AgarwaenME
-
Content Сount
4,811 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Battles
13808 -
Clan
[SCRUB]
Everything posted by AgarwaenME
-
A year of BBs crying that there are counters to them, and while BBs are still easily capable of dominating CAs that's not enough. Higher tier battles have been dominated by a fair while now by BBs who's only counter is other BBs (partly by straight out nerfs to CVs, and partly by the mirroring which makes them even rarer, and more and more ways to detect DD torps early, nevermind DDs modules blowing up if a BB HE shell lands anywhere close to it), so when you cry your bitter crocodile tears about CAs, who are still very easily countered, don't expect to be taken seriously. You still have 3-4 times the effective HP, and at least as much dpm against a CA as it has against a BB. How much more do you need?
-
Will the new fire chance and module damage stay as is now?
AgarwaenME replied to Caan's topic in General Discussion
How does anything of that prove there's been changes to fire chances or module damage? -
Will the new fire chance and module damage stay as is now?
AgarwaenME replied to Caan's topic in General Discussion
There's no "new fire chance". -
hssss hss hsssssss hsss damn, my auto-translate was off there
-
Ah, so it should never take more than two air attacks to kill a BB, interesting.
-
They need to get even better rewarded for their minimal effort playstyle or they're gonna go cry in the corner until they're op enough again.
-
[rant]Fire fire fire this game is all about setting other ships on fire
AgarwaenME replied to Skullblazer's topic in General Discussion
But it won't, at most you'll have around 10% effective chance per hit to set a BB on fire, so that is not something you can guarantee. -
While I'd rather not just state outright that I think you're making a claim based on no evidence whatsoever as you've never really paid attention to your comparative loss or win streaks and is a victim of obervation bias as you never think win streaks are odd but find loss streaks something special, and that you're merely throwing this out to attempt to use a personal anectode as "evidence"... Fact of the matter is, you're sitting at a positive WR, having had from a small to a significant higher number of wins (entirely dependant on your draw rate) than losses. So even if you're right in having had more long loss streaks, that simply means those rare long loss streaks have been offset by FAR MORE shorter win streaks. As for personal anecdotes. I tend to play ships to get my daily bonus, especially in weekends. That means the chance of loss streaks is actually larger, as I play a ship until I've won, but leave it after I do win. Playing like that actually worse win rates and increases the chance for loss streaks, while reducing the chance for win streaks.
-
Random doesn't mean win-loss-win-loss-win-loss-win-loss
-
[rant]Fire fire fire this game is all about setting other ships on fire
AgarwaenME replied to Skullblazer's topic in General Discussion
Clueless whine. It takes less skill to defend against fire, actually next to none, than actually setting you on fire. -
Actually it happens fairly quickly, and far from a lifetime. Well, no, not the "exact" same amount of each value, but that's an absurd demand. But close enough to even that noone would claim that those dice were "fixed"? That would happen quickly indeed. As for WoWs? Just look at how people actually sit in regards to WR and other stats, and it's clear that performing well, or abusing select ship (often while divisioned) against a lack of actual opponents in similar ships, will show up as "better" stats.
-
No, that's the conclusion one can only take from that sentence. As yes, on a SINGLE match basis then whatever the MM did for you in that match heavily decides is, maybe more, maybe less, than your performance compared to enemies. But that will average out over time. Thus claiming that the MM will always decide your stats can ONLY be taken to mean that it's trying to force it, or that you don't understand random distributions.
-
But you DID say it's fixed. You know we can just scroll up and see you've written " it's %100 true that win rate is decided by the MM and definitely doesn't reflect skill". The only way the MM could decide win rates, is if it's fixed, a random MM would even out skill levels of your team and the enemy.
-
And not merely divisions. At the moment high tier BBs (and a few high tier CVs) are going to far more influencing on a match than most other ships, so your choice in ship and tier spread is incredibly important (nevermind early CV grinders who enjoyed weeks of being 3-4 tiers above most others and just dominating completely). And of course, one can have a huge impact in a lower tier match if you pick one of the best ship of the tier, and have a captain with far more skillpoints than you'd see on other ships in such matches (part of why murmansk is such a good premium, an omaha might be more or less the same ship, but people just grinding through it won't have a 12-15 point captain on it).
-
It's not merely the most convenient, it's the only sensible position. And there's hardly much nickle and diming in this game (there's a couple things I dislike like the absurd retraining costs and the complete lack of a respecc for credits or xp option). But aside from your usual facebook/smart phone games, try any Perfect World game, where grinds are designed around forcing you to spend real money or face endless boredom, and real money can be used to bypass content or to instantly get the best available equipment.
-
You need to learn what that word means before using it again. Also, if you think one player cannot meaningfully impact a battle then you're just ignorant on purpose. You're about 8% of the team, so it's hardly unsurprising that you would be able to affect the scores by enough % to be statistically significant, and more or less depending on ship class and your tier position on your team. Oh, and if you're in a division where you get to pick good team mates, using ships with good synergy, then of course you can influence it even more than just those 3 people by themselves. There's a reason why there's people around with 60-70% win rates (something that wouldn't be possible if your imagined fixxing was occuring). Your're merely still looking for excuses because your egos view of your ability does not fit with how you actually perform.
-
The only vanity here is yours. You think you're better than your stats so you're desperate to find some excuse, no matter how bad it is.
-
I don't know what you did to the Mogami but she's horrible now
AgarwaenME replied to Aerroon's topic in General Discussion
And then he went to one of the many "OMG BBs are nerfed omg omg" theads to complain that CAs aren't free kills anymore entirely not understanding the word "hypocrisy". -
Then you should check the rather large threads with BBs crying about how their no-skill machines can't oneshot CAs left and right anymore. And they already had it easy to begin with.
-
Saying you know isn't the same as you actuall knowing. And I quoted that guy because I was replying to that guy, are you really this dense? And you're wrong about your ideas because the few actual things in your post that can be checked turns out to be blatantly wrong, and the rest you refuse to show us, so it can be dismissed out of hand. More than that, as you claim to have it but refuse to show it, then we can easily conclude that you're just a lying troll.
-
Now this is interesting. He's able to understand the numbers 1 and 2. And we already know he doesn't understand the number 4, or at least how it relates to the number 7. The scientific question now then becomes, has he learned the number 3? As for testing, I just made 50 accounts and played every ship in the game 1k times on each account. And the conclusion is that there's no such thing. So that's proven now.
-
If you don't know then you fall back to the null hypothesis. You do not claim that all possible options are as valid. Fact of the matter is, you don't need to rig a game like this to have people have frustrating games. If that's a desire there are many game design decisions you can do that would work far better than making a hard to implement thing like that. Just check any of your favourite nickle-and-dime-you games out there. As for the OP, his ideas are clearly wrong (assuming he's not merely trolling).
-
7 year olds? But we've already established that you're struggling to count that high. I mean, by your own words you think a 4 year old is older than a 7 year old.
-
Yep, a troll. Noone can be this stupid and dishonest unless on purpose.
-
Thus far you haven't proven you have either. So until you do, even if that's no evidence at all, stop talking as if you have.
