Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About EdiJo

  • Rank
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

642 profile views
  1. I noticed other bad effect of the time gating: if you HAVE to fulfill certain requirements in a few game you have time for - you NEED the most effective ship. So the time requirement converts into ship requirement... For example, I played Belfast more than I would like. Also, those stupid co-op games to quickly gather main guns/secondaries hits. Terrible experience from potato soup during night-time submarine scenarios, when brain activity of your team-mates was certainly not-detectable by any EEG and many games were needed to get 7 stars. I don't think this was the intention. But WG should know that significant part of WoWs player base are adults, who have various real-life obligations and simply CAN'T play whenever they want(/need). As another side effect - I was quite salty when I NEEDED those XP/hits/whatever and my brain-dead team was making it impossible. I would be less prone to anger if I HAD MORE TIME to fulfill those requirements. Generally though, I see the Cossack grind as a step in a good direction compared to the previous "marathons" - you could buy lacking guineas at a fairly linear price scale, and the schedule was weekly, so less demanding than previous ones. But still, it was enough to miss 2-3 weekends and the gain was not very attractive in comparison to just buying the boat in the shop at the start. So competing would quite easily turn into discouragement - and one of goals of any event is to provide some fun for players/customers, right?
  2. EdiJo

    DD cry babys

    I read this only upto the Bingo, so anyway I think it is time for another one:
  3. EdiJo

    Lack of Transparancy

    Maybe https://patents.google.com/patent/US8425330B1/en ?
  4. EdiJo

    Reasons behind "Roflstomps"

    It was milled many times before: unicum in a CV has serious advantage over any other classes. He can "project power" without being endangered, he get's the spotting he needs by himself, he is present in many places at a time, he can (almost always) disengage from unfavorable fight, he can choose his targets from all the map. For comparison, unicum DD can be neutralized just by single opposite unicum DD or even radar/hydro cruiser, and can't disengage easily (or it takes much of his time). Heh, but that's also a part of CV being OP, isn't it? And AA gets less relevant later in the game when 1) we have less ship density 2) HE spam destroys most of modules. Not to mention that we still have AP bombs, which should be called "anti-AA" bombs Of course some people always stomped enemies so they don't notice any special increase (unicum forumite triple divisions, for example ). But things are changing, and some of the reasons you mentioned above. Just counting: experienced players are more experienced now experienced players play more often in divisions there is more ships to learn and more gimmicks on them to learn - steeper learning curve - bigger skill disparity we have influx of fresh potatoes - again skill gap widens WG pushes potatoes to high tiers - and gives them free XP, credits, camouflages/signs, free medium tier ships, free commanders, easy commander XP transfers. more people are playing in high tiers where all of above is most prominent Soviets in 1941 were also a mobile army - but they were concentrated too close to the border and could not regroup fast enough. Some say it was because they were preparing for attack themselves, some say it was because good commanders were killed by Stalin in purges. It is not as simple - it just looks different from the Western perspective... Every war had disregard for civilians, and main difference was the area on which the war was fought. On the Eastern front both WWI and WWII were lethal for civilians and completely destroyed whole countries. Of course, planned genocide (both Soviet and German) was the new thing in WWII, but it is generally separate from "front" army operations. Although there is a difference in aerial attacks which in fact more often targeted civilian areas in WWII... Oh, and I'm getting allergic to WWII being called "axis and allies" war. This is terribly Soviet-Yankee point of view, and AFAIK we still have the version of history in which the war started in 1939. Axis is a late 1940/early 1941 concept. Before 1941 Soviets were on the German side of the war, and even in November 1940 officially sent application to the Tripartite Pact (i.e. "Axis"). Easy. When it lasts 10 minutes or less (counting true fight, excluding some running away border lickers which make some stomps "played" longer). I think even if you lose more, if the game lasts 10 minutes it is a stomp. Not counting sneaky standard mode captures Yes, happened to me a few times, and often I am the whining guy because I often check MM monitor ;) Still, the stats are not easy to interpret fast (not many games, you can't see all the player's profile), and anyway - it is true that usually skill disparity means that the game will be one-sided. Exceptions don't break the rule. Yes. I whine in such games about "world of DD" - I also agree that most of stomped games begin from stomped DD. Yes. This is a part of what I wrote earlier above Because it is true. We just said above that most of stomps begin with DD being stomped, for example ;) Quite often DD stomp is caused by good CV vs bad CV situation. And so on... This situation requires 1 good DD (which time & effort are wasted) and many potatoes which can't use this DD. So it is (much) less probable than multiple average Steves getting left without spotting/screening because one DD potato died right away before they could help him ;) Actually one potato in a critical ship which is put vs good player in similar ship (CV vs CV or DD vs DD for example) can cripple the whole flank or even game. Many ships are not exchangeable/expendable in this game. After in first 3(?) minutes of last sprint ranked game I scored 2 dev strikes in my Kamikaze vs 2 of 3 enemy DD the game was basically over, regardless of what other enemy ships would try to do. Kaboom, kaboom, GG. C'mon. Not everyone stomped poor potatoes in unicum divisions all the time - some are just starting now
  5. EdiJo

    Reasons behind "Roflstomps"

    That model is just not adequate - if you "adapt it and make it more complicated" it will no longer be as simple as Lanchester's dependency. Have you heard about that brilliant idea revolutionizing the egg industry? It was great, but assumed spherical chickens in a vacuum Yup, it is very rare to have really uniform firepowers facing each other in WoWs. Practically always you have different ship class, player skill, play style (forced, random or tactical...), or other conditions affecting the battle. Hm, not exactly! The point was that CV make it probable for a single guy to carry games - much more frequently than for any other class. So giving an example of a CV failing to carry is not proving it wrong. Sure, agreed. But the point is that you need much bigger skill disparity to compensate one guy in CV (or one division with CV). And you mention specifically double Woosters which have AAe broken almost as much as AP bombs Still, I can counter-example you with this Fara game vs 3 Woosters, and, let's remember that most of ships in this game are not Woosters.
  6. EdiJo

    Reasons behind "Roflstomps"

    Yes, but it only applies to forces directly countering each other. The problem is that we have very often a situation, when we can't counter enemy ship with what we have at the time & place on the map. If the game would've 100 BB, 100 DD, 100 cruisers etc. then we could apply the Lanchester's quite fine (although for each class vs class interaction, separately), for a while. 2 stealthy DD will slaughter 2 BB whatever their skill/hp/power is, if there is enough time. Exception from the rule. BTW by "couple" you mean 2 (those Woosters?)? I see quite many familiar clan tags in your team (for example my team was recently slaughtered by HOTEL guys...). Probably if we dig into stats of both teams we will see skill disparity in more than "couple" of them ;) I don't play since beta and I notice quite an increase of games lasting ~10 minutes... Seems we both can have a bias, but then we can return to statistics: quite many people complain about stomped games. Nope. More stomped games is not the same as stomped games getting more stomped ;) and 50% of more or less equal 2:1. Same with 3 potatoes. So it is "randomly" very not probable to have one team with 3 unicums and the other with all 3 potatoes ;) Randomly we could have relatively little stomping. Exactly. Divisions are not skill-balanced and this is a big factor. Yes. But it is not just "Lanchester's" law, but rather more complicated situation, strongly favoring skill. Skilled player can eliminate key units (CV or radar cruiser will focus DD, BB will hunt radar cruiser, AA cruiser will create no-fly zones and help his CV). Especially when they are divisioned and using voice comm... And we have more & more skilled players which had time to form "friendly circles" and learn to play together - also there is massive influx of inexperienced players, which are strongly pushed by WG to climb, grind and buy as fast as possible. Or even faster - with help of events, free gifts, ultra-bonuses and hyper-boosting signals. We have wider spectrum of skill now, much more different ships and much more gimmicks in ships which require L2P. Lanchester's applies to uniform projection of power in 1v1 engagements without considering any special abilities of units and without considering skill. This doesn't reflect well WoWs game where you have limited number of each unit type in a given map area, very varying player skill, or additional communication channel in divisions. Wiping the postulates is one of better methods for proving a theorem ;) Is almost as good as proof by waving hands
  7. EdiJo

    Reasons behind "Roflstomps"

    Counting guns is too big simplification for WoWs. Suiciding DD are quite good example. You can have unicum BB, and they will be helpless when your DD lose 0:4 in the first 5 minutes of the game. On the other side, you can have something with "carrying potential" - like unicum division - being not immediately effective because went to the "empty" flank - and the game can look lost but is still recovered when the division catches up. There are some critical points in the team: DD in domination mode, CV of course, single special consumable owners (radar/hydro/smoke) or single highest tier BB/CA. This makes games usually being quite far from Lanchester's square law.
  8. EdiJo

    Brushed under the carpet thread

    Moderators for sure have strict guidelines and it is quite obvious that the company doesn't need too many "suggestions" which can be bordering with some kind of a community-mutiny Well, that is exactly the reason why RTS CV have to go... You can quite easily stat-pad, playing some ships at some time of week or day. For example I recently didn't have much time and played Belfast to get all those missions done quickly. Because of the relative abundance of DD and T5 I was mostly top-tier and it was easy to carry games, so the stats turned purple instantly. WR is also not the best skill measure, because you need really large number of games to make it reliable. Most people don't have 100-200 games in a single given ship in a reasonable time frame. Nope, we already had this conversation many times here and there is not enough players to divide into any "leagues". Also right, it would be easy to abuse. Any skill-based MM would have to preserve symmetry between teams, so there is no reason for WR to converge around 50%, at least not strongly. Team consisting with 4 good, 4 average and 4 potatos would be matched vs similar 4+4+4 team - and the win probability is similar to what would happen in many 7+4+1 vs 1+4+7 steamrolls for all those "1"s. But divisions would suffer a bit, maybe. Still, not enough player base, and the only thing really doable now is to keep potatoes away from climbing to higher tiers - for example by creating a campaign mode which would enable PvP only if the player finishes PvE "exam" scenario tasks for given tier of each given ship line. AFAIK ranked only balanced number of divisions and number of divisioned players, not their skill. Ranked and Clan "leagues"/"brackets" are only very rough attempt, and you still can have many potatoes in high brackets. Also, WR is quite weak measure, and WG has enough data to compute something much better as the skill estimate... WR is not the goal of this game ;) And while having some number padded high can be a source of endorphins, this doesn't mean that any other source of fun is not worthy of sacrificing some WR... Bots are much better than AVERAGE player, especially at micromanaging, but also when they have some programmed strategy. But removing co-op is very bad idea - we need more PvE for learning people how to play in "controlled environments", not less. And we need to keep potatoes as far from PvP as possible - until they learn the basics (so for some of them - forever...).
  9. EdiJo

    How do we help players like these?

    Probably you're right Campaign mode ENABLING new levels (tiers...) separately in each ship line is quite possible and needed. We are not even talking about "good stats", but merely about "not abysmal" All is needed is to kick the ball in the right direction, we don't expect everybody to suddenly be football stars. I didn't suck, I was just average or slightly below. The whole problem begins when one tries (and is allowed) to advance to higher tiers too fast. I played without premium account, without buying much, and progressed quite slowly, being limited by both credits and xp. Now you can get tons of everything either by paying or from events requiring just being present on the server... Unfortunately it is quite impossible to establish whether a player is ready for a given tier just from looking at his general stats. And people would not accept such decisions either... ("I don't play for stats" old tune...). But progressing through a campaign PvE mode could be accepted - although it is quite an effort for WG (tens of carefully calibrated scenarios...).
  10. EdiJo

    How do we help players like these?

    You do know that even then there was plenty of T1-T5 ships available for you to learn? Anyway, if you really would've tried, you would reach something better since the beta even in that Warspite. After years of playing the ship: 24k dmg (3 salvos per game?) and 37% win rate. Really? Especially considering that earlier the MM was not as bad for T6 BB as it is now. You evidently just don't care at what goal you shoot...
  11. EdiJo

    How do we help players like these?

    Oh boy, you keep telling us that even if you "for fun" shoot the ball into the wrong goal there is nothing wrong with you? Even playing with 10yr old kids you'd have your behind kicked out of the game after a few such "performances". This game is EASY if you put MINIMUM effort into learning. The only "hard" part is multitude of ship parameters to remember, but after few years (since beta?) even a monkey would learn that. If it tried. Nothing bad in keeping to one nation. But it is SERIOUSLY WRONG to start the game from tier 6. I don't think you are, because if you really had paid any significant money, you'd have devoted some brain capacity to grasp basic concepts of the game. This is how it works - if you pay for something, you value it more. You look like a total casual, trolling people from time to time (1000 games since beta) because you yourself invested nothing.
  12. EdiJo

    How do we help players like these?

    You can't even define what "bad player" is, one can be good in DD while sucking as CV, for example. The solution is not to "ban from randoms/ranked/operations" but just to require to pass some test PvE mission for EVERY next ship in EVERY ship line. You didn't pass the "German T8 BB scenario"? Sorry, your new Tirpitz is restricted to co-op and training room only, until you do. I would add an expiration date to such exam - so if you didn't play T8 German BB for some time (3 months?), you'd have to do the test again. All those scenarios together would form something like a "campaign mode", which in other games serves as the learning tool BEFORE even players are allowed to go into PvP. This game is very simple & slow version of a FPS shooter, but has quite many vehicle & weapon characteristics/interactions to memorize. Currently WG seems to prefer dumbing those things down: unify parameters, introduce more RNG and less skill dependency (i.e. shoot their own game in the foot) rather than invest the effort into some learning tools Implementing very rough skill balancing is another, separate issue.
  13. EdiJo

    What ship with Radar can I play in the lowest tier

    The following may sound harsh, but I am tired of people pushing into high tiers without learning the basic basics of the game. This needs to be somehow limited by the game! You have still A LOT to learn in tiers BELOW 5, where NO radars are available. Please don't go higher until you are able to get at least yellow "PR" number in a current ship of the given ship line. https://wows-numbers.com/player/556942307,GudmundurG/ You have zero idea about playing DD, and all the radar is not the cause of it. If you want to kill noob DD in "the lowest tier" - learn to aim in your Bogatyr or Kolberg, you will still have to do the same in your "wished-for" radar cruiser, because you still have to shoot AND hit the DD when you radar him - ya know, radar doesn't cause a DD to automatically explode or smtn.
  14. I also am quite close to completing the collection (miss 3 or 4 items I think?), but in (6-7?) containers I only got 2 duplicates (I think I have all other collections, so I don't need to "turn on/off" anything). At this rate there is zero chance for the US Oven chick...
  15. EdiJo

    Pink stupidity

    "Faulty nodes" so close the the server can be easily detected by the test team (even using automated clients) - if you actually do continuous testing of the live server from several different locations. There is not so many different routes to check. Again, eeeasy. If you get ~2% (+/-1%) pink players per hour and suddenly this number raises to, say, 10% - this is a reason to do testing. The server has all the data: IP addresses of pink players, time & length & frequency of disconnects for each player. This is not a rocket science to differ real network or server problem (affecting multiple users from similar area at the same time) from typical Lazy Crashing Steve which doesn't bother to fix his clogged Windoze.