AgarwaenME

[edited]

moar hyperbole! MOAR!!

No.

Again, there's planes. Torps from planes only show up as they're being dropped by those planes, and they're marked on your hud even if you don't even pan over to look at them. Not knowing that torps that hit you came from planes, means you didn't even notice the planes. This is a basic skill in this game and it's not arrogant at all to consider it very bad play when you fail at it. Also, your own words "Evading is impossible when a carrier cross torps you with 2 squadrons I've had that happen twice to me so far I evade one spread only to sail into the 2nd one making it impossible not to hit at least 1 or 2 torps in a ship with bad turning also multiple squadrons make it hard to tell where to turn." While it's rather typical to have the amazing "I play amazingly well so it's only OP-XYZ that makes it impossible" "argument". this pretty much counter your own argument that it would be hard to know if torps comes from planes or DDs. You just can't have it both ways. Either planes torps are so easy to avoid that you routinely avoid 75%+ of their attack, or they're so hard to spot that it's perfectly ok for a non-short bus person to not even know that some torps were incoming from aircraft. Also, true arrogance is "the only reason they beat me is because their ships are OP".

Sorry, did you even read what was said in this thread? Before you reply again, try that. If anything, I didn't simply say what was closer to the truth, that he was intentionally lying to make a point and only was desperate to protect his preconceived bias. On the other hand, someone desperate to protect a liar/ignorant person is fairly likely to have similar biases so thats not new either. Why would or should anyone feel the need to "nicely" tell someone that they're lying?

You have two detonation achievements total. I'm not sure what you mean by "almost every time" but less than 1% of the time is far from what I consider as "almost every time". While your claims are anecdotal, they're clearly disproven by facts. End of story. P.S Airplane dropped torps have a much lower chance to cause flooding than DD torps (a change introduced to nerf CVs ability to tag BBs with flooding and/or fire, which most agreed was a good change, especially for the lower tiers).

"pretty please don't point out my false claims" Again, if you can't spot when those torps that hit you came from aircraft, and then you make claims that are based on your inability to see the actual facts, then these claims needs to be shown for what they are. It's what we call "rational discussion". Much like calling detonations something that happens "a lot of the time" when in reality it's >1%

No, it's very easy to see when you get hit by plane torps. Because of the planes. Which drop them. (also, you don't get detonated "a lot", it's actually very rare)

Just a question, is it uncivil to question people when they say something that's clearly entirely false?

So you think it's unfair how a ship designed to be your counter can manage to land a few hits every 4 minutes and that you can't be entirely immune to them?

You're the one on a high horse, sorry. [edited] Also, as noted from your thread below, how can you expect us to take you seriously if you whine about airplane torps, yet can't even tell if it's planes or DDs hitting you? (here's a tip, if they are from planes, then you can actually see the planes).

So you think it's unfair that when you extrapolate what you seem to desire, then that opinion seems silly? That's something you need to think about.

USN CVs in many tiers got put into the impossible situation where you only have full strike, or no strike. Thus even getting your strike planes slaughtered in the end going full strike ends up being more effective than only having the ability to kill enemy planes. That's all there is to it. Bring back balanced USN CV loadouts, and you'll see full strike loadouts go away in the meta.

Yes, it's the "not sitting at 25km range lobbing shells hoping for lucky hits" mission.

Sure, you used free experience to bypass nearly an entire tree (hundreds of thousands worth, requiring a rather huge amount of gold) to play a very few games at max tier, while not having played nearly enough games to get that much free xp (unless 1-200 of those games you had in cbt was in a premium, which seems rather unlikely), and in one case a ship THAT WAS NOT AVAILABLE. Explain that if you can. And my point wasn't to make "accusations" it was to point out how anyone can do like you're trying to do, cherry pick whatever stat, no matter how irrelevant, to use that as an argument (and a fallacious one) instead of using actual fact. Never mind how many of those stats actually indicate the exact opposite. And in the end that's sort of the point. You're making ridiculous claims and lying either due to ignorance, or because you're desperate. And in the end, even if those claims hadn't been false, it would still just be a silly attempt at an argument from authority.

No, it tells you what it's max capabilities are. And the larger the swing between the good and bad players, then the higher the skillcap is. If anything, if you check stats you'll see how that's different from BBs, which since they're just that much simpler to play are far harder to truly play badly. And you've still not explained how you played the Midway in CBT when it wasn't available to non-testers, nor how even if it had been available would less than 100 games have been enough to get to t10 (even with the accelerated grind). All you've actually managed to tell us is that you're just yet another BB mafia member out on your "I hate CV" crusade instead of actually staying on topic for this thread. Indeed, you had no interest in the actual topic beyond using it for that purpose.

You do realise the CBT stats are also visible right? Nor are the state of CVs in CBT in any meaningful way relevant to the state today, or even to a few months ago. And of course, "easy" and "having a high maximum capability" isn't the same at all either. Infact all it shows is that there's a higher skillcap for CVs, which goes entirely against your desperate and biased point of view. Also, you might need to know how the Midway wasn't even researchable during CBT, now there might have been a few who had access, but those weren't players with less than 100 games in CVs total.

I say you're ignorant, because you say ignorant things. You're just desperate to avoid that little fact by cherry picking this or that irrelevant stat to suit it. Of course, a far more relevant stat would be things like say.. number of games played in a CV, of which you barely have any at all, an a total of 6 after CBT. However, that still wouldn't be a worthwhile way to argue this point. I mean, much like me saying "atleast I don't just pick a high tier BB to farm average damage in" or whatever bland excuse for a fallacy you can make up on the spot. How can you even say "in each and every aspect", when you barely play half the types of ships in the game? "Oh look he's got a ton of games in the Murmansk, which clearly is to make credits, but I'm so ignorant/desperate to build a premise that he's farming stats when he clearly only plays it for credits, so I'll attack that stat". Grow up. Also, CVs already have to attack unfavourable ships, and frequently so. The incredibly low speed of planes compared to ships means you're as limited by that as a fuel gauge would ever be. Another pointer how you have no idea about how CVs play (or again, that you just lie to suit your agenda).

How in any way is that relevant? Here's a tip. it's not, and you're just desperate. You talk in a manner that shows that you either have no clue, or that you intentionally lie. Stop doing that and you might be taken seriously.

That assumes there won't be balance with more, which is blatantly false. Also, why aren't you asking for limits to the ships that perform and dominate games far more then? Ie BBs? If 2 is a good max limit to DDs, then one BB per match sounds ok right?

Tell us when he comes to your Cyprus office to report me though, I'd like to know...

*Makes new thread on old topic with threads already open* *Thread gets closed as he's asked to keep it to the open thread* *Makes new thread because in his arrogance he thinks his opinion is so important that he can't keep it to where it's discussed* *Gets locked again, still can't take it, opens a new one.. and a new one, gets a temp ban, whines* That about covers it I think.

But.. I've only replied to anti-DD whines when YOU claim that DDs are dominating in damage. I've not brought that up, so that's again you trying to twist things. Also, xp/credit rewards are based upon targets max hp, not total damage done. Another thing you're ignorant about. Also, I did the math, the average xp on the winning team have BBs WAY ahead of the rest (with DDs a bit behind CAs), so if that anecdote had any value, it would only be against you. QED

Nice, I didn't yet know that you were ignorant about how xp is awarded too. The list of things it's possible to be ignorant about in this game, that you've not shown yourself to be, is growing small.

Because stats for those tiers shows similar trends. With DDs, including those who are supposed to be counters to the ships with highest HP in the game, at the bottom of the list. If your ship is supposed to be a counter to BBs, yet your ships average damage is less than half the effective HP of a BB, then you are no dominating factor (beyond scared BBs thinking they are).