Jump to content


Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles



About KRBeC

  • Rank
    Chief Petty Officer
  • Birthday 05/18/1983
  • Insignia

Contact Methods

  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Czech Republic
  • Interests
    economics, politics, games, sport

Recent Profile Visitors

704 profile views
  1. KRBeC

    Ranked Battles Season 6

    This works only in case the team with advantage lose their nerves (or perhaps it may be true if you play epicenter mode). In "normal" game (domination) one team takes a cap first and have a point adwantage. And if both teams just camps, the one who capped earlier win. this creates a pressure on the "losing" team to take an action and get into the lead.
  2. KRBeC

    Ranked Battles Season 6

    OK guys, I have not expected myself to defend WG here, but considering what you wrote me, I will support WG bit more I wanted. It is not a problem, that majority (maybe not) of the ship that fits well in current meta are premium ships, rather consider it a feature. Despite WoWs being F2P it has to earn money somehow (otherwise there would be no WoWs at all). The fact you cannot aford any premium ship is again not a problem of ranked (neither current season nor previous seasons). Please mind I'm not trying to insult you here, just stating how it works. Still as far as non-premium ships goes, you have plenty of options (not really in CAs though, despite fiji being an often played stapler). Considering BBs I can only paraphrase what friends who do play BBs told me. There is Sharn (premium), but Gneis with bigger guns is considered eaqualy powerful (and also with torps). Moreover you can opt for Nagato (build on survivability recommended) and score high as well. What is not good to play (yet I have played it several times and it was playable) is Colorado - good ship, but compared to other T7 counterparts it lacks something. If you focus on DDs, you may find out that most "wanted" DD is Shira with best cammo among T7. In terms of spotting and sneaky attack it beats all the premium DDs available at this tier, but it is not a gunboat and requires more patient approach and better teamwork (dont expect to be able fight Blyska, Sims, Lenin or Mahan 1v1). And if you want to play CV, Hyriu is a good choice, though Saipan have better fighters (but only one bomber squad). Simply speaking there are lot of free options for you to chose from. Not gonna tell Myoko is a bad ship. It just does not fit well in smoke-radar game style. Anyway I am serious with a need to "get use to it". This is real world, and this is how it works. Although we spent some time writing what have to say about ranked (I wrote something about ranked being a poorly prepared game mode as well), we have only two options for this season - play it as it is or not to play it. Or say getting use to it or getting lost. Balance wise each ship has some weakness. If you want to discuss Belf, it lacks AA protection (somewhat compensated by being hidden in smoke for long time). And in case you focus in AA def at least by perks, you will cut down your damage potential you want to build your strategy on. Also (and this goes not only to Belf but to current smoke-style gameplay) there were never so much CAs damaged/killed by tors while not moving. That is the downside of smokecamping. But it does not mean that each two ships can be balanced against each other. Some are obviously good counter to others. Ultimately it shrinks to player skill but having an "OP" ship simply gives you small advantage and it is up to you how you can use it. And if you realy want to be able to attack smoked Belf (or other smoked ship that has radar or other means of spotting) head on, you would probably need to learn from Chuck Norris. Otherwise you will need to learn how the game mechanic works and what is not possible for you if you want to avoid suicide (and screwing game for your team). Paying players with no skill? Where is there a problem in that. And how much are those different from non-paying players with no skill (despite having "better" ships to paly with)? It only means that WoWs is not realy P2W game, since money will help you but if you have poor skill, premium ship itself won¨t win the battle for you. Ragequitting because of MM? Kinda childish and kinda contradicting to the fast many credit-card-players are (or may be) of poor skill. I have seen games against 3 Belfs won without much of problems (though those were not a fast games as those with no smoke-radar camping). Also I have lost games where we had "advantage" of more Belfasts. This has nothing to do with ranked but with mindsets of those leavers. And I would agree with severe punishment for such players (e.g. losing more stars, or getting banned for few days if leaving repeatedly). IFHE, well that is kinda problem since not every ship may benefit well from it. I don't know the game well enoug, but from what I read about armor and IFHE clculations, only some ships may use it to its finest (Belf and Atlanta are among such ships). Compared with Fiji that has no HE at all, it is a big boost for some other ships. Wall hack (or other cheats) you mentioned has again nothing to do with ranked. Cannot tell whether majority is using it or only few players, dont even know how exactly those cheats should work. I also don't know whether it would be possible to prevent such cheating by allowing to play raned only with clear installation (since WG added minimap options and alternate crosshairs, I'm using only default game and it is enough for me). When there was some lead-assist back in closed beta, someone was explaining that it is a separate programe and WG cannot detect it simply by comparing whther the game files have been modified. Probably that is the reason such cheats may be out there. Also the reason why in tournaments (so far only unofficial) players are asked to create screenshots. Perhaps a solution might be a feature that will ocassionaly take a screenshot of your computer and send it through game to WG, but not sure who would be analising all thos screens (maybe a comunity service, something as tribunal used to be in LoL). T7 CVs? Nad here we go. If you have team of belfasts, then CV have an easy way to play. Put there CAs with defensive fire (or even DDs, I like my Sims being able to protect itself or mates from air strikes) and CV does not have easy job at all. But considering how often you play with CVs, its more benefitial not to take care about AA def and once in a while being owned by CV (moreover you have also CV in your team that might provide some AA suport). I don't see Cs to ruin or poison the game anyhow (uneless it happens that one is uterly unskilled compared to the other, so its like one team having CV while other not having one, in such case just hope you are with the skilled one). Current meta is just as it is. As I wrote above, despite not being hapy with it, all we can do is just getting used to it (or we can ignore ranked). If you want to participate more, add some suggestion of how to improve ranked. But crying how it is not working is just a sing to WG that we are hapy, but not saying how to change it. Friend of my wrote some interesting sugestions for changing ranked today (though i don't agree with all of that). And that is what i consider a good way tell WG you are not happy, cause you would be giving a possible solution that way (still no guarantee WG gives a crap, but at least you will look like someone who cares).
  3. KRBeC

    Ranked Battles Season 6

    sorry, multi-reply kinda missfired against me
  4. KRBeC

    Ranked Battles - Season 7 Rules [Suggestion]

    No Epicenter, Tier 8 ships There should be a research dome among players. I would personally agree, players I am in contact with have mostly same preferences, though I would not be sure it goes for majority of players. As for tier, I find it important to make a stable tier for ranked battles (whether it should be T7 or T8, or even some transition aka T7 for battles bellow rank10 and T8 for above rank10). Having each season with tier being switched (and not even knowing long in advance - like at the end of season having set tier for next season) - is rather frustrating. Rewards for win/loss based on exp First of all I am no big friend of the rule that prevent me from losing a star if I score top exp (though it is the only reason I am rank 4 currently, with WR bellow 50%). On the other hand - if there will be some end-game content for season, where ranks could be seen as some sort of qualifier, then I would agree in making progress to rank1 easier. In my mind having rewards exp-based promotes playing for personal gains (exp-leeching) over teamplay. And suggested changes make these differences even bigger (despite making it easier to get to rank1 in general). Also some other system to measure one's contribution need to be used for this, or the exp-gain algorithm has to be revised not to benefit certain game styles over others but to reflect actual impact on team victory. Losing team rewards/losses .. Here I would oppose the idea of actually gaining a star for a defeat. Not losing a star is more than a good reward for player's performance. Even in case there should be more than one player who will not lose a star, there is no need for giving the top one something more (just make it that all three will save their stars). After all you should not be able to progress to top rank with 0% WR, what this suggestion could make possible. Victorious team rewards .. 3 stars for top exp player is way too much (unless you really want to make it just a swift run through ranks towards end-game). Again I can imagine giving 2 stars to three best players. This would actually lower the stress on leeching as much exp as possible since being in top3 is much easier than fighting for top place, and no extra reward for top place would give more space for fighting for victory. Overall star count for progress should be adjusted towards how fast we want players to progress to end-game content. Suggested setting would be way too fast I guess. All-star league (end-game) First to stress out, the best rewards should be given based on player's "progression" in end-game. E.g. the flag and doublons will not be given to player for reaching rank1 (since now it would be much easier under these changes (easier on purpose to allow more players participate in end-game) but for reaching certain criteria in end-game. 50 best battles .. kinda troublesome in my opinion. I value WR as the ultimate measure of player's success. This way I may be "grinding" entire month having 50 epic battles among thousand battles played with poor WR and score above a dude who has 100% WR though he never scored a result to match my top50. Moreover it would lead towards playing for individual gains, all those yolo runs screaming "glory or death", instead towards "professional" organised gameplay putting teamplay and victory above anything. As for the exclusive rewards - keep historical ladders accessible. I guess for most of top players the records of their successes are more valuable in long-run than some premium ship they don't really need (unless it's something OP useful to gain advantage in upcoming battles). ELO-like system suggestion For measuring performance in end-game I would prefer something based on ELO system. I don't want to go deep into math formulas, but imagine a coefficient for each player starting with some set value upon reaching rank1 and entering end-game. By winning a game player's coef would increase, on the other hand losing a game would reduce it. The volume of how much it will be increased/lowered depends on difference between player's coef and average coef of entire enemy team. The higher player's coef compared to this average the higher the loss (in case of defeat) and the lower the gain (in case of victory). This way WR is crucial factor yet there is a factor of how strong were teams the player was fighting against. In case there would be enough players playing end-game MM should try to match players with as close coef as possible. Anyway MM should try at least to balance overall strengths of teams (in case it would be possible, still balancing by ship types should be superior).
  5. KRBeC

    Ranked Battles Season 6

    I will no argue with your about ranked being ruined or imbalanced. But seriously, however the meta is, you know about it. Attacking smoked Belfast in Myoko (or its equivalence) head on is simply stupid. It could be compared to engaging Schanrhorst in Pensacola at close range. Muh have changed since last season, buts basically still the same. DDs are making the game (only not so easily due to excess or radars) and rest keeps camping (now mostly in smoke) in hopes to shoot unlucky (or unskilled) enemy who dare to show himself up. Get used to it, play ships that fit in curent ranked, or just don't play it. Sure the game is not balanced and new premium ships are somewhat OP, that is the point of successful F2P game. Devs need to be paid, they cannot live from air and a good feeling of working for WG. On the other hand even the ships that fit best in current meta are not as OP you cannot play against those, you just need to play different way than you were used to (unless you consider "skill" being a better aim in situations when you can shoot each other with your opponent with nowhere to hide for either of you).
  6. KRBeC

    Ranked Battles Season 6

    Actually ranked is awsome. Come home from work, turn WoWs on, after few battles I'm pumped more than after a football match. Its like using cocain instead of sugar into quadrupple espresso. So many players I would rather not dare to descibe in words to prevent my account from getting banned. Last season was bad in this aspect, this seems even worse. Cannot imagine better way to wake myself up for some evening fun.
  7. KRBeC

    Ranked Battles Season 6

    Switching tiers again. Saving a star for top exp still in play. Frequent epicenter mode. Welcome to ranked hell. Seriously, get the heck ranked something to make it a good mode. Personally I would preffer T8 over T7, but regardless which tier, make it just one tier that wil be ranked once and forever and dont change it every season there and back. There si long run towards something as CWs, but just as it works in WoT, make "competitive" tiers and keep on those. Obviously it would be T10 as top tier, and some lower tier (in WoT it is T8, and even lower T6, whether you go same way in WoWs, or chose e.g. T7 is not as important, but make it clear). I kind of understand the point of making players pay, game industry is a business, not a charity. But since its mostly p2w on T7/8, I think there is no need to switch between tiers every season. Otherwise why not to have one season with T6 and one with T5 before going back to T/78? Saving-a-star rule is nuts as it was since its introduction. So far it seems safer to play for experience than for victory, and if you fail, you at least keep you star. It was frustrating to be on top and yet losing a star cause team did not played well, but this is even worse (though I have to admit I made it to rank1 last season only thx to this rule). Once you have no other choice by to win, you will have a reason to play towards team victory and not risk you ship in attempts to claim few extra exp that may result in protecting your star. Also "taking one for team" is in current situation realy unrewarded, since taking damage, spotting, or say providing air supremacy is nothing compared to producing damage or capturing bases. In fact proper teamplay is punished compared to solo play, and there is almost always at least one teamate who tends to play for his own results, not only for victory. Epicenter may be working well, but I have seen noone so far being happy to get that game mode. I would preffer ranked not ot be a playce to experiment how players would like something, or feel about it, we have random games for that, or PTR. Rewads for ranked went down a lot, but actaully this is in my oppinion a good point. The less rewards for playing ranked, the less players who play ranked only for rewards. On the other hand rank would need something to play after you reach top rank, something as ultimate league or something, competing not to get to specific battle rank, but say a ladder comparing players based on their ranked performance after reaching rank1. Think about it please.
  8. KRBeC

    Prepare for Ranked Battles Season 5!

    Serouly guys, be glad for these changes. Sure, it won't solve some of the major issues we feel while playing ranked, but at least its back to what we were used to (and no more "low-tier" ships in battle). What scares me now most is actually instability of WG's ideas of how raked should look like. It is crucial for players to know basic meta (mostly tiers) so they may prepare ships in long-run. Swithing tiers from season to season only creates confusion (as if a PLC company would pay out generous dividends one year and following year reinvest earning o rise share value, though bot is acceptable, shareholders would be confused as hell and probaly start selling). Nothing but hope this tier shift is last and final and we can consider tier8 being crucial for "lower-tier events" and hopefully tier 10 for some CWs in near future.
  9. KRBeC

    General Feedback

    Good update so far. Cannt say much about bastions since I have not played them yet, but the changes in visualization is what I was looking for. Now WG should do something with smoke screen, that is invisible from certain angles/distances/zooms and most importantnly not properly displayed for ships that are inside smoke (some visible boundaries would be more than fine to make us use smoke properly).
  10. So by the weekend (mostly Sunday) I got up to rank 6. First of all I have to admit, teamplay is much better at higher ranks and though it feels still like a russain roulete (in terms winning/losing the battle), it was mostly enjoyable battles. So at least better player experience. The problem in the ranked I still feel is the not-losing-star rule. Since I start focusing on that, I saved quite some stars be scoring top-exp when I lost, but it feels realy bad. Based on prior experiences I just resign on desperate attemts to turned lost game into victory and just leeched as much experience as possible (especially easy on open map with DD and only few ships alive). The problem is, that not having this new rule, I would be playing more risky and had a chance to win some of the game I have not (what would be better for my team, though not for me in case we lost and I have ot reached top exp). Also there is lot of "solo payers" (epsecially among DDs) who ignore team and go try something on their own (mostly cap), so in case they are lucky, they get some extra exp, if not, they jut die. Sure, those were in revious season as well, but now I feel they are doing so not because they consider it good way for victory, but good way to leech some extra exprience for the case we lost (and happeed to me several times i died on cap with DD just after capturing it, killed enemy DD in process, and it was enough to be top-exp, thus it is viable strategy (exp-wise)).
  11. Yea, I'm making it too complicated (in case you reffer to the idea with doubling stars), but essentially I was for win/loss with no exceptions. And although its true tha ultimate way to progress is by doing all you can for victory, but from personal point of view (not team point of view) "rather safe than sorry" and faster would be sacuring top exp (eventhough it may mean we lose some of games we might win, if we (or say I) took the risk), and prevent losing star in case we won't succeed. This is even more relevant in battles where you get unfavourable team setup (e.g. less DDs than enemy team or CV withouth 5th perk on captain) or when one (or more) of your teamates die early on (leeroy DD, unlucky citadel on CA etc.) This problem goes mainly for DDs, who risk most by trying to spot for rest of team. Although important part of game, there are no experience for spotting (wish it was more like WoT in this aspect) and thus DD spotting for team wont score high. But when it start to fight (damage to get some exp, or trying to cap, though i dangerous position), it may easily die sending entire team into defeat. Kinda same when BB is trying to "snipe" instead of risk life (or just sacrifice) itself so team may push through defences and win. When you go for your personal gain, you play for win, but with your back covered if possibe, and wth ranked being strictly solo-play (no divisions), there is not as much of teamplay (kinda epxpect to have more teamplay at higher ranks, but this season I was only R8 and though better than R12, still a russian rulete on what you get in your team. And franky, if I were not stupid and played more for my stars, I'm not R10 right now (but as you corretly mentioned, oly way to gain a star is through victory and if I want to reach top, i cannot just sit on what I have). So based on my experience so far, I will probaly persuade myself to become a leecher, will play safe and focus on gaining experience with as low risk as possible, and switch towards teamplay when I have good team (mean people willing to cooperate, mostly players I know from earler gameplay), what I expecect at higer ranks. And although I don't know, what WG want to have ranked for, it should be fun, challangin and fair, possible rewading skill and reflecting it in results. So far I see ranked only as better-rewarded random games with less maps you play on and higer consequences of mistakes (not because some stars, but in 7v7 each ship has higher value than in 12v12).
  12. Seroíously season 3, hmm how to say it politely enough not to get banned, not met expectation of everyone I have discussed this with, though I was looking forward to it expecting high improvements (and at first glance not losing a tar for best result seemed a good move) Omit noobs, low-tier ships wth no modules, teamattacks who sink friendly ship because of sme dispute from match before and so on. It was just a russian rulete before and nothing change (not towards the good). Only difference was (and hopefully is) playing at higer ranks (lot of before e´metioned dont make too high in ranks). But there are lot of things WG might prepare towards good player experience, instead of preparing us another ranked hell. "not-losing-star" rule In essence a good idea to somehow help good players not to be dragged down by bad team, but it went completely wrong. Epxerience gained does not realy reflect player's cotribution towards victory, rather it reflect how well he know to leech exp (why to fight and risk dieing, when I can camp and let others take the damage). Partly for this reason there are way too much DDs in game (still too much exp for capturing bases, and its reatively safe in case you are not trying to cap it by force and thus risking your life). Make ranked count as win or loss, nothing else, so only way to gain a star (or prevent loss) would be through victory (or say double the stars and make a system where top player(s) of defeated team lose one instead of two, and lowest player(s) or victorious team gains one instead of two (for rest 2 stars lost/gained to compensate doubling the stars needed for next rank), and still you would need a system that would better reflect player contribution). tier spread First the tiers 6-7 for basically entire Seaon (except for lowest ranks and later (hopefully) two victoies with tier10. I kinda understand WG needs to sell more premium ships and we already have thos of T8, but tier7 is simply not good. Team battles are with T8 and majority of players dont give a damn about retraining captain, those are ships good for "nothing", except for exping through those and for collector purposes, and now for ranked). Good is there is no tier9 to play with, at least something (although i need to exp my Dimitry now). Secondly, as in previous season, there is spread, so you meet T6 ships as well (usaly guys who just wanna exp their T6 ship and why not to do it in ranked, who cares their firepower are insuficient). Wouldn't it be better to mae players play only with one tier, and eventually add more steps throughout ranks (so say 5 ranks with 6, then 5 ranks with T7 and so on). ranked over public Ranked is much more rewarding than public. Sure, good for us so we can earn more than in public, but sadly there are players who play for better exp. Ranked should not be about most profitable way to paly, but about fighting through ranks, competitive play with some sweet rewards for achieving ranks and ultimately getting towards the top (though I would welcome a system, where top ranks is for the top payers, and not just a matter of being patient, playing enough games and being a bit lucky, as it was in previous seasons and nothing makes me feel different about this one, sure, I would not achieve the top, I'm not such a good player as I would like to be, but right now anything above 50% win rate means you can get to top (statistically)). I'm not sure about how many players would play with lower income (both exp and credits) but say you gain no experince for defeat, and only as much credits you need for repairs and consumables (in case you would earn that much). By such change in rewards ranked would be not favourable for those, who just want exp their ships fast (or earn credits easier) plus there would be pressure toards playing for victory. ----- Nothing to hope its still just a problems of early days of new seaon (though I doubt it) and pray for Season 4 to be at least back where Season 2 was.
  13. KRBeC

    Mods in WoWS 0.5.5

    Well in 0.5.5 some mods worked wrong or not at all, but hail to the WG for 0.5.6, the game is quite nice withouth any mods at all (though there are stilll features I would like to have provided by game). Kinda wonder why e.g. map (as it is now) were not implemented in WoT long time ago se we were dependent on XVM. Seems WoWs is progressing the better way (my opinion) and I am glad for that.
  14. OK i take it back, seems I was kinda blind.
  15. This is mostly for WG, but guess I'm not the only one who is missing important information about my ships (bacome realy annoying with recent changes in IJN DDs' torpedoes). Some stats should be accessible from port, so that players will know more about their ships. I expect it to be easily implemented by WG (just add few more lines in ship detail into respective parts (e.g. torpedo spot distance by enemy ships as one more line in torpedo details). Since there will be obviously lot of information we would like to see, add it here please, so we have it in one thread. stats to be displayed (hae two by myself so far) ... torpedoes .. detectibility range [add to modules, so players can see it before researching and mouting on ship] concealment .. detectibility range by sea/air after shooting from main armaments