Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'xp'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • World of Warships - News and Information
    • News And Announcements
    • Updates and PTS
    • Developer's Corner
    • Community Volunteer Programs
  • Feedback and Support
    • Game Support and Bug Reporting
    • Player Feature and Gameplay Suggestions
    • Game Guides and Tutorials
  • General WoWs Discussion
    • General Game Discussion
    • Discussions about Warships
    • Player Modifications
  • Off Topic
    • Historical Discussions and Studies
    • Off-Topic
  • International Forums
    • Foro en Español
    • Fórum Brasileiro

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 25 results

  1. I am trying to find the XP breakdown of what ribbons give what amount or how the end result reward is formulated. If this is posted I do apologize. I noticed that I never really allowed that to gauge if I had a good game. As sometimes I had a good game just defending a couple objectives but not tons of damage. You know the random situations where you might not have the highest ribbon count, but you were a playmaker that decided the match. I hope I'm explaining that well enough. Thanks ahead of time!
  2. I don't understand it. Do I need to get 2388 xp exactly?? Or do I need to gain over 2388? Because I've done that. If it is the former, I'm pretty mad because I just had a 2387 game
  3. 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
  4. FairWindsFollowingSeas

    Is Ägir Worth the FXP?

    Hi all! I'm curious, for those who have Ägir, if they enjoy playing her & believe it was worth the FXP. I am getting close to 1 mil FXP and was wondering if I should get Ägir, or save the FXP to work on Research Bureau regrinds. (Siegfried or Yolo Emilio... ) For the record I have Alaska, Friesland, Småland & Hayate; I love them all and play them frequently. Azuma doesn't really interest me too much. I wish WG would allow "rentals" for premium ships, so you can try it out for a few rounds to see if it's something you would like to add to your ship collection before you throw down your hard-earned resources/doubloons/FXP. They did that for Kaga & Saipan a while back, I thought it was a great idea. Anyways, if anyone has Ägir and loves it, hates it, or is just "meh" about it, let me know! Fair winds and following seas!
  5. 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?
  6. A Plea to Wargaming: consider having carriers score more XP for their successful aerial attacks I'm finding carriers a pretty severe grind, especially seeing that the game has you skip a level to get to the next Tier-up carrier in many/most cases (so, instead of needing around 65,000 XP to go from T4 to T5, you need around 161,000 XP to go from T4 to T6 as there is no T5 carrier, for example). It's difficult/time-consuming to get that XP -- both for the ship and for the captain -- due to numerous reasons. Right off the bat: 1.) You have to have the right "load out" when your plane leaves the carrier. Want to hit that destroyer? Probably need to have missiles ready. The CA or BB? Either torps or bombs will work. CV? I'd try torps or missiles -- you don't have to brave the AA for as long as with bombs, since you can drop the torps/missiles at a distance. BUT.... What if the ship gets sunk before you reach it? Or it dodges into smoke? Or it ends up inside a group of ships with terrific AA? Then you're stuck with using the sub-optimal ordinance for another ship, OR you can simply return to the ship and try again. Meanwhile, the game may END before you get back into the "optimal" ordinance attack. 2.) You have to (safely) "approach" the target. This may mean you have to brave the AA fire of one or more other ships along your flight path. Or, you have to endure or dodge the fighter patrol the enemy carrier has laid down. Or your target may get sunk before you reach it, end up in smoke, end up inside a group of ships with good AA, or the game may end first. 3.) There's an optimal "attack run" you are trying to achieve with each ordinance you are carrying, and you want to try to get it to maximize damage. It's best -- scoring most number of hits and getting most damage -- to attack with torps and missiles from the perpendicular (side). But with bombs, it's best to attack along the longitudinal axis (length) of the ship to score the most hits. While you fly about trying to get into that attack run, again your target may get sunk before you reach it, end up in smoke, end up inside a group of ships with good AA, or you may run into other ships' AA, or the game may end first. 4.) Once in your optimal attack run, you have to survive your intended victim's AA fire. True for all attacks (surface vessels and planes), but planes have miniscule health, and die like flies. Not so much surface ships. 5.) After having survived the defensive AA, you need to have an accurate attack. Admittedly I've only worked with carriers up to T6, but missiles, torps and bombs all seem to have a bit of a "spread" or "dispersion" no matter how accurately I feel (or it appears) I've dropped them. PLUS you only have a VERY LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME to drop off your ordinance once you are in your attack run, something VERY different from standard surface vessel attacks (where you can hold fire to watch a foe come out of its turn and present a broadside or "bow on" profile to you). 6.) Finally, your air attacks get weaker/worse as the game progresses and more of your aircraft get shot down (VERY different from surface vessels!). This is a real heartbreaker, as once you get 1-2 planes in your attack groups, AA usually shreds them before you can complete ANY attack. Plus, there's no way to "repair" the planes/air groups to bring them back to "full strength" -- something you CAN do to guns and torps when they get disabled/destroyed on a surface vessel. So your air attacks end up becoming weaker and weaker as the game wears on -- something that really doesn't happen to surface vessels. With a surface vessels you simply fire your ordinance (artillery or torps), wait for the reload, and repeat this action, again and again. For aircraft, to make ONE attack you must: a. select the correct ordinance for a future attack; b. fly to the target without getting shot down; c. get into your optimal attack run without getting shot down; d. survive the defender's AA fire; e. have an accurate attack (may RNGesus be with you); f. still have a decent number of attacking aircraft to get a decent amount of damage. Since all these things work (in combination!) to limit carriers' planes offensive abilities, I think WoWs should consider _doubling_ the amount of XP given to aircraft attacks (not carriers firing their secondaries, or ramming). This would reduce the grind of playing carriers, and might encourage more people use them (out of curiosity, just what percentage people in WoWs DO play carriers versus other ship types?). Plus, this would not make carriers "overpowered" in that I'm not saying increase the damage they do in any way, nor am I calling for improved flight/attack mechanics. Nope, leave it all the same, just increase the amount of XP awarded for plane-on-ship attacks/damage. Yes, I am a noob, and I am probably a fairly unskilled CV commander, Be that as it may, I've never EVER seen -- in 7 months of WoWs gameplay now -- a Carrier be top scorer in ANY game. Nor second highest scorer. (I have seen them appear as third-highest scorer, however. Maybe twice, or three times?) Just a suggestion for consideration.
  7. Most of us Ole Sea Dawgs are pretty familiar with the finer points on earning credits and XP, FreeXP & CommanderXP - Quite honestly, with the constant addition of improved camo, signal flags, clan base bonuses and more , it has never been so easy to earn this stuff. On this 5th anniversary, I was thinking back to saving and grinding that 375k Freexp for Nelson - it took me 6 months or more! Now, that can be done on a weekend like this one right now if you use the right consumables on the right ships! There is actually a lot to the XP system and maxxing it out, so I decided to throw together a quick video detailing how you can get decent rewards even without the Fabled Missouri. These were back to back games 2 days ago, and are hardly anything Special, but very representative to what players can earn per match these days Besides the credits , XP & FreeXP you see on this screen, the commander XP in all 3 of those is near 50k - really good games, i have broken 65k with the right combinations. At the bottom - I have added a link to a Video I put together to help everyone get games that reward like this - particularly during these rare 200% first win weekends - If any of you have additional advice for the player base, I would welcome you add to the conversation & Feel free to add your good games screenshots through this weekend here Also ! Good Luck to you!
  8. 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.
  9. 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!
  10. 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
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. nastydamnanimal

    MM rework POLL !!

    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
  14. SteelShadow105


    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.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. Elo_J_Fudpucker

    Z-46 - XP Machina

    ..just an average game... or was it?
  18. 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.
  19. 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?
  20. 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.
  21. 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?
  22. fruitcake2014

    XP gain

    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?
  23. People claim there's an XP bonus when a lower tier ship damages an upper tier one. The simple fact of the matter is that a bonus doesn't exist unless it's clearly apparent to the players. There is no reason being undertiered in a match should be something people beshrew. It could easily be changed to seem like an opportunity rather than a curse. In the battle results screen, add an XP and credits bonus for ships that are 1 or 2 tiers down in a battle. Maybe +10% for 1 tier, +20% for 2. (modified, of course, by premium) This would definitely help damper a bit of the MM complaints we see so much and it's trivial to do. If there's an economy concern, just take the "hidden" xp bonus and make it unhidden so people can see it.
  24. Do bottom tier players get an XP bonus? I have heard essentially folklore about this ... no confirmation. In the spirit of being open and encouraging players to not exit out of a game; a definitive statement from WG would be nice. Even better would be if WoWS told a player : "Tier V in a Tier VII match you get +x% XP bonus"
  25. anonym_MbpaxbbAUblh

    How can I do 0 damage to a ship?

    The emerald took one torpedo hit yet it shows 0 damage. Why is that?