Jump to content
Update 0.11.9 Release: Wednesday 5/10/2022 Read more... ×

mtm78

Alpha Tester
  • Content Сount

    19,378
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    6105

About mtm78

  • Rank
    Admiral of the Fleet
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

7,338 profile views
  1. mtm78

    Gouden Leeuw

    Am I correctly inferring that you claim that the Dutch actually performed a lot of air raids in the Pacific theater? And it wasn't constant threat of IJN strike and reconnaissance aircraft which made life hard for ABDA command? Battle of the Java Sea - Wikipedia Battle of Sunda Strait - Wikipedia Second Battle of the Java Sea - Wikipedia Do the Dutch, or any of the nations in the ABDA force, perform air strikes during any of these engagements? Edit: Not that IJN victory wasn't based on naval action and didn't involve air strikes, at least this as an attribute seems to follow their doctrine more as can be attributed to the Dutch. I know about the 16 Dutch submarines, thanks for your condescending assumptions says more about you then about me. It's btw 'innovate', if were going to be pedantic. Not that I would want to but if you're going to start I think I should show you a mirror so you might reconsider. Btw, you weren't even here when I was asking WG to make low tier Dutch cruisers AA powerhouses based on the Dutch invention of the fully stabilized Hazemeijer mounts for bofors. Hazemeyer gun mount - Wikipedia Btw, can you list me all those combined surface fleet actions our Dutch submarines were involved in, or did we just as IJN and US in the Pacific utilize submarines in a different manner ( because.. submarines can't be used like that due to how WWII technology submarines actually operated they were better utilized in a different manner ). Being a war, assets were used where they were the most effective. But you're free to disagree with me, please convince me I'm wrong. I don't know why you're adding to this to a reply to me, I think this isn't addressed to me in particular but besides the gimmick, I do like what WG's art department has done. Balance wise I don't know, people been saying the gun performance isn't good, then I been hearing people claim it's actually decent. If I were to make a judgement I would have to take a look at her statistics.
  2. mtm78

    General CV related discussions.

    I think you missed your morning coffee as you're reacting in a way which has no relevance to what I said unless you're misinterpreting ;)
  3. mtm78

    Subs, simple yes or no

    Wg spend a lot of time on crew2.0, but community stopped them. Also yes submarines were an important part of WW2. But this what wg has put in the game after NOT those submarines only things made to look like WW2 submarines. Also just to make sure, you do realize submarines were never used on the manner wg is trying to make people believe. Integral part in the same engagements they are absolutely astoundingly not.
  4. mtm78

    Submarine feedback v 2.0 (Tier X only)

    Double post - blame phone
  5. mtm78

    Submarine feedback v 2.0 (Tier X only)

    Thanks for confirming your lack of arguments you're willing to stand behind, instead choosing to hide so you van later complain about bias. Know you're now unable to later complain about anything, also know people know it's you who started with your personal attacks constantly trying to claim I and people who been saying the same things don't 'understand' your irrelevant drivel and how others are avoiding the discussion when it's you who avoids the discussion by constantly sidetracking anything you can't dismiss with some attempt at an witty remark. "CENTERED" don't give people a heart attack with those jokes you're the most extremist defender of this abomination of submarines as well as cv rework. It looks like you actually only come here to do those two things. I pity those who have to deal with you in real life. Don't mind me btw for just correcting some possible wrong believes.
  6. mtm78

    Submarine feedback v 2.0 (Tier X only)

    Continuing on, even if you don't run out of DCP because you're not a potato, this doesn't seem to mix well with submarine mechanics as depicted in Sub_Octavian's create vision. Any increase in need to use DCP for subs goes at the expense of a usage in another situation. Depending on how good the enemy submarine is / how often you really need to use the DCP there has to be a negative effect on late game survivability.
  7. mtm78

    General CV related discussions.

    To that note, I just clicked on the matchmaking thread, when I was really active I never was really behind on it. I have 200 unread pages, and I'm 100% sure nothing in those 200 pages is different than the content which came before it. Normally I would enjoy posting there in response to all the claims about rigged matchmaker, the posts telling us that for real no joke WG actually has patents which talk about a rigged matchmaker and patents for 'rigged' matchmaking for premium vehicles. Those were delicious posts which made me salivate ready to bite and tear into people keeping those rumors alive. I'm pretty sure there are people looking at this thread in the same way, thinking we're laughably biased and wrong in all our assessments, and who come here just to read the latest whining in order to get a good laugh. Sad realization for sure
  8. mtm78

    My thoughts about the Patch 0.10.8 video

    I felt the same about Bastion at first. Basically you just said: they got the very basic idea, like.. uhm a convoy, a defending and an attacking force. But all the details are wrong, and need tweaking. Honestly I'm basing my opinion on what I seen from others and by listening to their opinions as I haven't played myself but it really sounds as a rough placeholder which coincidentally shows up right alongside submarines, to give the impression we might see that work and improvements like adding submarines in convoy missions and perhaps even add pacific ocean patrol interceptions of IJN or USN warships ( much more common in the pacific theater so I think it would fit more with those nations ) as alternative / second convoy type mission. Look at the CV rework. WG does not look at quality gameplay, all rework really achieved is allowing WG to add carriers to consoles, remove cohesion between carrier and surface gameplay and both in conjunction with this and worth it's own mention removed carrier team support aspect in favor of a greatly simplified damage dealing ability where they lowered the skill floor considerably and and the same time failed to do something about the skill ceiling while also failing to limit actual battle influence. Everyone is free to agree or disagree with all or part of that, but I think I'm quite capable of making excellent arguments for all of those points. It's not reasonable to expect WG to actually put in that effort without first making sure they publicly state they won't press on as they are now ( with small tweaks ). Because it will take more as a few small tweaks to bring submarine gameplay to a level where it's fun to play and fun to play against hopefully at the same time. I say hopefully because while I have a pretty good idea of how I would like to see them changed and added I'm not done with working that all out in a manner which I would be able to present to the community in a manner as to were it can be torn down or decorated as seen fit, hopefully added to or changed due to compelling arguments and a measure of community majority consensus. Just to say, I got an idea, but if that's any good isn't up to me. And I'm scared, I wanted to be done this weekend but ran out of time, I been filling in stubs today throughout when I have some free time and the creative muse isn't to far away. It doesn't scare me that I'm not meeting my self imposed deadline, that's because the scope is increasing more as the factor of time it is costing me, but because the more I write down the more I see a pattern I don't want to see. And that's going straight back to 'marketing department' aka 'creative vision'. Because let's face it, the way the game is monetized now IS different, WG can promise us they don't implemented lootboxes because of revenue because they still make most with premium ship sales that still doesn't mean they felt a need to add a revenue stream not based on actual content but on certain not that above the board mechanics which are sadly not to be fully attributed to WG but to the industry as a whole. Anyway back to my fear: submarines are closer to being stuffed down everyone's throat as some might hope and actually make a lot more sense if I were a publisher which would be focusing on a new demographic -> console players. Console players are generally less interested in slower paced games like WoWs ( ... commonly accepted characteristic of the game if we go back a couple of years ... ), console players are generally also less engaged as a community ( something to do with us pc folks having a keyboard which facilitates typing walls of text more easily I think? ) and are easier to deal with as us PC folks which are more accustom to big community management teams and lots off interaction with developers ( wrong forum/publisher.. darn it stings ). What folk, and I know I'm sounding like a total douche for being so generalizing but if you take away the obvious exaggerative nature of the statement you'll find a basis of truth, are better fitting for WG community engagement as console players? Further more, if I were a developer focusing on console players possibly wanting submarines, what WG is showing us is what I would try to come away with since it would work so well both in console control scheme as in the more arcade expectations of console gamers opposed to those who were here from the start and who remember fondly when this game still actually resembled something more akin to real naval warfare as could potentially realistically have occurred during WWII. How 'broken' RTS cv's were, they still forced battleships to synchronize with cruisers because they actually needed them, which made map deployments of players actually resemble more of what you could realistically expect in a semi real WWII naval setting with DD's picketing cruisers both supporting the DD and the BB's and BB's needing to stay near their cruisers if they didn't want to suffer a really high damage strike. I enjoyed that meta, more as that which followed, and that has nothing to do with denying the flaws of RTS carriers. Anyway, I'm halfway sure WG would like to increase their playerbase on console's significantly, and this might be a large part of why the community feels so disconnected from the mighty spreadsheet. Is it to much a fear based on nothing if I say it might not have been the community the spreadsheet was actually targeting in the long run. edit: jesus wall of text wall of text .. guess I was/am tired so stopping the train of thought get's harder ... to those who will read it all ;)
  9. mtm78

    My thoughts about the Patch 0.10.8 video

    Do you think it's a nice placeholder or do you think it's actually something which is already balanced quite well and fun to play on both sides? Asking for a friend. He thinks it feels like it's just a placeholder to appease part of the players who care into hoping WG will actually flesh it out and use it and possible other modes as places to implement submarines in ways they are 'meant to be played'.
  10. mtm78

    PEGI 18 : 4 All NEW games that have gambling

    Actually no, because the actual intent was to create a sh1tst0rm around the lootboxes by amongst others an assault on the PEGI rating office since it would generate attention, not because there was an expectation that PEGI would be able to stop them. Legislation. Wrong you can pay by phone or text message. Children have access to those now. Wow. such revelations. C'mon, everyone and their dogs know that. Wait, so IF Pegi would actually change it to a Pegi18 it still has nothing to do with what WG can do promotionally? Is that what you're saying? No, I think it's actually quite safe to state ex-CC's fully acknowledge lootboxes aren't going away because of a lack of legislation and I haven't seen anyone publicly state the game should be 18+ because that would 'protect the children' or any other reason. In fact I just heard the old man tell me Pegi18 is never going to happen because it would cost WG a metric asston of revenue, ow in the same video he states that lootboxes aren't going anywhere until legislation is in effect to mandate it. Btw, flambas and @tcfreerwere in that same video and I'm pretty sure they also agree on the above. You're doing an awful lot off gaslighting there. Could you rewrite this sentence so it makes sense using proper English to actually tie action to result? Yeah.. no. Because regulatory boards should not base decisions on limited examples on forum posts since it's not direct evidence of anything. People make lots of statements on a forum which are taken with the proverbial grain of salt for good reason. Tongue in cheek comments meant to show community solidarity between players and against the 'evil company' are not leading to any legal ground in any courtroom unless the defending lawyer is in need off turning over their license to practice law. Couple of points I would like to address. 1. We? You're royalty suddenly or you just consulted with who exactly? 2. No nvm, I don't need the answer actually because this 'we' you mention sounds like a person I wouldn't want to know or interact with anyway. Since this mysterious group of people seems to think this battle is about their ego, and not about the actual dangers of gambling mechanics in online gaming accessible by minors. Shame on 'them'. But fear not other engaged reader, the 'help' from those guys would consist of more hot air I'm sure, as the thing which is needed is legislation and in order to do this we're already underway. Though no critical mass was archieved, there is raised awareness at the political level which is the ONLY way this is going to be addressed properly. And 'we' don't need 'them' to continue to bring it under attention. Especially not since 'they' already displayed they want it to be about their ego being stroked by 'us' having to ask 'them' how 'they did it' even when that's akin to asking a penguin if it's cold at the north pole.
  11. mtm78

    My thoughts about the Patch 0.10.8 video

    Off with his head, this is heresy How to pronounce Dutch cruisers 101 : WorldOfWarships (reddit.com)
  12. mtm78

    Submarine feedback v 2.0 (Tier X only)

    So, I read your statement and thought -> well you're either REALLY REALLY good since you seldom run out of DCP charges you must be good at mitigating damage sources especially DOT one's or you're really bad and you die before you could run out of them. Then I say you had 800 battles played ( at least on this account ) and after some clicking I saw the only RU BB you played in PvP is Oktober Revolution the premium tier 5. Please tell me this is your reroll account or something? Or, no, just your 'secondary' that would be even better They are ofc very Russian, up to the stalinium armor schemes combined with this divine hand guiding your shells even if official statistics say they should have terrible long range accuracy, no point arguing that.
  13. mtm78

    PEGI 18 : 4 All NEW games that have gambling

    I was about to add you to my blocked list, this is the only reason I haven't. Also, while it's true Pete wasn't really interacting in the most constructive manner, he can only do this because your English is seemingly worse as mine which makes it very hard to communicate and very easy for someone to dismiss your posts or feeling an urge to correct you based on little misconceptions based on wrongful usage of terminology. Again something which should be really obvious to someone writing legislation where predicting and preventively closing any and all possible loopholes due to ambiguous wording is a basic job requirement. In NL there is a law which says people can not hold their phone in their hand while operating a vehicle. Sounds nice if you're predominant method of transportation is a bicycle or public transport, makes the traffic safer. But... if you put your phone in a holder, you are still allowed to operate the phone while driving... so no it's not actually any safer, in fact the law doesn't even distinguish in the kind off usage, it makes no difference if you input a change to your navigation system or if you're playing Raid: Shadow Legends. This has been held up in court, and we need a new law to define what is allowed and what not. Anway, been a long day, I'm off for the night
  14. mtm78

    My thoughts about the Patch 0.10.8 video

    Only nice part
  15. mtm78

    PEGI 18 : 4 All NEW games that have gambling

    How is this relevant to your ranting about forum doing things wrong when forum can not force by gunpoint legislators to make new laws applicable to lootbox mechanics in games, wait it's not. No, nevermind, please don't reply back.
×