AgarwaenME
-
Content Сount
4,811 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Battles
13808 -
Clan
[SCRUB]
Everything posted by AgarwaenME
-
If you've given orders then they will finish them even after you've sunk. So always give some auto-attack orders if you're under threat like that.
-
Useless Complaints From Noobs About DD "Buffs" and Mogamis
AgarwaenME replied to MS_Surface's topic in Destroyers
It is exactly what you're doing. Saying that everyone that has complaints about these changes is a cheap and stupid way to preempt counter arguments, akin to the emperors new clothes. It's as crapa way to argument as me saying your opinion on this matter is irrelevant because you're a sub-average player and the only actual noob in that context would be you (and you are so very much a sub average player). And really, people playing as poorly as you do after that many matches would be the definition of "noob". But again, unless you're making an argument directly linked to your skill level at this game, then that would just be insulting and add nothing to the discussion. Well actually.. pointing out how you've barely played the ships these changes will affect the most, if at all, and those you have played you've performned so utterly badly in that any opinion you have on changes to them would be worthless is way more of an argument. Still, not an argument worth using, I'm just pointing out that one could be made. -
Useless Complaints From Noobs About DD "Buffs" and Mogamis
AgarwaenME replied to MS_Surface's topic in Destroyers
It's called "poisoning the well." Read up on that and understand how wrong you are. -
Well WG you know absolutely well that blocking or banning posts does no good AND NOW LISTEN!
AgarwaenME replied to Cmdr_Kouta's topic in General Discussion
Do you even realise what that line makes you look like? Do you know what the word "insulting" means? Check a dictionary, then read up on the word hypocrisy... -
Yet in both cases it's merely a claim. Or are you suggesting you frequently sinks by enemy DD torps? Bad or good players will hit or be hit by them, so if he's a good or bad player is pretty irrelevant. Also, it's not like 11% is a guaranteed hit now is it? Not that pure hit percentages tell all that much unless you're desperate to cover for a lack of actual arguments by cherry picking stats to attempt to bypass that requirement. Your p
-
Unless his arguments are entirely tied to his performance in his ships, then attacking his performance is pure stupidity and reeks of desperation.
-
A "civil" way to express an opinion is to have one with a bit of thought behind based on some actual realities... As for the traverse nerf. Firstly it's a nerf on top of an earlier nerf to the traverse speed to make the 155s a bit slower than the 203s with the captain skill. Ie it forced you to take that skill to use those guns somewhat decently (though you'd be likely to have it anyways). Which in many ways was justified. On the other hand, removing the benefit from expert marksman while ALSO leaving that older nerf in place, is entirely stupid. Oh, and that traverse nerf? It also came with a nerf to turret hp, making it extremely common to lose turrets with the 155mm guns (in addition there was the undocumented nerf to HE damage for those lower calibres). And this problem comes on top of losing 20% range and 10% rof for those guns. This effectively makes them one of the worst stock grinds in the game, with the reward being worse guns than you had the tier before.
-
Sorry, in what part of my post was I calling you biased? Nor did I claim you had said DDs needed a nerf. So that pretty much makes half your post pointless. Now as for CVs, it's incredibly silly to still spout that "CVs have no risk" argument. CV's planes are as much their HP bar as their ships HP bar is, and they can easily (especially sub t7, but also moderately later insofar as losing especially all of select types of planes) be taken out of the battle much before their ship sinks. It's a childish attack on CVs, in desperation of having nothing else, nothing more. As for people being hit by BBs at max ranges, sure it's easier if people sail straight, as much as it's easy to hit people sailing straight with torps, which makes that argument even at best, but also BB dispersion is so large you can often score hits, or even citadels against a manouvering target (while also of course miss even perfectly lined up shots). " I do not blame poor players I state a fact of the game simple." And again, yes there are bad DD players, as are the just as many bad BB players, or just bad players. So again that's a non-argument for anything. As for the yamato vs montana, what's ridiculous there is that people say the montana is UP far more than anyone says that the yamato is OP, which if any sort of argument about average damage, winrates, survival rates etc it pretty much has to be. On the other hand. Maybe it would be better to buff those worse performing ships? Maybe make the Montana closer to the Yamato, not the other way around, and make other CA/CLs close to Cleveland/Mogami/etc instead of throwing broad and poorly thought out nerfs on them?
-
But .. if damage isn't everything, why does everyone who wants to nerf (or stop being buffed) non-BBs point towards average damage? Why is that stat so easy to point towards when it fits your agenda, but so easy to ignore when it's not? Also, blaming poor DD players is as silly as blaming poor BB players. It's the poor BB players that increase DDs average damage and gets them easy kills after all. Also, risk vs reward? What risk is there in shooting CAs in a BB from 20km+? What risk is there in a CA shooting at a DD 10km+? CVs usually have little risk to their ship period (but loads to their planes), as is there no risk whatsoever in firing at a CVs planes by itself. It's just a silly meme you try to force into it to justify DDs being nerfed, while making little sense in how this game works.
-
In some other game maybe, not in this one.
-
Get to longest range possible, and if possible get concealment expertise. The only way to survive is to ensure BBs fire at you the longest possible distances if at all.
-
DDs counter other ships depending on the DD, be it anti DD, anti BB or well, no DD is particularly suited to defeat CVs, nor CA/CLs. So, yes, IJN DDs very much are a counter to BBs, with some higher tier USN DDs being semi-usable counters to BBs, and at the current state of the game, they're the only reason you see anything but BBs beyond people being masochistic and not minding being target practice. And of course, those DDs are still from behind, to way behind same tier BBs damage... so.. nerf BBs? Also ,lower tier planes sure, but many BBs have so much AAA they need noone else to help cover against same tier (and even in some cases higher tier) CVs. And the point about the changes is, with one TB squad, you'll maybe get 1-2 torp hits at best against a same tier, lone wandering, non-turning BB at higher tiers. The dumbest possible t8-10 BBs will be nigh unattackable for lexi-essex-midway past 0.5.3. And the problem isn't arming time or drop distance with torps, they need to be at some range to make both landing them and avoiding being skill based, the real issue is no-skill requirement AAA mechanics, and loadouts that makes it impossible to actually protect your planes and also have a minimum of strike ability for .. well, pretty much all but langley and indy post 0.5.3.
-
The answer is, none. No CA has the ability to "dominate" in ranked. And the most common CA for those actively using a CA to rank, would be the Atago. And the only thing that made the Mogami even usable for ranked, was the range and dpm on the 155s, which now will be completely unusable. 50 sec traverse time is unusable for targetting DDs. As for salty? How would you else answer silly ignorant claims?
-
Firstly, torp based DDs are indeed supposed to be a counter to BBs. Secondly, if you believe this, why aren't you in the AAA threads asking why Essex/Midway is getting nerfed to a state where they'll be far behind same tier BBs? Why aren't you asking for nerfs to high end BB AAA? Why aren't you questioning why a NC is more or less immune to same tier or lower CVs? Hypocrisy, that's why.
-
Mogamis have dominated ranked? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA..... Ye right.. And if you don't think having BB like turret traverse isn't a problem in a CA, then any sort of opinion you have is worth absolutely nothing. After these changes Mogami will be one of the worst ship in the game for its tier, it might actually struggle to outperform the complete dog that the NO is. Too low range on the 203s to get into fights, too low dpm to push damage downrange, and extremely low survivability overall. The only thing true in your words, is that the atago will further cement it's position as the best t8 CA (with the MK close behind), with the hipper being borderline playable behind those two wallet ships.
-
You will also be matched against good teams. So your chances of winning will be less if you're actually as good as you wish to believe you are, but better if you're bad and need equally bad opposing teams.
-
So people are "scorewhores" for doing the missions WG has added to the game, or using premiums they've won or purchased? Grow the hell up.
-
You really need to understand how AAA actually works against planes in game. The long range AAA dictates how you can approach or have to fly around ships. With this buff even those you could pass by at 4-5km will now turn that area into a no-go zone. The short range AAA tends to mostly kill DBs and TBs AFTER they've dropped their weapons. And then on top of that, the three highest USN CVs got their potential dpm dropped by something like 75% for lexi, 40% for essex and midway, but the case will be even worse for the essex and lexi since single TB squads gets focused and either outright killed or reduced to 1-2 torps in the water max. That means an attack that before could get 4-5 hits, will now to 0-2. The damage nerf to those ships will make them complete garbage unless you love to kill planes. I do wonder if the "omg CVs have higher average damage so nerf them" bastards will come and ask them to rebuffed when they average half the damage of similar tier BBs.. well no, I don't think they'll be that honest.
-
So true. Damage stats don't tell the whole story. Unless those damage stats are used to ask for nerfs to CVs, or CAs, or DDs. In that case they always somehow are incredibly relevant.
-
Rather having followed these forums, and also seen what the same people are posting, and the results of WG paying heed. But keep ignoring how CVs have become very rare past the first few tiers, and how that affects the rest of the game. Keep pounding away at single targeted nerf cries while also ignoring the ships that actually cause the problem. Again, if the single requirement for any ship not a BB wasn't "can I fight against BBs?", then you'd see less shimas or other torp based DDs. P.S, You get to call me agressive when it's not me replying in kind to those who asks for nerfs like this. Until then, look after your own shoddy argumentation.
-
If you reduce a multiplier by 30% and then buff the other multiplier by 500%, then the result isn't less, it's actually massively higher. This effectively makes even more ships have no need to get help against planes. Especially at higher tiers, as a single TB squad on both essex and midway will get chewed up, nor can you cross torp with them anymore. Those two CVs outdid the same tier BBs by a fraction, but now they'll struggle in the same useless area as CAs are.
-
It has everything to do with the meta. But instead of asking why they can do what they do, you ask for them to be nerfed. And then what's the next ship we need to see nerfed, if simply being the best of it's class at a tier? More Zao nerfs I guess? Well, after Yamato then for sure. Then we'll need to nerf Ibuki, Myoko, .. actually every ship in turn. I mean, until every ship is exactly the same. And how would you "fix" DD MM? Enforce strict mirroring for them too? Stop being so bloody simplistic, as if nerfs to ships have no effect beyond that ship itself. Idiots will still eat torpedoes, and those idiots tend to be playing ships with tons of HP.
-
Or maybe those crying against them are those not playing them and who desperately need a skill buff for themselves personally? The reason there's a lot of DDs, and in particular Shimas, is because CVs were nerfed near oblivion (and the next patch is set to completely remove them), and that CAs lack both survivability and dpm (and tools to fights DDs). That means to effectively change the outcome of a game you either play a BB, or a torp based DD or a DD hunting DD. These are the basic options at the moment. At the moment, there are counters to DDs, but those are OTHER DDs, which you'd know if you weren't so incredibly ignorant (because you are, or because you intentionally chose to be so). CVs would be, but for some reason they are being changed into bland "fighter v fighter" snoozefests. Oh what was that reason again? Ah yes, clueless nerf criers like you. We spent months telling you how the game would look if they did as the BB mafia kept crying for. What we said happened. But shockingly.. no, not shockingly at all, rather obvious from the sort of players like you, you think you just can turn the nerf-wheel another revolution hoping that somehow the game won't look like what we tell you it will look like. And of course, you didn't come here to whine about battles with 8 BBs a side did you either... If you had a tiny little speck of insight, you'd see that the changes needed to be done to the game, is to reduce overall BB AAA (especially for USN BBs), nerf float plane fighters to "only" be as good as a single fighter plane, and increase CA survivability so they can cross the gap to hunt DDs without being turned into BB target practice. On the other hand, the exact opposite seems to be planned for 0.5.3, so enjoy your 8-10 DD a side fights going forward.
-
BOOOHOOO!! They're not only nerfing non BBs!! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHH!!! I'm not immortal just because I'm on a BB!!! WHAT IS THIS???? BOOOHOOOOOOOOO!! Of course, if you could see farther than your own navel, you'd actually be talking about the further nerfs to CA/CLs and CVs, which in turn makes those torps the only way to handle BBs (besides also playing a BB).
-
This simply isn't true though, as at most you'll get close to a same tier BBs range. At best it allows a few CAs to fire at their extreme range at BBs who are at just over their real effective ranges. And before you try, sure you could be able to outrange a t3-t4 BB with that skill, but it's a skill you only even reach by t6 in normal play. And for the ships it affects most, will infact just ensure that it's BBs that gets and/or keeps their massive range advantage. The effect of this change is a massive nerf to a few ships (murmansk, cleveland, mogami, yubari) all to appease the "omg fire, OMG HE CAN FIRE BACK OMG OMG WHY AM I NOT AUTOMATICLY IMMUNE CAUSE I PLAY BB" group of players. This combined with further nerfs to CVs.... If you thought there were a lot of DDs before, how do you think it will be when CL/CAs can't fire from ranges where it's possible to manouver? More over, the CL/CAs best suited to combat DDs. This change combined with others in this patch will turn this into a BB v DD game. Well, even more than it currently is.
