Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About ZealousStrategist

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

163 profile views
  1. ZealousStrategist

    Map tactics

    You are indeed correct, for the most part... But more often then not, when the first player on my (random battle) team sinks. 90% of the battles I played where I (personally) give a pointer on what the side of the map (where that ship sank) should do. They in most cases do it. What's more, what I noticed from my many battles trying to make the team be more team playable (the random battle 1). When I "stack up" a success rate in terms of "orders", where after at least 1 player does something I said they should do and succedes (and continues doing good for a period of time, thus "stacking up the success from "my" orders"). In such cases the team always without exception ends up following my orders as if I was some Admiral of sorts (which is kinda fun) . However getting to that point, or rather "stacking up" the "good" orders is a huge "pain in the *ss", and thus such events where I generally give orders to the (random battles team) are not many, simply because it is tiring to issue orders while trying to do well with the ship you have taken, All in all, if you have enough patience for it, you can 100% guaranteed make your (rb team) listen to your strategy.
  2. ZealousStrategist

    Map tactics

    Yes, you are right. But if you do limit it to just clan mates, then you won't end up with the best possible result which is to have a solid strategy against most opponents. Not to mention that clan mates are only so experienced in the field of strategy and plan making. Thus only by exchanging ideas and strategies, such as over the forums, can we as individual players gain more experience in plan making and thus better help our own respective clans (if that is your main issue). The other benefit of strategizing over the forums is that players who are not in clans, but want to help their teams in random battle to have a higher win ratio, could also gain more insight into map strategies and thus increasing their chances of successfull battles.
  3. ZealousStrategist

    Map tactics

    Thx for pointing out this section, but rather then vague advice, what I am looking for are actual plans, or rather creating simulations and discussing how to make appropriate counters. For example: Now the situation in the pic will probably never happen, but it was made just to show that having a plan "mapped" out gives finer details then saying things like: "The problem of this map is that going to B and C, the better option, requires superb discipline onf behalf of most of the team. DD's need to scout and smoke, BB's need to angle and threaten caps while cruisers support and keep their consumable toys ready. Superb discipline is required because there are so few islands covering B and C. Because of this, the first team opposite B and C that withdrawls is the team that loses instantly. And since player generally avoid risk and damage, which makes sense, any position near B and C is an inherently unstable one." or: "Cover the caps your team wants to capture with guns. Other ships are better suited to cap early."
  4. ZealousStrategist

    Map tactics

    Hello and welcome to this topic I do not know if this topic was already discussed, but even if it was I believe it can't be bad to "refresh" it. The "goal" of this topic is to discuss, share and/or create tactics for the maps that exist currently in game. I would like to start this topic with a tool, that some may be familiar with: https://en.wowstactic.tk - tool for creating tactics on maps I hope that we could potentially even have tactic discussion sessions on this tool if possible. Using this tool we could also "create" scenarios which we can discuss here or elsewhere. The next thing I would like to point out are a few videos that I have found "helpful": https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLslIWpE2CMxSj6Kf7EPZdSLHtQ4q0eNP6-- Now... I have a lot of possible scenarios I would like to discuss, but I would rather "hear" what you the 1 who read all this has to say, so please leave your thoughts/strategies in the comments.
  5. ZealousStrategist

    CV Rework Beta Test - Feedback thread

    All things considered, if this "type" of playstyle is a must. Then I would at least like it if I could switch between my cv and "active" squad of planes without having to send the squad back "home". Rather the reason I say this is simple. Does it make sense to go "flying" in a squad of planes while a dd or something sneaks up on the cv. So imagine a scenario where you are in your squad on a half-map-ish distance from your ship and something sneaks up. And you abandon your plane squad in order to launch a new squad to defend yourself while sending your cv to retreat. 1) your squad that was on half the map will be getting damaged on its way home, 2) and more importantly you would have lost a valuable chance to do some damage. And though this scenario is not that common, it does tend to happen from time to time, and as the cvs will lose their recon ability I recon it will become a more frequent scenario. The other problem with not being able to switch back to your cv without sending your planes back "home" and being able to switch back to that very same squad is that the repair costs will most likely be high, making it hard for new players to pay of higher tiered cvs without flags, cammos, etc.
  6. ZealousStrategist

    CV Rework Beta Test - Feedback thread

    I would like to share my premature thoughts on the cv rework. Premature as I have yet to completely understand every change that has been implemented as well as see them all in action. Yesterday, I played a few rounds on the TST server, with all 4 cvs and a few battles with Yamato, Montana and Worcester. First off I would like to start with the ship (cv). Before we could/would move our ship by either/mostly putting it on autopilot, or sending it forward in 1 direction, while at the same time controlling all our aircraft and doing strikes on enemy ships. However now, (practically speaking) the only way to move our ship is by giving it an auto-pilot order. And that would be fine in itself if we could control the ships speed at any time while it is in the auto-pilot "mode" as we could have before. Now let's move on to the aircraft themselves. First the "Rockets". They are an interesting add and definitely show promise as they can aid the cv in defending itself against dds. However their ability to start fires is nearly the same as is to the US bombers, and that is going to add to people saying things like "We have cruisers spamming HE, destroyers spamming HE, and even battleships using a lot of HE on other ships, and even cvs spamming HE", which is kind of true as there is an excessive use of creating fires on ships, or rather it can be dull for players being "spammed at" to continue playing battleships for instance if the only thing that is going to happen to them if they get into a decent range for taking damage (for the team) is fires. Next the dive bombers: Now the IJN cvs will have AP and the US will have HE, which I find troubling as I mostly used to use AP bombers on the US cvs. But being able to "bomb" directly is slightly more interesting then it was, when it was practically just passing an order to bomb a ship. Personally I would rather like it if both the IJN and the US ships had access to both AP and HE as was before, as that would be better (in my opinion) as players won't know the instant the ships enter the game, which bombers will carry which bombs, and also more importantly players like myself who have "bonded" with the AP bombs, wont need to stop using their cvs and switching nations, just because 1 nation cannot use the other type of bomb. Next the torpedo bombers: Same as before the US has regular torpedoes, however the IJN uses deep-water torpedoes. Which I cannot completely understand as IJN cvs will now lose their ability to "torp" destroyers, which lowers their defensive capability against destroyers when they are being "hunted". The flight mechanic though interesting (as it adds a view and feeling of controlling aircraft), for me at least, it lowers the ability to make sense of enemy positions, and I find it harder to "select" a target for my attacks. And I do not know why, but I feel as though, there should be a lock on function (X) be put onto the "flight mode". The main issue with controlling only 1 squad that I see is that cvs practically lose their ability to scout out enemy ships. Even if the patrol fighters are left in an area to "scout" they would be wasted as they are much needed to fight off enemy planes, or at least create a "No-flight area". The other issue I see with the fighters (other then not being able to control them) is that planes are becoming way to dependent on consumables. Once an attack squad uses up its consumables (fighters included) the players has only 2 options. Let the team suffer from enemy planes, or switch to a squad with fighter consumables, which again is a huge problem, as once all the consumables are cough...wasted...cough, the team will only have its AA left to defend against enemy planes. Another issue is if there end up being "premium" consumables for the planes. Then the gap between the "skill" of players will be as wide as it was before, and as I see it (at least trough the comments on this forum) many players complained about that. On another note the issue of the "skill of players" is in my opinion unrelated to the old playstyle (the "RTS" style). Rather it is the fault of the match-maker that players that do not have enough experience get matched up with players that have over 2k battles worth of experience. Same goes for "Uptiering" and "Lowtiering" matches. Rather, the match-maker should match players in such a way that occasionally players with more experience get matched with players with less experience, thus players would be able to grow at a steady rate, and no1 would be able to complain that 1 team has all the "pros" and the other is full of "noobs". Finally I would like to say a bit about the AA rework. Now players can choose the reinforce 1 side of their ship, while lowering the effectiveness of the other side. Which isn't quite bad as players can also choose the leave their AA unchanged and the AA would be equally effective on both sides, which in turn will make it harder for aircraft to "escape" once they are done with the attack. Though there is 1 thing I have noticed and have yet to find the answer to, and that is why do I receive +3 planes every so often, once I lose some of my planes? Thank you for the read and by all means tell me if I am wrong in thinking this way somewhere?
  7. Ppl should be allowed to play only 1 class of ships, or even only 1 ship if they so desire, just as much as they should be allowed to play all the other ships in game.
  8. I am having a hard time finding the supposed tutorials for the new cv gameplay. :P
  9. ZealousStrategist

    Halloween 2018

    I dislike how we can't reach the deepest dept that our submarine should be able to reach, or rather if by some chance we do reach it, we can't even remain at that dept for even 10s.
  10. ZealousStrategist

    A problem with logging on to the PT Forum

    Thx. I guess it was just a matter of a bad link...
  11. I do not know why, but I can't seem to log on to the PT forum site. https://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/forum/192-public-test-feedback/ http://prntscr.com/l02vmk I believe I did everything as was asked here: http://prntscr.com/l02vwi And so I think I have a separate account from my "normal account", but I can't seem to login...