Jump to content

nerderklaus

Players
  • Content Сount

    154
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    6470

About nerderklaus

  • Rank
    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. nerderklaus

    T8 Premiums need protection

    With all the T9 premiums coming out the T8 premiums sorta lose their point more and more. Obviously MM intents to make T8 players cannonfodder for the powercreep which is all the skill most T10 players have. Well, obviously this can happen to a T9 premium as well, but most of them simply have more potencial in the same battle as premiums of these tiers usually end up in the same battles. Obviously things like unlucky overpen streaks against the CAs that mostly depend on overpen luck can happen to anyone, but that is another design flaw and not the topic. Frankly, what would be the honest recommendation lately? Only get T8 premiums on some rabate like Christmas boxes and wait for a T9 offer. A progress ship would be like "play through it and possibly sell or straight skip" while a premium ship is a real cash keeper that is supposed to somehow reword people for funding the game. It's pretty similar to the downfall of WOT which started when they changed T10 economy so that maintaining resources became foolproof. Where is the fun when every match you get uptiered with a massive powercreep, your own toptiers are worse than coop bots and the enemy toptiers at least do something? You might argue "blabla reports". What if usually it's like 6 or 7 bot reports in the first match, because people in a ship with toptier guarantee play worse than bots and possibly a chat report for people who defend griefers which certainly is as poor sportsmanship as griefing. As of right now a T7 premium or a T9 premium simply are more worth it in PVP. I mean many of the T8 premiums would be fun ships in a T8 battle or maybe even teamed up when there are only few higher tiers unlike the typical 5-8 T10 per team battles. It's even possible that T8 would be the funniest tier, if matches were +/- 0 tiers. It's certainly no coincedence that there are steel ships for tiers 7, 9 and 10 while there isn't a T8. Players who have a lot of steel will know to get other tier ships with a T8 steel ship that would be more OP than any other ship yet being the only exception. In particular things like heal or no heal on comparable ships will make the powercreep matter, because the ability to simply heal damage between engagements or nullify a DOT is huge like major upgrades in all firepower parameters from a tier ascension within the same line would be. The summary of this is that MM ruins ships that are alright by themselves. Obviously there need to be more changes than just one detail tweak, f.e. possibly premium MM, clear up T10 instead of forcing people into it, generally reduce tier-by-tier powercreep or reduce RNG impact, because all the direct ingame RNG adds up insanely with the MM RNG (battle tier, suitable map for the selected ship, possibly the superior side, game mode suitable for ship, matchups, player balance etc.). Additionally a lot of maps work in favor of the higher tiers, in particular with BBs. Another really bad thing is that a bad T10 player at least needs to react to a T8 DD/CL/CA/BB unlike T8 CV whose planes take loads of "automatic" damage. This time please without moderator who indirectly supports streaks of extremely clear losses in record time via rigged +2MM. I wouldn't pay you for your work either and please no retardation who act like "poor freeloaders", "unfair to freeloaders". There wouldn't be something to play on for them without "donators" funding it. It's really no surprise that most people rather play other F2P games that don't punish donators like the T8 premium experience in PVP that you get most of the time. I really don't get why you potencially waste a lot of customers only to enable some white line T10 BBs... This BTW is why classical dedicated servers are better than matchmaking. You just perm-ban people like a white line T10 BB player and have a vastly improved game for everyone who at least tries to play.
  2. nerderklaus

    Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

    Purely based on the ships the lower tiers are less forgiving. With increasing tiers ships get more and more designed to compensate for people like the typical T10 player. Conq and Monty are the most extremely examples of this currently, f.e.dedicated balancing and skillgap denial when they whiteline camp on their own and the CV is T8, but other stuff as well. Another huge thing would be lines like IJN and MN cruisers where the single biggest factor is do you only get some damage sooner or later on a random BB salvo or does he noobbonus you for a major part of your HP randomly at high range. The Other big example of it not being like this would be the worst powercreep which is T8->T10 and you being able to play perfectly and MM still deying you into a quick stomp loss. At least T6 BBs can do some big damage by shooting the superstructure of some KM BB or getting a lucky salvo on some cruiser. Quite my T8 and T9 dailies depend on getting a match without being powercreep while having the typical T10 players in the own team. In a way WG literally enables them, because I have doubts that reporting useless T10 players for making my T8 ships unplable, but if you complain it's one day normal playing followed by three days mute meaning WG is actively supporting the griefers. The other thing is that you obviously deal with scumbags when they have chat reports over after playing multiple T10 matches with the whiteline BBs and DDs who still don't know what radar is. The situation that you play against your own team, if you want to win is nowhere more common than when being uptiered into T10 games and thereby griefer is the perfect word for the people causing the issue. Ohhh BTW this is like the issues that made many people quit WOT. I mean I have seen matches with 11 T10 per side a couple of times and what happened there usually looked like intentionally playing as bad as possible. Since getting uptiered to T10 got particulary bad the replay value of T10 regular ships is gone (except for missions) and this combined with the introduction of T9 premiums ruins T8 premiums until ALL of them get protected against T10 MM.
  3. nerderklaus

    Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

    Well, lets start with the bad typical T10 players. They still have purpose build ships for them like the original Conqueror and in the current stage of the game probably Monty or Republique. They still could run into these typical Shimas who engage Gearings before their torps are ready, don't know about radar or stay far away and spam 20km torps. That already is 1-3 required reports per T10 game BTW. Anyway, isolating them would cause less resistence even though they probably would frequently play matches that time out without anyone dying, if you isolate them. When I get uptiered with T10 some of them are even worse for the team than starting with one ship less, because the missing ship can't cost the team objective points while giving the enemy objective points. This really reminds of WOT when you felt a massive increase in playability after they changed the economy so that losing money in T10 became impossible. Before that the typical E-100/IS-7 needed multiple matches in a T8 premium to make up for the money loss of a T10 match and thereby couldn't ruin as many battles for lower tier allies. Things like heal or no heal in some lines and massive leaps in firepower really matter.
  4. nerderklaus

    Matchmaker Discussion Thread & MM Balance

    T8 and T9 is getting unplayable lately because of the typical T10 noobs. Usually victory or not depends on finally getting a match without these edited*. This simply is unacceptable. Usually whether these ships are playable or not comes down to being tiered up with T10 ships or not. The same BS that ruined WOT repeats itself by now. What really ruined WOT was when they changed the economy so that noobs no longer had massive credits losses when playing T10 tanks. Being uptiered with T10 ships is getting worse than WOT with the most edited* E-100 and IS-7 players. What sort of game design is this? Role dice, end up with either a win or a 1vs23 autolosses with many big ships... You either must change the game so that these typical T10 players have massive credit losses when playing T6 or higher or split them from everyone else so that they can have their 20km fights where nothing ever gets capped and matches time out with the vast majority of ships still alive, but don't let these griefers ruin the game for everyone else. These 7 daily reports only add insult to injury, because they only last for one or two games with T10 players involved. Reporting them for making the matches feel like fights against the own team in order to win seems to have no effect, but don't you dare complaining. You will get perma-muted. Guess why most people who left WOT truly quit? It's never for any direct game element or things like this. It's because of the enemy of people who wanna win usually being in the own team. Where is it most common? T10 in either game. Watch the language please
  5. nerderklaus

    Conqueror 457mm guns accuracy

    Did the larger guns on Conqueror get lower sigma? Usually high tier BBs with 12 guns get 1.8 sigma except for certain ships they are biased for and BBs with less guns get improved sigma to compensate for the reduced hit probability except for ships they are biased against, f.e. Iowa getting buffs despite of already being superior to FdG and Izumo. There isn't really a reason to use the bigger guns, because the tiny advantages simply get lost against the extra-guns with the other option... Well, I think the true reason for you not seing the bigger guns still is that 90%+ of T10 players are too stupid to change the guns to test the other ones.
  6. nerderklaus

    CV Rework increases problems instead of solving them

    It's not just firepower. It's flight time as well, if you wanna kill the other CV first. More or less it seems like they want all CV to be weaker than before and maintain or increase the tier-by-tier powercreep. Well, other ships are more dangerous by various means so, yeah. Still the most important changes would be resetting stats, give everybody the same RNG and stop forcing free points for picking certain ships, in particular release Conqueror or present Monty. My expectations are that things will only get worse for CV in the next months. Except for losing less planes on return there only were nerfs. Well, WG got to appease the "recognized noob" and "the overrated noob" types of player. They both only get points from inflicting damage and kills, but not from other stuff like spotting or caps.
  7. nerderklaus

    CV Rework increases problems instead of solving them

    Now it's one torp squad instead of sometimes two or even three. Back then the chance to stack DoTs was better. Odds of getting DoTs are lower. I mean granted with old CVs I had things like Shoka 8 Torps and 10 bombs on one BB with the special playerbonuses so that he didn't get a single DoT when it mattered, but still. Flooding chances feel much lower.
  8. Well, lets just go through various gameplay issues with the game and how the CV rework. When being uptiered the AA works automatically. There already is far too much powercreep with some examples being T5 vs T7 or in case of most involved ships even worse T8 vs T10. It's a big problem that WOWS enables such a typical noob resumee which is like die up to one tier 10 ship (usually Shima, Yama, Monty) and play it all the time. With battleships and cruisers they at least need to do a couple of things, but a retarded typical Monty player will just shred the T8 CV planes without even doing something to get them shredded. The attack planes will probably get a good drop onto him but DBs and TBs will do far less. This is more about such issues, not like a AA cruisers with an AA setup which obviously should be effective against higher, same and lower tier CV. No problems solved here, the gamebreaking effect of battletier luck got potencially increased. Farming dailies on T8 and T9 comes down to getting battles without the baboons in the big ships and I still see no efforts to get rid of such gamebreaking issues for any class. Make T10 CV less common by making T8 CV a nightmare to play? Such issues get increased further with the changes that took away a CVs air to air potencial. In the past T8 CVs could at least fight each others planes when every ship was in some mega-AA-bubble. Now? Well... The concentration of the worst players in the game at T10 combined with this powercreep ruins many matchs for T8 and T9 ships BTW. The 7 reports usually aren't even enough for 3 T10 battles, f.e. 3 Shimas with T10 as most played tier that still don't know about radar, the AFK CV and 3 BBs that maintain their maximum range to the enemy. Skillgap is another one which works on all the cognitive dissonances of certain people, in particular the ones who only played the strongest stages of new CV and only the best ones, but acted like "skill, skill, skill" after preparing intensively on the test server. Every healthy person will understand that people had practice with old RTS CV drops and given time they will get their practice with the new drop mechanics as well. Some people might make some odd assumptions about skillgap and such, but in reality controlling 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 units at once should be obviously more difficult than flying one squadron, giving the ship some waypoints and using a consumable from time to time. The problem that still is ignored would be people who liked the old CV most like they were with the RTS gameplay. No problems solved, but some potencially increased while others certainly were created. Some ADHS person might be like "yeah, no free stuff", but no comment on these. The other thing would be that some people obviously will not realize that they don't take more damage by CV on average, because of stronger CVs. The biggest factor in this obviously is more CVs being around now. It's no so difficult to look up an effective build and if you wanna try something you can easily change it, if it doesn't work. The effects of AA builds got reduced meaning the rewards in that area for making sacrifices somewhere else got reduced. This is particulary bad, because who usually has low level captains or misskilled captains? Whiteline BBs that should have that misplay punished much, much harder. This increases issues with the class system not working as supposed to be, the customization system not working as it's supposed to be and general skillgap issues. Destroyers who want to have a good game WHILE DOING THEIR JOB instead of leeching have such a hard time, but there literally are dedicated efforts to give certain other people free points, in particular the BB line that gets "balanced" to compensate for it's users. AP bombs are particulary strange. They seem to have the same accuracy as HE bombs, but the properties of them seem to be like before. They had higher accuracy before for a reason. On T10 ships more bombs sorta neglect the issues, but what about the others? The attempts to help DDs out might have been already, but everything else was simply about making BBs more foolproof against CV. The other big thing would be that HE bombs at least maintaining potencial to cause a DoT. Now AP bombs are like less damage per drop (except for T10 as usual), less accuracy, AP limitations against lighter ships, if you manage to perfectly align a full aimed drop again some lighter ship. The compensation for AP bomb disadvantages is gone and generally all DBs except for Midway and Haku vs BBs seem to stink. Things like TBs with two low-damage torps per strike on strikes that are more difficult to aim than the old ones should be an obvious issue as well. Whiteline BBs... In the past MN, RM, USN should have been punished much harder by CV. If any BBs would have needed good AA it would have been the brawlers. Well, now it seems like it's simply less relavant to pick the right BB for camping. In The past a T8 CV had major impacts on his damage based on whether there was a lonely GKUR/Yama or not. These two ships got for whiteline camping what they deserved, but many other BBs didn't. I did not notice any efforts to get this right. This paragrapth will really trigger the DGEs of certain people. Montys and Conquerors should suffer on misplays like GKURs and Yamas. What should have been better? Things like perfectly aligning a DB drops, in particular against manouverable, small ships should get rewarded more. Attack planes should be less cookie cutter and instead have some edge. More air-to-air options should have been maintained. It should be noticable whether you invest a lot of skillpoints and module slots into AA or not like RNG noob bonus is breaking for creating the possibility that one player gets consistently smaller spreads without accuracy upgrades than another player gets on the same ship with all accuracy upgrades and shorter fighting ranges. There generally is too much impact of battletier luck that needs changes, but it's most broken with CV and AA that works without player control. It would have been better for the game, if the time spend on that rework instead was used on the tier-by-tier powercreep. Stop rewarding people for dying up to a T10 or converting it. There are so many profiles like a player with almost everything red and orange, but suddenly all-green Monty stats... Last but no least: Come up with something that forces the player to work against planes himself instead of fully automatic AA and O+click for a sector from time to time. The tunnelvisioned Monty on the white line who certainly will not be able to react like this should suffer the consequences. Obligational note for the usual special suspects of all colours: If CV can fight other CV more effectively again, the lost planes obviously must get compensated with more effective strikes PS: Forgot to wrote that Kaga and Saipan can now get dragged into T10 battles and all BS coming with them PS2: What needs to be brought up as well is that with just premium account a T10 CV can lose money while being the topscorer of his team. A T10 BB just needs two lucky salvos to make money.
  9. nerderklaus

    FdG, the most frustrating ship out there

    They seem to deal with the German trees like in WOT and USN BBs seem to treated like Russian HTs in WOT. I bet it takes two patches at most until they nerf German DDs, because they will gain far more from the BB AP change than most other DDs as long as there allways is the noob who by himself would be like a bot, but gets dangerous despite of that due to constant cruiserlike spreads in his BB. The only reason why KM high tier BBs might get better stats would be the lower range forcing players closer to the caps in domination. "Ships with few cannons get better accuracy to compensate"... German ships with 8 guns in shitty layout with shitty arcs get inaccurate dispersion, but USN ships with 6 frontal guns probably have less than half the spread diameter on average with better penetration AND better times for lower chance of overmatch. For brain amputees who get consistent cruiserspreads in BBs for "reaons" the KM BBs might be better, but people who don't have this are screwed. "Germans get improved AP damage" 406mm USN AP has damage of KM 420mm AP (the AP imbalance is even worse when you compare the CAs of both nations) "Germans are good for brawling" Shitty AA, AP bomb vulnerability for brawling situations in which cruisers can't savely support you... But meanwhile MN, RM and USN get far superior AA and less AP bomb vulnerability for being able to savely borderhug... Only 6 frontal guns and shitty arcs aren't necesarrily brawler properties. For true balance and a brawler role the KM BBs would need to most CV proof on their own out of all BBs So called brawler and pusher just getting randomly instagibbed by AP bombers... The good bows simply gets compensated for with more vulnerable superstructures and the AP bomber vulnerability. Some of this BS might be justifyable, if USN and KM get proper citadels, but no... WG needs to act like in WOT. Well, I think that after the IFHE nerf CL with HE will be the trash ships, because right now they are mostly about the IFHE and WG almost certainly will not compensate them, if they make IFHE useless. Right now it's hard to say what should be done with an incoming unpredictable CV rework, but there are many obvious imbalances that should have been adressed long time ago. However, I would be very suprised, if the already superior Iowa isn't going to get buffed much more in the incoming patches. PS: Izumo is a shitty one as well. Hard to say which one is worse, because I played my Izumo very long ago and was even more unlucky with stacked tier 10 player retardation there. Most likely it depends on what maps, ships and players you get which ship is worse. Izumo certainly does better on some T10 standard battle campsite and FDG should be better in a T9 domination match. Though some other ships like Monty could need the citadel raised like the Conqueror as well. Edit: With the tier 8 comparisons. Firepower probably is the biggest factor of ships unless they have one outstanding weakness or strength. The main armament (with all factors like layout and arcs) of a Bismrack/Tirpitz looking like of a ship multiple tiers lower compared to an NC doesn't get compensated. Better camo, better performance against higher tiers and better AA properties (including citadel chance). Being forced to be closer to caps in domination is the only thing that might get the German T8 BBs better stats.
  10. nerderklaus

    Tier 10 is making Tier 8 unplayable

    Well, the vast majority of WG customers are megaretards like the typical tier 10 players or just supernoobs who desperately try to entitle RNG gifts as their accomplishments. Generally, I don't have any idea how it's any different given the fact that some people get even battletier luck, some get mostly toptier battles and I get over 90% +2 with all these 100% useless noobs that have the hardest tier power creep in the game. The Soviet DD is nothing more than depending on others to do the DD jobs for you and then either use some way type of cover or smoke (pretty cruiserlike only at drastically reduced impact) or shoot on the move and hope for enemies to get big spreads, because there are their bad turning properties that prove all the entitlement of lucky players what it really is. On top of everything it's particulary vulnerable to that kind of rigged MM when the other team has more DDs, without Soviet DDs... Neglected caps decide matches. Why the difference between stats? More of that retarded Yamato lolpen, more teams that do absolutely nothing when the Missouri radars enemies. Most Bismarck matches at a better time for BBs compared to Missouri having most matches played when it still had a balanced citadel and after a break now with the RN BBs that are build around people like you. Guess why many of your usual suspects usually change favorite ships on patchdays. Why would everyone who is truly good distract from his own skill by entitling such things that can come to everybody with the right dicerolls to be skill? Maybe, because of such things being the skill of that person? It's pretty embarassing to depend on such things despite of trying hard. That is like such a guy who has a small one, but hires another guy to do his wife infront of him and make her tell him how the other one is much better. Ohh, hahaha the noob who is proud on needing advantages equal to the enemy only getting 10% damage weapons in CS is talking again. That level of failure is unaccomplishable for everyone who deserves to be called a human. There often is nothing except for the noobs two favorite lines (USN BB, RN BB), cruisers with defAA which in particular the high tier cruisers who don't even meet CV in most battles use all the time or maybe it is because they are as smart as you and it takes them over 10k battles to figure out how to use hydro instead and well, I honestly would not be surprised, if you were unable to figure that out until somebody else shows you. In gamer regards you are at least 10 times over the harakiri-line, but obviously you never had honor to defend.. Perfectly what I am saying about that type of very bad players who try to entitle RNG gifts in pubs overfilled with bots to be anything else. That so-called common denominator is one ship out of 12 per team or one ship out of 24. Depending on battletier there is some weighting to it meaning someone who is has more toptier luck gets more out of it than someone who has a lot of the other end of the diceroll spectrum. Comparisons between a tier 8 and the tier 10 from the same line should make things undeniable (f.e. NO vs DM, Bismarck vs GKF). The common denominator in all random battles is a matchmaker, the only function in videogames that can pre-determine every single match before a single second is played and more than anything else designed around players that would have been permbanned in a conventional server working against their own team and a function that straight forward has the purpose to narrow the winrate spread. That is why games should get rid of that function. Just weeding out people like the white line Montana would make the game massively more enjoyable on average, but the stat people would be even more against this than the people who get banned, because they depend on them. The purpose of a game over everything else is winning and not a stat farm pattern from people who for suspicious reasons depend on comparisons with the typical white line Monty or the HE-only E-100 before. Why do certain people depend on that comparison with these people in such a high RNG environment so much? Fail vs epic fail players, obviously. You can't have a good game without winning, because that would be a compromise. The other big question is why perfectly the same player performance can give results ranging over all color codes on a segment. Couldn't be that all over the place, if it had creditibility. Where is the causation? The thing that these correlation addicted SJWs hate like nothing else. BTW these are the magic words for educated people to get why NC/Iowa/Monty didn't need any buffs, but certain USN cruisers needed despite of sometimes similar overall stats on the ships.
  11. nerderklaus

    Tier 10 is making Tier 8 unplayable

    This rigged BS is making it unplayable lately. With the tier 8 CVs im at more than 20 games with the meganoobs (tier 10 players) in row. Minotaurs, Des Moineses, every noob cruiser has defAA for the one tier 8 carrier they meet like every 3rd game, countless Shimas who usually don't get a single move right and obviously the most broken noobline ever, USN BBs that for free get AA comparable to cruisers with defAA. OMG the poor noob in the USN BB might die to CV while camping the white line. So lets give even more buffs to that line, because it's the ships and not the fact that it took me over 4000k battles to meet 1 good NC, 1 good Monty and still wait for the first good Iowa to be encountered in a random. Planes just popping and even if something hits it's 1/3 of the alleged flooding chance and 5-8k per torp. With the Kiev it's extremely rigged with a ship that is for players with good RNG (tier dependency, needing other DDs to contest caps for you, highest dependency on enemies shotgunning for a tier 8 DD) it's quite ridiculous as well. Streaks of tier 10 games, not a single of the meganoobs (tier 10 players) is doing anything useful. The closest games assembled by this MM that only 100% mentally handicapped people claim to be not rigged are half the enemy team left. The one ship that is better on standard battles obviously gets domination almost exclusively. If you don't have the god tier RNG to usually be toptier or at least midtier in tier 8, it is unplayable. These efforts to generate free points for noobs like the tier 10 power creep, balancing based on generating free points for meganoobs (high tier USN BB, RN BB). WG even enables these scumbags with muting people so that every mute literally is a badge of honor. Obviously in the current state you can't recommend tier 8 premiums to anyone except for people you hate with more than just a passion. Burning the money is a better investment. If you don't have godtier RNG with MM in general, the best thing for your stats you can do is free XP 100% of tier 8 ships. Tier 5 is balanced compared to this.
  12. nerderklaus

    Tier 10 is making Tier 8 unplayable

    Just quickly going through some points made... "No +2 would be P2W" Emmm, certainly not. Tier 8 is very popular meaning there would be other tier 8 that are toptier too and facing tier 9 would be still possible. "DDs and +2" Emm, tier 8 DDs can meet ships from tier 6 to 10. It's up to you to look up radar data based on which of these tiers are encountered and how hydros get better. Belfast has it's reputation for doing certain things, but right now there is a certain rare DD and two regular DDs are in the making. They will probably get weaker cannons the a Belfast, but using such tools with DD concealment and even having torps are game elements I don't really want to be teamed up with, because it's too much reponsibility on random team members I can't influence. The other things is that obviously as a DD you have a better time when there are no radars or less radars. "BBs and +2" Emmm, one of the extremely severe power creeps. In case of every line the tier 10 ships is so much better that it feels like old WOT MM as a tier 6 that was meeting 9s and 10s almost every game and got the ace tanker the one single time it only faced tier 8. "Helping average tier 10 players (extremely bad by standards of all other tiers)" and "there is a tier 10 ship to deal with the enemy tier 10 ship" They certainly don't progress from a negative number to something considerable within one game and the other big thing is that the tier 8 ship often has to directly combat tier 10 ships, because the own tier 10 are far inferior in comparison with a coop bot. Eventually this just makes for running against a wall and a game with not only a 100% unchangable result, but a cap on a generally bad match as well just because some extremely bad players want to power creep two tiers lower ships all day long. Maybe it is a stupid idea to potencially make people not want to play tier 8 where most of the premium revenue comes from. "Tier 10 population" Maybe there are reasons that nobody wants to play that broken tier with these [edited]. I mean even statpadders who desperately look for the worst enemies they can find to claim it means the same as beating good players often don't wanna go there, because it's too annoying and that really means something "The system teaches camping" Even though standard battles have been returned to high tier to help campers and bad players there is domination in most battle and this mode is pretty simple. For someone who is even remotely mentally able it should be obvious that usually the caps win these games which is active, not passive. Granted, some people fail to get that, but this is on them. "Chances of getting +2" Varies a bit from ship to ship. With BBs it's roughly 2/3 lately, but for carrier it's much worse lately. Seems like them being limited to one per match and things looking like imbalances make most people quit CV at tier 7 or 8 really make it very bad for them. Comparison with T5/T7 The big difference is that ranges are shorter and ships turn better in regards to gameplay and generally ship power creep is lower. This results in 5vs7 being drastically more enjoyable compared to 8vs10 even though it's still extreme. Another big problem is that playerskill can do more. These low manouverability ships combined with the high ranges drastically increase the impact of some people simply getting better RNG than others meaning things like 15km+ shell exchanges and one guy firing tiny groups while the other one shotguns most of the time. "Cruiser 8vs9" It seems to be in line what happens between these tiers. Now basically Atago and Fiji have heals there, but AFAIK all cruisers get heal at tier 9 and Neptune gets a much better heal. The ability of cruisers to take some shots, hide for a bit while repairing and then come back with more reserves makes for more difference than it seems on the first look. The only one that really doesn't care is MK since IFHE. Comments of butthurt tier 10 abusers Keep proving me right you dum***ses Statements like "Challenge" There might be some challenge to getting damage and such, if you care for it, but based on it being the game the ultimate objective should be victory. This is kinda hard with such an insane power creep, if you own toptiers often are failing to a degree that looks as if they intentionally do as bad as possible like the Monatana that hugs the Western white line when all enemies are far East. You can really hurt a Yamato when you catch it off-guard, a Shimakaze has a long time of effectively being disarmed and Minotaur has it's citadel, but there are Montanas with lowered citadel and spreads that encourage range camping and the Conqueeror. Monarch is being used as example a lot here, but lowered citadel, heal, better camo than some involved cruisers, RN BB HE. It's basically fighting broken game designs by picking broken game designs which in return says "avoid non-broken, remotely OK and anything in between game designs"...
  13. nerderklaus

    Tier 10 is making Tier 8 unplayable

    How severe this gets obviously depends on luck to some degree, f.e. if +2MM happens twice as often to you compared to somebody else in tier 8 ships there obviously is a difference in perception. Anyway, an old WOT pattern carried over to AW and potencially feels even worse. Many people try using the certain toptier spot of a tier 10 ships and the far-too-extreme power creep compared to tier 8 as an l2p replacement. In the beginning this was most common with Yamato and Shimakaze (many of them obviously still don't know of radar), but Montanas got more common, there are other tier 10 BB as well and lately it seems as if a lot of people convert Minotaurs. The type of player who hugs the Western white line while the enemy is doing lemming train or lemming camping in th far East simply is common as with NC, Iowa and tier 10 BB players. The Montana who wants even more injustified buffs so he does no longer need to run away from a half HP tier 9 ship, because it isn't a tier 8 cruiser. Other things would be the Shimakaze spending all game on trying to torp the only tier 8 BB in the other game and not hitting a single torp in the process or the Shimakaze who searches the shootout with the Khaba or the Shimakaze who ignores the the Des Moins at 10km, because it got a couple of km concealment left. Whoever denies that tier 10 is by far the worst one when it comes to player quality must be drugged up to levels that would kill 99% of the people out there instantanously. What is the big problem? As a tier 8 ship you are dealing with differences like the tier 10 ship of the line having up to +50% HP, massive firepower advantages and gimmicks added. Lets say a Bismarck having 8x380mm compared to 12x406mm (and reload upgrade in the tier 9/10 slot) or other parameters on cannons increase so that you get a comparison like New Orleans vs. Des Moines and it gets even worse when you add the heal into the equation. Another big ones would be the risc of one lucky salvo severely screwing a cruisers goes up time when there are things like the Monatana with it's BS spread on 12 cannons ("we increase sigma on BBs with 8/9 cannons to make RNG more consisted"). To make matters even worse someone had the idea to introduce even more radar carriers with DD concealment. Almost every line, even the ones who are said to have bad AA get massive AA leaps in tier 9 and/or 10 so that when carriers are involved sometimes the power creep gets just passively applied, so that CV gets screwed pretty hard as well (even more than other +2 ships do to CV). A particulary annoying one would be having lots of tier 10 DDs that are good to cap, but none of them bothering to cap and ending up forced to take the risc as a Kiev which usually doesn't end well. Tier 4 had the MM fixed, because +2 MM was too extreme, but most games in my tier 8 ships are unplayable, because of a +2 power creep that is even worse with usually even worse toptier players so that things get utterly unplayable. The MM often litterally composes matches like lots of tier 10, lots of tier 8, few tier 9 so that the tier 8 ships really get screwed hard as if it was intended to give free points for some bad players who play their tier 10 ship most of the time. It certainly is much worse than tier 5 vs 7 and actually I even would recommond tier 7 over tier 8 for premiums currently, because they don't meed the retarded tier 10 players and a power creep as extreme as tier 8 vs 10. In my personal case results vary drastically based on how lucky or unlucky I am with battletiers, f.e. losing over 90% of +2MM in tier 8, because of "reasons", "WG reasons". Another big problem is that in these tier 10 battles range camping is most common and easier to maintain compared to other tiers which makes the RNG noob bonus that gives some players tighter spreads than others even more impactful. Something must be done about this like for example... Protect ALL premium ships against +2MM Reduce the chance of +2MM or somehow normalize it, tier 8 is unplayable when 2/3 of your matches are +2 Balance power creep between tiers Do something that extremely bad players can't drive ships that certainly get a toptier spot all the time Get rid of the particular broken stuff like BBs that get cruiserlike spreads If tier 10 was that magic spot where players are better than in other tiers as noob ad hominem claims, there would be no need for such an absurd power creep to a tier they meet most of the time in random battles. Based on the extreme potencial for MM to screw people over based on what kind of people is in tier 10 ships most of the time, it simply is too much what the MM can do there currently. The more severe a power creep between tiers is the less you can do when your toptier is being denied by it's players. The severity of the issue that is being tolerated feels as either this is different on other servers or devs aren't playing this game.
  14. nerderklaus

    Conqueror vs Montana, both needed nerfs

    Well, this actually is what you are doing when being called out on your deficites. What you demonstrate here is like these people who are proud on being 100kg overweight, because it really is severe to have the online-alt-persona solely based on something that is comparable to the other team only doing 10% damage in a CS game. To make matters worse there even might be people who get screwed worse by RNG than me, maybe twice as bad. Just the mere fact that you are unable to make the distinction between a player missing the easy shot and one getting a spread like demonstrated in your screenshots and the other one shotgunning with the intended target being center-point of that spread. Did another one of your multiple personalities post the screenshots that proof all of this? You sort of managed to dismantle the noob ad hominem arguments big time even though they had no fundament to begin with. Anyway, that 1-10 ratio is a big one already, but what if others are screwed twice as hard by the system as I do? This would mean you depend on a 2000% advantage compared to them. I would be embarassed, if I was half as catastrophic. What makes this even worse is that this still is there with you trying hard while these others casually mess around so that it gets even more severe. Science, the enemy of the ones who profit on design flaws in modern games. A forward-upward diagonal vectory from the shell being launched and a downward acceleration vector that causes the drop. Guess what gravity is. Sure, based on various factors there still can be differences, but the score still remains the same and somehow ships are managing to lob shells over islands ingame as well. You might notice sometime by the end of next year now after I pointed out to look for it. Ohhh, BTW you so-called realism. Queen Elizabath vs bow-on Myoko, no angling, recently, my average RNG, ~8km, turrets fired one at a time, double turrets, paralel guns, each time both shells far off to the side, Myoko dead center. With the alleged "normal spreads" this would have been a bow overmatch for double-citadel each time so far more than necesarry to kill him compared to complete denial by something the player can't influence and [edited] even argue with realism for such things. Emmm, you defended the lowered USN BB citadels. Anyway, you probably haven't realized yet so I need to tell you. One part of keeping people to play and spend money, a few more bucks than necessary is making people get multiple lines, possibly convert of the one bad ship many lines have (which they even did early on in WOT already), make some people convert over all stock periods (so that they can claim their better stats is just from them) etc., etc., etc. ... This won't work well, if all of these ships are the same with different looks. There somehow got to be noticable differences like you have with the tier 10 cruisers. You basically are the Conqueror version of that other bob who wants his Montana to compensate for lack of skill. Just the combination of that healing potencial, lowered citadel (for no reason like the USN BB buffs) and to make it worse the heal even having higher percentages of repairable damage makes it look as if the ship is where it is intended to be. I mean granted, could be. I though when it looks as if shells simply explode midair it's a de-sync issue and well, netcode issues are now the norm, not the exception with new games. Anyway, I judged the trajectory based on what the game displays.
  15. nerderklaus

    Halloween Skin Purchasing

    Let me guess, you have over 10 accounts in each social media site and spam there how great Japanese cartoons and wrestling are with all of them... Using an overall category can't ever be wrong in particular when there are things like Southern Dragon or the new Halloween skins or some very colorful other skins that probably could fall into different categories based on who is distinquishing them anyway. To make this even better with using the overall category instead of a subcategory there is no risc of using the wrong sub-category :) I had to get more than I wanted, because I got the ones I wanted like the Egyptian CM last :(
×