mtm78
-
Content Сount
19,378 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Battles
6105
Everything posted by mtm78
-
Didn't we already have a thread on this ship, which was active this week? Pretty sure there was..
-
- 636 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- battleships
- whinning
- (and 1 more)
-
They are called idiot torps for a reason..
-
Edited. This post has been edited by the moderation team due to naming and shaming
-
Really? Doesn't look like it. Tier 6 has a 3% higher CA population then BB, tier 7 a 2 percent lower and tier 8 a 18% percent lower CA/CL population. How does that add up to enough CA/CL to 'even them out'? Total numbers are important, not percentual increase. If that doesn't make sense to you, all I can say is #alternativefacts Also, it's not an increase in DD's, its a decrease in BB's since to many casuals can't play tier X BB's without losing to many credits. Statistically.... The 'statistics' don't indicate causality directly. It's however clear that BB overpopulation PUSHES people out from playing cruisers. Who even mentioned 'overpowered' BB's Not to mention that there are a higher percentage CA players at tier X then tier IX and there are still more players in CA/CL then in DD's at tier 9 so idk what you're trying to say there but it doesn't really sound that convincing...
-
I wasn't addressing anyone in particular, I don't know if topic starter falls in that category
-
Sometimes I really miss BBV... his banhammer was epic, the newbies have such small hammers in comparison.. ( I know BBV is still around but not as active here ).
-
The problem is that tier is so big, that it bleeds out to everything from tier 6 to tier 10 due to +-2 matchmaking ;)
-
Wait, so because I have a Tirpitz and a Scharnhorst I'm a nazi? Really? Tell me more
-
Not the first time I see one off those comments from him, seems he doesn't learn easilly ( or at all? ).
-
Staph dodging idiot torps, better die from those torps then from being citadelled by enemy because idiot torps force you to show broadside. Also, NEVER repair flooding from idiot torps
-
It's the same with other classes, and I think the already existing CV players would prefer to play tier 8 premium carriers as opposed to tier 7, since tier 8 makes more credits and trains captains faster. But a requirement before buying is fine with me, owning a tier 8 CV and having a 50%+ wr or something It's not even 'a chance' it's quite likely because CV numbers have been stagnating for some time and new players tend to give up, it's the old players with more experience which are what new players will meet instead of other new players. WG tried to fix this with making lower tier CV's less attractive for experienced players by removing manual drops. Not sure how this will work out. US server has the same issue, it's not just wheraboos. But I dread the day the teaaboos will get their battleships
-
You have no place in an actual balance discussion, you've shown this often enough and you're making stupid ignorant statements even now just to solidify your 'unsuited' position. So they are bad, it's ok they feck up the game balance? Lol no please don't answer, I'm going to ignore it anyway They should make some premium tier 8 CV's to balance them out. And premium tier 8 DD's.... All the other classes except cruisers are one tier lower... that's 'weird' game design to say the least. Or just make a competitive tier 8 premium CV so players can grind credits / train captains while clubbing the surplus of BBabies?
-
WG should stop selling tier 8 premium BB's
-
-
And more CV is what should happen, certainly at higher tier's. Look at the chart posted above, less than 3k unique players in a 2 month period, that is NOT healthy. You mean dividing? Like in dividing total battles through unique players, giving an average amount of battles per unique player? That is the column next to it with 'average of rates - battles' header. Multiplying wouldn't give any meaningful info at all.
-
Yeah that one is unique players http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20170422/eu_2month/average_class.html This table shows both unique players and total battles for a 2 month period unless I'm the one misinterpreting...
-
http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20170422/eu_week/average_class.html Low and high are for low tier and high tier. You can compare snapshots to display trends. That's games played, not unique players.
-
player 1: ships : games played : other stats xx : xx : xxx player 2: ships : games played : other stats xx : xx : xxx player 3: ships : games played : other stats xx : xx : xxx ~~~ player 1xxxxxxxxxxxx: ships : games played : other stats xx : xx : xxx ~~~~ Somehow this doesn't allow 3rd party stats sites to make a list of 'total games played per ship', which in turn can't be used to chart server class distribution.
-
WG API allows tracking ships people play.... If that doesn't somehow ring a bell in your mind somewhere on how these statistics can lead to accurate class distribution graphs then....
-
-
-
-
https://eu.warships.today/vehicles correlate that with maplesyrup table and stop being thickheaded. Even WG have used the 40%+ class distribution ffs, and it all matches up quite nicely. So again, do your own research I don't need to hold your hand. I should repeat myself.. in fact I will ..
-
You're the one being a troll as evident in this thread trying to twist it into something about CV's being out of place. I use profiles, or them being hidden, to point out how retarded a single poster in this thread is who been trying to make claims and claim bias with OTHER people in this thread, when his posts in combination with his hidden profile is the only thing actually showing a bias. Sorry to dissapoint, you can go post now about how bad CV's are ok, but please make a speciul thread for that I am sure people will come post in it
