Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles


About csebal

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia
  1. csebal

    Stats of a Good Player?

    I did check out your stats to see how much of it is coming from CVs. You can imagine my surprise to realize that none of it was. Dang man, that's some nice stats with those cruisers. Sure judging from the tier you are at, you likely was ahead of the tier curve all the time, making it somewhat easier to get decent results but still impressive.
  2. csebal

    Stats of a Good Player?

    Okay.. Just to clarify, I am not a great player myself. Maybe above average to an extent, but I lack the focus to become really good at one class or the other simply because I play them all. With that said, it is interesting to see how my stats look like with the various classes: BBs - New York and Kongo are the best, with 1330 ish avg XP for both over 38 and 37 matches respectively CAs - Cleveland is king with 1414 avg XP over 34 matches DDs - Minekaze with 1416 avg XP over 38 matches CVs - Zuiho with 1822 over 28 matches CV stats are horribly inflated compared to other classes. I would hazard a guess that most players having over 1500 avg XP are playing 50-75% of their games with CVs (or are actually really good). My overall stat together with the decent averages above is 1178 XP over 716 games. Then again, I play all ship classes, not just the ones that are OP.
  3. The only problem about the old hawk is her horrible vulnerability to criticals in my book. Last game, first HE shell from some 15km away knocks out my rudder. I repair it. Minute later, HE shell knocks out the rudder and the engine and starts a fire. That same game, the ship got two more criticals to engine or rudder. It feels as if the entire ship would be one huge "engine/rudder" hitbox, so no matter where you are hit, that thing (obviously made out of glass) gets shattered. Apart from that, the guns on it are awesome and its has very good armor too for its class and tier. The torps we can forget about as the launch angle requires you to be broadside to the enemy, which at shotgun range is anything BUT healthy, however there are times when you need that shotgun to kill the passing enemy ship. As much as I hated her initially, I have grown to love her for some of her aspects. Her biggest tragedy is having to live in the shadow of the Omaha or Murmansk.
  4. csebal

    BBs need buffs.

    Yesterday: Furutaka from 19km out with my Kongo. 2 citadel hits from one salvo. He was not a happy camper afterwards. I know.. bad example, especially since at 19km.. everything that happens is done not by you, but by RNGesus. Still.. that one made me smile.. a lot. Thinking about it, considering how narrow and small profile that ship is, scoring two cits from 8 shells at 19km range is kinda like winning the lottery
  5. csebal

    BBs need buffs.

    The problem is not with BBs being bad. The problem is - lack of teamplay in general, which is likely to be a long term problem until WG creates some way to incentivize it - damage mechanics, making just two consecutive torpedo hits deadly if they both cause flooding, as you are dead from 2/3 health by the time repair party becomes available again - accuracy of cruisers and destroyers being waaaay too high. I mean, unlike a battleship, cruisers have pinpoint accuracy from about 2/3 of their range, especially against large targets like BBs.. I do agree though, that gun dispersion at short and mid ranges can be a little too RNG. I once managed to miss a Cleveland's broadside with 8 out of 8 shells at 7 km range, even though the shells were aimed perfectly at the center of its hull. Half of them went too short, the other half went too far, which is incredibly hard to do considering how tall the superstructure of that ship is. At that range, it should have been a guaranteed kill or at least a crippling hit with minimum of 75% of the shells finding the proper range. Especially since the max range of the Kongo is at around 21km, so I was shooting at 1/3 of my maximum which is pretty much knife fighting range for that BB.
  6. csebal

    Relative AA and the Cleveland

    Last game I played my Cleveland, I downed 12 planes in one go. three IJN torp plane squadrons. I was out of position to boot, as the BB they were attacking was about 2km in front of me and the planes came in from the side, so they did not have to fly past me to do their attack. Out of the 12 planes, 3 managed to drop torps and miss due to confusion, the rest died before even reaching drop range. Manual targeting of planes with defensive fire and AA built Cleveland can kill an insane amount of bombers. Any sane carrier will avoid Clevelands entirely.. just stay 7+ km away from them at all times with your planes. I sure as hell do and yes.. in some games this means that I starve to death or lose all my planes trying to break the brick wall of Cleveland's AA. Do I think its imbalanced? Well.. defensive fire is a little OP to be honest, but apart from that, general AA power of the Cleveland is completely in line with other ships. The only real problem I see with defensive fire is that its a no brainer pick. The alternative sonar skill is just ridiculously pointless. Would there be some meaningful surface warfare oriented skill option to pick versus defensive fire, you would see more players playing with that and less players moan about cleveland's AA being OP, when in fact its his AA boosting skill that is over the top.
  7. csebal

    Any UK/English speaking based clans around?

    Shameless plug: = CG = // Company Gamers http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/22309-cg-company-gamers-recruiting http://companygamers.com/ I joined up with them recently and never for a moment regretted it. Friendly folks from all over Europe and there is always someone around to play with I can recommend us to anyone who is looking for fun with the potential of taking it a little more seriously once organized play gets added.
  8. My arguments were pretty clear: - Key difficulties in playing BBs right now are: lack of teamplay forcing BB players to either overcommit alone or stay back where dispersion is horrible lack of teamplay making BB extremely vulnerable to enemy planes and DDs HE spamming and fire damage mechanics making even cruisers several tiers lower potentially deadly to BBs simply due to their ability to keep it on fire all the time. None of those can be overcome by better skills, because skills do not replace teammates or RNG. As such, your success as a BB right now mostly depends on luck, hence my comment. Besides that, the only speciality BBs have over cruisers in terms of gameplay is that you have to account for the slower reload times of your ship and the lack of maneuverability, forcing you to plan your moves a little more ahead. Would it not be for the above mentioned difficulties, BBs would be the king of the seas and would own cruisers 10 out of 10 times, as they should. The reason why most players suck with BBs is this: most players play solo, so they are extremely vulnerable to the lack of support from teammates. As a result, most just tend to hang back and fire from their max range, where dispersion is hoplessly large and makes their shots totally random. Alternatively, BBs overcommit without support from teammates and get taken out by cruisers spamming HE, planes or destroyers. I could not tell you the last time my BB was actually killed by another BB.. I mostly die to cruisers or planes or very rarely to DDs.. nothing I can do anything against really, besides not playing the class, which I tend to do. Also, I said BBs are easy, as in they require less skill than other classes. On the other hand, your results with them will be extremely varied, with some games being awesome (you were lucky) and some games being below average or outright horrible (you were unlucky). Other classes - even cruisers are more consistent in terms of results. If you asked: which class is the hardest to play, I would say BB.. because of the factors mentioned above. However you asked: which class requires the most skill to play, and BB is definitely not it. Would those luck based problems not be present, BBs would be the kings of the seas, instead of being the clowns of the seas. Here is the key things for a good BB player, and please feel free to add if I missed anything: - Positioning: ideally you want to move forward to stay mid range to your opponents, however you also need to stay behind your screens (smaller ships spotting torps and DDs ahead of you + providing air cover). Quite easy to learn, but is dependent on teammates. Generic skill though, not BB dependent, but needed for all classes. - Ship knowledge: know your aim.. how much you have to lead at various distances - purely on you (I sure as hell suck in this, as I do not play them enough). Also learn how penetration mechanics work and preferably know where to hit with the various shell types on various ship classes. Again, needed no matter what class you are playing. - Skill usage: when to pop the repair. Also easy, but I still see lots of players use repair after the first salvo of the enemy cruisers HE shells, only to be lit again 15 seconds later. - Armor and the proper use of it. Again very basic knowledge if you are aware of how armor works in general. Proper distance + proper angle can help eliminate quite a lot of the damage. So besides the skill and armor usage, there aren't any truly BB dependent skills one needs to master to be good at playing BB. As said, most of the difficulty comes from non skill related factors. I could also say, that it takes more skill to play a cruiser, because you have to also learn how to protect your battleships in addition to yourself. That's it in a nutshell. Hope it clears up things.
  9. 1) You are having a bad evening dude and are acting like a 5yo kid. Behave yourself. It is not like you got any right to call anyone's opinion idiotic just because you disagree with it. There is disagreeing with something and there is being a jerk about it. You were here longer than me, but I am still fairily sure that going anal on someone on a personal level is not tolerated in any form, so take it back a notch. 2) My stats are none of your concern. How good or bad I play is not an argument for or against BBs being easy or hard to play. 3) If there is anyone being ignorant here, it is you for dismissing an argument without giving any sort of reasoning or counter arguments other than: you do not agree. I am not beyond getting proven incorrect, however for that to happen, you at least have to try and prove that I am incorrect with .. you know .. some arguments. Hope you come to your senses and start behaving like a civilized person.
  10. Kinda shooting your own thread in the leg with that sort of comment... You start a thread asking people what they think, then if you see an opinion you dislike, you just troll into your own thread. Pro. I guess the truth hurts.
  11. Hard to answer: I would say destroyer, closely followed by carrier. They present different challenges. Destroyers you need to plan ahead. Not just your actions, but also the actions of the opponents, ALL the opponents in range of you. Sure it seems easy on the surface, just throw torps around until you hit something, but that only works on lower tiers, where reload is quick and players are dumb. Higher tiers, where there are planes everywhere, your torps are more likely to be spotted early and as such are ridiculously easy to avoid. Also.. firing torps randomly will just give your position away for the enemy cruisers who will be happily chasing you down. So if there is a class in the game that requires excessive amounts of planning, thats DDs. Carriers are a different animal. Easy to learn, hard to master. Especially on higher tiers, as the number of squadrons you have increases, carriers become a full time job and you will find yourself extremely busy throughout the game, lot more so than with any other class. It requires excessive amounts of multitasking and situational awareness. Move with your team, but also know when to retreat. Know who you can attack, and know who will demolish your planes before they can even drop a bomb, etc. People saying Carriers are easy, should be made to play a few dozen games in the higher tiers with carriers. The popular pick, the battleship is quite easy in my opinion. Would its guns not be at the mercy of RNJESUS and would HE not be as broken as it currently is, we would see BBs are OP threads all over the place. None of those have anything to do with skill. Luck makes you better at BBs, not skill.
  12. csebal

    Impossible CV matchmaking

    1) Good to know, but I think you would also agree, that a tier IV carrier doing a platoon with a tier IV cruiser is hardly to blame for not knowing how MM works, as WG does no effort in making it clear in their games. So in essence, the game experience suffers, no matter why. 2) One step in the right direction. Not necessarily enough, but we have to start somewhere I guess.
  13. csebal

    Impossible CV matchmaking

    Hmm.. please elaborate. Assuming you are in a Langley, and the opposing team has a fighter built Bogue against you.. what sort of tactics do you envision, that can work? Another scenario that you can see quite often: Langley vs Langley AND Hosho, Langley vs Langley AND Bogue, Langley vs Independence The list goes on really, the bottom line stays the same: Carrier MM is extremely bad at the moment. Every other game is playable, but only because you end up on being on the "favored" side, you might not see truly balanced carrier matchups for 4-5 games in a row. Some things they could / should do: - Reduce Carrier MM Tier range to 1, so Tier IV should never find himself against a Tier VI. - Ensure that both teams have an equal number of carriers.
  14. Everyone makes mistakes, everyone does stupid things and I am all about forgiveness if the other party is ready to apologize, HOWEVER... if someone is just plain inconsiderate, he needs to be punished. Current penalties and compensation for TK is a joke. Penalties for excessively damaging or killing a team mate should be severe, as in: screw up your game results severe, just as the act of killing a teammate has likely screwed up his game. Just an example: you get hit by a friendly torpedo and lose 4/5 of your health. Not only did that torp hit force me to use up the repair ability, the shelling I got from the enemies afterwards took away the rest and I was dead within a minute of the "accident". Repairs cost 14k credits and after the game you get 8500 credits in compensation, when the real damage was closer to 150k credits (part damage, part profit loss due to being out early in the game and I am not even considering how that game messed up my first win for the day too.) Yes, if someone is doing team damage intentionally and repeatedly, ban him.. that's alright. IT does not solve however the frustration of having one's game ruined by someone with no regard for his teammates, with "team damage" compensation of such a ridiculous magnitude, that it only adds insult to injury. Suggestion: XP and credit compensation should be a) increased significantly - should match average performance of player with that ship. So someone making 500xp and 100k credits on average should get that much in compensation from anyone doing team damage to him. If it was more than one offender, they should split the penalty based on the ratio of damage done. Not only would this likely deter people from spamming torps when they have team members in the line of fire, but would also serve as a half decent consolation price for the victims of such actions. One exception I would make is for ramming damage. First off, you cannot really do significant damage with ramming, and also it is far too common and more easily done by accident than shooting or torpedoing a teammate. b) make compensation and penalty symmetrical. I don't care as much about the punishment someone gets for being stupid as me getting compensated for his stupidity. Simply have the XP and credits be taken out of the offending player's XP and credit rewards and if that's not sufficient, then his xp or credit pool. c) make a chat command /forgive, so players can forgive true accidents, in which case no penalties or compensation would be paid.
  15. csebal

    Wrong calculation of experience

    I think WG uses additive bonuses in all its games. Meaning that 50% bonus and another 50% bonus equals a total of 100% bonus, which is what you got: 174 + 100% of 174 = 348, The alternative would be: 50% bonus times another 50% bonus, which would give a net 125% as a result, so 174 + 125% of 174 = 391.5. Working as intended and nothing wrong with it: It might not be the method you would prefer for calculating it, as obviously multiplicative bonus would be more beneficial for you, but honestly, the difference is not that huge either. Only multiplicative bonus to XP you get is from premium account, which I think is another 50%, but that 50% is calculated from your final (with all other bonuses) result, so the more bonuses you have, the more you win from also having premium on top of it.