mtm78
-
Content Сount
19,378 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Battles
6105
Everything posted by mtm78
-
Getting back on track and ignoring the tears: I just had a Tirpitz division, they ended last in XP but I still complimented them. Because they found their W key and both tanked like madman for our flank, knew when to hold back to stay alive, and even while they didn't do a lot of damage them acting as damage sponge won us the game. I actually felt bad seeing them so low on the team list, as I'm 100% certain without them the game would have done a lot different and I don't mean in a positive way. WG should reward tanking a lot more I feel, that seems to be the only way to actually motivate people to play for the victory.
-
^^ excellent point.
- 73 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- Udaloi
- Russian DD
- (and 2 more)
-
Depends on the DD. IJN DD with a skilled CV -> almost guaranteed kill.
-
It is something they did globally, to everyone, and it was pre announced. And as I said, I gained 22m from the split it was a ncie gesture to give people the ships from the new line without having to regrind it. Imagine having had a vkB close to a Maus and you were playing WoT just for that Maus.... ;)
-
Why would you waste your time on that? Want a copy paste answer?
- 73 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- Udaloi
- Russian DD
- (and 2 more)
-
So let's remove battleships jk, I wouldn't want to remove either of them, they both are part of this game whether we like it or not. What has to be looked at is the balance inside the game, as convincing WG that CV's or any other class have to go is ... well it's the exact same as saying arty has no place in a tank game ( eg, you can complain for years but it is never going to happen ). will have to suffice WG's will be aiming at supporting high APM, not sure if they will rework mechanics along the way but they will fix the bugs which are in the interface now ( mainly because the client can't handle the high apm ).
-
^^ which was good I guess. I played AAA 'female companion' to people at times at well. But that did tie up people from the actual game objectives, and in random's people just weren't interested in teamplay if that meant they had to escort a CV which might net them some plane kills but very few in actual damage vs ships or cap points / defense points. Well yeah. but it's not 'fun' even if it's what happened in real life.
-
Just as an obvious example why you're wrong -> CV's were doing what you want/are saying you want: sniping eachother at start of the game. But what do you think happened AFTER one off the CV's actually killed the other CV, he had free reign. And remember that good CV players are not just damage dealers they also lend utility to the team, spotting DD's / torpedoes, scouting ( providing vision ). Infact, WG had to discourage this habit by adding defensive AAA to cv's so they can't get sniped anymore.
-
Double witherer is Hindenburg was much more fun then playing Zao
-
Likely, no point denying since it is one of the thing which I strongly dislike I'm certainly noticing it more. Not sure how much it would influence people if they knew their 'statistical performance in relation to averages'. You also got people on forum dismissing 'statistics' because they think this game is being ruined by 'he spamming campers who can't aim'. What would surely help though is better rewards, and more transparency about the accreditation of XP and credits. So even people who don't care about statistics would still care about that particular stat because they would realize how much it correlates with their XP gain and credit income. I played a few games in new Taskent... two of those had 6 DD's per side. The BB tears were real, and salty
-
No they don't, DD's need to be able to deal damage to BB's or did you use torpedoes as main damage dealer in your old Kiev...? AP already IS more powerful, IF you get a nice broadside. But with the bow on BBabies you need HE to be a reliable source of damage as well.
-
But the names are 'historical' so changing them would be nonsense?! All in all, I'm happy about the split, I gained a lot of credits and I got free ships. That WG put 9p captain on a tier 9 which I had to replace later, that I am not happy with. But I can understand WG doesn't want to set a precedence where they will have to give the options to reassign captains freely.
-
At least this gives us the chance of a balanced tier IV tech tree BB at some time in the future
-
Campbeltown served in the Dutch navy ( briefly ) ;)
-
With some Noodles active in the thread I'm sure he will pass this on so it can be fixed in the next patch If the biggest issue of a patch is a mislabeling of a gun I'd say they done right
-
1667 was a year you're probably trying to forget though But sure, you were the dominant power, just not always as dominant as you thought you were.
-
Idk either, but it is still more frequent to see full hp BB;s at the end of a match then any other class which is designed to be in the front lines ( so excluding CV's ) and that is just the sad truth. I know WG tried to get them to play better by making repairs a fixed cost, and by showing important stats like damage received and potential damage in the after battle report but they are not PUNISHING playing badly enough ( which is the same as saying that doing the right thing isn't rewarded enough ). Just like they shouldn't give equal credit income when you lose, it just makes some delusional people think that self advancement is more important then securing a victory.
-
1. you're assuming your way is more 'fun'. 2. the game is not a simulator, if you want it more historically accurate shall we start with giving BB's their normal 3% hit ratio? Giving DD's a single torpedo launcher without reloads ( for most of them )? Shall we give CV's multiple times the planes in the air as they have now, so they can have the actual influence they had in real life? The task force protecting Yamato ( + Yamato's own AAA ) shot down 4 planes in total, so shall we give ships more 'historical' AAA as well? See, history doesn't make for fun games And BB's which 'kamp' are one of the biggest problems in this game, if not the biggest. And no, they don't kamp because of broken HE or fires, they mostly just kamp because they CAN, they have no incentive to be less useless to their team. Which should be changed, for the betterment of EVERYONE. I can't imagine how some of the kampers I had today were actually having fun, I mean in your Bismarck hiding behind your team the entire game being the last alive and still only getting half of the XP I got in my DD actually trying to contest capzone's. Ofc it happens, you don't always get baddies in BB's sometimes you get people who understand the game and utilize their strengths when they can and should. The issue is forcing the baddies to do it less often by making doing the right thing more attractive.
-
I'm sad I can't rub something in... but hey you choose 33 years later on purpose I guess
-
@Steviln... Don't worry, you're listening to someone who flees from topics when he asked how I was doing with my 'weak' ships so I showed those and he suddenly got very very quiet.... Ow and that one 100k game he is so proud off -> for a 40k avg for the day, those other 2 games must have been quite a lot worse, but he won't ever use THOSE to 'proof his point'. edit: Also, isn't it nice, you reply to someone who is advocating for more teamwork by making ships more depenant on eachother, and you get some guy crying about 'HE + fire to strong cry cry cry and everyone who doesn't agree is an HE spamming kamper cry cry cy'. But don't worry, he does that a lot ;)
-
The Dutch have enough for a full cruiser line, not much more paper then most nations ps: also feck De Ruyer, gib me Isaac Sweers and gib it noa gib it nao!
-
Bye! Who cares? This is a game, it's not a simulator.
-
More cover = more spots to camp behind while slowly advancing? Would just shift the meta a bit ( in the right direction, any movement is better then none ). My Roon, Hindenburg, Donskoi also have +-20km range, and the further I am from BB's the more chance I have to dodge incoming fire. Don't think a range nerf would be good for the game. What would really help a lot more is giving BB's a XP/CREDIT malus when 'sniping' and not tanking for their team. And we need a cap on the amount of BB's in game, current overpopulation just shuts down cruisers and forces them into long range spam. Hopefully new releases of FR cruisers, VMF DD's and hopefully RN CV's before BB's will make BB population drop to better levels.
-
Yes, Sharana is a crap CV player that is why he failed to win the game for his team when the enemy had no CV at all Or, it wasn't an auto win at all? Sure, CV is still most influential class and having a terribad CV vs an excellent CV will make games a lot harder to win even now, but it's possible. Also people tend to FORGET that a big part of the issue was the high XP gain which was back then totally tied to damage. CV does the most damage, so it got the most XP. Which lead to CV specialists to get higher tier ships before the rest of us, which lead to CV's being top tier almost always ( in case of the server top at least ) and they harvested many salty tears. Rightfully this has been changed, CV's don't get the insane XP they got back then, and now people already had a chance to get equal tier ships. And in tierI IX and X CV's are limited to 1 per side, also for a good reason. CV's can't division, they could 'back then'. Talking about the worst aspects in order to claim everything was bad is ofc anyone's prerogative just like I'm using the positive aspect of it often. Because yes, I liked having people 'in balls' having to work together. Because other ways don't work. Delusional people thinking teamplay happens when you make each ship self sufficient, well they are delusional for a reason.
-
I never said Leni was 'bad' ;) But you said GUNS, and Leni and Minsk have the same gun setup. So if those are bad on Minsk, they are bad on Leni ( and their not ).
