World of Warships - I Sank Your Waifu 

Calculate that to US dollars and then I'd say, maybe XD

* per game well really per token which you can get in packs of 10 100 or 200

TAKE MY MONEY

Girls und panzer was already a sign of his discent, once you go weeb, you cant go back.

flamu is next

psht. Blue headband with leaf symbol.

**poi**

Dude already has a shelf of Sabers I think he's well and truly gone And I approve

Also, the information "Player NICKNAME has been banned" contains nothing that needs to be protected.

A ToS doesn't allow a company to break the law, and will still land the company in hot water. Many companies think the ToS allows it, but it doesn't.

@@BenJamin-en3jb A nickname is often either, reused across multiple locations, or a name often used by different people, not to mention some people using their actual names. So still personal information, hence Datalaw protection.

@@Nukedk Correct, but a ToS can give permission for data to be shared, and the law is not then broken.

@@Nukedk Doesn't matter, a nickname is a piece of information you chose to publicly disclose. Different kind of thinking, Wargaming gives us all kinds of info about a player based on their nick. Why should the info that the player is currently banned be more personal than the rest? It doesn't help you identify the actual person, or anything.

same

lol

You filthy-minded bastard, LOL

I think it should be lol.

How do you think he sank her? ;)

Its a glorious thing~ Utterly glorious!

Yeah, seems like BS that they can’t say the guy was banned when you have examples of games like Azur Lane that will name and shame the cheaters quite gleefully. They aren’t giving out RL details about the person.

I'm guessing that the Difference stems from where the Company is located. Wargaming is polish I think and therefore falls under EU Data Protection Laws while Azur Lane is what? Korean? Chinese? I still think that giving out a Username doesn't break Data Protection. After all, who actually uses his real Name in the Internet.

@@DerPolygonianer me

​@@DerPolygonianer Wargaming.net is based in Belarus originally, and Cyprus internationally. Belarus is not in the EU, which is unfortunate for the Belorussians, because they could probably kick Lukashenko out more easily if they were. And he'd definitely be more likely to face charges for his human rights abuses. Lots of companies set up international corporate offices in Cypress because it IS in the EU, but has nice relaxed tax and finance laws. Azur Lane is, in fact, Chinese. Poland ain't perfect, but it's earned a better rep in the game industry (and in general) than that!

He literally said exactly that.

James Findlay Steam do it, so there shouldn’t be.

cos they do not understand what a personal data is. Even though GDPR law in EU quite explicit on it ... in game nick is not personal data, if they posted e-mail address with ban info at that point they would breach the law, with just nick no ...Also telling we are going to limit services provided to them is not personal data ... Since US laws on this matter are more lax then EU's not sure what they mumble about ... :)

@@klonik79 Ubisoft doesn't seem to have any issue of broadcasting the names of accounts that have been banned for toxic behavior or hacking, even people you haven't ever seen. Heck, you can see those messages appear in pro league games too.

War Thunder posts a list of banned users every few weeks, no reason war gaming can't do the same thing.

Why are people allowed to hide their profiles?

Checking Jingles' counting.

HERE HERE !! in the UK those backwards sods say "MATHS" :P

@@DrakeHunter324 we never did get to directly hold him accountable. Though we did throw a bunch of egg in England's face for his stupidity.

"I Sank Your Waifu" -> I_sunk_your_Waifu

same chuckles that plays Warband?

If WOWS did this they could possibly use the Kraken or something similar.

@@nadjlegos656 Have the kraken tentacles reach up out of the water and pull you ship under? GREAT idea! Troll is looking at his screen trolling and suddenly his client exits with no explanation. The rest of us see the kraken animation and hear a ship being crumpled up and pulled under.

Come on it's Jingles, We all know he's a bit crap it's why we stick around.

Did he call you "Dave" again? XD

Awesome game, man! You carried your team hard to victory.

You ever wonder if we gathered all the people that were called "Dave" to greet him.

Actually Jingles got it wrong by writing it correctly. ^^

worldofwarships.com/en/community/accounts/1021868212-Invexus/!/pvp/overview/

Good

Hopefully that ban carries across all Wargaming games and not just WoWS. Also hopefully the chode had thousands of dollars of premium tanks/ships that he no longer has access to.

Invexus does NOT appear to be banned as of may 7th 17:45 CET

According to na.wows-numbers.com/player/1021868212,Invexus/ he didn't play a single match in April or May so far.

No. They deserve no mercy. An atlanta withouta Citadel is not something deserving ANY mercy whatsoever.

Lies... lol

Dude I thought I was the only one. I thought it was my stomach XD

@@ianfairfield8373 I thought that too, but I went back to the beginning of the video to see the name of that Akizuki player so I could search for him to see if he has played any battles recently (he has not, apparently, so He hopefully got what he deserved), and when I jumped back I heard it again xD

@@TheExecutorr *Akatsuki It's #JinglesEffect

Swore that was my stomach too o.o

@@Pilvenuga thanks. It's all the fault of that bloody kitten ^^

there has always been one. you just had to enable it before

APFSDS scattered among the random HESH shells

@@r.slaurent437 NSDAP randomly scattered and now disbanded all over the world...

Does it come with glock mags???

got 69 likes, fellas we made it

WG just cant be arsed looking into bad behaviour of any kind. It costs money and time for no reward on their part and this is why they will never seriously do anything about it. Its not profitable and its less hassle just to do nothing at all. Smoke and mirrors....

Yup.. It's a shame that Jingles bought into it :(

@ Flaming I3unne Flaming I3unne: You turned 30!?! *_Oooh! You have to goto CAROSEL!!!_* Here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-RTGvY5Vs998.html

Happy birthday!

Happy Birthday!!

Happy birthday fellow salt miner

Happy birthday!

While driving you insane at the same time

@@alphawolf1786 depends on your wifu, though the level of craziness is more random than lootboxes

@@HuMaNise34 bruh you ain't lying on the craziness

@@alphawolf1786 female friends can teach you alot.........wives are no different in that department.

@@HuMaNise34 IF you have enough female friends, you will enjoy being single, and the ability to go home to solo sanctuary lol.

The only thing more accurate than enemy fire, is friendly fire.

I've seen people farm Kraken, High Caliber, and Confederate awards all day. Arguably the most prestigious award in the game is the Solo Warrior. "Stand alone against at least 4 enemy ships and win the battle" is a task that nobody wants.

@@cracklingvoice in nearly 10k games i have only two of those myself. And damn they where hard work games.

@@andreasmuller4666 I managed to get one in my Perth, still no idea how though and I've only got about 2k games under my belt

@@dominicrobertson7626 i g.ot over 9k games and 2 solo warriors in that time. One with the Scharnhprst when she came out first (and no one knew what a monster she can be) and one in a weird CV match

Random english-as-a-second-language question: Isn't "sank" the correct form? (Which is probably why Jingles defaulted to that...) At least I learned that "sunk" is the past participle, so it's either an adjective or perfect tense (i.e. "I HAVE sunk your waifu.") - while sank is past tense. So without an auxiliary verb it should be "sank" - or am I wrong somewhere here?

@@QemeH You are correct; however, the name is a reference to a common misuse of "sunk" in relation to the board game Battleship (e.g. "You sunk my battleship!").

Well, European Union's new super strict data protection laws came to be year and a half back, so I'm no sure about how those affect WG's behaviour in this matter. Sure it shouldn't affect NA servers (also, I don't know how the laws are in any NA country), but maybe they have adopted uniform policies for the sake of simplicity. Not really sure would telling about an online account's ban break those laws though. Either they're not taking any risks or it provides them a good excuse not to tell because they don't want to.

@@wombat4191 Telling about a ban wouldn't break data privacy laws at all. Data privacy/protection laws are ment to protect your personal data and quite frankly an account name is not a form of personal data. Unless the EU is just that retarded.

I'm not buying the data protection argument here. If WarThunder can list the nicknames of players who were permabanned for illegal client modifications, why wouldn't World of Warships? Nicknames are not personal data. Emails are, but you're not featuring emails. It really does smell like trying to avoid scrutiny players could apply to customer support actions Example: warthunder.com/en/news/6151-countermeasures-against-forbidden-modifications-april-en

It's a bullshit answer used as an excuse not to send ANY response to tickets. This way it's impossible to say whether tickets were processed or not. Behaving like an asshole in a PUBLIC game is a PUBLIC event. By saying that X (which is a public, well-known PSEUDONYM) broke Y rules (which are public) in a particular game (which is a public event) and consequently got the sanction Z (as detailed by the aforementioned public EULA) is NOT "disclosing private information". It's being transparent. You just have to see how long it's taking the dev team to add the minimap to the list of blacklisted interactions to realize the support team, which is most likely mainly made out of underpaid temp workers who hate their job, just don't give a DAMN about your user experience. All they want to do is tell their bosses they've met their daily ticket closure quotas, and if no one can tell when they closed the ticket without even reading it it's all the better. Incidentally, it's probably the reason why they ask for a replay, even though I suspect they might have to keep the chat logs around for legal reasons anyway.

@@GigAnonymous what the fuck are you on about, im pretty sure you dont have the slightest idea of what actually happens at wows HQ, unless you've been there, youre just assuming things and blurting them out as false facts.

@@menofwar-os1wi actually, he's spot on, given the displayed behavior pattern of WG. Unless you have another more logical explanation for the completely WRONG claims about Data Protection laws and the abysmal customer service record?

"Data protection laws" Is just a excuse ..A poor one at that. The laws do not protect what WG is trying to say they do. Its just an excuse to not do anything.

It's definitely on WGs end, War Thunder Devs Gaijin have a monthly (ish) ban list that they say specifically which users have been banned.

Unless your war gaming and it costs you time and money for now reward in which case you continue to do fuck all......

Terrifying indeed, this is the reason I play wows! That rof is straight nuts and so fun!

EU. World of Warships is a Russian game, but the majority of the players are in the EU. (As opposed to World of Tanks, where the majority of players are Russian.)

Right but the issue was sent to customer service NA. That's in Chicago, IL. Hence the joke.

@@HowardMoth I would presume that Wargaming has the same customer service policies worldwide, because it would be simpler that way. Meaning that they'd mostly follow EU rules everywhere.

Actually no. While typically branches of international companies follow the same guidelines there's nothing in place to hold them to it. Case and point, you may recall the drama more than a year ago when WoT released the Chrysler and a popular community contributor negatively reviewed it. Drastic differences between how EU and NA handled the issue.

No, WG NA is the entity in charge of the NA server, and it is a distinct entity from WG (a Russian company). WG NA has to follow US, and has zero responsibility to follow EU law. And they certainly have distinctly different customer service departments, as running a single one would be a logistical accounting nightmare, trying to figure out who pays for what.

Or flambass vids

Compl3te Control which episode was that again?

@@patrickhaarz5629 If it is the one I am thinking of it would be episode 7 ( ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3qAlQCPSqsE.html ) which is were we "got unfair plane, he kemp bush"

@@RandomPerson_6 Actually, this is the one I was talking about ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-NJ-hFzddv5Y.html

ikr

IRL, that was the normal reload. Wg nerfed it to 5 seconds

Yeah, all I could say as he opened up on that last BB... Holy SHIT !!!....it's just a rain of fire...constant...and *POP* there he goes lol

I agree, especially when the Colorado's 5"/51 calibre guns, which should easily outrange the Atlanta's inferior weapons, don't even fire.

More Tea Please I have played a game in which there were monthly announcements containing a list of banned people, cheaters and the like. I wonder if Asian policies are different to WG NA’s American policies in a way that allows the reporting of singular identities to the public?

Historically Small/Mid Caliber Guns had proven useless against Battleships, only when one ignores Yellow River, Tsushima, Guadalcanal, Surigao Straight. If you fire a hundred exploding shells at a Battleship's non-vital/unarmored parts in a timely manner, then a great many of the Crew will be dead, the Steering Gear, Rudder, or Propellers potentially broken, The rangefinders/optics/radio masts will likely all be smashed, and the wooden decks, secondary ammunition or anything else flammable above the waterline will burn uncontrollably, and if that fire is near the air uptakes it will render the engine rooms uninhabitable, or if it's near the Barbettes, It could set off the magazines. Battleships are strong, but in an age of modern weapons armor alone isn't enough to allow one to waltz into a fortified anchorage like a fox in a hen-house the way the CSS Virginia did at Hampton Roads (1862), and if/when Battleships get into a close-quarters fight against opponents with a higher rate of fire and torpedoes, It cannot be expected to go their way.

@@bskorupk Battleships are worthless in-game because their accuracy has been nerfed into the ground, getting a full broadside off at close range shouldn't be the impossible feat it is in WOWS. See HMS Warspite for further info on why they shouldn't be missing at close range. All a Battleship can do is get hit & hope to RNGesus for a citadel.

@@KamikazKid , which line are you playing? To be fair, German BBs are not that accurate beyond secondary range and do tend to scatter pretty good. IJN and USN BBs do have decent accuracy at range. I haven't played any BBs in the RN line yet. That being said, RNGesus can say no, no matter how close you are and you do occasionally hit a bad RGN run where you can hit anything. My luck with shot runs the entire gambit. On the rare occasion I miss perfectly aimed shots at less than 2km. Other times I can get a citadel or two blind firing a cruiser in a smokescreen. RNGesus giveth and RNGesus taketh away.

@@KamikazKid The main thing that annoys me with Battleships is that Basics of Survivability is a Tier 3 skill and not a Tier 1 skill, as for Accuracy long-range misses tend to force enemies of all types to scatter like ants, and although not nearly as accurate as cruisers, Battleships can be made to work properly if one keeps in mind the slightly absurd and esoteric "Age of Empires Logic" ballistics, in that if one either doesn't "target" (with the little symbol), or simply changes target after firing, the shots will artificially disperse to a greater degree than if the enemy ship is targeted for the entirety of the process, furthermore, it's harder to adjust for the fall of shot because badly aimed shots will artificially disperse more than properly aimed ones. BB's are not "useless in-game" by any stretch, but require a great deal of skill to use, unless one is trying to rush in with secondaries like an ironclad, which only works properly when done en-masse in low-mid tier battleships.

@@dennisuerling899 Well I'm talking all lines, you shouldn't be missing half your BB shots at 5 km, American Civil War cannons being aimed by line of sight could hit at that distance, but a Battleship with a lead computing gun sight misses half to 3/4 of its shots. That's some great historical accuracy there. I think there should be two accuracy tables for one for line of sight distance, and one for long range RNGesus due to gun dispersion.

Also in csgo and tf2

The EU has different laws the the US

While true, WG's "explanation" is pure, 100% bullshit. Nothing in GDPR (or the other data protection laws) prevents a person's PUBLIC account name from being named and banned publicly. It's not protected information, and notifying people of actions that are taken against that account are not in any way private data. I do this for a living. WG is simply wrong, and it's a bullshit answer.

steam have more experience with handling the eu data/consumer protection laws. Data protection law is there to protect user data from being abused, sold or leaked in such ways that it can hurt said users experience. There is however a loophole in this protection and that is if the user behaves in such ways that the user contract gets nullified.....or put in gamer term vac/permanent banned. This loophole also allows companies to signal x is criminal warnings to other users but only after sufficent diligence and measures have been taken ( interneal investigation, police involvement etc ). Even then there are limitations to how much that can be signaled. For example you can't out a suspects name in a newspaper or " housewifes of chicago's child abuser register" etc until there is a judgement from a judge and even then homeadress etc of said person might still be protected from several registers ( they would still be in the police one though and the police have long memmory). Hence denied future employment in fields where that person might be deemed less welcome. As a news organization you can however write about the ongoing investigation of x person as long as you don't behave like a witchhunt. Long story short, It is still being handled but the small guy might not hear about it all the time.

Friendly Fire is actually a good thing, amazingly enough. Image if it wasn't there - now think about all the situations where you could abuse it to the detriment of the enemy. The most obvious is to shoot torp spreads willy-nilly, knowing that only the enemy could get hurt. That would let you spam torps into a BB brawl. Same goes for gunfire - FF means you can't just blast away, using a friendly ship as a meat shield.

Some others games used to have it, but players actually abuse it on order to avoid certain very good players. I think if this was implemented a lot of people would just use to it block any CV captain they encountered.This would result in CV captains waiting for any game much longer than ever before.

Pretty sure WoW Guys missunderstand that. Personal data would be the E-Mail-Adress. GamerTag is not a personal data.

That's precisely what you can't usually do, naming the specific account that has been banned. I can understand they don't want to open themselves up for any liability. But a better explanation as to how to report people + replay submission would be nice. I had to dig around to find replay files (not to report someone, to send to jingles).

@@Swordie100 I still don't understand why revealing the name of the account is an issue. They don't reveal names, addresses, e-mails, etc. Accounts name is the info that is available to the public anyway.

yes we are, indeed.