mtm78
-
Content Сount
19,378 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Battles
6105
Everything posted by mtm78
-
Ow but it's to late for that... rigging missions was instant account ban right
-
Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"
mtm78 replied to Deamon93's topic in General Discussion
Those German cruisers aren't bad at all, trust me ;) -
Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"
mtm78 replied to Deamon93's topic in General Discussion
You mean you would have gotten a Missouri for nothing? Sounds legit -
Idk man, changes to credit multipliers for premiums have been done more often then changes to tank/ship characteristics. I mean, it's still a risk. And don't forget ... -> Much more cost effective, depending on how many tier X games you play.
-
Sorry I left ST, the remainder is not nearly as alien as me
-
Not going to spend money to convert xp, not at these amounts.
-
Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"
mtm78 replied to Deamon93's topic in General Discussion
Dutch ships would be nice do some Historical Battles with the IJN ( and Brits ), for that alone I am looking forward to them. -
I am having a really good evening tonight playing Shiratsuyu, I'm cursing the ship on the one hand but it's been quite 'consistent'. No monster games yet, but a steady damage and now I got EM on the captain it's already starting to become less of a turd there as well. The 10km upgraded torps aren't that terrible either
-
Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"
mtm78 replied to Deamon93's topic in General Discussion
People also said Sweden would never get tanks in WoT I bet At least I know WG would consider a Dutch premium if they see there is a large enough Dutch playerbase ( reason PL got Blys ). -
You want to remove bias from your poll? Remove the reasoning from your answers, just make them yes/no answers and let US do our on reasoning as to why we think yes or no ( ask for people to specify in the thread if needed ). Perhaps even add: other, please specify. Then question number 3 needs the additional option: I already said yes to 1 ( you can't tick no, then you're doing it wrong right ) I'm actually quite sure people are voting against you just because of the bias in the poll.
-
I been told there was a WG announcement/message in PL section which indicates it will be removed at the end of next week or something.
-
But your poll is biased, question 1 and question 2 are not open questions, and they all force you to answer 3 in a certain way or be labelled 'WG Apologist/employee' . And I approve of Brexit, it was about time you Brits learned having all our benefits comes at a small cost Leaving politics aside, the concerns might be legit, you're making it harder on yourself with the wording you used. In the end it wouldn't matter either way I feel, so probably you were just making fun of those people who thought forum feedback was a part of WG's decision making tree ( because if it were, you should perhaps make sure you provide them with better structured/worded feedback if you really want results )
-
Yes they did because WG couldn't reverse the situation iirc.
-
The ship was not balanced properly, average performance indicators are not the only concern. Though I am quite sure I had other DD's where I have better/more consistent statistical performance in, it's a different means of getting there. With Gremlin, how OP she might be, I feel I still have to do actual work ( like aiming manually, instead of getting a nice aim indicator.. and with the unnerved torp speed this indicator was usually pretty accurate even if people try to avoid ;) ).
-
Like I said your poll is devalued because of your choice or words and questions number 3, this is the communities reaction to 'trolling', you get trolled back.
- 48 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- permanent camouflage
- doubloons
- (and 4 more)
-
Any decent player owning these ships would say the same.
-
I can see that It doesn't matter much, on questions/topics like these it's always the most heated of stances which is usually presented on this forum so I guess everyone is used to it edit: btw, I voted yes to 1 and 2 but there is no neutral 3rd option indicating such ;)
-
You misunderstand ( on purpose ). It is not the player, I played like a 100% potato trust me. And yes, the enemy only started with two DD's so I didn't have to do any DD fighting ( killed one which sat still in smoke, other one died elsewhere ). But, I guess you had to be there, I literally was playing one handed most of the game, just sitting stationary in smoke or concealment and sending speculative fishes. My hit ratio wasn't even that high with torps ( for the speed I should almost hit them all right ). But the reload is what made it imba, ok so that BB charging me only took two torps and repaired flooding and is using heal, before he is actually close enough to be a concern I will have reloaded, and then I'll kill that cruiser behind him and then maybe the other BB..
-
Totally unbiased poll with that 3rd question ( and while the questions might be legit, the way you word it devalues the poll imo ). I voted yes yes no Btw, Ev1n would like your poll edit: btw, I voted yes but I don't think WG did the worst job here regarding point 2 as with the doubling it should still be possible to play the new or it's counter tree part in a similar manner. Though if both can not be played nearly the same, the option for reimbursement would make sense. I wouldn't pay for something I like to be more profitable, to enjoy it being replaced with something I don't like getting those paid benefits ( even if the bad comes in pairs ). I seen people hate on Yugumo but I didn't feel it as bad ( need a lot more games but as far as first impressions go it wasn't bad ), I guess it's also because it requires such a big change ( best concealment in the game allowing for stealth capping without getting spotted by counter DD's which are forced to smoke up when they come contest due to your spotting... now it's more a worse Fletcher.. )
- 48 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- permanent camouflage
- doubloons
- (and 4 more)
-
In essence yes I think they can do anything they want. But in some countries EULA's are not worth as much as consumer protection laws If they could change them without much fuss, I am sure they would have done so. Rather nerf Gremmy and be able to sell it, makes more money. Except when it would actually cost money
- 48 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- permanent camouflage
- doubloons
- (and 4 more)
-
Hit ratio is so situational I can't even begin to think of what to say without you giving more info. What is your playstyle in each class? Which did you feel the most natural in while playing ( disregarding performance )? Best way would be for you to enable replays and upload them to wowsreplays and then ask people to watch them and give pointers.
-
I agree with your line of reasoning fully, but your comparison seemed flawed. No one buys a lifetime Netflix for the exact reason you just mentioned. Which is why you don't have an option to pay for 'permanent premium time' but you can only buy them in blocks ( of a year.. which is quite long but still ). If WG would introduce a 'lifetime premium status' I am actually quite sure some people would buy it Also, no, the premiums are not changed, their surroundings are subject to change. Otherwise WG would have changed Gremmy's fire chance and he dmg + concealment penalty when firing ( which they didn't because as you said they don't want legal issues from people demanding refunds ).
- 48 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- permanent camouflage
- doubloons
- (and 4 more)
-
I autistic ( doc says so, I just say I'm normal and the world is utterly nuts ) so I hate seeing comments about autism. I didn't feel anything about your comment until I read his reply, and I instantly thought: I would be so triggered if it was 'autistic' instead of 'ocd' so yeah I understand him. So I either have to grow a thicker skin, or he has a point. Or, most likely, a combination of the two.
-
And since WG does not like refunding people ( duh ) I expect the cammo's to be removed at some point in the future. I did not pay for them, and while I appreciate getting something for free which is marginally useful I don't want WG to allow me to keep them and then feel ok for overly reducing the torpedo velocities to much.