Jump to content

Sander93

Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

    990
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    3372

1 Follower

About Sander93

  • Rank
    Officer Cadet
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Sander93

    What has happend to the Missouri?

    IIRC they also said that there might be a bug with the accuracy module giving a wrong or worse accuracy modifier and that they were looking into that.
  2. Sander93

    do you think games are fixed ??

    Business strategy to subtly make bad players (who make up the majority of the playerbase) win slightly more than they would on their own, to make them more happy so they'll stay around longer or spend more money. Since nowadays countless companies use big data to get an edge or manipulate customers or voters or whatever it really doesn't sound that far-fetched. In WoT there was a system so that newly purchased tanks would get favorable matchmaking (less uptiers) for the first x amount of matches. Don't know if that's still in place but it proves how easy it would be for a company to manipulate games. I'm not saying the game is one big conspiracy theory but the absolute naitivy you guys are showing isn't healthy either.
  3. Sander93

    Ships that need a buff

    I played a few battles in Mahan while grinding for the Fletcher and it was an incredibly good gunboat for its tier with decent self-defense torps. Got about 87k average damage in 18 matches. That was before the smoke changes though.
  4. Sander93

    Ok then, I want Radar Mod on my Missouri

    I know. I meant a mod for increased duration for a useless +8% speed consumable isn't remotely comparable to the mods that increase radar and hydro duration.
  5. Sander93

    Ok then, I want Radar Mod on my Missouri

    How is a modification for a miserable +8% speed boost even remotely comparable to radar and hydro mods?
  6. No it doesn't, which is exactly the problem. 40 plane kills is still an extreme amount for anything that isn't a tier 9/10 AA CA or CV. Do you even realise that in 3442 cruiser battles and 2185 battleship battles, you have only one ship with a max plane kill amount that is over 40? So you think a 1 in 5500 chance to get an achievement is a reasonable requirement? The problem of the Clear Sky achievement is that it is incredibly hard to get even though it is based on a very basic and ever present aspect of the game. Meanwhile the similar achievements High Caliber and Confederate scale for every tier and ship and so should an achievement about shooting down planes. These new requirements will only affect a small number of ships (T9/10 AA CA and CV and maybe US BB) and will still be extremely rare to get for the majority of ships, especially at lower tiers.
  7. Exactly. You don't find it weird you'd need to kill 83% of the total hanger capacity at tier 6 while only 40% will suffice at tier 10? The scaling of this achievement just doesn't make sense, especially compared to other achievements like High Caliber and Confederate.
  8. I think a percentage of total planes killed was the correct way to hand out the award, it just needed a lower requirement. Like 30-40% or just getting the most plane kills of your team with a minimum of like 25% of total enemy hanger capacity. They could even lower the reward to 5 flags if needed. An absolute number requirement just seems weird as only tier 9 and 10 CVs have anywhere near as much hanger capacity needed for an enemy to get 40 plane kills.
  9. Sander93

    Best troll-secondary build for Alsace?

    I thought Aux Armaments mod.1 was generally considered useless since the extra HP for AA mounts is supposedly still not enough to prevent them from being taken out by a single hit. Don't know if secondaries share the same problem, though.
  10. Sander93

    Poll for "X spot on Map mod"

    In regards to the topic that's being discussed it doesn't matter how many ships do or do not have a spotter plane. Because of its advantageous nature the mod shouldn't be allowed even if it only worked for a single ship.
  11. Many people suspect the april fools jokes are being used to test some new features. It's a good way for WG to introduce new mechanics and features without making a big fuss about it. If they are not tests then it indeed seems like a waste of time.
  12. Sander93

    Give all cruisers heal?

    I think giving cruisers heal is a way of fighting symptoms rather than tackling the root of the problem, which is BB overpopulation. I think cruiser vs cruiser/dd/cv balance is pretty spot-on and the only problem cruisers have is that they take too much damage from battleships. But I think that's mainly because there are too many battleships per match. Reduce battleships to 3 max per team and the performance of cruisers will increase because they'll start to face a more balanced opposition.
  13. Sander93

    Target Aquisition Mod vs Concealment Mod

    I know. Sorry, that's what I meant.
  14. Sander93

    Target Aquisition Mod vs Concealment Mod

    Yes since Hindenburg is a pure brawler I wanted to improve her mobility. While steering gears 3 isn't very special at doing that it does open up the fourth slot for propulsion mod 2. Prop mod 2 allows you to decrease and increase speed much faster than normal which means you can actively use this during fights (stop-move-stop-move-stop-move-et cetera). It's very micro intensive but when done right it makes it incredibly hard for enemies to hit you because they can't properly predict your speed.
  15. Sander93

    Cyclonic iritation

    More often than not cyclones hit just when CA/BB have established a proper battle line at ~15km range apart and everyone can spend the next five minutes doing nothing but watching fog and water while trying to get within the cyclone visibility range. It's usually incredibly boring and annoying. I guess cyclones are somewhat a refreshing mechanic, but they should really increase the visibility range. Somewhere around 12-14km would be good. That would still force ships to close the distance but it wouldn't take as long to get within view range. And it gives BB's less of an edge.
×