Jump to content


Alpha Tester
  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About Cloud_RO

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Birthday 01/02/1982
  • Insignia

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Essex, UK
  1. Cloud_RO

    Something really needs to be done about the Bismarck.

    It's the only decent build for her, as it has little else going for it. Secondaries build works much better on the tier IX, as you can upgrade it with the 3 mil. module and, by that time, you get the 5 points skill for her captain as well, but the main guns?! Even the 420mm... The most annoying bit for me are WG's claims about precision when they should actually say: the gun stats displayed in the game are a joke, we put them there to get people talking. Don't start me ranting again.
  2. Cloud_RO

    Something really needs to be done about the Bismarck.

    Going back to the title of this topic. i think something needs to be done about the Bismark and all german battleships starting with tier VII to tier X. I had the Tirpitz since it was first offered in the shop, it used to be a brilliant ship and then the german battleship branch of the tech tree came along... I gave up on it when reaching tier IX after. Currently, my port holds the Gneisenau, both Bismark and Tirpitz and Friedrich. Haven't played any of them in weeks, if not months and in no rush to do so, as Kurfurst seems to be the worst tier X battleship in the game. Someone was asking here somewhere how you counter the Bismark. Don't even bother. Just stay out of the secondaries range and sail past, those "rapid fire and precise guns", as Wargaming describes them, will hit f*ckall no matter the range. Worst frikin' battleships guns in the game! 460mm Yamato guns are lasers compared to german guns. Iowa & Montana guns will shoot the enemy captain's cap off of his head at 18km no problem. North Carolina has the short barrel version of the same guns so, basically, same thing. But the "precise" german guns? Ha! Smallest caliber, shortest range and low accuracy. And you're saying it's an OP ship ?! The most important thing Bismark - and all of them, actually - has going for it is the fear factor. But once you get past it, you'll be surprised to see it's not really that great. Best german battleship?... The Hindenburg, tier X cruiser.
  3. Cloud_RO

    Why are so many BB players so dumb or bad at the game?

    I've been playing this game for a while now ... since the first test weekend, before the launch in closed alpha. Played all ships but carriers. I'm an average player myself. I have no particular liking for a class of ships... I have a particular dislike of carriers. A lot of people here have been saying battleships are more forgiving etc. etc. winning rate counts, not the average damage dealt etc. there should be a cap on range to stop people from sniping and so on and so forth. Yeah... it's not the game or the ships, it's the players. Cruiser and battleships captains will say destroyers don't do their jobs and they don't care anyway cause they can easily hide in smoke or take advantage of the speed and high concealment, battleship captains will complain of having no support from the cruisers and cruiser captains will say something like why should i charge in, it's actually the battleships' job to tank. For me, it's not the class of ship that makes the bad player... Been playing ranked battles last week. In a battleship, I got torpedoed by a friendly destroyer from behind. His answer "why did you turn?". [edited] if I know, should have exposed the ship's broadside to two enemy battleships... He wasn't that friendly, i guess. Been playing a cruiser... destroyers went for the cap point, I and the other cruiser(s) went in for support against enemy destroyers, to fend them off, battleships stayed behind, 20km back, hitting fuckall from that distance. Cruisers? How many times were you playing in a battleship and a cruiser stayed with you for AA support or to fend off enemy destroyers? 1 out of 10 times maybe? Yeah, enough said. My point is this: the game is fine, the ships are ok. It's the players, all of them. All of us, actually. The fix is easy and it doesn't involve a cap on maximum range, limiting torpedo ranges or chances of setting the target on fire and whatnot. I think it's asking oneself "how can I help the guy next to me?".
  4. Cloud_RO

    German Battleships

    Ok... they may have introduced german battleships but the guns on every one of 'em is close to awful. Having bought the Tirpitz when it was first offered, I think i can tell the difference between then and now. After playing in closed alpha, closed beta etc. and getting bored twice with the game already I was so looking forward to this tech tree and now I feel I need to quit playing this game entirely...
  5. Cloud_RO

    US Ships question!

    That'd be overkill... it's besides the point
  6. Cloud_RO

    US Ships question!

    I made this suggestion as it would be very easy to implement, as it has already been done for the ARP ships - which, in all honesty, i think a lot of people would sell at least 3 out of 4 and keep the port slots if they could. On your second point, we have 4 mighty classes and I don't feel the need for PT boats or whatnot. But even if you see written New Jersey and you think "oh, the garden state" before you think "battleship", it quite easy to see the class symbol and the ship tier. I can understand it's impossible to make everyone happy but this is an example of a fairly simple thing and, if we browse the forum, we'll find other suggestions people liked. Personally, I would like at some point to be given to option to "build" my own ship: not design it entirely but a system in which you could select a hull from a short list, select bigger or larger guns - with the respective bonuses and penalties involved, like turret speed and rate of fire and whatnot, add or remove armour - which would make it faster or slower and so on and so forth. I'm sure you get where I'm going with this but I understand it would be more difficult to implement. Fair enough, but some things, like a few US ship paints, a few "clones" in the tech tree, the famous ones at least, I'm sure WG can do more easily. Not saying I'd like to see secondary gun turrets turning to follow the target one designates... albeit very nice, it would be hard work and I'm sure they thought of it already...
  7. Cloud_RO

    US Ships question!

    Flavor feature, yes. I can understand WG bringing new content slowly to ensure they keep players interested for a longer time. The longer players stay with the game, the more cash they can bring in. Ok, fair enough but the suggestion above requires minimum effort. copy-paste-rename and that's about it, other than a split in the tech tree and adding another bracket for the new ship. I would assume that after the epic World of Warplanes failure - used to play that game and gave up when WG spit back in the community's face with one of their updates and ignoring completely the players when asked to roll back to previous settings - they would have learned to listen by now. I have no idea what their figures show them on the other servers, but i've been playing this since the very first test weekend on the EU server. Game started with approx. 30.000 players online. Now it's down to 20.000, if not less. I can understand lots of things: amending the ranked battles with a cap on tier so they can increase sales of lower tier premium ships, I can understand new fleets required time and research and we're going to see the Royal Navy, for example... at some point, God knows when... It's not a game, it's a business, granted. But throw down a bone now and again! And I don't mean tier II ships... WG modus operandi is clear: they start off brilliantly then it all goes south. I think dealing with confused players - who I'm sure have the means to go to wikipedia and see for themselves there were more than one ship in a class - is easier than dealing with annoyed players. If anyone else's like me and the friends I played World of Warplanes with and now, World of Warships, I'll stop playing and paying on principle alone and look for other options. There is a market and I'm sure there's someone else out there looking to give the players what they want making a pretty penny in the process. World of Warplanes vs. Warthunder. 'nough said.
  8. Cloud_RO

    US Ships question!

    If this is so, this brings me back to a question I asked on another thread, which, of course, no one from WG bothered to read or discuss the suggestion: if the ships in the game are general designs, so to say, it would be very easy for WG to diversify the tech tree - just like they're already doing with those silly ARP tier V no one cares about - and just "copy/paste" the New Jersey, for example, the Musashi etc. in the tech tree. It would require minimal effort and would bring some diversity to the game, showing in queue different ships not just "Iowa/Iowa/Iowa". This can be done for many other ships in the tech tree.
  9. Cloud_RO

    More content!

    I'll tell you what I'd would like and it would be easy to implement and would bring more diversity to the game. I would like to see some of the other ship in a class in the tech tree. Why not "copy-paste" Yamato in the tech tree, for example, and introduce her sister ship Musashi. Iowa class... perhaps some people may chose one of the other ships in the class, not the Iowa. It may have been the first but New Jersey earned more battle stars than any other of the ships in this class. Someone may want to sail this one. How hard would that be to implement? In the regular tech tree, why can't WG do the same thing they're already doing with the ARP tier V battleships? Seeing the same ships names over and over - at least at this point in the development timeline - it's just boring.
  10. Cloud_RO

    TAW is recruiting

    Hi there Considering to sign up. Click here to view my profile for more information and feel free to ask if there's need for more Thanks
  11. Cloud_RO

    Known Bugs/ Issues

    I found an invisible island today... http://imageshack.com/a/img901/2900/Bk5eT2.jpg