Aethervoxx

Superships can't degrade T2. Nor can they degrade T3 (although farce T4 reworked CVs might). [In the interest of full disclosure, I'm a 100% supporter of RTS CVs ] Nor T4 although farce T4 reworked CVs will. T5 doesn't see Superships either (although farce T4 or T6 reworked CVs might & maybe T6 Subs) T6 doesn't see Superships but, unfortunately, can see farce T6 reworked CVs & T6 Subs. Similar situation in T7, no Superships but either farce T6 or T8 reworked CVs plus, ofc, either T6 or T8 Subs. Does anyone see the 'trend' here? T8, no Superships but, ofc, farce reworked T8 CVs & T8 Subs. T9+. Here is where the degradation gets further 'diarrhea-ed' (shat upon) & we can see all of the farces together (T10 reworked CVs, T10 Subs & the farce Superships) all rolled up into a bundle of '****' . **** = You pick your own favourite anti-Wedgie word. Did I mention, Wedgie loves giving out 'atomic wedgies' .

Everyone I quoted above deserves a +100 . This is why I quote so many .

This is so GOOD. This requires repeating .

I'd just like to point out that there are plenty of lovely ships in T2, T3, T4, T5, T6 & T7, as well as a higher ratio of real ships too ( I expand on your observation, Bruce RFK ).

No competent player would. However, Wedgie has to be relying, imo, on the new Potatoes that won't have a clue. Wedgie loves frying new Potatoes. Did I also mention, Wedgie loves giving out 'atomic wedgies'.

Wedgie loves new Potatoes to fry.

Two places. in the toilet or, alternately, flushed down the toilet.

Might that be of the owner's pocketbook? Isn't he the paid 'buttler'?

Degradations? ROFL What degradation # are we on now? How many degradations have there been since the great farce CV wreck (aka 'rework')? Good characterization , btw, SodaBubbles , of Wedgie.

Earlier today, I dived up with RuruushuVuiBuritania & we had two enjoyable T5 random battles. We won both & I, I'm proud to say, did better than my div mate in one of them (he's much better by WR) .

In denial aren't you? In place of your candor you are met with denial. * This is very instructive. We have 1) a poster who believes he was a mediocre RTS CV player & provides stats to illustrate this point and we have 2) a poster who continues to claim RTS CV play & players were far to OP who, furthermore, says player #1 stats are actually indicative of doing well. I'm going to believe player/poster #1 in this particular case.

LOL. We know who WG wants to spread cheeks, lol (the players, ofc). Good one, Eagle_Six_TR.

& yet RTS CV players had to do this (control both CV & up to 7/8 plane squadrons) all at the same time. I never had any problem doing this with RTS CVs & I was by no means an OP RTS CV player. Another POS & BS argument by FukushuNL down.

While playing a T4 ship don't Div with someone who has a T5 ship or you then might see a battle with T6s where you might see a T6 CV.

I quite agree about WG not including more pre-Dreadnought era ships such as beginning around 1880, say. There were a lot of motorized warships from 1880 to 1905 that would have been some great eye candy - perhaps, then, current T10s might have been T12 (lol). As to T2, sure "no one in WG's eyes" - still some of them are a lot of fun to play - who doesn't like the V-25? I, personally, like the Emden too, amongst others.

It's pretty clear the majority of the Forumites are curtailing their playing & spending. The clear majority won't even recommend this game (RL friends are more valuable). OP's poll confirms all this. Wedgie only wants new Potatoes who they can fry.

TY, Pete, for showing RusuuhuVuiBuritania that, in fact, some other players play T2 which then makes the following comment exaggerated. I'm sure 1.4%% is still hundreds of players

We are only onto post # 26 here. How is this topic & how bans work been discussed "ad nauseum" as you put it, Pete? Has this been discussed anywhere in your previous 33,535 posts? If so, perhaps, you are referring to your own 'ad nauseums'? Elucidate (we all know you will).

Easy. . WG . Next time, ask a more difficult question .

This hasn't stopped Potatoes from obtaining T10s nor will this stop a Potato from obtaining a T11 Supership. In fact, Wedgie is setting it up for Potatoes to get a Supership after just one T1 battle (that paltry 1 XP requirement) along with enough from their shop. Won't it be something to see a T11 in battle with a 0 pt Cpt & that T11 ship with nothing in the way of equipment upgrades . Did I mention, Wedgie loves to give 'atomic wedgies' to it's players

I never accused anyone except WG MM. So, you can quit making blanket statements that I am "accusing people". So, "basically no one" plays T2, according to you? According to you, T2 players are 'no one'. This will be news to players who play T2 ships. Who made you, RuruushuVuiBuritania, the resident forum authority? I don't see any WG 'title' associated with your account. All I see is another argumentative twit who has to be right & doesn't like an alternate view that differs from their own self-appointed big ego mirror gazing. So, when the rules allow one team to get two T2 ships in a T3/T4 battle but then the rules don't automatically add two T2 ships to the other team, that's perfectly fine? So, something subverts the rules for unfair advantages is a cheat (according to you) but that something is not a fail division? Nonsense. There is an unfair advantage - the two T2 ships on the one team but none on the other. Since WG MM allows this, it is a cheat they are responsible for.

It is a CHEAT when one team is stuck with two T2s and the other team has none. The MM should never allow this. Since it does, it is a blatant WG MM CHEAT.

Some do play T2. New players, ofc, & players who enjoy a low tier battle without the chance of encountering any farce reworked CVs - sometimes one sees quite a few players running a T2 ship.

Which is a blatant cheat against the disadvantaged team since the fail division should just sit in the queue until another equal fail division appears. I don't get why this is so hard 'for WG to correct' (so this never happens).

Skill ceiling for RTS CV players was not through any roof. What a blatant exaggeration. Another exaggeration. The better CV player could dominate the other, yes, but not completely so long as the lesser CV player had some degree of intelligence. The main problem for RTS CVs was when there were two CVs per side & if the two better CV players were on the same team. Easily fixable if WG just did a hard cap of one CV per team. What an idea. Cap the number of CVs in a battle. Note how War Failing allowed up to three farce reworked CVs at T4 for over a whole year before the idiots figured out that was disastrous. Note how War Failing still refuses to hard cap a battle to just one farce reworked CV per side &, ofc, we all know how farce reworked CVs are advantaged in terms of survival (armoured CVs anyone?) Furthermore, RTS CVs could run out of planes unlike the farce endless factory ship CVs we have now. Furthermore, a RTS CV player had to decide what kind of plane load out to take into battle (before the line up of ships was even known). Also, AA was much more effective versus RTS CVs. Note how bastardized AA has become with the farce reworked CVs. As is so glaringly obvious after the removal of RTS CVs, WoWS is but a pale & sick version of what it was before the FARCE REWORKED CV INSERTION (especially, with a few of the other complete stupid introductions from Wedgie)