Jump to content

_Ezio_

Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

    3,368
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    6438

About _Ezio_

  • Rank
    Commander
  • Birthday 11/25/1996
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    This Thread

Recent Profile Visitors

2,747 profile views
  1. _Ezio_

    Gut gemacht Wargaming!

    Mhm habe zwar nicht geliked oder disliked, aber ich kenne die Stats von einigen derer die hier auf beiden Seiten diskutiert haben und von den 6 Leuten wo ich die stats kenne, die auf beiden Seiten relativ gleich verteilt waren liegt nicht einer unter 1800PR XD Der Schnitt belüft sich glaube ich sogar auf gute 1950-2000PR... Was machst du jetzt mit diesen Daten? Spieler über 1800PR liken/disliken keine Posts?
  2. _Ezio_

    Gut gemacht Wargaming!

    Zwischen T5 und T7 haben wir schon einiges was einem CV schmerzen bereitet. Die Exeter auf T5, Die okt. rev. auf T5 als BB, die Texas als BB. T6 ist etwas mau, ich müsste tatsächlich nachsehen was da wirklich gute AA hat, aber der 6er premium Fr kreuzer hat ausreichende Luftabwehr sowie viele andere auf der Stufe auch. Auf T 7 haben wir die Atlanta, Flint als absolute Monster, sowie die Lyon mit recht starker Luftabwehr, die selsbt T8 Trägern nicht egal sein konnte (nach der Anderung kann ja sowieso garkeine AA auf T7+ mehr als "schwach" eingestuft werden,da ja selbst die schlechteste AA immer noch zu beträchtlichen Verlusten führt. Wenn ich zugriff auf das Spiel oder eine Schiffsliste hätte würde ich sicher noch einiges mehr zusammen kriegen, aber übers handy macht sich das sehr scheiße.
  3. _Ezio_

    Gut gemacht Wargaming!

    Nunja... Ich war nie CV main oder Fanboy, aber ich war schon seit der beta verteidiger der CV gegen dumme Forderungen. Genau wie ich das auch immer bei Änderungen die gegen die DD gingen gemacht habe. War es sinnlos oder übertrieben habe ich gegen die BB Kevins argumentiert.... Weis Wg, Hat Wg ignoriert. AR ist jetzt auch faktisch nicht mehr nutzbar da es absolut situativ ist, anders als auf allen anderen Klassen im Spiel wo es egal ist wer oder was den Schaden macht muss der Schaden bei CV nun vom schlechtem Spiel (mangel am Skill beim Ausweichen der Wolken) kommen um etwas zu bringen.
  4. _Ezio_

    Gut gemacht Wargaming!

    Genau meine Aussage. Jetzt nochmal von jemand anderem der hoffentlich nicht gleich als "CV Fanboy" gelabelt wird, obwohl er eigentlich mehr Kreuzer und DD fährt...
  5. _Ezio_

    Gut gemacht Wargaming!

    Die Dmmit Def AA holt selbst beim slingshotten immer 1-3 Flugzeuge runter... oder habe ich so schlechtes RNG? Ist ja auch völlig OK. Auch wenn ich den Nerf für viel zu hart halte ist auch das egal. Meinen Punkt, den du völlig ignorierst, ist nicht der nerf. Sondern Wg`s ignorieren der Tatsache das diese Änderung nur kommen kann wen andere Sachen mit angepasst werden und nicht für sich alleine kommen darf. Lappen ist man nicht wenn man mit einem buff oder nerf einhergeht. Lappen ist man wenn man dies blindlinks auf Kosten der Integrität der Spielmechaniken macht. WG Ändert nurnoch über Generelle Änderungen. Wie viele der letzten nerfs oder Buffs an Schiffen auf dem Live Server waren direkt auf das Schiff bezogen und nicht auf die ganze Klasse, linie oder unterlinie? 2? vlt 3? von was? 10?15? Buffs/nerfs. Um es etwas extremer dar zu stellen: Warum wird Wg ein Mord verziehen sobald sie einen Euro an die Kirche spenden? Der Euro ist der Nerf, der Mord die Zerstörung von Skills, einzelnen Schiffen, Spielstilen, und hart erarbeiteten persönlichen Skills. Alles nur um "Spielern ein besseres Gefühl zu geben". Was der größte witz ist! WG sieht das ganze nichtmal als einen Nerf, nein im gegenteil sie leugnen das es einen signifikanten Einfluss auf das Gameplay haben wird! Die Devs sind mitlerweile am WoW Spielen und nicht mehr am WoWs, nur so kann ich mir ihren mangel an den simpelsten Spielmechaniken erklären.
  6. _Ezio_

    CV Rework Discussion

    Not argueing with that. I trained hard in my CV to get the 130k badge. But I am certain that in the old RTS system it used to be 135k or 140k avg dmg and not just 130k.
  7. _Ezio_

    CV Rework Discussion

    it was lowered from 135 or 140k... so no it was adjusted...
  8. _Ezio_

    torpedo bomber heal/ adrenaline rush issue in 8.5

    WoWs defs once again proofing that they have no clue how their game works at this point, or they just don`t care... hell maybe they are all just that incompetent. Since 0.8.0 we havn`t had a single patch where there was not a large portion of players thinking that WG does not know it`s gamemechanics anymore. Hell 5 patches or 5 months and I can still quote myself from 0.8.0 "This change is not thought through and will screew with x,y,z and you need to fix it before you release it" It is not right to change a mechanic when players find major issues caused by that change seconds after the change is teasered. AR and Heal, as well as the massive nerf to all CV with low reserves and or high reload times where known to WG less than a minute after the change was posted on reddit. Then WG said they will test it and might release it if it works as intended and delivers on what it should do. Which if both does not. This is just like the change to the HE bombers in the last patch which was released after everyone agreed that it did not meet a single one of its two targets. Neither did it lower the dmg DD`s take nor did it keep the dmg BB and CA take from them at a similar level. unless you consider 75% less dmg on CA and 25-50% more dmg on BB to be "similar". utterly stupid.
  9. _Ezio_

    0.8.5 PTS - Game Mechanics Improvements

    And many CV´s which rely on not losing planes like Saipan or Furious and Implacable. Saipan is, with this change, basically not worth it. You can do maybe 10-15 attack runs as a toptier, and super unicum player, and then you will be deplaned as you are bound to lose at the very least 2 planes on each attack. Three to four planes will be the average for most players is my guess. With almost two minutes or one and a half minute with all skills etc. to reload a single plane... Great idea.
  10. _Ezio_

    Haku Ap Damage

    I can start marking the new ones where it happens and compile them (that might take a while though as i am currently strugeling to even keep my "1rank per day" target), but i do not have any older replays, as I reinstalled the game while trying to fix the mess that the 64bit version was for me. So a comparison will be hard. Is there a way to make a replay from a training room? that would make it by fare easier to gather replays as I could provide acurrate time stamps with expected outcome and actual outcome in a situation where I am the only variable. For now I seem to have found a way to make them work as I want them to work (atleast most of the time) even though it is different from how it was before.
  11. _Ezio_

    Haku Ap Damage

    @MrConway After some more testing and talking to a few people with similar concerns as me I might have an idea what happened. Could it be that some of the changes done to the HE Bombs have affacted the AP bombs as well? more specifically the change to the dispersion e.g that the bombs have a higher chance of hitting the egdge of the elipse rather than the center. If so it would explain both the strange appearance of the previously uncommon "normal penetrations" and the lower number of citadelhits on targets where previously it was basically impossible to not get multiple citadels. Could you look into that and keep us updated?
  12. _Ezio_

    Haku Ap Damage

    Q: Can you give us a penetration value of AP bombs? It's really interesting to know. Thanks. A: Hosho (Type 99 25 Mod1): 174 Ruyjo (Type 3 25 Mod1 Mk4): 228 Shokaku (Type 2 50 Mark1): 262 Hakuryu (Type 2 80 Mk5 Mod1): 351 Enterprise (M62): 244 GZ (PD 500): 334 (pre buff) These should be the base values. Please take this into account: Penetration capability is always the same, it's not affected by anything. However, bombs interact with effective armor, so angle matters and they even can bounce. They have normalization. It's base value is bigger than AP shells, but it's applied non-linearly; if the angle is bad, even great normalization won't help. Aircraft angle and speed affect bomb speed and trajectory (but bombs do not loose penetration from speed!). Which means that for maximum penetration capabilities we must make the drop as close to 90 degrees as possible -> dropping early. For soft targets it may make sense to drop lately because, as with AP shells, for soft targets you don't want overpens and increasing effective armor turns into a benefit. taken out of: And if they did not change anything i should get regular 2-3 citadels with 3 bombhits on a Yamato no matter when i drop, as I did pre Patch. 8Also i usually drop between 4s and 6 s because the bombs tend to fly in nonesense directions if you drop below 3s
  13. _Ezio_

    Haku Ap Damage

    Wg jsut recently stated that velocity and hight of the bombs have no influence on the penetration capabilities of said bombs. Hight and planespeed only have an influence on impact angle which in turn ofcourse has an impact on penetration. But I played nearly a hundred games in my Haku pre patch and spend nearly 10 hours in the trainingroom learning every single thing about the AP Bombs. And jsut now i spend another hour testing it and I can only confirm what I said, something is off. I believe there to be an issue with the penetration after the changes to GZ. It would not be the first time that a change to a specific ship affacted other ships with similar mechanics because someone forgot to switch from "general change" to "ship specific change" in their minds. And as WG seems to preffer the "general change" over specific changes to a ship those mistakes keep happening more and more.
  14. _Ezio_

    Haku Ap Damage

    I played it hardly pre patch because I was training my midway but I can't seem to remember getting many, if any, pens on cruisers pre patch. Usually it was either a citadell or an overpenetration. Not that I am complaining, a pen does more dmg and all, but still seems strange. But the Bombs on many CV seem to be working not as intended since the patch. But many of the bugs I lised in the first run of the 8.4 test are still present on the life server. e.g. - invisible flak burst becomming more regular; - AA doing immense impossible dmg to the planes (like 20k dmg from a Shima in 2 seconds) which is also a known bug since 8.0 I believe but now it happens way more often. But as I was bussy I could not provide WG with the data they wanted from me so.. .yea my bad?
  15. Are you using the 64bit client or the 64bit? aka do you have 8Gb RAM or less? Would be interesting to know because most people have atlest some fps loss (if not nearly as bad as described by many in this thread) Never. I have most music disabled and I would mute many more sounds, if they where not bount to others... e.g silence planes without silencing Torpedos is not possible...
×