Jump to content

misinformed

Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    3050
  • Clan

    [BK]

About misinformed

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia
  1. Its not a pleasant ship to play, it took me the better part of a year to get through it, refusing to play it with anything less than a +100% bonus + flags. The Yorck didnt help my disposition either for that matter. The only positive is the subsequent Roon is a fantastic ship and feels like a fully upgraded ship at stock.
  2. misinformed

    question about winrate (and i need something off my mind)

    Im going to echo what has previously been said which aligns with my own experience. I originally i started off playing destroyers, however I'm not a great DD player either; if i were to play them exclusively i wouldn't come off too well. And found it extremely difficult to do consistently well sailing them. Finding them (generally) unforgiving to play, and thats also with playing a DD that is considered overpowered by some/many. Further its also not quite as clear cut when measuring your effectiveness in a DD compared to other ship types, that generally rely more heavily on quantifiable measures to gauge their success, ie damage taken and damage received. So try shifting your focus to other ship types.
  3. misinformed

    Domination.

    I would also prefer having the option of disabling it, however thats mainly because i feel theres often not enough time to get some decent fighting in, this is more of a problem when using the slower ships. And i dont mean hanging around at the back, without taking the initiative. One scenario can be incredibly annoying to plod to one capture point, not face any/much resistance and spend the rest of the battle trying to catch up only for the match to be decided on points, of which sometimes you have little chance. I dont dislike domination games in destroyers, infact theyre quite fun, but thats mainly due to the role destroyers play on those games allowed for by their speed/stealth and ability to get to those points quickly. I would suggest slowing the rate of points acquired through the capture areas by 1/3 to 1/2 to give battles the opportunity to fully flesh out, while still averting draws.
  4. misinformed

    Battleship Accuracy test

    Angled armour is a distant secondary consideration; you really have to worry about the small profile of such targets - an angled cruiser moving towards/away from your position and your ability to hit him at all due to his small silhouette. So worrying about 'bounces' is almost moot at this stage, there wont be (m)any hits. If you were talking about two equal cruisers using AP on each other i'd agree with that. But i think you actually have to worry about first getting the hit to worry about the armour penetration mechanics, as it becomes increasingly uncommon the further the range opens up, starting at 10+km in that situation, to the point of not having to consider it significant. Also at the those and further ranges you're more likely to see plunging fire. Now it sounds obvious but i don't see it happen much; BB's, much like the guy with a big slow-to-reload sniper rifle, often need to bide their time and wait for their moment - a cruiser showing, or about to, a broadsides to fire, which is fair enough, regardless of the ammo type. As to the discussion that has already been raised comparing torpedoes and BB's main battery's; any case of a direct comparison between the two systems wouldn't be fair, they just work too differently. The whole BB players are just less intelligent people argument and therefore perform worse than other players of other classes is laughable; heres one off the top of my head, that assumes that a 'typical' BB player (whatever that is) only plays a single ship class, which is untrue. In any case one argument isnt to give BB's laser like accuracy (which i dont think anyone was arguing for, but the argument was taken to the extremes and then criticised regardless) is to (selectively) improve it a little bit at ranges that are more commonly used in any given battle, 10-15km. I'd argue a general across-the-board <3km accuracy buff to all BB's isn't particularly meaningful (and possibly have greater/lesser value at different tiers) i have had plenty of first hand experience consistently hitting destroyers with (the vast majority of) main battery fire from <5km, in a Warspite, at least. However I'm sure Kawachi drivers would be more welcoming of it, given the accuracy of that ship.
  5. misinformed

    Bismarck class ingame dispersion (Horrible!)

    As far as historical accuracy goes it always comes a distant second to can be overridden by the need for game balance. However i have also seen historical accuracy used as an argument for the buffing of a vehicle in World of Tanks, so its a murky area, and they probably just make it up as they go along. Now whether that's correct for the in-game Bismark at the moment i don't know. If its under-performing against comparably tiered ships it will probably get improved, although there are countless cases in world of tanks with terrible vehicles being ignored. Now it is the nature of the beast that certain vehicles/ships will have to under-perform for others to over-perform or vice versa, and a game filled with perfectly balanced ships/vehicles isnt achievable. However given the ships status they'll probably try to do a good job of getting it 'right'. This also brings up the interesting question of what is considered 'right' (by the majority; and are their perceptions of the ship accurate) and we're back full circle again. And whether its ever possible to get it 'right'. So one again were back to, "does it perform adequately for the opponents it faces?" Which is the only measure that counts ingame. Big gun dispersion in general is pretty awful when your not dealing with trivial ranges <5km (IJN BB's suffer the least currently, with the exception of the Kawachi) and it would be nice if there was an easy way of comparing different BB dispersion. A graph would be great. Given dispersion does not increase in a linear fashion.
  6. misinformed

    DD Detection range issue

    I had something related happen to me a month ago. Late game, i was bee-lining for two IJN DD's (tier 5-6) going after the friendly carrier, i was in a Gremy (DD) trying to stop them. Still too far away to help, the carrier went down, the DD's positions/icons on the map were now visible having been spotted by the carrier, but i assume outside my rendering range, as they were simple coloured red line triangle icons - not the full filled-in block red version. There were no other aircraft or ships apart from me and them now in this half of the map. And neither me nor the 2 IJN DD's i was facing dropped smoke. However as both i and they closed the distance, im not sure how close exactly, their positions on the map updated - fairly often (still uncoloured red line triangle icons) however i couldn't find them for the life of me despite being practically on top of them. Ended up taking a torpedo, having never gotten a look at either ship, despite them being in close range, we must be talking at the very least under 5k. Their final map positions were practically on top of me. Both were in a division and had 3 kills each. It may have all been a bit of a coincidence, but i cant say what went on one way or the other with any certainty but its a bit of an oddity.
  7. misinformed

    Draws...

    Justify what a high draw rate is. Qualitative data need not apply.
  8. The Omaha is of course overpowered, ive done 130k damage games in that thing, all you have to do is get in there at long range and start 'driving' around in circles, employing all guns on both sides and making yourself a difficult target to nail. It is by far the most overpowered cruiser, that ive driven or faced. especially given that its ability to just spam out shells is second to none. Coupled with the way HE currently works - while using AP on cruisers. If a player had sense they'd leave the 3rd hull upgrade at home, those 2 additionall guns that you'd lose with hull C, make a huge difference. I couldnt agree more that BB's as a class do suffer, they have to simultaneously: Mostly be wary of destroyers - random erratic course changes. Watch out for other BB's, so be wary of showing a broadsides or anything approaching it. Be constantly vigilant for torpedo bombers, so you get those turns in early, god help you if more than one squadron come after you and your on your own - dont be alone - well we try not to but circumstances dictate otherwise often enough. Avoid long range fire from cruisers, which not only does HE damage, fires, but youve also got to worry about plunging AP shells; cruisers staying at range (if they have any sense) will easily avoid any of you main gun return fire. Once all thats been accounted for, youve (most likely) got to get close to cruisers to be a significant threat, theyll just dodge everything at 13,14,15+ ranges, so unless theyre not paying attention and sailing in a straight line showing a full broadside forgetaboutit. They can also close with you fairly effectively by showing only their bow while taking minimal damage, given big gun shell dispersion. Youve still got BB's you can target but you wont be getting many (practically any) citadel hits at long ranges. So its a similar (but a much better) prospect to cruisers; the range neednt be as close and leading the target is far easier, and their ability to maneuvre is not as great. At the moment it seems like cruisers are supposed to counter battleships and not the other way around, battleships dont seem to have a class that they can face and say, well, im in my element here (catching a cruiser showing a full broadside at sub 9,8,7km range is the only circumstance, and youll send him to the bottom easily enough) as a carrier might with a battleship or a destroyer similarily or a cruiser countering a destroyer. Prey for everything, predator to very little.
  9. misinformed

    Warspite

    I didnt make use of the Warspite during the closed test, i have however had it for a while now, i would describe its accuracy as anything other than awesome at extreme ranges, you can expect every shell in a well aimed full volley, bar 1 or 2 if you're particularly lucky, to land either side of a BB showing a full broadside. Extremely combat ineffective at those ranges, so if i can i avoid playing at 16km+. Seeing dispersion that is like throwing a bunch of tennis balls in the air and then landing a sole 1k hit on, well anything, is so bloody awful i get up close. Sub 12,10,8k and you're far far far far, more of a threat, especially to cruisers. Much better chance of getting those citadels too ofc. Risk sure, but there are times when you can press forward and this ship does it well, when its a viable option. But yea often im at 12,13,14 out of necessity. Ive also taken to using the main armament accuracy upgrade to help (if it does significantly i cant tell, but frankly the vast majority of damage done is with the main guns, so its worth a go to try it out) but it kills me to lose some secondary gun range. So its not a done deal. I agree that the Warspite benefits greatly from having teammates close at hand, the more the better, early on lone wolf gameplay is punished.
  10. I had gone to the trouble of writing a well reasoned argument in support of the opening post, however im no longer interested in attempting to sway other peoples opinions. All i can say is im glad we don't see 3 or even 4 carriers in matches (per side) - atleast i haven't yet, the same way we often see three or rarely four artillery/side in World of Tanks.
  11. misinformed

    Wot Gold = WoW Gold

    Silly prices certainly, if you lot dont buy them, they wont stay at those prices forever, especially since its early days regarding pricing and theyre testing the waters. There will no doubt be some sort of store incentive to get more people playing once the open beta starts, or shortly thereafter, or atleast for Warships *official* release, whatever form it takes.
  12. misinformed

    Fridays patch is 'not' OBT....

    Given that we all have an equal chance of getting into these matches i would still agree with this, not so much because of getting lumped into games with what someone might consider to be bad players (if you perscribe to the winrate %'s - some people might consider 55% players to be terrible im sure) but because it would hopefully reduce the number of easy wins aswell, both quick victories and losses are no where nearly as enjoyable or rewarding as a hard fought win or loss, the best thing theyve done in a while was introduce the couragous resistance condition, but that only provides a partial solution. However its difficult to implement, due to the same sources of bias you mentioned earlier. Anyway wont happen and ive digressed.
  13. misinformed

    Fridays patch is 'not' OBT....

    Obviously there are numerous things that can influence that percentage and numerous ways it can be biased, and its certainly safer/easier to identify who the bad players are than the good ones using the available stats. Also just because youve beaten a player once easily, does not mean its representative of his/her overall competence on a wide range of vehicles across a wide range of situations across large time periods. Im not going to do the rest of the speech as its probably already been said before.
  14. misinformed

    0.4.0 or OBT is a big nerf for DDs

    The smoke screen changes worry me the most as well as the find-you-when-your-in-one consumable, will also have to see how much the HE changes reduce destroyer damage. I dont envy US destroyer users as theyve generally already got the short end of the stick.
×