Brickdust_Express

2 hours later than my previous post. Guess what 6 more games played in convoy 5 of which in defending team and all lost

In the last convoy games I,ve played, if I remember correctly I played in the attack team once maybe twice, defended in all the other 7 or 8. In the 7 or 8 defending games just 1 win. This seem's to be a daily re-occuring situation, I end up playing a lot more defending teams than attacking. Which is beginning to put me of playing this mode. This did not seem to happen as much in earlier instances of the convoy mode which I enjoyed. I cannot for the life of me see that the game selection by MM is that random., the reason I think that is because most days that I play the convoy mode I would say that I am on the defending team far more than the attacking team. So my conclusion is that it is far easier to win in this mode attacking. A possible leveler for this might be to actually decrease the amount of attacking ships allocated. Just a thought.

I,ve always had my Italian special Captain Luigi Sansonetti on the Tier 10 Italian battleship Colombo, so just for a change I put him onto the Tier 10 Italian Cruiser Venezia for 1 game, this cost me 250 dubloons for retraining, so after the game I wanted to put him back on the Colombo, to do this I would have to pay for retraining again (another 250 dubloons). I don,t understand why I should have to pay for retraining again back to a ship I,v already trained him up on and paid 250 dubloons to do so. I know that these two ships are tech tree ships and not premium but would I have to pay to retrain him every time I want to put him back on the Colombo after using him on another Italian tech tree ship after paying to train him on that tech tree ship? It does seem a bit unfair. The cost would be 500 dubloons every time. I understand the rational for paying to retrain on a ship he,s never been on but not for going back to a ship he,s already been train on and charged 250 dubloons for.

Let me add my opinion to this debate. All players are not equal, so get use to it. I personally don,t give a toss about winrate, why should I? I think that damage achieved is possibly a better yardstick of ability. A very good player once said to me when I questioned him about winrate, that he considered that if you could inflict more damage per game than your ingame ship had HP then you were doing well. I,m an almost 3 year player of this game and I do not have a high win rate. But I feel I have improved by a great deal since I joined a clan When I joined the clan I had a winrate of 32% now it is 43%, my damage rate was 32258 after 2250 battle, now it is 50527, after 7226 Random Battles. S0 in my mind that is a good improvement Don,t get me wrong I would like to be considered a good player but, I would rather keep on improving my damage rate, as that, giving my limitations, gives me more satisfaction. Having said that I very often get insulted ingame by the so called good players, some of them are quite vile and upsetting comments. I would expect all shipmates to remember that this is a game and there are differences between players standards. I remember something I said in a different post, and that is If there were no bad players in this game then there would be no good players. Just think about that statement. Oh, by the way my limitations for those interested are 1/ I,m 73 years old and my speed of thought and reaction is obviously not as quick as you younger players. 2/ I have relatively poor vision so games in a poor visibility mode are extremely difficult for me. 3/ As well as being tonally deaf I suffer from arthritis so my arms and fingers.are sometimes a serious problem, but I keep playing. The point of me listing my limitations is not for any body to fell sorry for me, but you so called good players should remember that that player you might insult or critisize might have difficulties or limitations you know nothing about..

There are occasions when you play this game and think you have come across a bug, which understandably can irritate players. So inevitably you hope that WOW will fix the bug and that the "bug" is not a permanent new feature of the game. Let me explain the statement above, and hope it make sense to the reader 1. Yesterday I had on a occasion of entering a Random Battle to wait almost 6 minutes to get into game, that in itself may or may not be unusual. But I do not ever remember it taking that long to queue to get into a game. 2. Normally the reason for this wait I imagine would be that there was not enough players queued up to play. After all the least number required for a Random Battle would normally be (2x12) 24 assuming all the criteria of matchmaking was met immediately. 3. I joined the queue and to be honest was not sure if I remember correctly there were about 32-35 players queueing. that in itself not unusual, what I did notice though was initially that there where no Submarines in the queue at all and the other classes of ships waiting were all in double figures except CV,s 4. The queue never really reduced during the whole process I am describing the lowest, I saw was 26 and the highest I think was 78 ships (no submarines) waiting in queue (If I had known that this was a problem I would have taken screenshots to prove my statements) 5. I then noticed something odd seemed to be happening, the queue (and by inference Matchmaking) never reduced the queue unless submarines started to be queued up - seemed a minimuim of 4 were required in queue. And then Matchmaking would allocate teams which would include Subs therefore extending the game waiting time for the othere classes already in queued. 6. Finally after waiting so long (about 45-50 ships queued besides 7 subs queued which had only been in the queue for a max of about 30 secs.) I get into game. The attachment shows what team numbers matchmaking came up with, I noticed out of the 7 subs that had been in the queued matchmaking had allocated 3 per side to this one game. So my thoughts on this are:- Is matchmaking now giving priority to Subs queueing? I thought the maximum no. of subs in a game was 2 per team, has this changed? Why are we waiting 4 - 6 mins or possibly longer to get intoI must admit I detest the fact that submarines are now in game and for me have decreased the enjoyment I once got out of the game. But that is not the point of my post. My main point is this, is this now a new feature of the game or is it a bug?

Just played a random match in the Colombo. Distance between me a Preussen 12 - 14 km Both ships broadside for more or less the whole of the engagement.. Fired 6 broadsides at Preussen (that,s 96 shells) of which only 2 shells got registered as hits and registered any sort of damage. Zoomed on a couple of occasions and shells seem to be hitting target with absolutely no effect. to damage counter. I know I,m far from being a good player so I accept that I could have just had a off match so to speak but even I,m not that bad.. Also had another problem at the same time whereby the selecting A to turn to port the ship actuallty turned to starboard. turning to starboard, using D was no problem so both keys were turning my ship to starboard. Believe it or not the Columbo is my favourite ship with almost 1100 random battles just wondered if any other shipmates have come against either of these problems?

I accept that RNG probably had a effect, my problem with that is that it gives the player and his stats a false negative if you understand my point.

Just played a random match in the Colombo. Distance between me a Preussen 12 - 14 km Both ships broadside for more or less the whole of the engagement.. Fired 6 broadsides at Preussen (that,s 96 shells) of which only 2 shells got registered as hits and registered any sort of damage. Zoomed on a couple of occasions and shells seem to be hitting target with absolutely no effect. to damage counter. I know I,m far from being a good player so I accept that I could have just had a off match so to speak but even I,m not that bad.. Also had another problem at the same time whereby the selecting A to turn to port the ship actuallty turned to starboard. turning to starboard, using D was no problem so both keys were turning my ship to starboard. Believe it or not the Columbo is my favourite ship with almost 1100 random battles just wondered if any other shipmates have come against either of these problems? Sorry I,ve put this post in the wrong section.

Why are Hybrid BB,s allowed in Ranked? As i see it if only one team has a hybrid BB in the game then that team has a advantage.

Not a achievement, but, my greatest disappointment with World of Warships so far (and there have been a few). Went into queue for game 2 CV,s 4 BB,s 3 CA,s 4 DD,s and finally 30 Subs. Suffice to say left queue.

Why don,t you visit us at http://taw.net/ and click on the JOIN NOW under sign in/register. We have a very friendly English speaking clan with a age range of 16 to 75 with the majority being from the UK, (I live in Yorkshire as well). You will be assured of a warm welcome into the clan. Should you wish to chat ingame I,m on every day for hours. Hope to see you soon in game and in the clan shipmate

Problem solved, somehow it had become set as primary ship, although I have absolutely no idea how it happened, so JohnMac you were right. Thankyou all shipmates for your help.

I have (had) the Yoshino, both the coal version and the black version. I was attempting to look at the different setups I had on both. I first looked at the coal version Yoshino then the black, when I came out of the black version,s screen and went back to the carousel the coal version and captain had disappeared. Perplexed I rebooted the game and it still has not reappeared, yet the coal version stats are still showing in my in game profile. I can assure readers I had not attempted to sell the ship. Has anybody else come across or had this problem

I,m getting on in years shipmates, (almost 73) and I,m a little hard of hearing and struggle with tonal differences. Does anybody know if there is a way of being able to set the collision up volume separately as I find it difficult hear in game. I have the visual warning setup but find I still need the audio warning increased. (it's a age thing) Any help gratefully received.

Not being a DD, CV or Sub player this salty old seadog really likes playing the Columbo and the Venezia, I now have 21 point captains on both and have great fun with them both. Really get a sense of achievement when I take out a BB after farming with the Venezia, such good guns. Although nowhere near as popular as the Venezia and other tier 10 BB,s, the Columbo can can hold it,s own against any BB, especially so when you use it with Captain Sansonetti and a spotter, the range increases considerably and the again are fairly accurate. Both ships seem to suit my style of play for their class. Also for my money these are the best looking two ships in the game.

Has the running lights option been removed from ModStation as I,ve not been able to find it since 11.6 update. I really liked using that mod.

Thanks pl_piter, I missed that. (It,s a age thing)

Am I wrong but when a enemy ship (who is not visible at that moment) fires his main guns at you, is he then suppose to be visible for 20 seconds. Or have I misunderstood this. Thanks in advance for any help.

This is a extension if you like of a post of mine from a similar debate which in retrospect I should have posted here, apologies. Personally I think there should be 2 immediate changes to Ranked Battles for whatever tier when the next round is announced by WOW 1/ Do away with the present form of level progress, as I think it restricts the advancement of a lot of players in ranked, particularly the better players (of which I am not) and causes a lot of friction between players, replacing it with a system whereby once you have won a number of games ( it could be say 2 games in bronze, 3 games in silver and 4 games in gold) at a level you would then automatically advance to the next level upwards (losing battles should not cause a deduction and loss of stars) my reasoning for saying that each level of qualification should be a set number of wins (without losses being taken into account) are primarily this:- How many times have you gone into game and found that you have a "team-mate" afk, or even 2 afk, which I have come across a couple of times, it can be hard enough to in random to win with 1 or 2 afk but I personally have yet to play a ranked game that has been won by a team with a afk player in their side. I,m not being critical of a afk player what i.m saying is how frustrating it is to build your levels up only to lose it the next game because of absent players this affects not 1 player but the whole team through no fault of their own so they also lose a level or star, (I have actually had this happen to me 3 times in a row) so the term flogging a dead horse comes to mind. At the same time do away with the saving of stars if you're on the losing team and if you happen to be top scorer in that team. This way you would still need to (in my example) to win 18 games to get from level 10 to 1 in bronze, 27 in silver and 36 in Gold besides doing the promotion level 1,s in each 2/ Only ships that have been acquired through the uptodate tech trees should be allowed in ranked battles, it is I think unfair to have ships in battle that are not available to all players simply because those players joined WOW after a ships status has been change by WOW making some of them unavailable and unobtainable to all players. This then would I think have a more positive impact especially for the better players and importantly mean that newer players cannot buy their way through the game. I give you as examples the present Ranked battles whereby the Missouri and the Musashi are in use. To my mind these are problems that definitely needs to be addressed by WOW to stop the "innocent" being punished along with the guilty if you get my drift. I,ve posted this only as food for thought shipmates and not to start arguments, so the question is how would you reorganise Ranked if you could? Look forward to comments on this.

An addition to post 14 in this thread, my reasoning for saying that each level of qualification should be a set number of wins (without losses being taken into account) are primarily this:- How many times have you gone into game and found that you have a "team-mate" afk, or even 2 afk, which I have come across a couple of times, it can be hard enough to in random to win with 1 or 2 afk but I personally have yet to play a ranked game that has been won by a team with a afk player in their side. I,m not being critical of a afk player what i.m saying is how frustrating it is to build your levels up only to lose it the next game because of absent players this would affect not 1 player but the whole team through no fault of their own so they also lose a level or star, (I have actually had this happen to me 3 times in a row) so the term flogging a dead horse comes to mind. To my mind this is a problem that definitely needs to be addressed by WOW to stop the "innocent" being punished along with the guilty if you get my drift. Look forward to comments on this.

Personally I think there should be 2 immediate changes to Ranked Battles for whatever tier is used by WOW 1/ Do away with the present form of level progress, as I think it restricts the advancement of a lot of players in ranked, particularly the better players (of which I am not) and causes a lot of friction between players, replacing it with a system whereby once you have won for example 4 games at a level you would then automatically advance to the next level upwards (losing battles should not cause a deduction and loss of stars) at the same time do away with the saving of stars if you're on the losing team and if you happen to be top scorer in that team. This way you would still need to (in my example) win 36 games to get from level 10 to 1. I personally would not change the format for promotion from bronze to silver to gold that is already in place. 2/ Only ships that have been acquired through the upto date tech trees should be allowed in ranked battles, it is I think unfair to have ships in battle that are not available to all players simply because those players joined WOW after a ships status has been change by WOW making some of them unavailable and unobtainable to all players. I give you the present Ranked battles whereby the Missouri and the Musashi are in use, (the Musashi is a tier 10 in all but name anyway) I,ve posted this only as food for thought shipmates and not to start arguments, so the question is how would you reorganise Ranked if you could?

So how do you quantify (risk vs reward for your ship) that seem like a load of bull, what greater reward is there for sinking a sub than say any BB, CA, CV or DD, none that I see, if I understand what you are saying. with regards to your statement "Overall BBs currently are the most powerful ASW class in the game" how on earth do you come to that conclusion? More HP does not mean a you can survive a 1 on 1 with a sub because of the reasons I previously stated. Take a look at the C. Colombo for instance, no ASW weapons at all other than calling in a flight of bombers, but then you are back to to the situation I,ve already stated, you cannot spot them. Distance from ship for torps is not even relevant given the circumstances. So with respect none of your statement makes sense to me.

I play BB,s 90% of the time and as far as I am concerned subs are killing the game for me. with the latest upgrade it seems the only time I see them is in the game start team listings and on the rare occasion when one surfaces in the game. (I do appreciate I do not know how to use them having never played one, and also that I,m not a particularly good player) But having admitted to that, I think they are so OP that in a battleship they tend to be un-defendable against, they can almost keep up with you in terms of speed, and can indeed sometimes overtake you, then you have the speed of the torps and the reload frequency which further compounds the problems faced, then there is, what seems to me, the almost impossible task of actually spotting the damn things, And then to compound the problem even more quite a few games have two subs in. It,s a long time since I saw 2 CV,s in a game so why are we being subjected to 2 subs. I used to play WOW all day as i,m retired and a OAP plus the all important fact that I enjoyed the game, but since subs have been put back into the game I have enjoyed and played the game less and less, in fact I,ve even started to drop out of the game queue if I see subs waiting but alot of times that does,nt work. So now I am considering giving up all together. I will probably give it a couple more updates to see how it goes.

With reference to my earlier post (post 17) and to clarify, later realised this only happens when I am attempting to access my clan information tab

No problems with my internet, WOW hanging when switching screens with permanent busy indication on anchor icon. Only way I can get out of locked screen is to either reboot machine or close WOW using Task manager option. When Task manager is opened this is what shows every time