allufewig

Borderslider!! Glitcher!!! Burn the witch fortress!! Seriously, did you win? Played some 20 Murmansk-battles the last 2 days, didnt see any halloween-ships. :/

Über Leute die die mit Abstand stärksten Damagedealer, mit der höchsten K/D, der höchsten Survivalrate, ehemals höchsten Winrate (danke Spiegel-mm) auch noch buffen möchten, kann ich nur lachen. Das ist Comedy Gold. WG lässt die Träger so, weil sie - deren Aussage- die Realität mit ihren zunehmend wichtigen Trägern annähernd abbilden wollen. T9/10-Träger dürfen also aufgrund historischer Gründe als OP-Mobile herumfahren, während fast alle anderen nur hoffen können dass der eigene CV kein Depp ist, der gegnerische aber schon. Träger haben alleine über ihre irren Damagewerte, an die eben auch Yamato etc. nicht (annähernd) rankommen so viel Einfluss aufs Spiel, dass man mit der Aussage "der bessere Träger gewinnt" ziemlich gut hinkommen wird.

Die Zitadelle ist da wo sie bei anderen Schiffen auch ist und sie ist auch nicht kleiner. Das hervorragende interne Panzerungslayout macht jedoch durchschlagende Treffer fast unmöglich. Hinter der hauptpanzerung befindet sich eine weitere stark gewinkelte Platte mit über 100mm Dicke. In 150 Spielen in denen ich die jap. BBs von T7 bis 10 hochgespielt habe, habe ich 1, in worten einen Zitadellentreffer auf eine Tirpitz gesetzt. War in der Amagi auf ca 14km. Wie der reinging weiß ich selber nicht. Selbst mit der Yamato auf 10km, also praktisch schon Nahkampf, kriegt man die Zitadelle durch den Hauptgürtel nicht geknackt. Dafür sind 10k+ reguläre Salven auf die Tirpitz nicht so selten.

Negative! Not the case. It is simply a bug or something. In all domination matches (and standard-battle is now also called domination) cap and decap dont get recorded anymore.

Ich find die Beleidigung "super". Toblerone-Fresser, heehe.

Mirror-mm does that. One CV always wins at the cost of another one. The average dmg, kills, surv etc. tell you the true story about the impact carriers have in battles. It is disproportionally large especially for Essex/Midway although there are still some other strong performers in the class. But hey, it is not nearly as bad as it was.

OMG I am dumb. No really, sorry. Thats embarrassing.

http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/35033-051-patch-notes/#topmost #230,235, 241 Low attentionspan? Or how should I understand the fact that you approve of a posting that basically says "Cruisers should not be able to defend themselves against BBs with any slight reliability"?

That is true. But at the same time you agree to the proposed change to Advanced firing training, ripping the well-rounded midtier-cruisers of the crucial ability to successfully kite BBs, pushing them more towards a pure Support role. I dont understand the people posting in these forums. Edit: Was anyone talking about other carriers than Essex and Midway here? Since 4.1 the situation is largely at peace. With the exception of the two US hightiers, CVs seem fairly well balanced. We dont have the times anymore in which "General discussion" was a bloody battlefield with every second thread being about carriers. Even Hakuryu isnt so much ahead of the T10 BBs that I would consider it problematic.

Still not worth any investment. That 140mm-fireworks-batteries overpen DDs and bounce the rest, unless they hit some cruiser broadside.

I know all this and I know that thread from ancient times as well. So even if I was shooting a T10 with a 0,5-modifier the increase would be +1,5% to a base-value of 2,5% which is still 60% extra. With a low base-chance, Atlanta would be THE ship to profit from the skill teh most, if it indeed was additive. And that simply could not be confirmed. With maybe 5-6 fires started per game before DE, I did not get a single more fire on average afterwards. Samplesize was ~50 games. So unless I see a more recent statement from a dev that DE indeed is additive, I keep on doubting it.

I cant see any teamwork with or without carriers. All that I see is overpowered hightier CVs that are overpowered because they were powerful IRL. That is WGs whole reasoning behind this. Yes, they stated this. And that is just as stupid as your theories about pain and punishment in online games. People do things they get rewarded for. Theres is no incentive to babysit your random shithead in his OP-mobile, so it is not being done. Not being raped is no reward. The moment you have to rely on "punishment" or "pain" as a games(!) mechanics to get your idea of teamplay around, youre doing it horribly horribly wrong.

One does not have to be able to perfectly manual-drop to correctly read and interpret serverstats.

What you perceive as the truth. Big difference. I consider it hilarious nonsense.

I dont see any dev comments in that thread. There is a link to one that I cant open. And the russian one that I know of, is from some time in 2014 when Pyromania was still 5%. I am absolutely not convinced it is still additive as of today.

It doesnt work, if a class is helpless against another one which is on the brink of overperforming as is. Why do you think the cruiser-population in hightier is so low? That is because the lighter ships have little reason. An Iowa or an Amagi is a better cruiser than any *real* cruiser. People will play the package that gets you the most wins, the best stats and is least dependant on the team. AFT helped midtier-cruisers to compete with BBs and offer that package. Reducing the range-effect of AFT to DDs will greatly change class-distribution in midtier as cruisers will lose an important aspect of their allround-capability and be relegated to pure support. Any changes that makes players more dependant on random tomatoes in the carry-classes is fail because there is and never will be sufficient teamplay in randoms for supports to pay off.

"Unavoidable" oneshot-capabilities never added anything positive to any game in the long run. Not sure whats worse though. Hyper-RNG based weapons with very mediocre serverstats like WoT-arty or at least somewhat skill-dependant manual drops from Derpway&Co that also overperform statistically. @fnord: You cannot force teamplay uppon people by [edited]with gamebalance and let every game revolve around a single class. Because people do not want to be dependant on 1 or 2 random tomatoes. It is a completely dumb and futile attempt that will achieve nothing but constant frustration.

I doubt this is true. (98%+ sure actually). Tried it for dozens of matches on Atlanta. DE would make the firechance jump from 5% to 8%, a 60% increase. Nothing like this could be observed. Not even remotely. It rather was 5%x1,03 = 5,15%. In other words, the skill did nothing at all.

Isnt this quite obvious? Aside of being generally beneficial for damagedealing, AFT is the skill for light cruisers, because it allows them to engage BBs on a similar (or greater) range and dodge a lot of their shots. Not only was it an offensive skill, but also one that increased survivability. Now CLs will have to go closer, which will more often end fatally. Well played Kongos, Fusos, New Mexs etc already pretty much rule the field. Now they will have even less competiotion from the cruisers.

Reducing AFT to only work with secondaries for the range-aspect, would bring the BB-meta into midtiers and fueling the hightier-BB-dominance even more. Im very sceptical about this.

Allerdings. "Ich hab in der Beta 250 Spiele auf xxx gespielt, ich kenne das Schiff", geht jetzt nicht mehr, außer es stimmt wirklich. Und ich find es super das wieder einsehen zu können, schon weil ich mich selber z.T. über meine Beta-Werte getäuscht habe. Ich dachte ich hätte mehr gespielt und wäre besser gewesen, tatsächlich hatte ich nur 175 Gefechte und Mörderkackstats, außer Winrate.

Pretty sure its a buff "enjoy better.." But to be honest, this buff better be good. US CAs past T6/elite T7 are just crap. The only thing they had *really* going for them was the AA under the effect of defensive fire. Now with limited charges, US CAs get crippled in the only aspect they were good at. Thats just dumb.

Ich versuche mal eine Hexe oder die Festung zu Murmansken wenn ich eine von beiden zufällig antreffe. Sowohl den Salven der DM als auch den Fliegern der Essex kann man damit mit passabler Wahrscheinlichkeit ausweichen. Für die meisten Schife dürfte es aber extrem hart werden die Dinger mit Aussicht auf Erfolg anzugehen. DDs mit hoher Torpreichweite (Gremy, evtl Minekaze) und agile longrange-Kreuzer (Murm, C-Omaha, am besten mit range-skill) könnten noch am besten sein. BBs können gut Schaden machen, aber auf T4/5 schmelzen die gegen eine DM weg wie Eiswürfel im geheizten Backofen. Edit: Die Hexe (Des Moines) hat nur T-4-matchmaking? Na dann ist für deren Gegner nur zu hoffen, dass der Event-Spieler nicht sonderlich begabt ist. Kein T4-Schiff hat eine realistische Chance eine solche Konfrontation längere Zeit zu überleben.

Il try to Murmansk it. DM simply doesnt hit such a maneuverable target with any reliability at 12km+ range with its cleveland-like firing arc. I approve of the fact that after all we do get that event as well.

Well, Im not sure I brought the point across: I think it is a dumb idea to make a class/vehicle deliberately stronger than others because of historic reasons. To me this is simply bad gamedesign. You dont enforce teamplay on players by doing so,you just frustrate them.