Jump to content

Cazbol

Players
  • Content Сount

    43
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    9681
  • Clan

    [LONGS]

About Cazbol

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I've played 3 games in the Ognevoi today and lost all of them. Therefore the Ognevoi still has the snowflake. Two of the battles were between 12 and 13 UTC and one at around 17:30 UTC. These were all random battles. The webpage is showing the Ognevoi with a strike-through and the steel count is 150, 75 for the Ognevoi and 75 for the Tirpitz. The Tirpitz one is correct but the Ognevoi isn't. Edit: Is it possible that it's counting battles from a time just before the patch went live? I may have played a game shortly after midnight on the day the patch launched, but before the time of day.
  2. @Rukenshia , there seems to be a bug. It seems to counting what ships you've played, rather what ships you've won in. It is currently showing my Ognevoi as done, but I have yet to win and it still has the snowflake.
  3. Cazbol

    Upcoming WG stream today evening

    Thank you, sir.
  4. Cazbol

    Upcoming WG stream today evening

    Where do I find the stream?
  5. Cazbol

    Weekly Combat Missions: Black Friday

    What is the reason for having a B version of these ships? To me, it just makes the ship names look ugly.
  6. Cazbol

    Sucking at Implacable: A Plea for Help

    A little follow-up. I've taken the excellent advice given in this thread and changed my priorities accordingly. Since then, I've played 34 games in the Implacable, of which my team won 71%. That's one hell of a reversal from the previous 36.5%. This raised my overall win rate to 50%, which makes me happy. Many thanks to those of you who helped me improve my game.
  7. Cazbol

    Sucking at Implacable: A Plea for Help

    @GulvkluderGuld and @asalonen, many thanks for going through the replay. This is helpful. You're right, I should not have let the Shiratsuyu get away. My thought at the time was that my team seemed to be ignoring B, so I wasn't helping anyone cap it by staying there, but you're right, getting rid of the destroyer would have been more valuable. My move to C was meant to help our destroyer there, which was being hunted by their carrier. Our destroyer was sunk just before I got there, but then I saw the Kidd which started reversing behind cover. I tried an attack run on it but realized I wouldn't get the Kidd in my sights so I threw the salvo on the Cleveland instead. I was therefore of no help at C. The rocket attack on the Hipper was done for a similar reason. The rocket planes were sent to finish off the Budyony, which they did, after which I found my planes so close to the Hipper that I decided to let one salvo off before recalling them.
  8. Cazbol

    Sucking at Implacable: A Plea for Help

    This is excellent. I'm guilty of 3 of these and will try to correct that. Thank you.
  9. A team that I join in my Implacable has a 63.5% chance of losing. I am one of the worst Implacable players out there, with a 36.5% win rate after 52 matches, despite trying my very best. My damage and destroyed ships and planes are unimpressive, but still slightly above average for the server. However, my win rate looks like I'm attacking my own team. My win rates for the other carriers are Lexington: 55.3%, 85 matches Shokaku: 52.8%, 53 matches Ranger: 72.7%, 44 matches Ryujo: 55.6%, 36 matches Furious: 50%, 58 matches Langley: 50%, 10 matches Hosho: 50%, 10 matches Hermes: 50%, 20 matches My stats page. In summary, I'm clearly dragging my teams down when I play this particular ship. I'm therefore asking for any advice on how to play the Implacable. In what way should it be played differently from the Lexington and the Shokaku? I do try to focus on the destroyers in the beginning but I also try to weigh that against the difficulty of finding them vs. doing damage against other targets. I've also wondered whether I'm staying too far from the action and therefore spending too much time flying to the targets, but I must weigh that against available cover and the risk of quick destruction. My attempts at improving my performance have been futile. I'm attaching four replays, if anyone can be bothered to analyze and criticize. These are my last 4, not something cherry-picked. 20191031_124540_PBSA108-Implacable_42_Neighbors.wowsreplay 20191031_120025_PBSA108-Implacable_28_naval_mission.wowsreplay 20191030_124550_PBSA108-Implacable_15_NE_north.wowsreplay 20191030_120345_PBSA108-Implacable_50_Gold_harbor.wowsreplay
  10. Cazbol

    Italian cruisers are intentionally that bad?

    I got Raimondo Montecuccoli and I'm really struggling to adapt. I'm used to mid-tier cruisers being fragile but the Montecuccoli takes it to a whole new level due to the size of the citadel. It feels like every battleship shell that touches you is a citadel hit, even if it just goes through the flag. I have no problem with SAP shells. They have their benefits. My highest damage in a game was 81 thousand, all with SAP, the majority of which came from the superstructure of a King George V that couldn't see me. The AA is also fine. In one of my first matches I downed 52 planes, but admittedly against 2 tier IV carriers whose players probably weren't all that experienced. My normal matches see very modest damage, somewhere between 30 to 40 thousand. SAP is great against destroyers, but to get into the position to properly target destroyers you risk getting close to the dreaded battleships. My current approach to playing the Montecuccoli is the following, in order of importance: Avoid battleships at all cost. Don't stay spotted in their range unless you can quickly disappear. If all enemy battleships are on one side of the map, move to the other side. Stay close to islands and shoot over them or around them. Use only SAP, unless a weak cruiser is being really silly with his broadside. Focus on the enemy destroyers. I'm not saying you should copy these priorities but this is where I'm at, at the moment. It makes for pretty cowardly looking play-style and my karma is slowly falling but my win rate is rising a bit from the bottomless pit, in which it was.
  11. Cazbol

    Italian Cruisers: the Rules Made Simple

    I believe the point of early access is to get players starting the new ship line at different times, so you're less likely to have matches with 12 Italian cruisers per side in the first days after launch. For this to work they need to make sure that only a part of the players gets early access. The main ways to limit access would be to make things grindy, expensive or chance based. All three methods are used in this case. I don't fancy loot boxes so I don't buy them. No problem. I only complete directives when it fits in to my normal gaming, which is usually the case. I don't go on an obsessive compulsive grind where I play more than I enjoy, in order to get a ship that I can buy cheap for credits a few weeks later.
  12. Cazbol

    Update 0.8.8: Fourth Anniversary!

    Happy anniversary, Wargaming and fellow players. Thank you for a fantastic gaming experience. Long may it continue.
  13. Cazbol

    Armada: Benham

    While I do sympathize with those that would like to acquire the Benham through other means, the selfish part of me is somewhat relieved that there won't be too many of these monsters spewing out 16 10.5 km torpedoes every 85 seconds.
×