Jump to content

cptnwhite

Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

    43
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    28429
  • Clan

    [PWNED]

1 Follower

About cptnwhite

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. cptnwhite

    0.9.4 - Ranked Battles

    Overall, I really liked the fact that it wasn t T10 and even more so that there were no CVs, I kinda doubt I d have played if it had been T10 again. A very long time ago, you did a T7 ranked season before and it was commonly deemed as the worst of all seasons up to that point (smoke detection mechanics and map pool was different and ofc certain ships didn t exist back then or were changed) and it ended up being all about smoke and radar which only was available to Belfast (possibly Indy was out as well, not sure anymore). Lots has changed since but I d say mostly for the better with 1 exception. SinOP with its overmatch, pinpoint accuracy and great armour is in a league of its own - at least in this environment where short range engagements really matter. Belfast clearly isn t what you can call a well balanced ship but in this environment a Sinop seems to require even less effort to do well in than a Belfast (or Fiji). Ofc well played Fijis or Belfasts are forces to be reckoned but despite all gimmicks, they still are far less forgiving when it comes to player errors than Sinop which seemed far more forgiving whilst still having the ability to do great. It s the relation between effort & impact which is off there. Whilst having a Belfast & Fiji I decided to go for the Yorck with the hope that I can rely on my smoke firing ability, buffed AP and the yolo power of the torps whilst expecting that most enemies will be more stationary island abusers or smoke cruisers and clearly there was barely a game where I regretted that choice. I played it very AP heavy trying to make use of the more stationary nature of Flints, Atlantas, Belfasts, Fijis and the decent gun characteristics even at mid-longer ranges against DDs. Made it from 10.2 to rk 1 in 81 battles with 67.9% WR ..but okay, let s not forget that ranked is more down to "who has the weakest 2 players on the team" instead of "who has the best" and clearly sample sizes of games played are too small to be really telling. Final verdict: T7 was a nice change esp as there were no CVs and I d like to see more non-T10 seasons and CVs shouldn t be in any format that has less than 12 players.
  2. cptnwhite

    Visual and other Enhancements

    On certain maps and spawns lighting has always been an issue. It shouldn t be that one team plays at a disadvantage due to the lighting being too bright to see what shell type the other team is using or having a harder time to see where those ships are going. Key areas or cap position don t change and therefore key areas that need to be taken or held don t..but lighting often makes it unnecessarily difficult for one of the parties to identify what kinda shells the enemy is firing. Overall, it s just too bright and playing against the sun is clearly a disadvantage. This isn t some aerial combat where u wanna make use of that as the caps etc stay the same.
  3. cptnwhite

    Raid for the Filth

    Absolutely pointless post. Did you check the articles? Read the news? Watched others play? Having no clue is fine when you're trying something new but nowadays there are so many resources to learn and watch other's experience. Filth has absolutely nothing to do with DMG. How much DMG you did and how many ships you sunk is are the least important things in this mode. While I do criticize many aspects of this mode, I can't agree with a single line you wrote and I'd advise you to inform yourself a bit before writing such nonsense on the forum. For special ppl lacking the ability to abstract: 1. I do call it a waste of time for a temporary mode if you gotta go back and forth from the post to figure out what ship is what...even more so if they re carbon copies to tech tree ships anyway - solution: be straight forward, save ppl time, call ships the way they re called in the game instead of renaming things for no added value at all 2. New mode therefore hard to predict what crew skills are beneficial, no ability to reset skills for free therefore making ppl waste more time checking out vids or thinking twice about what crew skills to pick in the first place - solution: make the crew skill reset free or at least heavily discount it 3. Lack of relation between effort and reward and no clear guideline how to max out profits makes it all feel derpy and pointless aka a waste of time -solution: establish a clear effort-reward relation, preferably in a way that doing more pays off and/or is at least clearly predictable (positive feedback loop). EDIT...and this is a big one: After my first mostly negative impressions that nearly made me walk away from this mode, I decided to give it a proper try....and gee, I m so glad I did. Whilst I still stand by the first 2 points I made, I d say i was plain wrong when it comes to the 3rd. I prematurely judged it by what I m used to and the first 2 points led me to not giving this mode a fair chance.. so I took a deep breath and tried.....I played this a lot by now and I ABSOLUTELY LOVE IT! This is more like taking part in a social experiment, it s evident that the best outcome can be achieved by cooperating and not attacking other players and yet, it basically never happens and that irrational dimension is part of the beauty of that mode. It s this uncertainty of what the others- even those who pretend going for truce - will do and it s such a good laugh to punish the irrational ones attacking you. The fact that the bots basically always do the same- especially at the start- was an EXTREMLY good design decision (!) as it guarantees that ppl bring some loot to the decisive end game where they ll meet the players at the portal. This spices things up coz teams now face the question, "do I keep the truce and keep what I got? / will those having less loot attack me? / or should my team even go rogue and attack the others?" Meanwhile even if the bots around the centre area close to the portal basically always do the same, they still can be an interfering factor adding a degree of uncertainty whilst not being truly decisive for the real player vs player interaction. The interaction with players in chat also adds to the fun (both enemy and team). It doesnt rly depend all that much on their skill level, I dived a lot with deep red 45%ers or orange 47%ers that were willing to try and learn and it was nice to see them living up to the challenge, playing their role and growing into it... I also played with ppl I know who are better and yes, ofc this also leads to more profitable games but honestly, I just had as much fun with ppl I met along the way regardless of the outcome...and this is a really good sign I d say. I truly want this mode to stay, it s that breath of fresh air that was desperately needed...I d also say that this has the potential of dragging new ppl into the game...I haven t checked but I hope that new players can also play this coz I know ppl who d like this mode. On a sidenote, the special style camos are nice but overpriced (aka 8k for a t10 one) I admit I m tempted to buy one just for the sake of rewarding u for introducing this very mode.. again, those should cost 6k and not 8k, still a premium compared to the normal one but I d say 1k extra for the artwork can be seen as justified.
  4. cptnwhite

    Italian Arc - First part

    Whilst I do suffer from event fatigue like many others, I do think that the missions are a huge improvement over past events. What bothered me the most in the past regarding missions is that many tasks were tied to a specific class or a specific nation, forcing me to play ships I don t necessarily wanna play (or even worse: a game mode I don t like).... This time around, the missions are designed in a way that you can complete them in whatever ship you feel like playing. Ofc some missions are more tailored to one class or another but the important part is that you re still free to chose and this is a huge improvement to me. That freedom of choice is a game changer and makes it all feel far less of a chore as the feeling "omg I can t play what I wanna play now coz I still gotta complete nation x or whatever ship class mission". Sadly the rewards - especially the lucky draw- flaw the campaign. I m clearly not willing to spend tokens for yet another lottery ticket "lootbox style" and therefore it will be borderline impossible to get a mission for an Italian ship. Clearly, I won t buy any of the proper loot boxes for money either and given that game companies show no restraint whatsoever exploiting loot box gambling, I m delighted to see that lawmakers across Europe have a closer look at this and hopefully put an end to it.
  5. cptnwhite

    Raid for the Filth

    Absolutely pointless mode, so there goes my experience: First thing that upset me was that I had to waste time figuring out what of the 3 ships I got is what and trying to figure out what grindable ships are what, then wasting more time thinking about commander skills that are remotely useful in this very mode (reset isn t for free so u gotta think ahead)...ended up picking very few skills as a result, next up: first game: totally clueless, felt like contributing little and then ended up topping the scoreboard with 1.2k filth and what felt like little dmg (300k), next game (still no clue what cmdr skills to choose), a lot more action, 600k dmg and wtf, 460 filth...HOW... Aside from that it seems derpy and I got no clue what I m doing, am i m doing alright or not...no clue so wtf...at the very same time i feel like wasting my time. It s just bad and I doubt I ll give it another try after 3 games...so gj wasting ressources for that I guess....
  6. cptnwhite

    Update 0.8.8.1: Audio Hotfix

    Sound is still messed up...and no it s not the Windows patch 1903 coz I had that installed prior to the update and the sound was perfectly fine till 0.8.8. dropped. Regardless what I do in the settings, the following key issues remain: 1. AA sound - basically not audible anymore (is this meant to help CVs to sneak in drops, esp against DDs...given that the AA activation is a nightmare aka having to look around and by doing that turning the turrets every 10s to get the sector activated whilst dogfighting is enough of a nightmare) 2. Torp warning sound is also way too low now 3. Borderline useless sounds are way too loud (fire...and this is animated anyway) 4. Reload sound when guns are ready should be louder 5. Secondaries are barely audible Lower caliber guns sound shallow and are way too toned down compared to BB guns - esp on light cruisers (I get that BB guns are meant to sound punchier but ppl don t play 2 ships at the same time so it s irrelevant, the sound volume should be at a comparable level...nobody cares about the difference from the game before when one has played a BB and then plays a cruiser...ppl just wanna hear when the shot goes off in the game they currently play). All this isn t just cosmetic, it hampers the gameplay itself ! Let alone that I never heard anyone complaining about the old sounds being bad.... what I hear are ppl frustrated to play on a permanent test server
  7. Vielen Dank, aber irgendwie traurig dass man seitens WG erst von einem User darauf gestoßen werden muss. In Anbetracht dessen, dass WG bislang anscheinend nichts unternimmt, um an sich eigene Interessen ggü. der Telekom (und anderen Nutzern der Telekom Infrastruktur wie z.B. 1und1, o2 etc) zu vertreten, kann ich nur dringlich dazu raten, entsprechende Emails an die ISPs zu senden. Wie gesagt, bislang hat die Telekom diese Problematik nicht auf der offiziellen Agenda! Und ja, ich bin auch nur über T-Systems und dann entsprechenden Connections zum 2nd Level gekommen...man kann sicher davon ausgehen, dass andere Normalnutzer ohne Firmenverträge da nicht durchdringen, sondern sofort à la "alles andere geht doch und die Tests zeigen: alles i.O" abgefertigt werden....das ist übrigens nicht mal gelogen, alle Dienste der Telekom funktionieren näml. in der Tat...außer eben der Server Access auf die Warships Server!!! Wenn selbst ich über meine Telekom Kanäle das herausfinden kann, dann hat WG da sicher mal ganz andere Hebel....die wohl bislang nicht genutzt werden... Also, damit die Telekom (und die Nutzer der Telekom Infrastruktur wie 1und1 etc) darauf aufmerksam werden, Email mit "World of Warships Server Access Problem" an info@telekom.de (oder respektive andere Service Email von 1und1, o2 etc) schicken und Problem kurz schildern!  Ich darf nochmal sagen, an sich sollte WG mit ihren eigenen Kanälen dafür sorgen, dass bei der Telekom etc das Problem wahrgenommen wird...aber hey, darf ich halt WG s job machen..... Fair enough, wenn du das so siehst. Ich weiß von div. anderen Großfirmen (ähnlich der Telekom) dass da sehr oft die linke Hand nicht weiß was die rechte Hand tut. Somit kann ich mich hier nur wiederholen: Ich als Anwender weiß gar nichts, weder wo das Problem liegt noch ob WG tätig geworden ist oder nicht noch ob die Trollkom tätig geworden ist oder nicht. Klar, dass mag einige frustrieren die gerne einige regelmäßige Updates haben wollen über den Fortschritt etwaiger Lösungsansätze, aber da sehe ich halt auch: Wenn die Serverspezi's von WG erst Mal an den entsprechenden Telekom Fuzzi kommen müssen der überhaupt in der Lage ist diese Probleme zu erkennen (das ein Problem besteht ist ja offensichtlich, nur kann es anscheinend kein automatisiertes System - egal ob von WG oder der TK - erkennen). Und da hab ich die Vermutung, dass dieser Telekom Fuzzi seit Freitag 14:00 Uhr im Wochenende ist. Aber gut. Die bisherigen Aussagen von WG gehen nur leider nicht in die Richtung "wir sind mit der Telekom und den Nutzern der Telekom Infrastruktur bzgl. der Problematik im Gespräch und nutzen alle Kanäle, um die Probleme bewußt zu machen und entsprechende Lösungen zu erarbeiten"...oder?.... (gratis PR Statement, bitte gern)...vielmehr heißt es: "es liegt an einem ISP Problem" (soll ich das jetzt kommentieren?...). Es ist angesichts dessen nur zu hoffen, dass hier bereits Channels genutzt werden...aber keines der Statements deutet bislang darauf....es liegt im tiefsten Eigeninteresse von WG, das Ganze mit den ISPs zu lösen. Ich darf hierbei nochmals betonen, bislang (Stand 16h) hat die Telekom das Problem nicht auf der Agenda und daher oben beschriebener Weg, so dass entsprechende ISPs aufmerksam werden (und ja, da sollte WG klar Vorarbeit geleistet haben und nachdrücklich ISPs in die Pflicht nehmen, WG s leverage ist da mit Sicherheit größer, als mein perssönlicher).
  8. Was ich mich hierbei Frage: Wie kommst du zu der Einschätzung? Die offiziellen Statements dürften hier für sich sprechen... aka "es handelt sich um ein Problem seitens ISP etc" (Crysantos/ MrConway)...dann setze das in Verbindung mit der Aussage Telekom 2nd Lvl: "derzeit besteht kein Dossier zur weiteren Nachforschung und seitens Telekom ist kein Fehler erkennbar".... Also ja, es ist sehr zu hoffen, dass bereits entsprechende Channels von WG genutzt werden, bislang - insbesondere aufgrund der bisherigen Aussagen seitens WG- deutet hierauf wenig
  9. Vielen Dank, aber irgendwie traurig dass man seitens WG erst von einem User darauf gestoßen werden muss. In Anbetracht dessen, dass WG bislang anscheinend nichts unternimmt, um an sich eigene Interessen ggü. der Telekom (und anderen Nutzern der Telekom Infrastruktur wie z.B. 1und1, o2 etc) zu vertreten, kann ich nur dringlich dazu raten, entsprechende Emails an die ISPs zu senden. Wie gesagt, bislang hat die Telekom diese Problematik nicht auf der offiziellen Agenda! Und ja, ich bin auch nur über T-Systems und dann entsprechenden Connections zum 2nd Level gekommen...man kann sicher davon ausgehen, dass andere Normalnutzer ohne Firmenverträge da nicht durchdringen, sondern sofort à la "alles andere geht doch und die Tests zeigen: alles i.O" abgefertigt werden....das ist übrigens nicht mal gelogen, alle Dienste der Telekom funktionieren näml. in der Tat...außer eben der Server Access auf die Warships Server!!! Wenn selbst ich über meine Telekom Kanäle das herausfinden kann, dann hat WG da sicher mal ganz andere Hebel....die wohl bislang nicht genutzt werden... Also, damit die Telekom (und die Nutzer der Telekom Infrastruktur wie 1und1 etc) darauf aufmerksam werden, Email mit "World of Warships Server Access Problem" an info@telekom.de (oder respektive andere Service Email von 1und1, o2 etc) schicken und Problem kurz schildern! Ich darf nochmal sagen, an sich sollte WG mit ihren eigenen Kanälen dafür sorgen, dass bei der Telekom etc das Problem wahrgenommen wird...aber hey, darf ich halt WG s job machen.....
  10. @Crysantos @MrConway Re-poste hier mal folgende Erkenntnis nach längerem Gespräch mit dem 2nd Level des techn. Dienstes der Telekom: Es sollte klar sein, dass es in WG s bestem Interesse liegt, hier zu handeln. Ich habe soeben mit dem 2nd level Service der technischen Abt. der Telekom telefoniert. Grundaussage hierbei: keiner der angewendeten Tests wird den Fehler erkennen, da generell alles funktioniert.... außer der spezifische Zugang zu Eurem Server. Die Telekom unternimmt derzeit noch rein gar nichts und es gibt auch keine interne Fehlermeldung...dh bisher wird ISP seitig rein gar nichts unternommen, da die Telekom dieses Problem offiziell nicht auf der Agenda hat (also werden alle Anrufe diesbzgl mit Statements à la "alles ist okay" abgefertigt. ohne dass es zu weiteren Schritten kommt !). Der einzige Weg, der mir geschildert wurde, um ISPs (v.a. Telekom) auf das Problem aufmerksam zu machen, ist das Problem per Email mit Betreff "World of Warships Server Access" o.ä. per Email zu melden, so dass so eine auffällige Fallzahl zusammenkommt, damit die Telekom (oder Nutzer ihrer Infrastruktur wie z.B o2 oder 1und1) überhaupt erst auf das Problem aufmerksam werden. Also Aufruf zum Email schreiben: im Falle der Telekom: entsprechender Header und kurze Schilderung des Problems an info@telekom.de (bzw. entsprechende Mails an 1und1 , o2 etc). Ansonsten sollte WG in tiefstem Eigeninteresse dafür sorgen, dass Telekom (und andere) auf diese Problem aufmerksam werden (ihr dürftet da auch eigene Kanäle haben).
  11. @Crysantos, Es sollte klar sein, dass es in WG s bestem Interesse liegt, hier zu handeln. Ich habe soeben mit dem 2nd level Service der technischen Abt. der Telekom telefoniert. Grundaussage hierbei: keiner der angewendeten Tests wird den Fehler erkennen, da generell alles funktioniert.... außer der spezifische Zugang zu Eurem Server. Die Telekom unternimmt derzeit noch rein gar nichts und es gibt auch keine interne Fehlermeldung...dh bisher wird ISP seitig rein gar nichts unternommen, da die Telekom dieses Problem offiziell nicht auf der Agenda hat (also werden alle Anrufe diesbzgl mit Statements à la "alles ist okay" abgefertigt. ohne dass es zu weiteren Schritten kommt !). Der einzige Weg, der mir geschildert wurde, um ISPs (v.a. Telekom) auf das Problem aufmerksam zu machen, ist das Problem per Email mit Betreff "World of Warships Server Access" o.ä. per Email zu melden, so dass so eine auffällige Fallzahl zusammenkommt, damit die Telekom (oder Nutzer ihrer Infrastruktur wie z.B 02 oder 1und1) überhaupt erst auf das Problem aufmerksam werden. Also Aufruf zum Email schreiben: im Falle der Telekom: entsprechender Header und kurze Schilderung des Problems an info@telekom.de (bzw. entsprechende Mails an 1und1 , o2 etc). Ansonsten sollte WG in tiefstem Eigeninteresse dafür sorgen, dass Telekom (und andere) auf dieses Problem aufmerksam werden (ihr dürftet da auch eigene Kanäle haben). P.S. Danke für s removen des Pink Status im voraus...und ja liebe 0 dmg Gearing games....
  12. cptnwhite

    AA Defense Changes

    <<<< THIS!!! would indeed solve the "looking around issue" described above... 2 AA sectors could be bound to the mouse or whatever keys ppl prefer, one for port, the other one for starboard.
  13. cptnwhite

    AA Defense Changes

    Assumed it was clear in my original post that I was referring to the system prior to 8.0 aka Ctrl+click on the squadron...but hey. I m well aware the AA overlay introduced in 8.0 wasn t popular at all BUT honestly, this now is worse, esp for DDs (or to a degree fast firing cruisers with fast turning turrets). At least the overlay used to change sectors didnt require looking around as it was a separate menu and once set you could - if you desired - leave it so that the side where u expected most planes to come from ended up being focused without further intervention. Now, with an action time of only 10sof your AA, you perma have to look around (assuming the planes come from the opposite direction than the target u re shooting at) to click again which is absolutely detrimental to fast shooting ships in the middle of an engagement. Not only do the guns turn whilst looking around but you also lose focus. Given that DDs suffered the most by the AA changes, I highly doubt that this could have been an intentional thing..and if so..omg. I agree that the overlay system introduced in 8.0 was clunky and far from ideal but you just managed to make it worse...The Ctrl+click on squads (aka the old focus fire prior to 8.0) was far more convenient and enabled ppl to keep their focus on the actual fight.
  14. cptnwhite

    AA Defense Changes

    Let alone that there hasn t been a proper explanation of how the new AA sector is to be used, it s far worse than before. How are DDs meant to interact with planes whilst being in the fight with another DD...same applies to cruisers to a lesser degree, esp those with fast turning turrets?! You basically always turn your guns as you have to look around when planes approach from the opposite direction than the enemy you re fighting...so you re shooting every 3-4s, have to turn ur view towards the planes and by doing so you turn ur guns and have to aim at the enemy again...and that every 10ish secs in the middle of an engagement???!!! That s absolute garbage and hampers DDs being the class by far the most affected by all these changes since 8.0 even more.... Btw, the element in the old mechanics to focus fire by simply clicking once on a squad was good, why change that in the first place. The new iteration is worse than the overlay we had before as it actively distracts from the core gameplay....esp DDs in a close fight (aka already the class the most negatively impacted) suffer from this change. Anyway, if I wanted to play a game centered on (naval) aviation, I d play War Thunder or World of Warplanes....
  15. cptnwhite

    0.8.5 - Rogue Wave event

    Having played this mode for 2 weeks by now, I intended to revise my original feedback focusing on sth positive but nope, simply can t...and that s actually just partially down to "savage battles" in itself. As I previously stated, it s much appreciated that you try to introduce new modes BUT being kinda forced to play this for the campaign simply ruins it all. You can t introduce whatever mode pretending it s for fun and some additional content if at the very same time you go like "oh btw, if you re not playing this very mode, your only way to finish the Benham campaign is to buy 10 containers".... Regarding "savage battles": the map sucks, wasting time going back and forth in the final circle sucks, my main gripe (aside from having to play this sh.t in the first place) is the the map. I appreciated torp beats during space battles but this map is just awful and yes, can t stress enough that having to play this over and over again for the credit missions in order to fulfill the Benham mission doesn t leave anything positive. The overall direction you re going for the past months is deeply concerning . From the CV rework aka playing on WoWs Beta for months after having paid for premium time, your retarded NTC idea that s been apparently replaced by OP ship rewards, the introduction of OP captains, lootbox mania to your pseudo summer sale that s been clearly favouring Steam accounts.. you name it . It should trouble you that many dedicated players are either deeply disappointed or shocked in disbelief...ofc you can argue, you want to attract an entirely new audience but apparently you forgot that you used to have a true asset compared to your competition in having a far above average retention rate that other games could - until recently- only dream of. As a highly committed veteran of this game, I can t recommend it anymore and yes, I actively dissuaded 3 ppl from spending money now. This mode/ campaign or even more so the way of its introduction and execution gives the good old saying "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" a proper meaning...
×