Jump to content

Jexter

Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

    160
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1826

About Jexter

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia
  1. Jexter

    Cleveland is soooooo OP

    Thanks for the detailed answers Dropsiq, much appreciated. Only played a handful of games in the Cleve, but I can't seem to adjust to that high-arc shell trajectory, my hit % is beyond appalling. I've certainly been drawn into picking the wrong fights too, should just focus on setting BBs on fire ; trying to hit those evasive CAs and DDs with that high arc is a pain in the [edited]. Furutaka, on the other hand, is proving to be a blast. Those 203mm guns make AP a viable option, and the 10km torps can come in handy as well.
  2. Jexter

    Cleveland is soooooo OP

    Were there changes made to the Pepsi/NO/Balto as well? I used to play these a lot in CBT and quite enjoyed it, but I'm starting to wonder if it's worth the grind if they were rendered useless...
  3. Jexter

    Cleveland is soooooo OP

    Unlocked her only yesterday after playing her a longgg time ago in CBT, and I was like "daf***'s going on??" Totally unaware that they'd changed the shell trajectory/velocity, surprised the hell out of me. You're right, she feels really lackluster now compared to what she used to be (granted, she was totally OP). Too bad but oh well.
  4. Jexter

    Patch 0.4.0.1 Carrier gameplay issues

    Not going to comment on the CV particulars as I do not play the class, and have no intention of playing it. However, I do agree that something needs to be done about the map borders. Its current implementation breaks immersion (no pun intended) and is notoriously abused, by all ship classes. I think the best way to deal with it would be to add a buffer area on the edges (instead of the current 'hard' border) with a warning to turn around and re-enter the operational area within n seconds or be 'lost at sea' (ship sunk). The soft buffer would likely then just have to be large enough to allow for standard plane control (planes themselves would not be subjected to the warning/timer, only ships would).
  5. Jexter

    Patch Notes 0.3.1.4 explained with Danny Volkov

    So, this is more or less ™ a buff to CV & BB, and a nerf to DD & CA. Good thing AW EA is starting again today.
  6. Jexter

    The TK system clearly isn't harsh enough.

    Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant but I misworded it. It should read "when a pink hits a friendly, all damage is directly applied to the pink, and none to the friendly being hit", regardless of the hit being voluntary or not. And if pinkoes are afraid players will sail voluntarily in the path of their torpedoes just for spite, well, tough luck, should've thought about it before turning pink.
  7. Jexter

    The TK system clearly isn't harsh enough.

    Sorry to hear about your misadventures, Tajj. I'm glad I have yet to come across one of these [edited] in game. After reading your report, wouldn't it make more sense that instead of the damage being reflected back to him (with a delay, apparently), it is directly transferred to him? I.e. when a pink targets a friendly, all damage is directly applied to the pink, and none to the friendly being targeted. The innocent target only acts as a proxy. Would that be possible? Damage done (to himself) would obviously still be added to his friendly damage total, until the ban threshold is reached.
  8. Jexter

    Build your own gamemode!

    Class-specific modes: 1. Line battle - BBs only - Ocean map - Spawn in a line formation, with the highest tiers at the rear - Each team has to follow a pre-set route (could be in the form of intermediate capture points) - Team with the highest HP % (based on starting team HP) when reaching the final capture waypoint wins. Ships that have failed to go through one of the waypoints are not counted. - Opposing routes are designed to parallel each other at typical engagement range 2. Convoy - CAs only on defense, CVs only on offense - CAs must escort convoy from point A to point B - CVs must sink at least half of the convoy ships (i.e. halving the convoy's total HP by 50% isn't a win if more than half the ships survive) - CAs spawn with the convoy - CVs spawn out of view range, in random locations - CAs can attempt to leave convoy unprotected to hunt CVs, or choose instead to focus on providing AA cover for the convoy - CVs can attempt to reduce AA cover by targeting CAs or choose instead to focus on sinking convoy ships 3. Troops rescue (CTF) - DDs only - 3 rescue pick-up zones (any balanced island map can work) - DDs must rescue troops by stopping in one of the zones for 1 to 5 seconds (full stop) - the longer you are stopped the more troops you embark - Troops must be delivered back to home base (i.e. spawn point) via the same system (full stop to disembark, the more troops you carry the longer you have to stop) - DDs carrying troops are unmarked (cannot be distinguished from others) - First team at 100 rescues, or team with the highest number of rescues at timer expiration, wins
  9. Jexter

    Damage Model pre and post patch 0,3,1

    0.3.1 because it indirectly buffed cruisers & destroyers (HE) while making battleships more interesting and slightly more skill-based (armor & angling).
  10. Jexter

    The real problem with carriers

    Seriously, what are you smoking? I just did tell you how air superiority was beneficial. Keeping your DDs unspotted, your BBs safe from aerial attacks, making your ships harder to spot, that's not helping the team as a whole?
  11. Jexter

    The real problem with carriers

    Negating TB/DB threats, negating air scouting, avoiding your team's DDs to be detected by air, etc. In other words, keeping enemy planes grounded.
  12. Jexter

    The real problem with carriers

    Are you serious? You want to compare XP earned in BBs with XP earned in 3 DDs, 2 of which are tier 2 and 3 jap DDs and the third being the Grem... You want to compare? Let's compare: fnord_disc (thread starter): CVs 1808 avg xp, DDs 985 JohnHusky (another notorious CV player): CVs 2077, DDs 1160 azell: CVs 1869, DDs 1138 etc.
  13. Jexter

    The real problem with carriers

    What? How does having air superiority not benefit my team? Do you know what air superiority is?? I want to reward carriers for doing something useful other than their current, imbalanced damage output. And dynamic loadouts will only be plain and systematic IF only damage is rewarded. As it is, because of the current reward system, people are shunning USN carriers in favor of IJN. Of the 3 available loadouts, people only ever choose the full bomber one - why? Because it's the best way to deal ship damage, because only damage is rewarded. So much for variety.
  14. Jexter

    The real problem with carriers

    Ship damage is important because it's the only thing being rewarded in game at the moment (along with kills). I just find it imbalanced that BECAUSE a class has probably the highest survivability in game, it should ALSO have the highest damage output. There are other means to reward carriers: air superiority (killing planes including scouts), scouting (revealing ships), spotted damage, etc. This would also be beneficial to cruisers and destroyers, by the way. Combine this with the ability to pick your carrier loadout dynamically and it would allow for more creative gameplay - IF rewards aren't limited to ship damage, obviously it wouldn't work otherwise. Ideally, I'd say let carriers pick a full complement of planes (x fighters, y DBs, z TBs) and allow them to launch squadrons as they see fit (5 planes per squadron, max n squadrons in the air at one time - say 2 at tier IV, 5 at tier IX-X), until all planes are depleted. So for instance, Langley would be able to carry say, 35 planes, and Essex 90, the composition being at the discretion of the player (one slider for each plane type, each step of the slider a multiple of 5). Same for IJN carriers. If you want to introduce difference between nations, slightly adjust the abilities of planes (for instance, USN could have slightly better fighters, and IJN slightly better TBs - that's all fine-tuning). All I'm saying is, there has to be better adjustments to be made than either nerfing a class into oblivion or giving it free rein over the entire game.
  15. Jexter

    The real problem with carriers

    But see, that's precisely my beef. Any other class can live just as long(er), but in order to deal damage they have to expose themselves and thus reduce their life expectancy. I think that CVs, BECAUSE they have a better life expectancy, should deal less "alpha" damage (or damage per bombing run if you want), so that their damage over time is normalized with that of other classes. In a sense, it goes with what fnord_disc is arguing here.
×