Venturous_625

The clan commander owns the clan and resources. As a player in fully developed clan you receive a number spiffs to costs of playing your ship. The Battle Pass has reward for each 10 point sections. If is coal it is increased based on develop of the coal facility in the cclan naval port Clan members and WOWs have legal authority to take the commanders resources. Further it would be consider an illegal taking. We as players do not have an ownership claim to the resources. The direction some what to go in taking resources like oil is in This Way Lies Madness I left a dead clan and moved to one that is very active. Just vote with feet and leave. find an active clan.

I am not getting credit for "playing today" on clan battle screen if this or these are the first battles I play for that day

The Maine is not very inspired. The max range is 24.2 k and it has a vulnerable citadel. Vulnerable like Montana and Iowas or worse? The secondaries need to have a minimum range of 8 k. Also add 4x2 6" Worcester dual purpose guns as secondaries. For surface engagements they would fire SAP. I would add an additional combat instruction radar assisted fire control that fills like the first one. The effect would be increase the accuracy to slightly better than Montana, add 1.8 km to max range, and reduce loading time to 30 sec. Action time is 60 seconds.

This reference is from 2014 in an article by Brendan Sinclair Managing Editor Published in Game Biz on April 9, 2014 "Swrve tracked the habits of 10 million new players on 30 games in its network over the course of 90 days, finding that only 2.2 percent of those players ever spent money. The spending of monetized players wasn't spread evenly, as Swrve found 46 percent of revenue came from just 10 percent of that group, or .22 percent of the total player base." In an article by Sean Murray Published Apr 10, 2020 in The Gamer "Almost 90% of people who play an MMO have spent money on it in-game." ..."A new survey from Top Dollar asked 1,000 American gamers about their MMO spending habits. Specifically, they asked which games they spend money on and how much. The answer is pretty astounding: 89% of respondents said that they have spent money on an MMO, and most of them think that they needed to spend in order to remain competitive." Article was about micro transactions The MMO gaming world is different than in 2014. The monetization methods are also different than in 2014. Then there is: https://medium.com/building-the-metaverse/game-economics-part-3-free-to-play-games-78aa790d55ae It is a long article on game economy, which are complex. No single measure can capture what is happening. In the article it is stated "In the above example, the top 20% of players spent 75% of the money (keep in mind that most players spend $0 in a F2P game). Twenty-four percent of the revenue came from the top 1% of players." So 25% is spent by the remaining 80% and in this group are the group of most players who spend $0. In this 80% are new players and are future top 20% players. Is WG/WOWS paying attention to the whole player base? This is a question not an allegation.

I purchased the needed tokens and bought the CLR N. Carolina. Cool ship for $40.

Do you like the list of restricted ships? Has that been easy for your clan to deal with?

The limit of two tier IX and 5 lists of restricted and banned ships is not a good idea. Tonight was mass confusion. Clan battles should be set up to be fun not some complicated experiment. WOWS this set up you created is causing a lot of confusion and frustration. Unlimited BBs is a bad idea.

In a convoy match yesterday I was in my Pommern B. I had fired my MB multiple times. About have way the MB would just fire on their own into water. This bug has appeared again. I have no mods.

It is not the modders faults. It isn't WOWs fault. As a game is built areas of bad code may be bypassed or is forgotten. As the game ages problems appear as bugs. It can be expansive to now go back and fix. WOWs is in many ways are large relational data base. WG has been investing money into simplifying the code, making the visuals better, plus many more things we do not see that is coding. They have been doing this for two+ years. I am thank they have. I use Mod Station. They have a complex job of altering the mods to the new code in the released patch. It will be ready when they have finished.

Here is a link to a Chief Petty Officer USN, from Peru. The links has picture through his career. https://www.defense.gov/News/Feature-Stories/story/Article/2242081/face-of-defense-from-peru-to-us-navy-chief/

Is this a new bug?

I can only answer your question based on the experience I had in the US Coast Guard. The opening through a water tight bulkhead has a raised metal lip called a coming. The hatch (door) has a reverse metal lip that fits over the coming and the hatch has a rubber gasket that mates to the coming. The hatch has metal latches called dogs that mate to a raised metal piece the more you move the dog and tighter the hatch is closed. Some have a lever that opens or closes all the dogs. These hatches are designed to prevent the spread of fire, flooding and resist explosions. The hatch fails if the dog are bend back (pealed back by force). In 1982 a fire started in the engine aboard the 600-foot grain ship Protector Alpha. The fire fighting system did put out the fire. The engine room was sealed and fire smolder producing flammable smoke. The Captain of the Port ( A Captain) and several other Coast Guard personnel board the ship and proceeded to the main hatch leading to the engine room. The damage controlman 2nd class (DC-2) was in the process of cutting a hole in the hatch when the compressed air tank that is used to start the main engine (multi-story diesel) ruptured causing the smoke to explode. All the dogs were pealed back and the hatch shot backward crushing the DC-2 against the bulkhead behind him.

In slot 6 are modification that affect secondary battery reload time (Aux A Mod 2). It is not working the secondaries on Pommern and GK stayed at stock rates. Further this mod doesn't do anything to AA. On GK I have the UU installed in slot 6. That mod does effect secondary firing rate either. I checked the PTS server and these mods are not working there either. Mod Station is not installed on the PTS server. The UU installed on GK worked before 12.3. I have no idea what over slots and mods are not working. The 4 point Manuel secondary skill isn't working (-10% firing rate). I have no way of knowing if any of the dispersion mods are working. Lutgen sec firing rate buffs are not working. This doesn't seem related to Mod Station or my instance of the game. Would you provide me an answer quickly on if this is a bug in the game, and if it is when will it be fixed. The secondary firing rate affects the final score for player and ship.

Falklands would be cool map to add.

I have purchased two unique upgrades (UU). The one for USN Montana which fits in slot 5 I gave up a 10% concealment buff for, -10% fire ext time and flooding recovery, -30% in rudder shift (15.5 sec), and -70% in rudder repair. The other UU is for the GK and fits in slot 6. This reduces range to 19 km, reduces the sec battery firing rate and MB firing rate -15% and -10% respectively. With Lutgens on the GK works very well in Air Ship Escort and Convoy Escort battle, brawls, and maybe CBs. Not good in random battles. In works in Coop, but not a best choice. I have looked at the rest of the UUs not interested.