Search the Community

Is it just me or does it seem like subs get extra XP in games? Because I've been getting 160k+ DMG games in my smaland in ranked a lot of achievements but yet the subs on my team even when I know for a fact they didn't do much all game and got less than 60k DMG still get top place on the team. They're getting like 500+ XP than the next person. Feels like subs are getting special treatment when it comes to earning XP at the end of the games. This just doesn't seem fair since I lose the stars in ranked just because there's a sub on my team and they are on top of leader board and I keep receiving second place, I look at their profiles and they are all around 40% w/r but yet always stay on top somehow. Does anyone else having the same experiences? Its bad enough having subs in ranked now this.

Wargaming tells us only 'xp with premium bonus' instead of the average 'base xp'. The problem is that we repeat using premium and then stopping again, so this makes the exact average exp data unknown. So we don't know the average 'bxp' of the user, and we rely on the win rate and ratings shown by stats sites like 'wows-numbers'. I'm so sad to see some users hiding behind allies and shooting from afar even though they know it doesn't help us win at all to protect their rating. 'Solo win rate' is a very important indicator, but I think 'bxp' would also be nice if we could know. 'bxp' includes all the things you can't see in the ratings, such as how much he sacrifices for our allies to be their eyes, how dedicated the user plays in the front through capping, how many planes he faces and protects allies, how effective alpha damage he inflicts on his enemies, and how he faces a DD that threatens allies rather than sitting still in the smoke and harassing a stupid BBs for fire. Will there be a day when we can know the average bxp excluding premium bonus? The sentence can be unnatural because I used a translator. I'm sorry!

What's the closest you've come to a goal, then fallen short? "One more battle" turns into, "I only need 273 xp, a quick Co-op game ought to do it!" Then you eat an early volley and die accomplishing next to nothing. "One more quick Co-op game..." Well i only wanted my second Daily Container. One quick Co-op game ought to do it... At least it shouldn't be possible to poop the bed here...

meaning that if i think the amount of xp gained was spoiled by defeat or early demise and the fallout was rather insulting then i want to remove the amount or if the extra 50% was wasted and not worth the spending then i think it should suit me to erase the amount i don't want, that goes for credits, commander xp and anything else that shouldn't be added because it was not earned in battle if the result is that i got wasted or failed.

If you're looking to reset lines for the research bureau the following show the least amount of XP required to get back to tier 10. It should be noted this is the path of least resistance and only includes upgrades required to unlock the next ship. Data is from the excellent https://wowsft.com website. RESET LINES - BY NATION RESET LINES - BY XP Nation Ship XP Nation Ship XP Europe Halland 737,900 Japan Hakuryu 617,340 France Republique 874,670 Germany M V Richthofen 617,920 France Henry IV 739,670 U.S.A. Midway 618,040 France Kleber 774,610 U.S.S.R. Admiral Nakhimov 618,370 Germany M V Richthofen 617,920 U.K. Audacious 619,100 Germany Preussen 871,810 Japan Harugumo 676,640 Germany Hindenberg 755,760 Japan Shimakaze 685,140 Germany Z-52 719,620 U.S.S.R. Grozovoi 711,220 Germany Elbing 752,920 U.S.A. Gearing 711,290 Germany Schlieffen 858,810 Germany Z-52 719,620 Italy Christoforo Colombo 875,950 U.S.S.R. Khabarovsk 724,720 Italy Venezia 732,550 Japan Zao 731,100 Japan Hakuryu 617,340 Italy Venezia 732,550 Japan Yamato 852,500 Pan Asia Yueyang 733,320 Japan Zao 731,100 Europe Halland 737,900 Japan Shimakaze 685,140 U.S.A. Des Moines 738,430 Japan Harugumo 676,640 France Henry IV 739,670 Netherlands Gouden Leeuw 777,500 U.S.S.R. Petropavlovsk 746,200 Pan Asia Yueyang 733,320 U.S.A. Worcester 747,030 Pan Asia Jinan 775,320 U.K. Minotaur 751,400 U.K. Audacious 619,100 Germany Elbing 752,920 U.K. Conqueror 875,900 Germany Hindenberg 755,760 U.K. Minotaur 751,400 U.S.S.R. Alexander Nevsky 763,200 U.K. Goliath 786,100 U.K. Daring 774,200 U.K. Daring 774,200 France Kleber 774,610 U.S.A. Midway 618,040 Pan Asia Jinan 775,320 U.S.A. Montana 850,730 Netherlands Gouden Leeuw 777,500 U.S.A. Vermont 846,230 U.K. Goliath 786,100 U.S.A. Des Moines 738,430 U.S.A. Vermont 846,230 U.S.A. Worcester 747,030 U.S.A. Montana 850,730 U.S.A. Gearing 711,290 Japan Yamato 852,500 U.S.S.R. Kremlin 886,500 Germany Schlieffen 858,810 U.S.S.R. Alexander Nevsky 763,200 Germany Grosser Kurfurst 871,810 U.S.S.R. Petropavlovsk 746,200 France Republique 874,670 U.S.S.R. Delny 724,720 U.K. Conqueror 875,900 U.S.S.R. Grozovoi 711,220 Italy Christoforo Colombo 875,950 U.S.S.R. Admiral Nakhimov 618,370 U.S.S.R. Kremlin 886,500

Recently in the past 48 hours I have noticed I am not receiving XP bonuses from my flags. I used to play a t10 game and get up to 10k XP per game if I performed well but now I get around 500-1000 XP per game with camos and flags active. I looked at the post game XP and credits screen and it doesn't even show the flags but yet they're still being consumed. I have tried restarting the game, reinstalling, trying different ships, etc. Nothing has worked. If anyone can help me out that would be much appreciated! in the game shown I had 75k damage and assisted in captures etc. I used to get more for less damage before this issue. I also lost multiple flags due to me not noticing the issue at first, such as ouroboros and leviathan.

This would be similar to RESEARCH BUREAU, and probably shall be "managed" from the same interface/screen - Tech Tree - reset, and also from the Commander page, with his HISTORY, or career steps to current rank. This must be some new, special commander type, that's bound to a branch and keeps history for all ships in that branch. The objective is to complete a CAREER in Navy, taking a Level 0 Commander, and make it progress until Level 19, using all ships in a branch, achieving a progressive amount of Cmdr XP, preferably but not necessarily during a Tech Tree RESET - when you reset a branch, offer to create a "Career Commander" L0 and that player should use this same commanders with all ships re-researched. Probably limited to 1 Career Commander per nation, at least in early stages. Or one per each of ~8 branchs, like CV, BB(BB,BC), CL(CA,CL), DD(DDG, DDT), UB. This "Career Commander" would unlock some nation-specific Talent and "Improved Skill", similar to Legendary captains, but only one, single improved skill and talent. Something as German gets better secondaries, British gets better heal, Russian get longer range, Japanese improve torpedos, so on. No SUPER powers, but a distinctive skill that must be unlocked by playing with all ships in that branch, and only provides the buff to the ships in that branch. So it becomes a requirement to keep a captain's HISTORY, for the ships in the "Career Branch". From the T1 to T10, how much Cmdr XP earned on each ship. The XP requirements for each tier shall be similar to half Cmdr XP, as we have 10 tiers for 19 Commander Levels: T1 > L2, T2 >L4, ..., T10 >L19 (Unlock improved skill) This would be very simple to track, from the "Career Commander" page, showing the achieved XP for each ship/tier in the branch. After the first Career Commander is unlocked with a Branch RESET, it should be possible to create a new Career Commander for each complete branch you own, using the same existing interface to create a commander, except that a Career Commander must be created as L0 and becomes "locked" to a branch - so he keeps XP history for 10 ships! There shall be a cost (Doubloons?) to use this method, and be free, or much cheaper, when creating during a branch reset. These Career Captains must have some distinctive image, either a simple overlay icon, or a different backgroud or uniform color.

I have been grinding out ECXP for my Cunningham captain using all my 21 pointers. Last night before I went to bed, it occurred to me that it would be more profitable to actually use Cunningham since he got all the XP for a match and he would bank an extra 5% in ECXP for me to use on him. I checked the Wiki and this is the way I am reading this but of course, I am prone to old timers. Am I correct thinking that there would be an extra 5% earnings doing it this way? I actually have a bunch of British premium ships so could run them all for a first win bonus too.

Ok so the new ranked sprint system has some good and bad things about it that ppl have expressed. Some ppl are unhappy with the rewards and others are unhappy about the quality of play in gold league. this idea i think helps with the quality of play. Right now if your team wins, you earn a star, If your team losses, no matter how well you play, you can only save a star if you are top otherwise you lose a star. The problem with this system, bad games by players on the winning team earn a star while the good games by players can get punished and at best save star just because they lost. I think this is the reason why the quality of play in gold was what it was. compared to the previous system it is much easier to reach gold than rank 5 due to all the stopping points from bronze and silver. This is why there were alot of red players in gold league and such a big skill gap which is frustrating for competitive play for everyone. Solution A subtle performance based approach - "why not change the the top 7 base xp earners to gain a star regardless if their team wins or losses" this way teams are still incentivised to win because you get more base xp for winning but it also address the problem of 1-2 players on the losing team who have over 1500 base xp and played very well while the bottom 1-2 on the winning team could have less than 600 xp yet they earned a star even though they basically did nothing that match. Bonkers.... With this all 7 players on the winning team could still earn star especially since the base xp boost for winning, this just addresses the games of extreme cases which is quite frequent. "Finally the player with the 8th highest base xp saves star and bottom 6 xp earners lose star regardless of team" Hypothetical result - 1. the quality of play in gold will be improved (not perfect, but improved) 2. toxicity and player frustration could be lowered due to smaller player skill gap 3. the grind to rank out in a sprint will be less daunting and the rewards will be more worthwhile time wise 4. really good games on losing teams have greater value over really bad games on winning teams What do yall think? im sure there could be bigger changes to the star saving system but i think this is one of the roots of the problem with ranked. I personally really like the idea of the sprints and it seems more relaxing to play it. but i think this would make it a lot better. -(added 2/7/21) As an example or a reference point, here is the system for WoT. some ppl complain about his method too, but i like how the system is more dynamic by distinguishing the level of play on winning and losing teams. Pika

Title says it all. I really enjoy playing my UK Ships, but I find they are really crappy at earning XP and Credits. Why? I just finished a game in my Goliath where it was a decent performance and I barely made any $ and XP. I dropped 101.8 k damage of which like 15k was fire. Not a super game but not horribad. Any idea why when I play my conqueror and goliath the XP and Credits are so garbage. I can land 150k on my conqueror and find myself #6 on scoring and have only a mild credit gain. I netted about 80k this match which is horrible. It feels to me like the scoring does not like Fire / HE and that it favors AP hits when scoring and doling out credits. Is this my imagination?

Eu já venho percebendo isso já um tempo, mas essa deixou-me muito decepcionado, foi a mudança no status de desconto na Arv.Tec. A história começa assim, estou desbloqueando uma linha de encouraçado alemã, e estou na classe Gneisenau, faltando pouco XP para desbloquear o Bismarck, que custa 11 000 000, mais com o desconto do Clã, o valor vai para 5 500 000. O que notei dessa vez e posso provar foi a alteração do status desse desconto de "Permanente" para " termina em 2 dias", como assim? Agora que estou chegando perto, vcs estão querendo dificultar? Poxa, serio, fico sem palavras com isso, pode dizer "falha no sistema", ou algum outro argumento, mais esse, a sorte é que tratando de jogo Naval, esse é o melhor, se não, eu parava de jogar. (Um elogio em meio a uma crítica) As outras observações, mais que não posso comprovar, e os tais XP Livre que não contabiliza, afff. Teve uma vez que joguei, se não mim engano, consiguir em uma batalha: auxiliar na captura, conseguir destruir um navio, acertei diversas projeteis , e isso, sem camuflagem e bandeira, ou com aquelas que não afetavam muito o recebimento do XP, e supondo ganhei, 1000 XP Livre, quando eu colocava camuflagem de possibilitava +250% de XP Livre, e bandeira ´´Papa Papa`` 300%, e tinha os mesmos exitos ou parecidos na batalha, ganhava, 200 de XP Livre na partida. Como assim? Deveria ser 550% a mais, 6500 de XP Livre, se o calculo não estiver errado. Eu acho que é muita desonestidade, espero que o problema exposto, seja resolvido, obrigado! Abaixo, esta as imagens em relação ao primeiro problema. Que não é o Bismarck, mais essa alteração no status se encontra em toda linha de encouraçado.

The ship XP no longer shows up in the module section, is very inconvenient to keep switching back and forth to see how much XP you have and how much more you need. Would like this to come back!

A total of 60 hits if you count overpens and such. She took first place though with a great team. Every one survived and all were complimented on a great battle. The Mutsu in Aegis is great fun, the torps are even usable a lot of times. 20190905_205926_PJSB506-Mutsu_37_Ridge.wowsreplay

Does anyone know if the xp I get on early access ships stays on them after the line is released or goes to the T1 or something? I got an Izmail and I'm wondering if I should keep grinding out the Xp to get to the T7 or play something else.

I have played and not recieved rewards after completeing game. I also notice i am not receiving full credits when game is completed as well. example . shows i recieved 136,000 credits but my total only went up 32,000. Anyone else experiencing this.

OK how many of you want the MM to be as follows.... Random MM mechanics = same tier and same average xp average xp can be found in your service record btw. Low xp Premium and Armory ship buyers will also have to climb the xp ladder. There is a bunch of them so they will just have to play against eachother and bot fillers until their average xp improves opening up more full pvp no bot filler random games. this is a poll so dont flame me just vote maybe WG will listen? thanks

Ok, I understand that in order to get a good amount of xp you have to get an array of ribbons and deal a good amount of damage. What I don't understand is that I do those very things and yet I still get crapxp. I've played matches before where I did far less, yet still got better rewards. I've never minded having to grind to get through the tech tree, but I've gotten so close to just stop trying because I have matches like this that makes it take Forever to climb up. I still remember how many matches I had to play just to reach Kongo and Myoko. Not to mention the even slower crawl to New Mexico. I've always tried so hard to get as much xp as I can that I don't even play the game anymore, I just play to get damage just so I can get decent progress on a battleship or cruiser that I don't even like playing. I know part of it is just my capabilities as a player, but it isn't always just me. In that match I was the one who had received the most xp for my team, so everyone else on my team, whether the did damage or not, practically received no rewards. That's not even the first match I've seen like that. I've noticed that many matches I've played the most a team would get is around 9-800 xp. How does anyone make progress with that? Even when I do get above 1500 base xp I still feel like I never really got much further. Sure it wouldnt take too long to reach a 100k xp or so to get to your next ship (especially when you have premium), but thats not even including the hulls you have to research, or the other modules just so you can play the ship where it can actually be effective. All I'm trying to get at is that the xp system never seems consistent, and in the end gives so little progress, especially when it comes to new comers trying to get to their ideal ships. If there is any advice on this I am happy to listen.

In recent weeks I've noticed something odd about my commanders. I have a commander on the Nassau working on 41,000 with 10 points. I have a commander on the Konig also working on 41,000 but only has 8 points. The Konig commander is also farther along in XP than the Nassau commander, so I'm stumped by this.

I've never played a CV match. My preferred ship type is DD but I'm not enjoying the new way I'm forced to play them. So I was wondering if the CV players grinding through the lines can tell me about the experience. I dont need to hear from people that had them all previously and have them all again. I want to know how the grind is now and especially what your impressions are on the low tiers post hotfix .8.0.1 My assumption: - XP seems to be extremely low for CVs per match. This would mean that it would be a long and tedious grind. Since most of XP is based off damage dealt coupled with the fact that WG is doing everything possible to take alpha away from planes post rework (which I disagree with) I would think having high XP games is going to get more difficult...even more so after hotfix. Thoughts on all that? I really dont want to quit this game and the British CV line looks interesting so if you can't beat them join them right?!? In regard to the hotfix I personally think they went too far. It was correct to make AA more continous DOT and less flak bursts but now they need to buff plane HP or give speed/aim time a buff to balance that out to give planes less time over target or more "armor" to absorb the damage. Certainly a step in the right direction overall though and a lot of the hotfix implementation was right on the money.

..just an average game... or was it?

I would like to Dismiss some of the Captians i have and be able to recoup some of their Captian XP and transfer it to Elite Commander Experience to use towards another existing captian of that same nation. I have all regular tech tree ship with their own captians. I Currently have 90 commander's in reserve and 305 ships of which 106 are premiums or event ships(no captians in them, training tech tree captians). Only 9 Premiums with captians are those that don't currently have a regular tech tree as of yet. Of those 90 reserved captians 15 are rotated in or are available for future ship lines like the up coming French DDs. That leave 67 captian that are good for nothing given some countries have completed Tech Tree such as the USA and IJN( All these ships have 10pt+ captians). I think it would be fair that we should receive some credit for unused captian that will never be use. I would love to get full value for them but 75% would be acceptable. All captian have been earn and worth something. Part of the problem is receiving new captian with premium ship. Hello, we use these ships to train current captians most go unused.

Quick question - multiple flags provide different credit value for additional XP based on the flag. If two flags are mounted that provide additional XP for a Commander, example: The Hydra Flag provides +150% of the battle experience and Leviathan Flag gives +100% from the battle. If the Commander XP was 2,300 for a battle - is that 150% x 2,300 = 3,450 then + 100% of 2,300 or 3,450 / or is it calculated as 250% of 2,300 which equals 5,750?

I have seen plenty of matches where the DD wants to avoid the caps and a team loses very badly because of not having a single cap. I have also seen games where there is a huge cap and the enemy team has a ship in and gaining points on it but our DDs/CAs don't want to contest the cap to stop points. How about the game mode Epicenter. A DD has to go in the middle first or the enemy will cap it. Now that the DD is hiding behind an island the DD has no shots at torping or shooting a enemy ship. He is not a cap contestor and will get on xp if the he leaves and does no damage or get no cap. the DD is screwed. ** Both of these situation can be changed very easily.. in clan battles, ranked, other competitive game play ships will go into caps just to stop the points. Here is what I propose- 1 - Give xp to DDs for every 2-4 sec in a cap alone. so if a DD goes into a cap that is uncapped or capped by enemy team he get 10-25 XP per 4 sec. (encourage ships to do what they should be doing) even if he don't capture it he gets xp.. 2 - Remove XP for finishing a capping process. meaning if your in the cap for 40 sec and get the cap. you would of got 100/ 250 (10 xp/ 4 sec). but as other ships get in as your capping they would of got an assisted cap. No longer they get the xp defined above, lets say they got in it 10 sec from capping they would get 20/50 xp. giving the credit to the ships who stayed in cap the longest. 3 - Cap contesting. this can and usually much more dangerous but they can stay in there for a while so this rule helps those in epicenter. for every 4 sec (for simplicity) they get 5 xp. this person usually can't do damage and is fighting for the team by points so they should be rewarded. 4 - As for rewards for Capping, Assisted Capping, and Contesting Caps. set a time that has to be reached of each like this - You get a Solo Cap reward for every 40-50 sec in a cap alone. does not have to be consecutive and can add up to 3-4 caps. limit to 4 per game - You get assisted Cap reward for spending 12 sec consecutively in cap with others. Gain additional Assisted Cap rewards for every 20 more seconds in a cap with others. - You get Contested Cap reward(NEW) for every 20 sec consecutively in cap with the enemy. 5 - Xp for DDs to get cap type XP is 5% more than other ship types. to encourage GG game type and style. The time per XP is up to WG as well as amount of XP. This would be better then what goes on now.. will not be hard to program in either.

There has been a lot of discussion on the WoWs forums on ways to discourage and to reduce the number of BB players who camp and snipe from near their maximum gun range and passive gameplay in general. I have made the following suggestion in several of those threads, but I really needed to put the idea down in the proper place, here in the Suggestion section of the forum, and get some feedback. Here is my suggestion: Increase the amount of XP and credits earned for potential damage. In addition, I also suggest a new Ribbon I would like to call "In Harm's Way" that can be earned for every "X" amount of Potential Damage. I'm not sure what a good number would be but say for ever 250,000 points of Potential Damage a player earns a Ribbon. Further, for every "x" number of "In Harm's Way" ribbons earned, a player gets rewarded "X" number of India Yankee signal flags. An example would be for every 4 "In Harm's Way" Ribbons, which would be 1,000,000 potential damage received, a player would be rewarded with 5 India Yankee signal flags. This would not just apply to BB players as any ship class could earn these increased rewards, although, I do understand that BB players would likely benefit the most from it. I think it would encourage some of the BB camper/snipers to move up and in general, remove some of the passivity experienced in random higher tier matches at tiers 8, 9, and 10. Good or bad idea? Thoughts?

Hello everyone recently i played a game of random i had 4 kills and a devastating strike when the match ended and we won i only got 900 EXP. Why is that? I am confused because i also had flags on can someone explain why i did not get more?