Jump to content

m4inbrain

Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

    662
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    501

About m4inbrain

  • Rank
    Officer Cadet
  • Insignia
  1. m4inbrain

    Since buying the cleveland, my winrate and k/d have plummeted.

    You got some numbers to back that up, or are you just blindfiring and hoping that people actually believe that the deck armor of Aobas etc holds up against long range plunging AP fire of a Cleveland? Sidenote: i know for a fact that it doesn't. So i'd like to know where this comes from.
  2. m4inbrain

    Battleships?

    Nah. It's fine. But keep assuming that you do everything right, and it's purely the ship. PS: even a shitty player like me can do four times your damage and twice your hitrate. Think about it, and ask yourself if the ship is the sole problem.
  3. m4inbrain

    Dissapointed for the third time

    I guess it's clear what you want to say, but it doesn't change the fact that it's wrong. Every single parse of stats, of whatever sort, shows that these ships are underperforming. And that's not due to people not trying because people said they're crap - it's because they're crap, heavily underperforming especially compared to their respective other-nation-counterpart. That's parsed stats, numbers that you can look at and see that the colorado has less survivabiltiy, avg damage and whatnot compared to other ships even on lower tiers (iirc, it's in the same ballpark as the Kongo). And in terms of the colorado, there's nothing to suggest to make it work, because the biggest problem is the dispersion. You simply don't hit with it. Now one could say "get closer, where dispersion is not so bad" - and that's where the other problem kicks in: the nonexisting survivabilty. You can't snipe on range, you can't brawl. There's nothing left, that's why people suggest to jump it via free-xp. And without substantial buffs in some form, that won't change - it's not an attitudeproblem. It's an objectively bad ship. Not like the M3 Lee, hated by many people - it's not bad, if played right. Don't rush, use corners to poke your gun around, play a bit like a TD - it even has a decent top gun. There's nothing like that to say for the colorado, and that's what i mean: it's objectively an incredibly bad ship. That being said, you can (circumstantial) make the Izumo work, every blue moon. The fact that you basically auto-angle to get all your guns on target is a plus, for example. There's ways to make it work - as long as there's no carrier in the enemy team, or you get hunted by CAs. So it's less bad than the colorado, but still not even remotely comparable to all the other ships in the line. Many words, sorry - i'm not trying to talk you down, but you need to understand that many people tried the colorado (including me, in CBT and PTS), and they all were frustrated. For a reason. And no good-will or whatever is going to change that, you can't make a ship work just by changing your opinion about it. And that's what i meant: it's objectively bad, underperforming. A bit like the Maus back in the days, where literally everyone could shoot through the gunmantle because "wg-reasons". It was unplayable until they fixed it. You can't work around some things, like people shooting through your gunmantle - you have to point your gun at them eventually, and that meant all your armor doesn't mean anything anymore, because even auto-aimer exactly hit the gunmantle. Same with colorado: the downsides are so intertwined, you can't make up for it.
  4. m4inbrain

    Are DDs under performing

    I'm inclined to agree - they're just not fun, really. Finished Minekaze which was kinda fun, but from experience in CBT, i didn't buy Mutsuki - and won't get Farragut after Nicholas either. They're just not enjoyable to me (same problem on CVs btw). Conceptual i love DDs, but as they are right now, they're just not fun. It's not even about the damage they deal, it's more the way you have to play them, or rather, what can ruin your day. I like playing LTs in WoT (even though i suck at it) - because i like the concept. They're important to the team, can make or break a match. DDs can't do that, there's very few matches where i thought "glad to have that DD instead of a same tier BB/CA", especially on standard battles. That's pretty much what has to change in my mind. Make them important for the team, like they do with CAs (deals with DDs and planes, so they add something to a fleet).
  5. m4inbrain

    Are DDs under performing

    Well it's average stats parsed across the asian server (i assume) - so certainly there's some people doing better or worse. The New Mexico gets listed with roughly 40k, i almost double that - although it won't stay that way i assume (like 7 games or smth). It still gives an indication of how good a ship does across a whole serverpopulation, and are generally either over, or underperforming. Considering that the one dude in this thread manages 70k average or something on his minekaze, but his t8 (benson) barely does 40k avg - his t9 barely scratches the 50k.. That's peanuts compared to NC/Iowa, and i wasn't even looking at the top 10% but ALL stats parsed for those ships. That chart shows quite clearly which classes rule the battlefield, and which don't. An interesting question though would be (and i'm not answering it, because i'm a bit split on that one) : is it fair to give a DD the same damage potential as a BB, considering that a BB needs to expose itself to enemy fire if it wants to shoot something, whereas the DD can (in theory) take out an entire fleet (on higher tiers anyway) without being spotted once? I'm actually not 100% sure on that. I do think DDs should stay competetive in damage, but they shouldn't have the option to do all that without exposing themselves. And yes, i know about high tier CVs having their planes everywhere - but you also have matches with no airfields around.
  6. m4inbrain

    Are DDs under performing

    How about you do it? The question is, are DDs underperforming. Answer is: yes they are. Just because there's one ship in both lines combined(!) that isn't, doesn't mean that they're not underperforming. edit: wow, just saw this posting: I'm not sure if troll or stupid, to be honest - because the chart you linked pretty much tells the exact opposite story. In general, a DD does basically as good as a BB/CA of the tier BELOW it. See: Fuso avg Damage parsed 37k, Aoba 28k, Hatsuharu: 20k. In fact, even the Fubuki gets parsed with less than 25k. Meaning that the first IJN DD to do comparable damage (Minekaze excluded, since that actually is an op ship) to tier 6(!) BBs and CAs is the Kagero. It takes a tier 9 DD to do a little less damage per battle as the Fuso. Definately not underperforming, right.
  7. m4inbrain

    Dissapointed for the third time

    To be fair (and for the record, i'm not fond of aerroon), his answer is pretty selfexplanatory. Especially regarding the two mentioned ships (maps are subjective i guess). The Colorado and Izumo are widely considered the worst ships in their tiers and trees (apart from the tier3 ships), for a reason. They're objectively worse than anything else, ESPECIALLY compared to their same-tier counterpart of the other nation. The Izumo doesn't have "a different playstyle", don't get tricked by the gun-layout. It is not even remotely a match for an Iowa, not even in the same ballpark. Names like "Trollorado" don't come from nowhere. It's no match for a Nagato (and that already is barely a "decent" ship). That's what he called you out for, and in my mind, rightfully so. Colorado and Izumo are not subjectively worse, but objectively. In fact the Izumo is so bad, that it felt like half of the last (or was it the one before?) patchnotes were only in regards to various buffs to make that turd even remotely playable. edit: Upkeep, as far as i know (not playing high tier yet - taking my time, since there's not really much to grind yet), on higher tiers is pretty impressive. Increasing that wouldn't be a good idea, it would also counteract your "enforce aggressive plays", because people would try to stay alive/take as little damage as possible. If i have to do 120k damage just to break even, you bet your hat that i'll do what it takes to NOT take damage, including lurking on maxrange.
  8. m4inbrain

    Lazy graphics

    Nah, not really. You're not discussing. All you're doing is stating "game looks crap", and then call everyone who has a different opinion fanboy. So how about you actually take your advice, understand the "discussion" part and actually have an argument, accepting that people might not be your opinion without being fanboys. Because "fanboys" literally is the end of any discussion whatsoever. It's down to simply hating/bashing.
  9. m4inbrain

    Lazy graphics

    But why exactly bother telling other people how crap it is then? Isn't that kinda as stupid?
  10. m4inbrain

    Lazy graphics

    If you consider tanks weighing roughly 150kg sliding all over the place realistic, then it might be. edit: personally, as a former gunner and driver of a 50t SPz Marder, i can tell you, it's nowhere near what a tank feels like. As in, exactly the opposite.
  11. m4inbrain

    Lazy graphics

    Because Ground Forces is so incredibly realistic. Right.
  12. m4inbrain

    anybody know a fix?

    Monopolies are never a good thing, but that wasn't really the argument. Everybody knows that. But arguing that they're/were inefficient, and therefore the worse GPU is simply wrong. Yes they used more power, but honestly? It's not like you point it out in terms of power consumption. I just got a platoon invite for World of Tanks, i'll add a picture later of the racing rig of a clanmate of mine from pCars. And i promise you, if you understand what you see there, you might understand why i think that AMD is not enough. edit: hm.. can't find it right now, have to check later - he's running a triple monitor setup as most of us, difference being that he's using 3x 4k Monitors. In native resolution. So, that guy has four Titans to actually be able to run pCars smooth. ^^
  13. m4inbrain

    anybody know a fix?

    Not according to any techsite. The radeon R9 280 is the only card that gets the cake in its price segment, all other segments radeons get outclassed by nvidia cards. Apart from obvious problems like support, Ark, Project CARS etc being a prime example at release. But that's not the argument here anyway.
  14. That pretty much goes for any cruiser against every BB starting from tier 5. Especially the NM eats cruisers alive, and i absolutely do not understand how someone has trouble dealing with them. edit: Colorado has some trouble, but that's not because CAs are too strong, it's because the ship is called Trollorado for a reason, it's simply crap.
  15. m4inbrain

    anybody know a fix?

    Sounds stupid, do you have a stream or video running in the background? Because that happens to me if i have a stream running in the background.
×