Jump to content

Kutfroat

Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

    134
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

About Kutfroat

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Kutfroat

    Vote with your wallet...

    ...just like with the "Giulio Cesare Gate", vote with your wallet until CV´s are fixed (read: nerfed), so that they dont completely ruin the game. I was patient, I gave "them" time, but apperently they (WG) thinks carriers are fine as is and dont need further fixing (read: nerfs). Currently it´s worse than the old CV system and worse than artillery in woth ever was. So...no more money from me until I can take out my AA ship and it´s able to do it´s job (read: dont get bullied by a carrier, although it´s ist direct counter, no matter if low or high tiers). If anything, the current event shows, how extremely unbalanced and overpowerd carriers still are, although there are people complaining they are overnerfed... So WG you want my money? Make CV´s support ships instead of pure Damage dealers, or at least nerf them to a state where AA ships rip planes apart as they are supposed to do, especially in late game.
  2. Kutfroat

    Wearing down AA modules viable ?

    So lets put it here, too: DefAA should become unlimited, and AA mounts should not be permanently destroyable, or limitless planes need to go, period. Carriers allready ruin the earlygame, but lategame is when they become unkillable nightmares, even for dedicated AA ships. And that is very bad gamedesign. It doesn´t matter if you are in a Sims/Kidd/Cleveland/DesMoines/Worcester...if it´s late into the game and you need "that" cap, no chance. Carriers will just chip you to death, slowly, relentlessly, but it´s inevitable. They dont care what ship you are in. Right from the beginning of this rework, the most broken mechanic were the respawning planes, when on the other hand you run out of AA mounts and consumeables. This becomes even worse, when every week another easy to execute carrier exploit pops up, that makes AA even more useless. So...early spotting of carriers got allready adressed, now it´s time to cut their lategame potential, especially against AA destroyers and cruisers. Edit: And I know how to dodge in a DD. It´s even possible to dodge one complete run, even of 2 carriers attacking you, but you can´t just dodge everything, every single time. So in late game, as a AA build ship, when your out of smoke, out of DefAA and - because AA mounts dont respawn - out of any defense...you will die to a carrier. And that is wrong. Russian cruisers, battleships, dd´s without AA...it´s all fine if they get countered by carriers, that is their weakness, but AA cruisers and destroyers? No, a carrier should allways be forced run and avoid AA ships, unless there is no other target, and it should be lethal to him (his planes). Just like attacking a light cruiser in a DD, to reset the cap. You can do it, ONCE! You might even sruvive, but afterwards it´s "gg" for you, because you sacraficed most of your health...
  3. Kutfroat

    Bearcat 3xTiT sealclubs ( lower tier ) Cruisers

    This thread proofs me right, so I just copy/paste this from my other thread: (note: Carriers must not be able to deal with their direct counters, AA cruisers and destroyers. As long as carriers dont avoid attacking dedicated AA cruisers except as an "last stand all in" attempt, they are not balanced) DefAA should become unlimited, and AA mounts should not be permanently destroyable, or limitless planes need to go, period. Carriers allready ruin the earlygame, but lategame is when they become unkillable nightmares, even for dedicated AA ships. And that is very bad gamedesign. It doesn´t matter if you are in a Sims/Kidd/Cleveland/DesMoines/Worcester...if it´s late into the game and you need "that" cap, no chance. Carriers will just chip you to death, slowly, relentlessly, but it´s inevitable. They dont care what ship you are in. Right from the beginning of this rework, the most broken mechanic were the respawning planes, when on the other hand you run out of AA mounts and consumeables. This becomes even worse, when every week another easy to execute carrier exploit pops up, that makes AA even more useless. So...early spotting of carriers got allready adressed, now it´s time to cut their lategame potential, especially against AA destroyers and cruisers. Edit: And I know how to dodge in a DD. It´s even possible to dodge one complete run, even of 2 carriers attacking you, but you can´t just dodge everything, every single time. So in late game, as a AA build ship, when your out of smoke, out of DefAA and - because AA mounts dont respawn - out of any defense...you will die to a carrier. And that is wrong. Russian cruisers, battleships, dd´s without AA...it´s all fine if they get countered by carriers, that is their weakness, but AA cruisers and destroyers? No, a carrier should allways be forced run and avoid AA ships, unless there is no other target, and it should be lethal to him (his planes). Just like attacking a light cruiser in a DD, to reset the cap. You can do it, ONCE! You might even sruvive, but afterwards it´s "gg" for you, because you sacraficed most of your health...
  4. Kutfroat

    DefAA and AA mounts...

    I'm talking about late game, e.g. when you - as a AA destroyer or cruiser, need to secure that second cap to turn the battle. so, no...not hiding behind islands, no more bigger fish (battleships at this point are in most cases stuck at mapborder). it's just the carrier going after you in your AA specced (U.S.) cruiser or destroyer...and again, and again, and again, and again, and again until your dead. and then he turns his attention to the next ship - often even another AA ship - and does it again, because he just cycles through his squads, while the rest of your allready hugely reduced AA mounts get destroyed while doing so. If this happens against ships with weak AA, it's ok...that is a dedicated weakness, but a carrier should not be able to straight up fight and kill his counters.
  5. Kutfroat

    DefAA and AA mounts...

    Only really bad carrier players get deplaned...that is the problem. On the other side, halfway into the game the AA of most ships will allready be greatly reduced by he damage. But no matter if good or bad carrier player, attacking a dedicated AA ship should just punish this decision really, really hard, even in late game. and that is not the case... A destroyer deciding or getting forced to attack a light cruiser get´s punished, no matter at what stage of a match. Same goes for a cruiser directly attacking a battleship...
  6. Kutfroat

    DefAA and AA mounts...

    DefAA should become unlimited, and AA mounts should not be permanently destroyable, or limitless planes need to go, period. Carriers allready ruin the earlygame, but lategame is when they become unkillable nightmares, even for dedicated AA ships. And that is very bad gamedesign. It doesn´t matter if you are in a Sims/Kidd/Cleveland/DesMoines/Worcester...if it´s late into the game and you need "that" cap, no chance. Carriers will just chip you to death, slowly, relentlessly, but it´s inevitable. They dont care what ship you are in. Right from the beginning of this rework, the most broken mechanic were the respawning planes, when on the other hand you run out of AA mounts and consumeables. This becomes even worse, when every week another easy to execute carrier exploit pops up, that makes AA even more useless. So...early spotting of carriers got allready adressed, now it´s time to cut their lategame potential, especially against AA destroyers and cruisers. Edit: And I know how to dodge in a DD. It´s even possible to dodge one complete run, even of 2 carriers attacking you, but you can´t just dodge everything, every single time. So in late game, as a AA build ship, when your out of smoke, out of DefAA and - because AA mounts dont respawn - out of any defense...you will die to a carrier. And that is wrong. Russian cruisers, battleships, dd´s without AA...it´s all fine if they get countered by carriers, that is their weakness, but AA cruisers and destroyers? No, a carrier should allways be forced run and avoid AA ships, unless there is no other target, and it should be lethal to him (his planes). Just like attacking a light cruiser in a DD, to reset the cap. You can do it, ONCE! You might even sruvive, but afterwards it´s "gg" for you, because you sacraficed most of your health...
  7. ...his name was something like [edited]. Remember, he is CC. He call´s himself a BB main, but said he started of as a dd main. So far, so good. What really "stunned" me and got me going "WTF, what kind of crap is he talking, he isn´t a bb main but a bbaby!" was, he literally complained that he can´t take on 2 destroyers alone in his battleship (in a TX battle). He really complained about the BB AP on destroyers nerf! I mean, a unicum player with a solowinrate of +60%, calling himself a BB main, has no idea about rock/paper/scissors? If anything, Battleships in this game need even more nerfs. They are far too easy and too forgiving to play. This will become even more obvious with the arrival of the russian BB´s, they are far too good against destroyers (everything) at close range. Battleships should crap their pants when facing a destroyer, even more if they are alone versus 2 of them...sorry, but this really puzzled me. If WG is advised by players like this, demanding that they should be able to take on 2 destroyers in their battleship, and listens to them, it explains nearly everything about the state of batlleships and some of the changes since closed beta. Sorry guys, don´t really know why I´m posting this, except for...WTF!?!?!? This explains o much...
  8. Kutfroat

    Friedrich der Große worth it?

    It's the only ship where I used the final 25k free exp to unlock the next ship (usually I only use free exp to unlock the better modules) and rage sold it, because I just couldnt stand it anymore. Given, that was "pre buff", but what made me rage sell it were it's horrible, horrible guns, and they didnt change. This ship is the definition of "it couldnt hit a barn, even from the inside". I remember a game, in which I missed a Des Moines from 3.5 km completely...two times (2 salvos). It only purpose is to make the grind to the T10 unbareable and to male you burn your free exp, even when fully upgraded. The pre buff baltimore grind was hard...but the Friedrich der Große is a whole different level. It's an M3 Lee (a lvl 4 medium tank it WoT that was known as the worst tank in the game and 90% of players skip it with free exp if they can...but it's only T4), but on T9! I dont regret selling it...I'm sure it's one of the worst ships in game for it's tier and in general.
  9. Kutfroat

    Giulio Cesare stays as it is + balance of other premiums

    I think this was the right decision. I'm all for balance, but in this case it would have left a very foul taste in my mouth. And I've allready stated multiple times...don't allow ANY premium ships in Ranked/Clanbattles (no Giulius, no Belfasts, no Stalingrads). They are meant as creditfarmers and captaintrainers, not to have the upper hand in an competetive enviroment, but the official answer to this was, that players for sure wont like it, if they cant use their (overpowered) toys in ranked games, no word about balance...well, I think WG never considered this, because it might mean less money spend on OP premiums. But o.k., here we are. I still believe this is the right decision. From now on just dont release blatantly overpowered ships. Good and interesting ones, yes! (Wichita, and the upcoming T8 US light cruiser one are anything but good and interessting, same goes for Viribus Unitis. At T5? No way...)
  10. Ok...go on like this. Enjoy beeing overreached/cheated on. Some people really have no sense for work/money/value anymore. Ever heard the saying "the costumer is king"? WG wants, needs OUR money. We, at least I dont need them. If they cheat on me once, I'm gone.
  11. Which caused an enormous shitstorm for apple, because someone showed that this is also just to devalue existing phones and not needed. Of course Samsung/Huawei and all others do the same, they just havent been caught, yet. LoL only has cosmetics/skins for real money...you cant really nerf apoearance? WoW and Starcraft dont have in game premium purchases as far as I know. I played MWO and there e.g the Timberwolf chassis got globally nerfed...but that thing overperformed just like the Stalingrad does in this game. It was toxic for the gamw because no other heavy mech was viable anymore.
  12. So "Premium-Account" is for free? Because most players (at leadt that I know off) that buy premium ships, also run an premium account...that needs to be renewed now and then. That would be the "fuel" in your comparison. And ships get worse by powercreep even without direct nerfing...so the post you're refering to is still viable.
  13. So because they are the best 10% it's absolutely reasonable to give them completely broken ships? Of course...and no, they are broken, because e.g. in clan battles everyone brought as many Stalingrads as possible. Only the ones that didn't have one had to pick the "poor man's" version Moskwa. They should be the first to be nerfed to normal perfomance, but be sure this will only happen AFTER it is no longer available, so it must be devalued to "incentivice" players to spend again (free exp/time/money). This is not about keeping OP stuff, as so many others allready stated. It's about trust between "business partners". If they start with the GC and do not properly compensate (only money, no dubloons), be asured this will become a very dirty business model from this point on. Do you really think it's about balance? It's because many players sit on this "OP" premiums (knowingly sold by WG) and would never need new ones. It's all about devalueing. If WG would care about balance, they should/could have listened to their testers, which told them multiple times that Belfast/GC/T-61 and so on are a bit too strong...but hey, they decided to take the easy money. Not the costumers fault.
  14. As I've allready stated...if they really nerf the GC and go on nerfing other, not more available, premiums, I will be very vocal about that "thiefery" on eg. Steam (negative review all about their business "model"). I dont have the GC, but I got a Belfast, and the last thing iI want is a T8 Belfast, because T8 matchmaking is the biggest nerf in itself. But if they realy pull this off...and not give back real money...oh boy...I really hope this will end in a shitstorm comparable to the "Battlefront 2" lootbox desaster for EA.
  15. Kutfroat

    Why do people dislike T10 and choose lower tiers?

    Ok, than I'm sorry, too. Might have overreacted. I play mostly DD and Cruisers, but also BB (up to Kurfürst, N. Carolina and Alsace). I just got the feeling, that BB are by far the most forgiving class, but feel boring compared to DD and Cruisers...so that's why I prefer them. And there were so many DD and Cruiser nerfs and BB buffs in the past, that led to the current BB powerhouse situation, and there are still players requesting buffs to BB's...and that is what I dont understand. The BB buffs/nerfs to others, and the cv absence, are the reason for this "hide and spam he" meta, because BB perform well against everything. But once again, sorry, missread/-understood you. Maybe shouldnt have stopped reading. And to answer the question: I "avoid" T10 because of the "try-hard" 3 men divisions. T10 games, especially when there is no ranked or clan battle season, are poluted with this kind of divisions. Often there are multiple 3 mens on one team, when the other team has 1 or 2 two men divisions. That leads to very frustrating steamroll matches in which, no matter how hard you try, you dont have (any) influence on the result of the match. Mechwarrior solved that problem with a "soloqueue"...wish WoWs had the same option.
×