Dutchy_2019

Again: Easy - dump them in a special Co-op mode with only a single human. Dumping them into Ops is a punishment, as they WILL find a way to grief their team-mates. Again, team killers in Co-op are a nuisance (though to some extent I can see and accept friends in a div fooling around with each other).

Then that Shima has already f-ed up. With CV's, it does not matter what you do. The initiative is almost ALWAYS with the CV, unless his team has completely collapsed and is targeted from multiple sides. The only thing that more or less gives a CV-player the same experience as players facing CV is the infamous 8-9-9 comp (or something similar).

One could argue American de facto being at war with Germany without declaring war (in itself a gross violation of ANY convention) was the reason those biplanes had a chance in the first place - mind you, it was an AMERICAN aircraft that spotted the Bismarck after Denmark Strait in the first place.

Been playing off an on, on both NA and EU. Some results from the past week or so: Ägir in Co-op on EU Fubuki in Randoms on NA. Scharnhorst B in Operations on EU (previous round of Narai I actually set my both server damage record for both servers at 349k) Visby in Randoms 16 torp haul on EU, that was a great help in me completing the fourth stage of the Dockyard campaign today. More general achievement - getting the Japanese BB, Cruiser and both DD lines to T7, and starting to grind that.

I see that - but that is still a step below throwing in the type of deliberate griefer we are talking about here.

I take your post as an example, but you were not the only one to suggest it, so my response is in general: To suggest that you should dump OBVIOUS griefers into Co-op is IMHO VERY disrespectful of the Co-op community. Just as suggesting that players who want the team to actively play in Co-op (and say so in chat) according to some Co-op players just should move to Randoms or Ranked, and stay out of Co-op. Mind you, many people playing Co-op play Co-op for various reasons: Having fled Randoms because of toxicity in Randoms behaviour. Chasing directives in Co-op, simply because to do so in Randoms would hurt the rest of the team Just having a few games of near mindless shooty shooty for relaxation, rather than playing a Randoms game while being stressed out / dog tired and hurt the Randoms team? It is - on occasion - already frustrating enough in Co-op to have to deal with team-torping bots, passive players and back-line torpers as it is. Deliberate griefers like this have simply no place in the game, in ANY game mode.

Depends a bit. For Randoms, over 2 servers combined I only have a few ships that would even cross the >50 games threshold (even with EU and NA combined) DD: Nicholas Cruiser: Königsberg (my 22 game average for wins and damage is actually borderline top 5% server average). BB: Kongo Overall (I like them, and they are near the top of my rankings). DD: Friesland and HSF Harekaze I Cruiser: Aegir BB: Jean Bart and Pommern

Thing is that simply because of the massively larger health pool XP farming, and therefore XP farming is MUCH easier than in lower tiers. A 1900 base XP game T5/T6 is much more difficult to get than in higher tiers - simply because of the lack of HP in the game.

Why? If you feel you have to buy a ship so you do NOT have to grind 4 pts in commanders (from 6 to 10 pts) you have a problem. That whole grind is a mere 150k commander XP; which - fully decked out in camos and flags - should take you a very limited amount of games (10 max if you are even barely competent). Edit: I missed that you can also get a few more signals playing the USS Kidd mission chain. Point still stands. The news article which you have to read to activate the mission chain - JUST BELOW THE PARTICIPATE BUTTON - actually says (copy pasted from the article): "You can complete this chain of combat missions in Random and Ranked Battles, playing [T] VIII Kidd or in Random, Ranked, Co-op, or Scenarios, playing American Tier V–X ships." The missions for all American ships is arguably are easier than the missions in the USS Kidd specific mission chain, and can be completed in many more modes. Edit: You would have a point if the majority of players were to have to buy the USS Kidd to get their hands on Jenkins. But they do not have to at all. Those who would be incapable of getting Jenkins through the non-USS Kidd mission chain, would have an even bigger problem (and would be an even bigger problem for their team) trying to get Jenkins by playing the USS Kidd mission chain. So now it is WG's problem that people are stupid? Because your argument frankly falls into the same stupidity line of argument of someone who decided to buy Georgia for Clan Battles with actual money, and then got angry she was banned (or only allowed in limited number) in Clan Battles, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS ANNOUNCED BEFOREHAND AND IN THE RULES THAT THIS CB SEASON WOULD HAVE SHIP BANS IMPLEMENTED DURING THE SEASON IF CERTAIN SHIPS BECAME A PROBLEM IN THE META. There is plenty for WG to be yelled at in relation to their greed (see the way they are dealing with the Commander Rework and respecs, for instance), but this one is not.

Not too many players are 'good' players, for one. Second: this holds true if you play higher tiers (T8 and up). Mid tiers, in losses, it is a whole lot harder to get the 1200 Base XP in a loss. Same with the get 2000 Base XP missions you see for some mission chains. Relatively easy to get in higher tiers, need a serious carry to pull it off in T5-T7.

True - I know some in the StatsBloke / Painezor / Killerbin community refer to the Chatham Raid as Grand Theft Flagship.

Seems to have worked for me now.

As pointed out, the name Hr Ms Celebes would work most easily if the T5 was a derivative of the Java class cruiser, which apparently the T5 as proposed by WG is not. On the other hand, you could argue that the T5 would be a cruiser line meant to serve in the Dutch East Indies, therefore would be named after the most important islands (which arguably Celebes / Sulawesi was by the 1930s. Hr Ms Tromp could well be reserved for a future premium. Kijkduin and Eendracht are ALL logical names, since these ships are (more or less) actual iterations of what ended up being the 'Zeven Provinciën" class cruiser; the original design, and reworked design (mid war). So it is no more that logical to give these ships names actually intended for that class. I would guess the SOLE reason that the current Johann de Witt is named Johan de Witt is because it is an amphibious landing ship, Johan de Witt was (together with De Ruyter) the founder of the Marine Corps (and some would argue the first ever to come up with the concept of a Marine Corps). A little cursory research suggests that the current Johann de Witt is the FIRST ship named after him, and in fact pretty much the first ship named after a senior Republican (= anti-Orangist) official from the Dutch Republic. I am not sure there has actually ever been a 'van Oldenbarneveldt', who was an even greater and more important official for the Dutch Republic than Johan de Witt ever was. Also, in that era, Wilhelmina would NEVER have accepted such a name (allegedly Kijkduin was already struck at her insistence), referring to an anti-Orangist official. Gouden Leeuw would fit in a series of flag ships of famous Dutch commanders (where Eendracht and Brederode) would also fit - even if the name was rarely used. Other naming options/issues: The complete absence of many other Dutch naval hero's in the names suggests there could well be a Dutch DD line coming as well (which would also be feasible without being a complete fantasy line). They could have named ships after famous Dutch naval victories, although that would probably irk or English brethren, since most of those victories were over the English.

To me, original Harekaze is quite a bit of fun. Well worth it. You have to work with a low health pool, but if you can make good of her concealment (shared best in game), she is a lot of fun to play.

Personally I think this is a positive change.

Same here - Twitch dropped claimed last night (19 hours ago), restarted the game at least twice since then - NOTHING has dropped so far. WG - there is a problem.

StatsBloke just teased a new ship - Name plate says "Zeven Provinciën", Dutch cruiser.

Why not make the T10 class a Tromp, and the Premium Tromp class cruiser the van Heemskerck? Not sure, but I think WG has done it for more ships in the game, where the ship leading the class is NOT the one in the Tech Tree. And 'taking their names'? I said I was wondering why WG chose the names they did? Who knows, maybe these were names proposed in the designs of the project. I said that based on what little I know of Dutch naming conventions, I personally found some of the name choices strange. For instance, Kijkduin is named after a naval battle (and an actual name proposal). Why not use that (naval battles) for some of the other ships. Just put in a Chatham (just to troll the Brits). Plenty of commanders to go around for the other ships. Why choose Haarlem over for instance Amsterdam or Rotterdam?

True - but would they have been named as such (or not have been renamed) if the high tier designs had actually been executed (especially the T10), which was considered at about the same time? Just look at how often the Zeven Provinciën and De Ruyter have been renamed.

nm

Yeah, but that has been the only 'famous' one - and even then mostly with Tromp serving under De Ruyter. Also, the name Tromp is actually missing. From a quick internet search I did, that 'Gouden Leeuw' also seems to have been the only big ship 'Gouden Leeuw' in the Navy. Conspicuously absent, based on how often the names come back in names for bigger Dutch ships: Tromp, Evertsen, van Heemskerck. Especially with the name Tromp missing, it seems that 'Gouden Leeuw' might have been chosen because Tromp will be the name of a future ship in the line-up. Otherwise I simply cannot figure out why they would go for Gouden Leeuw over Tromp.

Do you have any idea about the naming conventions - or whether these names would even be plausible? Just wondering about the following: Celebes - supposed to be the 3rd Java class, so I can see where a modified Java would get that name. T8 Haarlem: Why? Rarely have big ships in the Royal Navy been named after Dutch cities in the modern era, let alone actual fighting ships, and if named after a city I would expect quite a few other names to come first (Amsterdan, Rotterdam, Vlissingen). T9 Johan de Witt: A bigger fighting ship named after a politician (which Johan de Witt was)? Would be unique, AFAIK. With the current Dutch RN ship named after Johan de Witt, the name is chosen because Johan de Witt was one of the founders of the Dutch Marine Corps (and the ship is a landing ship). T10 Gouden Leeuw: Again a very rare name (it seems) in the Dutch naval line up, especially for bigger ships. Famous names I feel are missing: Tromp, Evertsen, Kortenaer, Wassenaer, van Heemskerck; all names I would have considered more likely to be used. Unless of course the lack of these names hints at a DD line coming up. But even then....

- The basic camo (visibility and dispersion reduction) costs 22.5k credits per time if you buy them. EVERYBODY should be able to afford that. No need to NOT sail with a camo AT ALL.

Again, how are you going to measure that? - The DD that spots, floods an area with torps to fix the enemy in position, and smokes cruisers so they can shoot from cover will ALWAYS rank at the bottom of the team (been there, done that on more than one occasion). Even if they are in fact the primary reason the team won in the first place. - The cruiser or BB that simply by choosing a smart position paralyzes the enemy, radars so team mates can shoot the DD, but has little to shoot at; again, something that can easily win/decide the game. Will not get the reward it deserves. - The cruiser that flanks, completely disrupts the enemy attack (and position), makes the advance break up as ships turn to meat him, gets killed fairly quickly, but in doing so allows his team to concentrate fire on one ship at a time, rather than being the victim of focus fire - again will rank bottom. Even if it was his action that broke open the enemy position. The BB spamming from the back will nearly always score higher, simply because of farming damage. For your proposal to be viable, the whole determination of XP should be completely overhauled.

Some are, many are not: Marco Polo OP? Plymouth? Marceau? Salem? Z-44? Most people do not consider them OP at all. Also, some ships turn out to be OP where nobody expected them to be in the first place: PetroPavlovsk was thought to be a weak pick - BY PRETTY MUCH EVERYONE INVOLVED IN KOTS (including the top clans) - for the first KOTS it was available. Turned out it was actually OP. Who would have figured Graf Spee would dominate Clan Battles in the way it came to be (Graf Spee generally considered a weak ship). Some of the OP elements only become prevalent when in meta for a while. Allegedly quite a few people figured that Colbert would be more toxic for the game than Smolensk before release - how wrong the were when the masses could get their hands on the latter. General changes (IFHE, Smoke, Captain Rework, Spotting) can make previously balanced ships suddenly OP. Currently, if those are premiums, the only way to solve the problem is to take them away from sale.