidence used in argumentation. See also the page on logic and argumentation. Facts Facts are among the best tools to involve the reader in the argument. Since facts are indisputable, the writer automatically wins the reader’s mutual agreement by utilizing them. A statement declaring, "On January 28, 1986, the shuttle Challenger exploded upon lift-off," must be accepted by the reader, since it is a historical certainty. Facts are used primarily to get the reader to stand on the writer's plane of reasoning. For instance, if a writer wanted to argue that smoking is a detriment to your health, he/she would begin by citing factual information about the large number of people who die every year from smoke-related diseases. This would then force the reader to agree with the writer on at least one point. Judgment Facts, however, cannot carry the entire argument. It is necessary for the writer to utilize Judgments as well. These are assumptions that the writer makes about his/her subject after carefully considering the facts. For example, a writer could start by presenting certain facts about the knowledge that scientists had regarding the condition of the Challenger prior to takeoff. From these facts, the writer concludes that the disaster could have been avoided if a few scientists been willing to speak up about some unsettling findings. This would be a judgment on the writer's part. There is nothing in the history books or newspapers that can prove this assumption to be true. The success or failure of the entire argument rests on whether or not the writer can utilize adequate reasoning in coming to the right judgments. Testimony The final type of evidence used in writing a convincing argument is Testimony. There are two types of testimony: 1) the account of an eyewitness, and 2) the judgment of an expert who has had the chance to examine and interpret the facts. Both of these lend validity to an argument. The eyewitness can supply important facts for the writer to use, and the expert can provide valuable judgments in order to give strength to the argument. For instance, in the case of the Space Shuttle Challenger, the writer might use the testimony of one of the personnel who was present at NASA meetings before the launch. The writer might also use an astrophysicist’s opinion about whether or not evidence existed before takeoff that the Shuttle was not safe to launch. However, the writer must exercise caution when employing these two types of testimony in his or her paper. Eyewitness accounts cannot always be reliable; no one person has an objective view of an event. Also, an expert’s opinion is not beyond dispute; another expert in the same field of study may find faulty reasoning in the first expert’s judgment. Also, the writer must be careful not to use an expert in one field to make a judgment about a subject in another. Imagine the absurdity of computer genius Bill Gates making an official statement on archaeology.

What if one more statistical record was kept? Placement in your team at the scoreboard (victory, defeat and aggregate); Percentage of team XP earned at the scoreboard (victory, defeat and aggregate); I think it would be beneficial. What do you think? Regards Saltface

Dear All, my two cents. All Ships should be available for cash. And for a hefty price. They could (should) also be available to be "earned" by good players. (coal, steel, freeXP, missions etc.) You want the ship? - Earn it. It will be for free because you have put in the effort to "git gud" and earn it. You can't earn it? Well buy it. High price. This will allow WG to make money. The more the better. The more money WG makes the more time the game will be in the market. The more the game will be developed. The more I will enjoy playing it. Once WG stops making money or her return on investment decreases they will stop supporting of making WoW available and they will put their capital and efforts on another game that makes them more money. And, alas, I will not have the game that I like to play. This is the free market. So anything that allows WG to make more money for me is good. So I can play the game. Now, will novice players buy ships clearly above and beyond their skill level? Yes they will. We all did. And we found out the hard way that..oops...I get my face smashed. I did it. (I did not buy a ship, I rushed my way up to Hindenburg with all my FreeXP) I ran on a brick wall head first and now I sit comfortably in T5-T7 , learn more, enjoy, "git guder" and occasionally play a high tier battle. Same as we have game mechanics there are these "mechanics" of the cold reality. If you are not a good player you will get massacred if you stretch your feet out of your blanket. Eventually you will get smart enough to understand that you will enjoy more at lower tiers until you develop the necessary skill to play at higher level. Will this "frustrate" top players? Oh come on now, the seals are coming to you and you complain? After all, no one wants a skill based MM. Why all of a sudden we complain about players of low skill being able to buy ships that require high expertise? I will buy Alaska. Will I play it? Maybe in Co Op. Will I play it ever in Random? Uhmm...if i "git guder" Warm regards and enjoy the new update Saltface

Dear All, 128 Battles later these are the results. They are posted for you to know that you did not lose your time and efforts with no results. One has followed your advise and please continue to give them to novice players. They are more valuable than all the videos, primers and guides together. Mentoring is maybe the most powerful teaching tool. A little bit of shameless bragging. Or to put it more delicately my opinion about the Kamikaze: She is an amazing fun boat and when skippering her one is not thinking if is uptiered or downtiered. She doesn't care if she faces T7. One doesn't care about tier if not seen. Warmest regards Saltface