Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About p0int

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. p0int

    A community to save clan battles

    For what it's worth, the question "Are they doing this on purpose" can be clearer. They are indeed making these changes on purpose, but they are not trying to ruin the game mode. They think these changes aren't actually ruining it because they don't know their own game or how it functions. As for the gentlemen's agreement, I will definitely try to get my clanmates on board with the idea. Personally, I wanted to play BB comps anyway because there's potential in that to actually be fun. Another season of spawn camping and trading at 23km does not interest me in the least.
  2. p0int

    Nerf Stalingrad and petro

    Do you even know why ships are banned in KOTS? Not because they are OP according to the organizers but because they are either unavailable for purchase (PR and Smolensk) or have been out for less than 6 months and the only way to obtain them is through an exclusive currency such as RB points (Slava). The strength and balance of those ships aren't a factor at all when it comes to their exclusion.
  3. p0int

    Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

    Sorry for not carrying you that game, vet came over for my cat earlier than expected so I had to go afk. :)
  4. p0int

    Clan Battle CV boycott

    All of us involved are well aware that they don't listen. That's why this boycott was organized in the first place. By not playing clan battles we will show them our dissatisfaction, instead of just proclaiming it.
  5. The premise of the boycott concept and the discord server supporting the cause is quite simple: We enjoy warships and would hate to see WG disregard overall game and CB balance by forcing CVs into the mode unchanged. The time for this action is NOW. We have no more patience. Recently, many players have become incredibly burnt out and we firmly believe that if CVs are placed in CB next season then an alarming number of players will quit and clans will die. This would be very unhealthy for the game and its community. We have waited 1.5 years to see if CVs would ever become balanced, yet that is still very very far from being the case. In their current state, CVs are simply not ready for the next season of Clan Battles. We would ultimately like to see an overhaul of CV balancing after being removed from CBs for the next season at least. More testing is required and appropriate changes must be implemented. CVs have great potential to provide fresh, fun, competitive gameplay, but in their current state they do the exact opposite. As we saw with this recent CB season’s extremely dull and unvarying meta of Venezia, Stalingrad, and Hakuryu, numerous clans quit early or did not play at all. Even old-guard competitive clans have moved on or are now crumbling because of WG’s refusal to listen to the competitive community. WG’s desire to inject a still unbalanced & unready class into CBs creates a stale atmosphere that almost encourages player departure. Alongside our mass boycott, we intend to have a direct discussion with WG by providing a thorough analysis of CVs and their current impact on gameplay. This includes determining a thorough list of their issues and how we think WG could solve the more problematic ones. Many of these viable solutions have been suggested for over a year now, and this is our best opportunity to make a real difference. Our Issues With CVs: Our sub-community may have many varying issues with the current state and direction of the game, but all seem to pale in comparison to the problems associated with CVs and their game-breaking presence in CBs and all other modes. To us and many others, CVs have ruined the experience of the game we all love. Gone are the days where CVs could be countered properly through a 2-way skill-based interaction. If you wanted to counter an RTS CV, there were tools available that could achieve that: Skills and upgrades such as Manual AA and various AA range buffs could catch even a Super-Unicum CV player by surprise, and cause serious damage and attrition. Not so with reworked CVs: There is no fighting for vision control of the map between opposing CVs, there is no viable protection for a CV’s allies, and there is no balanced interaction between CVs and their targets, nor any combination of abilities which can make the target safe or allow the target any semblance of counterplay besides “just dodging.” While RTS CVs were a far cry from being balanced themselves, they at least provided a number of counterplay options and were far closer to being balanced than reworked CVs ever have been. We understand that game developers everywhere just like Lesta (WG) have to make difficult decisions that they believe would benefit the majority at the cost of the community’s minority groups (like the competitive community), yet we fail to see how CVs provide an enjoyable experience for the majority when the product provided is fundamentally dysfunctional and oppressive to play against. WG have been told time and time again that CVs are broken, and after months of incredibly negligible tweaks, they *finally* nerfed CVs with a universal APDB damage nerf. While it was a significant 17% nerf, it only scratches the surface when compared to other issues a CV brings to the battle. The problem with CB Season 9 was not Venezia or Hakuryu APDBs - which were in fact the symptoms of the overarching problem. Carrier spotting at will and the lack of carrier vs. carrier counterplay were more central problems to CVs than any numerical balancing changes WG can make. On our discord server, we have already identified issues with CVs and developed solutions to many of them. Not all suggestions we provide should make it into the game as they would simply make CVs unplayable. We want CVs to be fair and balanced for all game modes and team sizes, and we do not believe the game is on the proper path to making CVs the class we all know it can be. Rebuttal: There has predictably been backlash directed towards our movement. The most common response is to suggest players “just adapt” to the new CVs. Well, we have “adapted.” We have the mechanical skill, team chemistry, coordination, and game knowledge to adapt to the new CVs and remain comfortably at the top of the CB points ladder and atop tournament podiums. Competitive clans and players forge metas, counter-strategies, and anything in between because of our min-max nature and competitive drive. We spend hours trying to develop counters to basically anything in the game, whether it’s a specific island position or team composition. If anybody can find an effective counter strategy, it’s basically guaranteed to be someone within the competitive community. Despite this, a truly effective counter to CVs has not been found. As previously mentioned, there is no way whatsoever to prevent a CV’s spotting ability. There is no reasonable way to counter a CV’s striking ability. Rocket aircraft by their very nature act as “guaranteed damage,” meaning there is functionally no way to effectively counter them. We don’t necessarily want CB and the meta to stay the same (to be honest it has gotten stale). Changes can be very refreshing but CVs only serve to degrade the experience. So we are seeking changes to CVs that will make the entire game more enjoyable by starting this community boycott movement. CVs being in a balanced state for CBs almost guarantees balance for the other modes. We simply want WG to implement opportunities for skilled play and counterplay. We obviously don’t expect everyone to get involved or to support us, but the more the merrier. A unified community is what’s needed to get issues solved. It has worked in the past to enact significant changes, albeit to varying degrees, as we’ve seen most notably with the NTC/RB disaster and the PR grind. About The Discord Server: The discord server facilitates discussion about CVs, their direction, and the game’s overall balance. There are dedicated sections for clan representatives, content creators (you don’t need to be a CC) and offtopic/meme channels. We have an international admin & moderator team that is very active, passionate, and diplomatic. We have created polls to gather data, a channel to list and “upvote” the more popular ideas that the community has developed or held, and we plan on presenting this directly to WG. I’d like to invite you all to join us in discussing CVs and their current state on our group’s discord server at discord.gg/Uf6w4Fw. We look forward to seeing you all and hopefully you’ll even join hands with us in our boycott. Initial Results: Our Clan representative survey received 110 clan responses from the time it was announced until today. There were a total of 66 clans that confirmed willingness to partake in a boycott action in Clan Battles 10. 3 New clans, 1 Squall Clan, 3 Gale Clans, 27 Storm Clans, 19 Typhoon Clans, and 13 Hurricane Clans have agreed to partake. Our survey responses included 50 EU clans, 56 NA clans, and 4 SEA clans. Of the members of polled clans, there are some 1660 individual members that are willing to participate in this boycott. https://www.reddit.com/r/WorldOfWarships/comments/hmed5e/clan_battle_cv_boycott/
  6. p0int

    0.9.4 - Submarine battle

    I shouldn't even be dignifying this with a response but your obliviousness genuinely intrigues and at the same time just makes me depressed. First off a big yikes for your insecurity and the need to insult and talk down. The fact that you have ideas is nice but in this case irrelevant. Experience doesn't equate solely to the number of a player's games. Even if a player has like 30 thousand games if their winrate is 40 something percent and their overall statistics indicate very low battle performance then that person has no place sharing their opinion on game balance. It's quite obvious they don't know very much about the game or how it works, otherwise their performance indicators wouldn't be that low. Such a person can share their feelings on the game and their user experience, but not opinions about balance and the mechanics of the game. For the exact same reason you wouldn't go to NASA and tell them how to build a rocket, you shouldn't be sharing your thoughts on how to balance World of Warships. You barely know anything about it. The key difference being you are aware of your lack of knowledge about rockets, but not about your lack of knowledge about this game. And the problem is your inability or refusal to recognize that lack of knowledge. So instead of making yourself feel better with empty, pointless insults start questioning your opinions and actually learn something. Having a high winrate has no correlation to the type of person you are and telling someone ignorant to shut up isn't arrogance but a pragmatic action. Hopefully you don't take this as an insult but as an honest critique, so to that end I'll challenge a few points you raise in your previous posts in an attempt to show you their faults. That comment about subs being one-dimensional wasn't literal and the poster meant their gameplay is a linear sequence of steps that doesn't change based on the changes in the sub's environment. Not that the submarine literally moves in one dimension. Your comments about the realism of depth charges and submarine interactions are fair, but in my opinion misplaced. This game isn't a naval warfare simulation, and as much as the devs try to maintain a high level of historical accuracy and realism, you have to draw the line somewhere, because what this game is first and foremost is an arcade game. So gameplay and balance come in higher than historical accuracy and realism on the priority list. Finally, concerning your comments about DDs vs. subs when it comes to fighting BBs - this is where you inexperience and lack of knowledge really hurt you. Comparing a sub's ability stay hidden and a DD's is just faulty thinking. A destroyer has a much higher detection range so just based on those numbers, DDs are about 5 times easier to spot. Of course that number is meaningless, just illustrates the point. But their detection ranges aren't even the main factor. You need to take into account their gameplay and interactions with other surface ships. DDs get spotted by hydro, by radar and by planes, they use smoke, they contest caps, they fire torpedoes that go in straight lines - all of that gives away their position. Even without seeing a DD rendered on your screen you have plenty of information on its whereabouts. Whereas for a submarine you just don't have that information. You can get the general location of where a submarine is if your DDs scout it but that's not very reliable or realistic because DDs often have to overextend to do that so they either don't even try or they just die trying. The alternative is if a sub actually surfaces and lets itself get detected but that's not something you as a surface ship can influence. Last option, though not a viable one, is again torpedoes - but they don't carry as much information as DD torps because they can change their course, so you can't know the sub's exact position. That's why adding depth charges to BBs or CAs wouldn't make them into sub hunters, it would just give them counterplay if a sub makes the mistake of sailing directly beneath them. It's simply not possible for a BB or a CA to actively hunt a sub. Most of the time you won't know where exactly to look and considering depth charges have about a 1km action radius, you would need to be pretty exact with your info. The second, more important factor is, again, gameplay. As a BB or CA you simply can't go around the map chasing the submarine because you are too exposed. There are too many external factors that affect BB and CA positioning compared to what affects a sub's position. It's just not plausible for their positions to overlap.
  7. p0int

    0.9.4 - Submarine battle

    Why are people like this tijgert guy even allowed to post in these threads? He is so uninformed, inexperienced and quite frankly delusional - he thinks he is none of these things. His opinions are borderline worthless when it comes to actual balance because they're based on completely false information and incredibly subjective perception formed from his scarce experience during his few games of questionable quality. Expressing your opinion is one thing, but when that opinion needs to be taken into account when balancing the game at least make some sort of threshold so people can't spout garbage that gets taken seriously and wastes time and resources.
  8. p0int

    Clan battles season 9

    @Crysantos How come you haven't mentioned anything about the global lockdown and how that affected CB numbers? Surely same numbers as the last season mean a relative decrease in play rate? You're supposedly all about clarity and transparency, yet cherry pick information in a way to create a narrative that suits you best. Obviously that's just business but you could at least be less hypocritical and blatant about it. Either that, or you as a company are completely incompetent and haven't even taken the quarantine into account - which seems highly unlikely. So pick one, push your agenda and admit it or actually be transparent and honest. As for your statement about clans having "burn-out issues" and "member leaking", that's just plain insulting to us players. Most of us are eager to play CBs, it's the only form of competitive we get outside of KoTS and it's the only game mode which offers actual high quality gameplay. But when it was announced that CVs were to be a part of this season, the enthusiasm died. Not because people got tired of playing, but because of carriers. As soon as their addition to CBs got announced, most people were immediately opposed to it, myself included, but still played some games in this season. And the results were depressing. The season was unbearable. Now you might think that's because a carrier can dunk on ships with impunity, you, as a player, have no meaningful counterplay and barely any overall or because it's infuriating seeing those 25500 red markers even though you're side on to the drop and your priority sector and def AA have been blasting at the planes for 15 seconds with no results. As [edited] as all that is, that's not even the main problem. Carriers as a class are fundamentally flawed. They are designed to be oppressive and unfair. That's how they are in real life as well. You could balance them all you want but they will never fit into an arcade game. There is no middle ground, either they are useless because AA is too strong, or they are sky cancer with no meaningful counterplay. What a CV does to a match is it basically suffocates gameplay. Your ship choices are restricted (that's why the season ended with Haku + 6 Venezias being the best team comp), your movements are restricted, tactics and strats go out the window, game knowledge, positioning, individual skill - all go out the window. Because playing a CV match is like playing a PvE survival game, where you trade shots with the enemy team until one of you gets a few good SAP salvos, or their CV gets a good rng roll and scores that 25.5k. There is no room for skill expression or tactical creativity. The game becomes incredibly dumbed down and linear and ultimately completely unenjoyable to play. So to clarify the statement that CBs are dying - as your holy, precious numbers have proven, the game mode isn't dying - it's fine, apparently. But the game is not fine. The game in that game mode is not the game we like and want to play. The game is dying. As for your questions, I won't answer only the ones you posted, so here's some related feedback as well that you would, supposedly, be interested in. 1. Remove them from CBs. 2. Different tiers could be interesting, but not before you fix cross-class balance at T8 and T9. Cruisers at those tiers are just pathetic compared to DDs and BBs. The very least you could do is add heals to cruisers across all tiers to offset that issue. 3. Fiddle around with point gains and losses in Hurricane? Right now the disparity is too large. Losing 30+ points for every loss and gaining on average 13-14 points seems too steep. Maybe bump the average up to around 20 and make the gains max out at the maximum of what you stand to lose? Basically make rewards scale only with your opponent's rank, not the relative difference in your rank. Maybe even keep the relative component so weaker clans get properly rewarded for beating a very good team and don't get punished as hard when losing to one, just make that relative component less prevalent. Just make grinding points in Hurricane feel better. Because currently it's just demoralizing. 4. How about you try balancing the game around its top players for a change? Surely the players that know most about it will point out what's sticking out and what isn't better than the average Joe? Gathering data on the average players and measuring their satisfaction is misleading because of their lack of understand about the game. Their satisfaction would be at the same levels with many different balancing ecosystems, simply because they don't know better. It's like in the series Chernobyl, when the device only measures 3.6R of radiation because it maxes out at that. That's what average players are in this case. The information you get out of them is limited in its spectrum. 5. I've mentioned it in another reply in this thread, but I guess this one might actually be read. How about an experiment with a CV and non-CV game mode? Random battles with and without CVs. Then compare the results after, say, 6 months. And not just the number of players that played either game mode, but the group composition of those players as well. That should go well with your interest of attracting new players and retaining the old ones. Something for everyone. Basically what you did with subs (as long as you don't force those into randoms as well, that would be another terrible idea).
  9. p0int

    Clan battles season 9

    I would love to see an experiment with 2 types of random battles. One where CVs are allowed and one where they aren't. Let them run parallel for about 6 months. Then at the end compare results. Which game mode had more players and what was the playerbase composition for both game modes? Carriers as they are now are a plague. There is no meaningful counterplay. They can't nuke you like RTS CVs could [except if you're a cruiser playing against an IJN CV :^)], but you have no way of staying relevant in the game and mitigating their damage at the same time. At this point they are like scripted environment events that you have to play around completely ruining your gameplay experience in the process. WoWS with and without CVs are two completely different games. You could balance CVs as much as you want, but they will never be healthy for the game. They are fundamentally flawed because the class was made to be the all-seeing all-destroying dominant force. It's like that IRL and it's like that in game. If this game is to stay an action oriented arcade style game then CVs need to go. If a significant number of people want to experience historical accuracy and proper naval warfare, then make a new game mode for them. That should go in line with WG's wishes of attracting and retaining as many players as they can. This past CB season was just a nightmare. I played a bit at the start and then just quit because it was extremely unsatisfying. The game I like is not the game I was playing. Tactical creativity is deleted by the presence of a CV. Ship choices are extremely limited, positional understanding of the game and playing around it are also made borderline irrelevant. You can't make plays, you can't carry a game, skill difference effects are eroded to such a degree that even team compositions can decide games before you start playing.