rvfharrier

Weekend Tester
  • Content count

    543
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    2854

1 Follower

About rvfharrier

Recent Profile Visitors

361 profile views
  1. Camping sniping BBs do indeed benefit from this change, but how do non-camping BBs benefit from it at all? They're the ones most affected! This change pretty much kills a lot of incentive for BBs and CAs to aggressively push the caps. I also don't really see how torpedo boats benefit either, firing torps into smoke was always a reliable way to get a hit or two (or three or four!) and with heavy ships no longer pushing up and being inside of them that avenue for semi-reliable damage is pretty much gone. This is an abysmal change which benefits no one except number two in your list, the people who least needed to be getting any help. MK was/is monstrously OP. Not sure what numbers you're looking at to get a 50% global WR but even if that was the case, you shouldn't judge the quality of a product solely by the performance of those who may not know how to use it to full effect. An amateur chef might not be able to use expensive knives that much better than they were able to use cheap ones, but that doesn't mean they aren't exceptional quality knives. Server stats alone don't tell a full story, only part of it.
  2. What would the incoming patch have changed were it active in the situation you describe? Is smoke really the problem here or was it perhaps more to do with the Belfast itself, a ship widely known as being OP, that you'd double divisioned? You don't make sweeping changes affecting all classes because two individual premium ships are monstrously OP.
  3. To quote the source you used: "Therefore we analyzed the statistics of Conqueror owners compared to their appropriate numbers with Yamato, Montana and Grosser Kurfürst." Those aren't overall numbers, they're numbers taken from Conqueror owners which even at this point make up a very small part of the T10 BB player base. Actual numbers over the last two weeks have the T10 BBs being remarkably well balanced with the exception of the Conqueror. BBs on the whole could stand to take more damage when broadside, but to claim the Montana is broken is beyond stretching it.
  4. People sniping from the spawn contribute to the passive nature of games far more than those smoked up on the objectives, yet the change supposedly intended to make games less passive will create more of the former at the expense of the latter.
  5. How is a BB supposed to be able to use smoke in any position when their detection blooms to ~15km? Many CAs to around 10km, same applies. The further from the objective, the less likely you are to be spotted in smoke but the less useful you'll be and the less likely someone will even be there to smoke you. Smoking up of allied ships will practically die with this patch because why would anyone do it now? Even if it could save someone's life, no one will be sure that the person won't fire while inside of it and render it pointless, so they likely won't bother! I ask again, what's the benefit? The claim that this is to reduce passive and static game play falls flat when that's precisely what will come about as a result of this change.
  6. So we're now balancing the entire game for and around the comparatively tiny competitive scene? This is something that house rules and ranked/clan ship restrictions could have accomplished, no need for a balance shakeup for the sake of a more action-oriented competitive scene. Fact is that random battles are already very passive and static as they are, this change serves only to worsen that problem as CAs and BBs will now no longer have incentive to take risks pushing into a forward position where they can influence the objectives, nor will smoke ships have reason to smoke them up in those positions. Both team play and aggression from larger ships take a huge blow with this change, for what benefit exactly?
  7. Perhaps, of little consolation to the Belfast though that he may just about be able to take the DD with him after he gets spotted for the entire enemy team to shoot at in a potentially vulnerable position. At any rate, the Belfast is absurdly OP and so will be one of the ships best able to cope with the change. This is your opinion. An MK always played at range is an MK not being the most useful it can be to the team. Ask what the point of the smoke change is, it's ostensibly to reduce passive and static game play is it not? Yet the method of dealing with it is to stay at range. Not untrue, but why are we assuming that every change is inherently good for the game? This is one of the main changes in the gameplay you asked for. It renders aggression and team play where BBs, CAs and to a lesser extent CLs are involved as pretty much redundant overnight. This change is so awful because it affects and punishes only those who were pushing close enough to the objectives to be able to actually utilize smoke to begin with. How many DDs did you ever see smoking up reversing Yamatos bowcamping in the spawn? Passive games are a direct result of passive play, yet passive play isn't the target of the proposed change but rather the beneficiary. Nonsense. Yet again you assume that every change WG makes is always for the better and they can do no wrong. They've made a game that a lot of people, myself included, highly enjoy but that doesn't mean they're immune from criticism if they make changes those people believe will harm it, which is something they've frankly been doing a lot lately.
  8. End of world of warships? No. Still a monumentally stupid and unnecessary change though. Just one of many as of late!
  9. I actually prefer WoWP 2.0 to WT Arcade I think, it's a little more tactical and a little less of a chaotic mess of planes all fighting in a tiny patch of sky. There's no comparison to be made to realistic battles, but that's not what WoWP attempts to compete with. Been enjoying it much more than I expected since downloading it the other day.
  10. It's different for every BB, but as a general rule I always angled until I could almost but not quite fire my rear turrets. If you're able to fire your rear turrets, then you probably aren't angled enough.
  11. 3 minutes 36 seconds is my record, I hope to never beat it.
  12. Could simply be variance. At the end of the day you're talking about a fairly limited selection of games, you said yourself that RNG largely influences this and it could simply be one of those cases. Your win rate over a session, or even several, can be very heavily influenced by RNG and the teams you get and just a couple of horror sessions can undo weeks of hard work when you start dealing in win rates such as yours. WR will always fluctuate and the higher you get above 50% the more violent your downward fluctuations while the slower your growth when the times are good, simple maths. Which isn't to say there aren't other explanations, but an objectively good player doesn't forget how to play the game and turn average overnight. Always look at things you can improve on, but don't get yourself overly worked up over win rate dips. Take a break or play through them, but accept that they'll happen and try not to focus on your stats too much, certainly not in the short term.
  13. Oh wow, the Team Water camo is so much better looking than the Team Fire camo it hurts...
  14. Is it so hard to accept that you may need to change how you communicate with others or regulate what you say a little more that you would rather invent a way to use chat bans to massage your ego? Between the chat ban system and the tk system it's amazing the lengths people will go to to avoid any sort of personal responsibility for what happens. The karma system is far from perfect, but it is simply not abused on the scale required for you to be chat banned on a weekly basis through absolutely no fault of your own.
  15. I have nearly the same number of random battles as you, use chat pretty much every single battle to call out points and yet have never been chat banned once while here you are making another thread claiming it's weekly. Am I just super lucky or is it perhaps something you're doing and the way you conduct yourself in game?