Jump to content


Weekend Tester
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About the_dude33

  • Rank
    Senior Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. the_dude33

    server population

    The wotapi.ru server seems to have been put offline. Anybody who could confirm this? Are there any alternatives to it?
  2. "Koschtenlos"... Nur dann, wenn es einen grösseren Update gibt, der Schiffsparameter so ändert, dass bisherige Skillungen an Sinn verlieren. Nur DANN gibt es MANCHMAL einen Umsonst-Reskill. Kommt aber wirklich SEHR selten vor.
  3. the_dude33

    Gameplay/Matchmaker mit jedem Update schlimmer?

    Nee, nee, mein Kleiner, das sind nicht alles nur blöde Sprüche. Dieses Spiel ist verdammt genial darin, allen Leuten den Eindruck zu geben, so in etwa gut zu sein. Was kann man sich hier alles einreden... geht auf keine Kuhhaut. Für einige Schiffe oder Schiffsklassen gibt es schon eine Korrelation zwischen Schaden, Überlebensrate und Siegrate, aber nicht bei allen. Klar kommt es immer darauf an, bei WEM und WANN man diesen Schaden macht. Bei Zerstörern gibt es eher einen stärkeren Zusammenhang zwischen Cap-Leistung und Siegrate. Natürlich sind Stats nicht immer vollkommen aussagefähig, aber der Umkehrschluss, dass sie deswegen überhaupt nichts taugen, ist absolut falsch.
  4. Hmm... I don't know about you, but I find this announcement, after all these months of getting ships off the shop, very fishy. And Huanghe has her AA nerfed. Maybe we should have a look at what other premium ships might have been ninja-nerfed?
  5. the_dude33

    Whats the point in collections??

    Nah... He's the ideal cash cow customer, buying up loads of tier VII/VIII premiums and being sh*te at the game.
  6. the_dude33

    Time for tutorials Wargaming.

    Oh I know what you mean. And I'd agree with Socrates, with his faith in humanity. I'm a teacher. But humanity =/= WoWs players.
  7. the_dude33

    Time for tutorials Wargaming.

    By that, you're assuming that watching a tutorial leads to a learning experience, and a change in behaviour. I would contest that assumption.
  8. the_dude33

    Time for tutorials Wargaming.

    Like people said above, I wonder whether it's really with tutorials that players can become more committed to playing for the objective. I have my doubts about that. What I observe in game now is that many people just seem to be happy to be doing some "pew-pew" (aka "pley 4 phun"). "Damage-farming" (on a really small scale) seems to be taken for the primary objective, even though that might go against winning. You find lots of examples of "inverted scissors-stone-paper": gunboat destroyers attacking cruisers, cruisers in inferior numbers attacking battleships, and nobody supporting destroyers. You look at their winrates, and people with 50% or better are the exception, and many have winrates of 42-47% with often thousands of battles. I think this is just, as people say here, "the meta"... And, Azalgor, I wouldn't blame this on "kids" at all. One of the most important insights is bushwacker's: "Most of this type of player have no idea they have no clue" - this game is fantastic for providing easy ways to find excuses or to really self-admire (against better judgement). I started playing with the beta weekends in January 2015, and I think that the player base has, shall I say, "evolved".
  9. the_dude33

    Chat ban - small change at least...

    That's an unfair and pretty idiotic comment, if you bothered to read OP's post. 1. he was chat banned across the board (in areas that have nothing to do with in-battle chat behaviour) 2. (and more importantly) he was chat banned, because somebody apparently took offence at his (rightfully, it seems) pointing out that a win was thrown away thanks to a division's bad performance.
  10. the_dude33

    What do you think of my progress so far?

    You haven't, actually. KGV is not "lower tier". But yeah, stick to your Kaiser for a good dozen battles, get out of binoculars view and study the minimap. It'll help you with lots of things: aiming, positioning, maybe even angling.
  11. the_dude33

    Güte des kommenden Spieler-Pools

    Sighhh. Ist ja widerlich. Geht Dir gerade einer ab? Es ist eher normal, auf niedrigen Tiers Robben zu finden. Das Problem dieses Spiels ist, dass es davon immer noch zuviele auf hohen Tiers gibt, und von denen auch noch die meisten meinen, dass sie gut sind. Mach doch einfach mal Dein Radio aus.
  12. the_dude33

    no rank display for nicks - programming mistake?

    No, certainly not. You could always check ongoing ranked stats with battles, ranks etc. And there is another programming error when you open a list of fleet members: Those that haven't been online for the last two days but participated in Ranked Battles before have their last rank and "Season 9". So yeah, there's some cleaning up to do. @Aragathor: you're saying that wows-numbers.com is better at stats than Wargaming... you're right there. That's why I'm saying there have been programming mistakes on WG's side for Season 9.
  13. the_dude33

    Great deals in Shop

    You're around a day late:
  14. the_dude33

    no rank display for nicks - programming mistake?

    Here goes: https://ibb.co/cTRgTc Hope picture displays all right. On the right, on the drop down list, there's no "Season 9". And sorry, the manner of posting images here is not self-explanatory... Here's my friends list, without ranks displayed (bottom left, obviously): https://ibb.co/nO7AMx
  15. Well, just wanted to check how I've been doing in ranked battles that started today. Turns out that in "Profile" and "Ranked battles", there is no "Season 9". Is this why none of my friends list ranks are displayed? In the battle result screen, the ranks are correctly shown. Also for looking up the stats of other players, you can see their number of battles and their stats, but not their rank. You can only see it mousing over their nick in your list. There's something wrong here...