Aethervoxx

Yep, King_ of_ the_ Potatoes, exactly as the Convoy mode should be. +1 for you .

I have this model - not finished (I'm such a procrastinator). One of my uncles served on the HMCS Alberni (K 103) & so I have whatever info I could get from him on how it differed. My Uncle was part of the crew who were fortunate to survive the Alberni's sinking. All the Flowers had minor differences, usually on the fittings they had, & what could be converted during their various refits HMCS Alberni was built in Esquimalt, British Columbia & was one of the few earlier Corvettes that never got the bow extension. It did, however, get the four extra AA Oerlikons for Operation Torch. FYI (& of all co-incidences) an ex-American now residing in Courtenay, British Columbia has established an 'HMCS Alberni Museum' dedicated to this 'obscure' vessel. I gave him the info from my Uncle. Google this, if you wish.

I'm what you all refer to as an 'old fart' so making models is a decades old partial hobby of mine. Since I have the Iwaki Alpha, I recently bought two 1/700 Waterline series Tenryus to make a conversion. The Tenryu model, although close to the Iwaki, is not exact for a conversion. I've had to make up the five 3 barrel AA guns & add the extra 140mm Deck gun which I was able to do with the model parts. The bridge of the Iwaki is different - the closest to it is a Kuma model which I might have to buy now & then modify the bridge. Eventually, I will have a close to accurate (as shown by WG) Iwaki Alpha cause 'Why not?', it's such an 'infamous' special WoWS ship. I will try to paint it with it's perma camo, as well.

Perhaps, I am being too hasty. Yes, I will try it, after all. Yes, I will play it. I stand corrected (tho, why CVs but not Subs?).

Gwynbleid, you do realize you put your team at a disadvantage when playing higher tier stock ships, do you not? It is much more advisable to have enough resources to set up any ship to full maximum or, at least, to an 'optimal' upgrade from just 'stock'.

#1) I advise not playing Ranked battles (as currently set up with no irreversible ranks) & #2) As others say, WG does not deserve a penny until it reforms itself (you know, when Hell freezes over) .

I got to rank 3 then got crap teams & reversed to rank 5 then the session ended & I was back at rank 10 for the next session. I'm no longer going to play a battle mode that capriciously screws one over continually. All you get other than some rewards is some hopelessly idiotic Sub flag. Is WG determined to wreck literally every battle mode?

There was no T1 Bougainville being played. He had 0 battles in both co-op & randoms in the battle report right after the battle. See the screenshots. Plus, he was playing a Jurien. His profile should have shown any ships he had played but it said he had not yet played any battles. That's ZERO (0) battles. So, Pete, where did the Jurien come from? This Bot V-25 sank me due to two factors, 1) I had to go against 4 enemy ships at the end of the battle & ofc I took damage so I was low HPs and 2) I took plenty of shots at the V-25 well before the end of the battle & at the very end of the battle & I got sunk instead of it due to the utter garbage aim results I was getting. That Bot V-25 should have been sunk before I got sunk. I almost won the battle at the end. It was BS I did not.

You're so far up some hole you have no hope.

I don't think WG cares about this so long as you are using reworked CVs. To avoid your CV moving backwards just make a proper waypoint far enough away from your present position & make sure that is not somewhere directly to your rear (your CV's rear, that is).

Why in the world wouldn't fire & flooding be shown on your main battle screen? You need to know if you are on fire or flooding. If some new interface is being tested in the PTS that's one thing. It's quite another to see this supposed proposed change come to the main servers. I don't know, Leo Apollo but I say, 'keep your pants on' until we see what actually transpires here.

Nothing wrong with playing T2 when it's not 'arranged' to have a BS loss. I'm angry because I got sunk due to blatant WG AI Bot cheating. If only my teams Bots had played equally as well this wouldn't have been posted. However, this Bot AI 'joke one sided result' is just another way WG 'arranges' battle results. &, explain how a human player who has 0 battles of record on either co-op or random battles can have a T2 ship in a random battle? Ofc, that player (in a div no less) played like someone with 0 battles.

Ummm, Sweet_Guffe, there was a recent 'News Release' about 'New Maps', specifically, illustrations for Faroes, Iceland & Kamchatka. How about you vote for one or two or them all? Plus, their Dev Blog (I believe) says what lovelacebeer here says, essentially, in post #9 above. There will be one new map for sure &, maybe, a second player contribution map. I guess 'reading' these days is over-rated & not worth doing .

Just keep 1 Cpt for each of the different Subs & play that 1 Cpt - just dismiss all the rest. Or, do as I have, free reset any Cpt you want that already has Cpt skill pts & hold that Cpt in reserve until Subs finally go officially 'live'.

I'm not naming or shaming - I do not know how to blank the player names from the screenshots. Here is a low tier battle that was a joke 'arranged' result as far as I can determine. Correct me, if I am wrong... The win team got a Div of two players both with 52%WR. The lose team got a Div of one player with 47%WR & the lower placed Div player had no % WR. In fact, this second A Div player shown with his co-op & random profile battles played had 0 battles listed yet is playing a T2 ship! How is this possible? Can anyone inform me about this 'anomaly'. Why is a player with '0' battles in a T2 random battle? How can they even have a T2 ship? Also, my team had a wonderful V-25 human player who did nothing but the Win team had a Bot V-25 that played a lot better than most human players. Also, although I tried my best, I somehow kept missing so many shots the whole battle including on the Bot V-25. It should have gotten sunk.

Is a clear CHEAT Incorrect. 12 - 0 is not random, it is a CHEAT.

My experience of 'weekend' play is it's either feast or famine. You see nothing but losses (garbage teams, ofc) or you see some wins (not too many before you see obligatory losses) It is abundantly clear that WG MM & 'aiming' results are 'arranged' however WG wants them to be such that about 60% of battles are totally bogus, a 'bad joke'.

A T1 battle where the enemy Bots played 'intelligently' & 'hit' a fair bit, hence my team was down 4 in two minutes before they even lost 1. A blatant WG CHEAT. It couldn't have been clearer that the MM cheats along with the targeting & hit cheat. I finished top of my team, top of the human players. Ofc, the enemy human players did 'so much better' being against Bots that actually played stupidly. Such a blatant CHEAT JOKE, WG can shove it if they think this player will ever give them another penny considering WG blatant CHEATING.

Of all ships, another battle with T6 Andrea Doria, another Loss but it sure wasn't my fault (grrr).

WG has given out a News release where one can vote for one, two or all three proposals for a New Map. The choices are Faroes, Iceland & Kamchatka - all northern latitude ice & snow 'wintry' looking designs.

All of us (maybe) get stuck on an island at various times. With underwater changes, maybe, it will happen more. So what? Quit whining about this. Stay a bit further away (or off of) the islands/land.

Y & N Yes LOL Yes Why? Yes Maybe Yes Maybe Haha, OP, I agree with most of your proposals

There are two lines, apparently (the Pan-American line closer to introduction?) [& likely even more in the WoWS pipeline].

Don't forget us few remaining early players .

Except this offer is not good enough from WG to convince me to purchase anything from their Premium Shop . WG will have to rescind every change they've made to WoWS since & including the CV rework , then, perhaps, I may spend money .