Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About FireRM

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

464 profile views
  1. FireRM

    Quality Control - Stalingrad (Now with EU data too)

    Really good work OP @Koruption What I notice, and you briefly mention it in the beginning of your post, is that there are not enough players with the required amount of battles in the ship, because it is fairly new, and fairly rare, albeit it, you have reasonably tried to balance this out. The number one argument so far about the Stalingrad has been about top players of top clans or veterans of WoWs (going back several Ranked seasons) or a combination thereof having access to it, which will likely skew the results towards the higher end of the spectrum. Now with the new CB season running, as well as the large influx of steel by virtue of missions and campaigns, a lot more people are expected to get it, and have actually done so, as we can witness in other threads. Admittedly, some of the new Stalingrad owners may also be experienced players and veterans that simply just missed out on one CB season, or a few ranked seasons, but I would wager that the vast majority of the new players are not of the same calibre. To reaffirm if this argument stands or not, I would like to draw a parallel to the likes of Alabama and Alabama ST. Not a lot of background information is needed here, the ships are exactly the same bar for a large cephalopod on the sides of the latter. However the former is a premium ship available to everyone, and the latter is only given to a select few Supertesters. Now, supertesters are not all super-unicums, some of them are, but most of them are not, something that makes sense, because you wouldn't want to balance ships around the elite 1% of the playerbase, you can look up some of STs stats if you so wish. Now if you compare the statistics of the two identical ships, you will see that the ST version of the Alabama greatly outperforms the regular version. Yes, the number of battles played in the ST is a fraction of that of the Alabama, however I would argue that even if the ST owners played the same number of battles as the regular version of the ship, the stats would generally stay the same. I theorize that this because of a much smaller, controlled group of people (who also happen to be very experienced) that are given access to ship, rather than the general public. Exactly the same thing that is happening right now with the Stalingrad. So I would wait for the number of battles played in the Stalingrad to pick up and then use the OPs tool to make comparisons again.
  2. FireRM

    Xmas crates nerfed and reward basis has been changed

    Yes, they sabotaged themselves in this one. They buy the De Grasse, an example I actually wanted to use before I watched the rest of the video, with dubloons from the Tech Tree, with 120 containers remaining. Then he opens a container with a De Grasse. The same thing happened to the Anshan, the Dunkerque and a couple of others. He also opens a Monaghan towards the ending of the video, although he dropped one in the beggining of the same video. So this is explained because he stacked his containers. So the better half of the video can be explained by watching this video alone and by possesing a fairly good understanding of how the system works. The beggining I cannot explain by watching this video alone, we have insufficient data, but given their lack of understanding of how the system works, I am willing to bet that they did something off-camera (i.e. buying ships from the tech tree with containers still remaining) that explains it, rather than WG pulling a fast one.
  3. FireRM

    Xmas crates nerfed and reward basis has been changed

    Okay, I see what is he doing. Later on in the video, he uses the gold he got from the "duplicates", goes on the Tech Tree and buys as many of the Premiums available there as he can, in order to game the system and make it drop him a Missouri. All that while he still has 120 crates left to open. This is pretty clear why it will not work. What happens earlier is still not clear to me. If he did something similar off-camera then we know what happened.
  4. FireRM

    Xmas crates nerfed and reward basis has been changed

    My personal experience is the same as @Kysmet above. What I do not understand is the following, even if the problem is indeed the stacking of crates, something which is evident in the video, it is suggested that e.g. the Okhotnik is already in the account, even with battles played, assuming this is correct, that means that it is not in one of the other crates in the same batch or other batches. Why does he get it the second time? Shouldn't the re-roll select a ship that is not there? The same thing happens with the Okt. Revolutsya further down the video.
  5. FireRM

    Xmas crates nerfed and reward basis has been changed

    The OP is correct, I went and watched the video in question. It would seem that WG has indeed changed the award logic in the middle of the sale and without notice which would be deplorable in my view if proven to be the case. What I don't get is the following though, in the video he draws a Roma from a normal container, then he immediately proceeds to draw a supercontainer with an Okhotnik inside which is then converted to doubloons (bottom right). So it seems that the re-roll is still working by virtue of the fact that he got a supercontainer and not a normal santa crate, albeit the re-roll gives you a ship that you already have. What gives?
  6. Nobody is forcing you to grind these missions if you don't want to do it. Everyone has their priorities in life. What I do not get is the mentality that "I have to have it now and not a second later!" (in the case of free xp ships, a.k.a. "have you seen the price tag on that, make it cheaper!") or "I have to have it, make it easier!". Which is what we see now with the paid campaigns for steel.
  7. FireRM

    clan battles

    You are not a bad clan, you probably lost because you faced a better opponent, it happens. As I said, it is the first day of the season, give the people a bit more time to figure out how to counter these setups and they will. The players are intelligent enough to figure how to counter certain metas to a good degree, the past seasons are a good indicator for that.
  8. FireRM

    clan battles

    It is a vast generalisation that "according to every top clan" Stalingrad is fine, one which I couldn't possibly comment on. What I am saying is that in every game that I have played today where people were complaining about the Stalingrad, I saw serious tactical mistakes and a series of misplays that contributed to the loss of the enemy team far more than the Stalingrad. My argument is, that these games were lost by the team not because of Stalingrad, but because the players themselves made poor decisions. As for people being able to earn more and more steel, I agree, but this is a separate discussion that we need to have, not that WG will change their minds on the matter.
  9. FireRM

    clan battles

    Did you quote the wrong post by accident? I didn't say she is weak, my argument was something completely different.
  10. FireRM

    clan battles

    It is the first day of CB where everyone plays against everyone, that means you can more reliably be matched against top clans. Chances are, you would have lost those games anyway with a very small margin for error. Calm down, as we get deeper into the season, teams will all Stalingrad compositions should become less and less frequent.
  11. FireRM

    PSA: Black Friday 2,500 doubloon mission

    It is already stated there, first paragraph right underneath the image with the ship on it.
  12. FireRM

    Had honour to play with man himself...

    I was wondering the other day where he was, I am happy to learn that he is still around.
  13. FireRM

    Z39 in Shop

    so... I can have two unique commanders for every nation in my port. Interesting...
  14. How dare you. It is quite clearly a Phalanx CIWS: