Sir_Sinksalot

As suspected and evidentially highlighted in the above post-battle screenshot, WG staff get pref MM where they're always top tier, have meme levels of plot-armor dispersion on all enemy shells inbound and "every shots a citadel" rng on their own shells fired.

Ah I see, so you can't handle criticism and hide your stats for pitifully insecure reasons. So you fall heavily under category B I mentioned. It's also a delusional concept you have going there as though every other player other than a re-roll account hasn't also walked that same path where they struggled early on in the game as a noob while they were learning with poor stats effecting their overall winrate etc. The difference here is unlike most players who don't care and would laugh off criticism, you would clearly melt if a person sent you a critical message post battle should you have been playing a DD and had a bad battle. "Nice stats loser! Go learn to play DD's jackass!" and you would utterly crumble mentally, right? Sure you would, hence why you also felt the need to big-up yourself by mentioning some ships you have with a 60% winrate in more recent times to convince us you are "kewl". Irony much? Well, lets rewind a bit since you're running away from reality a bit. Here's what you said and I quote. "You win when doing the right things and some of the right things are rewarded by score". This is bs of course. No, you don't win when doing the right things. You might win as a result of doing the right things but because this is a team based game with lots of other players you might also lose. Certainly a player will increase their % chances of winning doing the right things, but it's not the gimme you're making it out to be. That's why anyone sensible uses a large sample size of battles before assessing the influence of both themselves as a player and the ship they use in regards their % chances of winning or losing a battle but again, any given battle can be a win or loss regardless. "Losing that match is certainly (partly) your fault." Again, this is wrong, and for the above reasons mentioned, aka, this a team based game with variables outside of any one players control. A player, and let's say an excellent player with a really strong ship can do everything within his/her power correctly, could literally do no more as one player and contributed well beyond that of several other teammates combined efforts, and yet can still lose purely because his team was far weaker than the enemy teams for that battle. Yet you are stating "Losing the match is certainly your fault" . It's just not true, you know this too but then again I think it's fair to say and rather obvious that most the comments youve made since that initial blurt were efforts at trying to save face which would be in-keeping with the insecurity reasons you gave for hiding your stats, or at least partly the reason you do so.

So you expect me to read an entire thread instead of simply saying "I hide my stats because" A. I'm a tinfoil hat oddball that's so paranoid I even feel the need to hide stats on an avatar name gaming account that in no way reveals my personal details. B. As a player I suck balls, understand that I suck balls but I'm also very sensitive and don't want anyone else to know that I suck balls yet by hiding my stats automatically reveal that I most like suck balls or is a paranoid weirdo. So, which is it?

Wow triggered so much that you feel the need to go on the attack by adding "Even you" comments along with the over-dramatic collection of lololols? Having a 60% winrate proves nothing other than great players only win a smidge more and that bad players lose a smidge less, and as such only proves my point which is team influence is stronger than individual performance and that point STILL STANDS. We know this though, not sure why you're flogging this dead horse other than trying to save face, and that's not happening either btw lol. If this was a solo player game, then we would have those extremely talented players with 80-90% winrate while those utter trashcan players that do literally nothing ever battle other than occasionally act as a dither fish shell magnet, would have a 0-5% winrate. It's because of the team influence of this game that an amazing player can only scratch 60% while a braindead sea cucumber can at worst, no matter what he does(or doesn't do rather), can't lose more than a few more battles for every 10 battles player than the excellent player. That's the only difference in the end because of teammate influence. For all the high levels of skill and clear gulf in class between players, for every 10 battles played, the amazing player only wins 1 battle more than the average Bob, while the utter chimp only loses 1 battle more than the average player and only 2 battles more than the excellent player. If there was no team influence, then like I said, the excellent player wins most all his battles, the average player still wins about 50/50 but the really bad player wins almost no battles at all.

Hey guys. Not sure what you think about that and certainly I'm a BB main so might be missing the benefits but it just seems that the other "fancy but not AS fancy as the really fancy" commander options in the Armory offer more beneficial special skills than these two German dudes. Here's what they have. 1. Consumable Specialist - +12.5% instead of normal 10% 2. Vigilance - +35% torpedo detection instead of normal +25% Other commanders such as the US and UK come with arguably much more useful special skills such as Grease the Gears for fast guns, that's very beneficial for BB's and even US heavy cruisers since those cruisers have slow turrets and needless to say BB's also have slow turrets which are made slower still with a gun reloading mod so a stronger offering of GtG is very welcome indeed. The US "Doe" Brothers also offer Gun Feeder skill which changes loaded shell types at a whopping great 75% faster. That's obviously going to be good not just for a slow reloading BB but any US cruiser with big guns too and since those types of cruisers often need that to best punish DD's and then another cruiser, visa versa, what a great skill that is. The UK "Dunkirk" Brothers also offer not just 1 but 2 consumable buffs. Very nice for a radar cruiser option, get every last drop out of it. The French "Honoré" Brothers. They offer not just Grease the Gears same as the US/UK but also an improved version of Adrenaline Rush to increase reload speed as their ships hp lowers better than normal. The Soviet "Znamensky" Brothers. 3 skills for good measure. GtG but also a much improved version of Preventative Maintenance at -45% crit reduction of main batteries etc. Also an improved Emergency Repair so just a tank build enhancer. The P-A "Róng" Brothers. Also very beneficial skills here. Better Demolition Expert for improved fire chance and better Survivability Expert for more hp per tier than normal. Both excellent skills for P-A DDs and CL's playsytle of that nation. For some reason they both also have not just 1 but 2 CV skills which is interesting given there's no P-A CV's lol... perhaps an insight into future ships on the way. The Japanese "Suzuki" Brothers. Well, not as good as the P-A Brothers BUT, at least they do have that improved Survivability Expert which scales with tiers of course so you get a little bit more tank on your DD and last a little longer, especially when waiting to go invisible against something like a Secondary build BB or something slinging AP at your DD, nice right? This skill is also there for IJN CV's, making their aircraft a little more tanky via more HP, might just squeeze in that last torpedo drop before AA kills off the last few aircraft. So, back to the Germans, the "Von Jütland"s. Would we say either of those two skills are as beneficial as the other nations special commanders? Are those skills even worth wasting skill points on? Detecting torpedoes depends on the torpedo itself BUT, while that skill does apply to hydro too, it really makes no notable difference without hydro in effect since most ship will only detect torpedoes at 1-1.5 km depending on the torpedo so an extra 10% really make no difference worth mentioning, not even much with hydro tbh. Now, if that skill also came with a buff to torpedo damage reduction, it might be of use, but it doesn't. For me that improved skill should also buff torpedo damage reduction from a normal -7% to an improved -10%. But regardless, would I prefer GtG? and perhaps a faster reloading Adrenaline Rush or improved Preventative Maintenance so main batteries and even torpedo launchers don't get knocked out as often since most German BB's are sec builds and the new line has torpedoes including several premiums? Sure, of course I would, we all would. Lutjens offers some of these skills, fine, but does that mean the "regular" special German commanders have to be so seemingly useless by comparison to the other nations special commanders? What 2 special skills would you guys like to see on these German commanders?

Even so, you did at least get over 24.6k battles from it which for a F2P game is pretty amazing by any gaming standards. Don't misunderstand, I'm not disagreeing with you but even if you never played again, which would be a shame, at least you can say got a lot from this game before you walked away. For what it's worth, I found myself playing WoWS more and more recently for pretty much the same reasons you outlined but when applied to WoT. That game has become even more dogshhht in recent months that even I, who used to be a WoT addict marking tanks and rinseNrepeating the whole map and tank exploits finally couldn't stomach it anymore regardless of all the extra events and free stuff they chuck at the playerbase. At the moment, I find WoWS "ok-good" but there's been some experiences including as recent as yesterdays little session for example when team balance was SO BAD that I found myself getting triggered with a similar "F this shhht..." feeling after playing about 10 random battles. Crazy thing is I sat down relaxed and started playing with a complete "Just play, have fun and focus on what you can do and have fun blapping ships, not the result. Don't get triggered by what other players do or don't do." and yet like I said, the imbalance between teams was so hideously bad that this mindset quickly went south lol. If it was like that every time I played, then just like WoT, I'd finally get that negative association to playing this game ingrained on my memory and simply not play anymore.

Actually... on closer inspection I'm not sure these "updates" actually count. Instead of adding some better suited unique skills it's just nerfs, buffs and even a submarine skill. So let me get this right @Devs. Instead of actually playing around with some better suited unique skills more applicable to that nation, instead you just mostly tweaked the existing unique skills? Wow, that's weak. In fact, why are these unique commanders not equipped with 2 special skill specific to each class so that regardless of what class of ship they get placed in there's always going to be two useful special skills? I don't understand this approach to the game from you guys honestly. For all the hours of development and work that goes on, this seems by far the easiest to put right and improve with a real genuinely interesting consequence that would place a bit more attractiveness on obtaining these commanders. As stated at the start of this thread, some come with special skills that are just straight up useless in regards that nation and typical class... with some even having special skill for classes that don't even exist in that nation like CV skills for PA boats, really?? lol. Changes to commanders, skills, and upgrades A number of unique commander talents, skills, and upgrades have been updated to bring them to balance as well as increase their versatility. Talents Commander Changes Nikolay Kuznetsov "Will for Victory": The duration of bonuses after the activation of the talent reduced from 30 to 15 s; The amount of hit points restored per second increased from 0.25% to 0.35%. "Emergency Reserve": Bonus to the number of consumables now also affects squadrons' consumables. Yamamoto Isoroku "Emergency Reserve": Bonus to the number of consumables now also affects squadrons' consumables. Günther Lütjens Fixed an issue because of which "Aerial Equipment Expert" talent was triggered on ships without squadrons. Andrew Cunningham "Lightning Fast": Number of instances of flooding required for the talent activation increased from 2 to 4 Philippe Auboyneau "Rampant": Added a bonus that reduces the aircraft preparation time by 5% "Fire and Fury": Added a bonus that increases the chance to cause flooding by a torpedo by 10% Skills Ship type Skill Changes Submarines "Enlarged Propeller Shaft" The skill now also increases the submarine's speed when surfaced and at periscope depth. Battleships, cruisers "Focus Fire Training" Added a bonus that reduces the aircraft preparation time by 5% Cruisers, destroyers "Swift Fish" Added a bonus that increased the aerial torpedoes' speed by 5% Battleships, cruisers "AA Defense and ASW Expert" Added an activated effect: When the AA is active, improves the ship's consumables reload time: by 10% for battleships by 5% for cruisers Aircraft carriers "Secondary Armament Expert" Added a bonus that increases the damage of depth charges by 10%

Wow, that was a fast response. Changes to Commanders, skills, and upgrades A number of unique Commander talents, skills, and upgrades have been updated to bring them to a better balance and increase their versatility. More details are available on our Development Blog.

Indeed. After reading that dull contradictory comment and glancing quickly at the underscore riddled account name I just assumed it was the thread poster. My bad. On point. Umm no your "You win when your doing the right things" or "losing that match is certainly(party) your fault" is complete balls lol. For close battles yes, and by being heavily involved and contributing in the right ways certainly puts a tilt on a close and reasonably balanced battle that would have otherwise been a total one sided sht-show, BUT, there's no partial blame to be taken if a player gets a team of complete idiots, to which I often see some going AFK, most likely for reasons because they use some sort of prediction mod that told them their teams chances of winning was extremely low. Equally it's still a team effort to win. Have you killed every ship from full hp on the enemy team before? I haven't, and I can't win without my teammates help, nobody can. In fact that's why some genuinely excellent players are screwed to just a 60% win rate instead of a much higher win rate befitting their ability and game knowledge and it's also why some utter lemon is dragged up to having a 35%-40% winrate when they literally do NOTHING all battle for as along as they are floating, instead of having the 0%-3% winrate they surely deserve. It's a team based game, go figure. Any reason you block your stats btw? Should a person with blocked stats, most likely because they suck, really be outlining on reasons behind the winning and losing of battles? Well, certainly you'd be in a position to outline why teams lose.

Ah I see. So guy who cries on forum about constantly getting "crap loser teams" now contradicts himself by highlighting how he feels its actually a players own fault if they win or lose. nice meme.

You're just 1 player amongst 24 random Bobs, and as such the battle result is largely going to be out of your control. All you can do is give a good account of yourself, play sensibly and to your ships strengths, keep and eye on what's happening on the minimap and if you tend to finish up the towards the top of the results sheet for almost all battles you play then you really couldn't have done much more. If that translates into lots of wins, great, if it translates into lots of losses, ya can be annoyed but it really wasn't your fault. If however, you keep losing and also find yourself right down the pecking order of the results, then the problem is also you and not just your weak-as* teammates. Sure, there'll have been some unwinnable battles in your run of losses no matter how good you played but if you actually did f-all during most all of those battles too, it's impossible to know which battles were simply unwinnable and which battles could have been far closer and even wins had you got your finger out of your backside and been an active positive contributor for your team throughout most of those battles.

Played 16 random battles with the St. Vincent so far. Ya..... well.... I was looking forward to getting this ship. I know on the surface they seem like an inferior offering of the Conq line and the Vinnie seems like a weak Thunderer and probably is but it's an "ok" ship with some big damage potential. It's actually that one rare 300k+ big damage pyromancer battle that attracted me to this line or rather the T10 St V with it's 63% fire chance. Other than that, there wasn't much else that really stood out as attractive. From my experience so far of the ones I've played. Renown. - An ok ship. Fast, quick reloading mains(ish, 27 seconds)) but only 6 of them yet 381mm. Reasonably accurate 1.8 sig and very workable 8 torps(4 each side) with huge archs. Only played in Ops. Rooke - Gets 3 more guns of same T6 variants, far better range and yet a poor 1.5 sigma. Torpedoes are reduce by half to 4, 2 each side, but with 8km instead of 6km. Only played in Ops. Not too bad, certainly not great. Hawke - A very frail ship. I wouldn't dare play this in PvP. The citadel is big and high above the waterline with no real protection. Getting blapped even in Ops is a thing and I was very thankful I could use the new offering of Ops to grind through this ship. 3X3 406mm with mediocre range and 1.6 sigma. 45% burn chance HE... getting towards the right kind of territory. Duncan - I skipped it, simple as . What I saw in the port was another tall and rather unprotect citadel almost as bad as the Hawke(slightly less tall citadel) and the same mediocre failings of the Hawke. If the Hawke was a weak struggle in Ops at T8 it sure as hell wouldn't be a fun experience with a T9 offering in PvP modes. The major difference is the T9 finally gets the respawn heal so at least there's that but tbh if you're getting wrecked with citadel shots then it's kinda placebo. St Vincent. Right, the end product. Worth it? Well, I'm still attracted to playing it so I guess in ways yes, but just for that one big damage potential I guess. Would I play it much after I get a 300k+ battle? Not sure... probably not tbh. On the positive note the citadel is now beneath the waterline and so it's far more protected ship regardless of it's thin armor. I haven't been properly blapped thus far with a punishing citadel strike. It also gets the respawn heal which is much more of thing when your citadel isn't getting clipped all the time. Guns now have that 63% fire chance of course, plus 457mm cruiser smashing AP. Ironically it seems to catch fire more than the enemy ships but perhaps my commander could be better trained!! Thing is though, the guns are still a bit on the short range but just about ok, another 2km would be really nice. I tried it with the long range mod to achieve about the same as the Conquerors base gun range and there's decent potential there but then switched to the reload mod and still currently playing it with that. Problem here is the sigma is terrible again at 1.6 and the flight time of the HE is slower than Conq. So while its HE shells have a high fire chance, it doesn't have the accuracy or shell velocity along with 3 guns fewer than Conqueror to reliably land enough shells on target to trigger fires with each salvo and needs reasonably slow targets or closer distances to improve that outcome potential. Don't forget, T10 ships have 50% fire resistance too so kinda need to be dropping most of those 9 shells on a targets upper parts to get those fires in a meaningful way. Also, the HE doesn't have good pen like the Conqueror so its not dealing as much damage per salvo beyond what the 9 vs 12 guns would already suggest and so ya, overall it should come as no surprise that I find the Conqueror to be the better ship plus the Conq does have delightful cruiser smashing AP anyway. Also, the "rear" turret of the St Vincent has that setup whereby it has to swing back towards the stern of the ship in order to change direction, obstructed by some superstructure ahead of it. This makes it like most other ships with rear turrets in that regards but since all 3 turrets are pretty much located forwards, it would have been really nice if given the bad accuracy, shortish gun range, and 3 guns less than the Conq if this turret could simply swing around unobstructed in any direction. What about the torps? Well, there's only two in total, can only launch one from each side and they only have a rather narrow forward oriented arch which never really seems suits any sort of situation. That single torp hits for a decent 29+k dmg potential to make up for the fact it's just a single torpedo effort but as you guys know, when it comes to torpedoes it's more about locking out an area with a salvo of 4-5 torpedoes which makes avoiding all of them much harder compared to easily avoiding one single torpedo so ya... useless in all battles thus far. I thought the whole idea and selling point behind these gimmick torpedo launchers was the ability to "spin" torpedoes into launching really generous direction options. Well, if those single torpedo efforts could be spun into far more generous directions like they sensibly should, and also have a much better range like maybe 18-20km then at least that might be something and a little bit of rare fun moments, even if avoiding 1 single torpedo still isn't all that difficult unless it's travelling at extremely fast or has incredibly low detection rating(they don't have either)).

That said, like any of these Scenario missions, if you play a stronk sec build BB like the Bismarck, it's the one ship does it all carry-boat. Your teammates can try their best to lose but you can still drag a win out of it kicking and screaming.

The hint is in the name. "Raptor Rescue" as in... rescue that God damn Raptor, not "Lets all go south to kill one CV!!" There's a few little crucial moments. One is the end-game showdown you mentioned where ships spawns can continue even when it seems there should be no more... you get that Ninja bot pops out from somewhere and torpedo walls the Raptor lol... regardless of exit spawn. If you ignore those enemy cruisers, DD and even BB's, they can and will sink the Raptor. The other main threat is the two little ninja DD's that spawn from the west shortly after the Raptor is repaired and moves out. They can also end a players participation with a wall of torpedoes too if not treated with the utmost of respect. That said, and for the greater good of the win, should a player see a wall of torpedoes heading towards the Raptor and they're close to it, they really should take the hit themselves for the greater good and it's something I've done myself when in a position to do so should the team fail to spot and kill those ships before they unleash their torpedo spam. Sure, I might be sunk and out, BUT, hopefully the team gets over the finish line afterwards, wins and in doing so I still get more sunk winning that I would have staying alive and losing. Quickly touching on teammates going south to kill that enemy CV down south or pushing towards ANY well known spawn or bot approach. If you see a couple of teammates ahead of you ALREADY going there, DON'T YOU GO TOO FF* . This would be my only tip other than making protecting the Raptor the main priority obviously. That's something that triggers me in this mission and I see happening wayyyyyyyyyy too often. If a player can clearly see there's already a couple a teammates pushing south or towards another bot spawn, then why do they INSIST on going too?? braindead is all I can think of. Sometimes it's almost the ENTIRE TEAM goes! and I'm like "Well, this is clearly lost, nice"

Hi guys. New Scenario offerings are good fun imho including the mixed tiers and rather than harp on I'll cut to the chase This is one for the devs @Crysantos and co to consider and mull over my proposals which I'm sure many other players were also thinking. Because T7 and T8 ships will have enemy bot ships to offset that level of ship, this it can create scenarios(no pun intended)) which are too difficult for lower tier ships to carry should their higher tier teammates be really bad or die or both lol.(Hmmm... sounds like randoms) What I propose as a possible solution for this is.. 1. A 2 tier MM. So either T6 and T7 only, or T7 and T8. This is the easiest solution but personally I actually like the variety of the 3 tier mix. 2. Have the 3 tiers same as now, BUT, program the algorithm to check the remaining players ship tiers just prior to commencing the next phase of each stage of the battle, then spawn enemy bots better adjusted to fight those tier of ships. If the battle started out with T6-T8 ships but all the T8 ships have died before the next phase of spawning bot ships, then there's no point or fairness in forcing the remaining players with lower tier ships to fight bots for T8 players no longer in the battle. The ability to carry such battles with a T6 ship just isn't going to be there tbh, yet the potential would be if the next phase of bots were tailored to fighting that tier at that point of the battle. Of course, this also makes picking T6 ships unattractive and maybe even some T7 ships, especially if they're of a certain class, which is a shame and something I don't think you devs wanted to happen. I'd imagine you designed the new offering of scenarios to be played at any tier option available and to be enjoyed regardless of being bottom or top tier. If the tiers of the remaining players were checked just before the next phase of spawning new enemy bots and those bots were adjusted accordingly, I think that would solve the problem. My apologies if scenarios is already programmed to analyze remaining players ships tiers prior to next phase spawning during a mission, but I just didn't notice and it didn't feel that way. Thanks

I've found the T8 option excellent so far. Currently I'm grinding my way through the Hawke and it's such a frail ship I would have really struggled with it in random battles. It even gets blapped in Ops but once I got the hang of the new offerings and of course, the good old familiar ones, it's been pretty enjoyable overall. So it's a great way to grind through stock and just plain weak as* ships to get to at least T9 without much stress and suffering lol. Being able to play CV's on all of them is a bit of fun too for some hands down the pants playsytle. I like it overall. Obviously the new missions were completely strange to me so was a bit cranky until I got a bit more familiar with them and the enemy spawns but that's normal.

...and by "Randomly chosen Operations" what you actually mean is totally rigged so I get only the new Operation missions. Gotcha.

So what we have here is a big slow 22knt T5 BB with absolutely no AA or fighter consumables sandwiched between two tiers of CVs for 54k coal. Ya, great deal.

Go play Silent Hunter then. I'm as objective as the next guy and I've played subs in this game to give them a fair shake. They're both sht to play and sht to play against. Subs don't suit this style of game. By nature they're stealthy ninja's of the deep that set traps and need a lot of time to get in position and this was something I loved doing in sub sims but the subs in this game is just taking the pis* and are mostly useless with little pockets of extremely broken and over-powered moments between the vast expanses of dorking about uselessly like a tard. It took for braindead homo-torps and meme levels of arcade to make subs barely viable in this game, but in doing so made the game even more toxic than it already was.

As usual, for all the good helpful improvements mentioned and positive things to look forwards too that deserve a thumbs up, sadly it's overshadowed and derailed by the likes of subs and now fast jet aircraft to basically render the 4 point investment in concealment pretty pointless. Classic WG.

The treasure map does.... anything? other than pis* me right off?

CV's and Subs are often highlighted as a big reason for not having fun in this game. Thing is though, when it comes to CV's and Subs, I think it's a case of perspective. What do I mean by that? Am I saying they're fine and balanced? No, not at all, they're clearly not. What I am saying is that there's certain classes and even some specific ships that are very vulnerable and who's playstyle directly brings them into regular engagements with one or both of these classes so they're very sensitive to any changes made to CV's and/or subs. If those ships that are now very weak and regularly focused by CV's and/or Subs which also happen to be YOUR favorite ships, then you're obviously going to find this game a big pile of cow dung. However, while subs and CV's are clearly not balanced and cause problems in this game, there's certain ships and classes that don't really suffer to them heavily or find themselves focused by either of them as much as others. So from that players perspective they probably find the game ok and fun most the time.

I think the ideal situation purely to farm steel and gold asap would be to purposefully stay in bronze league until the very last couple of sprints of that season to purposefully get the more braindead players and theoretically win more battles and get your steel and gold with fewer battles to play with each sprint. Then, once there's just a couple of sprints left in the season, work up through the silver and gold for that extra steel and gold. Not sure if it's easy to purposefully stay in bronze though, especially with those runs of unavoidable wins no matter how bad a player performs and tries not to win.

I just farm it primarily for the steel and gold whenever a new sprint kicks off while also taking the opportunity to train up some commander skills, elite XP etc throughout that time. Then I ignore it for a few weeks. Gold league, silver, bronze... all felt about the same. Can be annoying battles and runs of heavy losses but then switches the other way. Battles are at least short compared to randoms so the suffering of bad teams is at least a short experience. MM is usually same tier and more balanced but can still get ship imbalances through some players using ships that aren't really ranked "meta" and some that use ships that are very strong for that fast paced brawl sort of encounter.