Jump to content

Exocet6951

Weekend Tester
  • Content Сount

    4,741
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    9287
  • Clan

    [SICK]

2 Followers

About Exocet6951

  • Rank
    Rear Admiral
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

3,823 profile views
  1. Exocet6951

    Arkansas Beta AA

    The Arkansas is so slow that the plane mistook it for an airfield and tried to land. Mistakes were made.
  2. Exocet6951

    Why report, total waste of time!

    It's actually easy enough on the surface. You have 3 lists of personal info, each with varying degrees of importance (read: level of personal). None of those can be leaked to third parties unless anonimized in a way that you are incapable of linking the information you have with an individual person (directly or indirectly). For each level of importance, you have to provide a plan of action in case of a breach. If you're breached and emails are leaked, warning your clients, plugging the breach and notifying the authorities is enough. If you're breached and info on sexual orientation/ethnicity with a name to identify the person are leaked, you can basically start calling your bank and telling them that you'll need to round up a few dozen million €€€ just to pay off the MASSIVE fine that's about to hammer down on you. Along with your data protection officer's resignation. That's the legal obligation. Nicknames in a game? Not personal data, but since you can potentially get someone's email address, and any other info they're voluntarily making public via the nickname, WG probably just decided to play it extremely safe and not give anyone nicknames, in case they get harassed. WG will be bulletproof, since all personal info has to be made public voluntarily....but the last thing you want to someone being harassed warning authorities that your company might be playing fast and loose with personal data. It's like a tax audit. You might be doing everything right, but you don't want auditors poking around because they WILL find something. Source: I work with tons of personal data from store fidelity cards.
  3. Exocet6951

    Battle Royale really?

    If only they could hire these people to do one task properly, rather than do three tasks poorly, and end up scraping one, rushing two, and end up just scratching one of those because it turns out not to fit the game anyway. *cough, CV rework*
  4. Exocet6951

    ST - new mechanics and consumables

    SAP shells mean one thing... Testing for Italian ships! Search your feelings, you know it to be true.
  5. Exocet6951

    CV Rework Discussion

    Wipe that grin off of your face
  6. So, a GK with a magical 3.5k HP more than your average GK?
  7. Exocet6951

    CV Rework Discussion

    Not only did you absolutely fail to grasp the point of my post, but you actually went out of your way to remove the "/s" from my post. And you dare call others not impartial?
  8. Exocet6951

    CV Rework Discussion

    You're right on both accounts. He's a CV fan, and he's not impartial at all. I mean, have you read what he's been writing for years? Gems like: About the rework: "Skill gap has increased!" "DDs are even more vulnerable and that's bad" "CVs deal even more damage and that's bad" "AA is a joke and that's bad" Prior to the rework, it was: "UI is terrible and it's putting off new players" "Too many either AA doom bubbles or defenseless ships, AA needs to be more gradual" Absolutely biased. Where is the stalwart defense of WG and the rework, and the flawless state of CVs in general? /s
  9. Won't stop me from doing it. [cries in Zara]
  10. Exocet6951

    Roma's 18.1km Range: Is it really justified at tier 8?

    More range in the Roma would mean that you fire more often at long range, which means you're spotted more often, which means that you're just thrown away one of the major strengths of the ship: stealth. Granted that was my experience before the CV rework, and I haven't played since last year ¯\_ツ_/¯
  11. Exocet6951

    Are we going to have CV refund?

    Almost as if releasing a half baked rework, messing around with it, calling it good to go, selling premium ships as expensive as AAA games, then deeming balance not good enough and changing a lot more stuff was a bad idea... I find it absolutely shocking that people on these forums are actually defending being used as paying, drafted QA testers under the excuse that it's a work in progress. All that to "win" internet debates. I can actually hear WG legal and marketing departments laughing from here.
  12. Exocet6951

    Ramming physics wtf?

    Haha, are you seriously talking about armor penetration and angling when it comes down to a deformable solid weighing tens of thousands of tons, while moving through water and hitting another solid with the same properties? Spoiler alert : steel deforms. Extra spoiler alert : steel subject to enormous energy deforms a lot.
  13. Exocet6951

    Ramming physics wtf?

    I think we would have to ask Buzz Aldrin and his titanic brass balls! Sorry, I'll see myself out.
  14. Exocet6951

    World of Carriers

    Funny, the more you complain, the more the exact thing you ask of CVs happens, which makes things even worse and makes you complain some more. Turns out that listening to CV players would have made things better all along, rather than screeching about CVs, demanding changes, and WG providing a dumpster fire you requested.
  15. Exocet6951

    ST, new ships

    With a super tight turn radius as well, jesus. 620m Please let this be coal and/or free xp...
×