Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About Takru

  • Rank
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1,742 profile views
  1. WG early December: "Buy our lootboxes and have a chance to get those arguably overperforming ships" WG two months later: "We really need to nerf those overperforming ships we used a few weeks ago to incentivise lootbox sales." Has it occured to you that if you hadn't used these ships, which have a reputation of being too strong, for "special occasions", that you would've had much less of an issue changing them?
  2. also known as "the marriage cake camo". But seriously, I'm wondering about this camo as well. Sitting on 4 copper and nothing to spend it on :(
  3. Takru

    ST, Space Warships Intergalactic Games

    I see what you did there, WG.
  4. Takru

    Russian CC Q&A with S_O

  5. Takru

    Russian CC Q&A with S_O

    It would be funny.... if it was a joke... but since the concept has been tested already...
  6. This is a fairly big point to make, imo. WG made mistakes by releasing some ships the way they are now, but they need to come up with a compensation that is appealing to players. Personally, Doubloons are not appealing to me. If they rule out money, they could still resort to other ingame currencies such as steel, coal, commander XP, Free XP or any combination of those.
  7. Again, if someone would have wanted to have doubloons he would presumably have bought those instead of a premium ship. As it stands right now, I don't consider those Lunar packages worth my Doubloons, much less so worth my money. Also, this compensation question isn't at all just theoretical. It's an actual, inevitable concern right now, because the premium CVs, all of which undoubtedly have changed completely away from how they were sold back then.
  8. It's WG's game, they can change whatever they want. I'm absolutely not fine with being compensated with Doubloons, neither for GC nor for premium CVs. Point being that I have no use for Doubloons and if I had wanted Doubloons I would have bought them and since I already have loads of premium ships anyway, I'm also not interested in any "conversion into another ship" scheme, since there aren't any that I don't have but would want. I'd prefer my money back for whichever premium ships WG wants to change as an option or failing that, something actually worthwhile like steel in exchange. I'll argue that the people most affected by these compensation schemes are people who have invested a lot of money in this game and as such have no use for even more Doubloons either. This whole compensation with doubloons thing has really alienated me from even looking at the premium shop and unless there is a more consumer friendly approach by WG, I don't see myself spending anything anymore on this game. It's not what I paid for and it's not what I wanted to get.
  9. Takru

    New CVs

    @MrConway I'm not happy at all with the CV rework and I would want reimbursement for my premium CVs. However, I have absolutely no use for more doubloons. I ask WG to come up with a worthwhile compensation for your long term and heavily invested customers.
  10. Takru

    New AA mechanics explained

    I can't help but think that there a few issues with how AA works, conceptually. - First off, reducing the range of AA inevitably reduces teamplay. This in itself is something I have a very hard time appreciating as a good change in an allegedly team based game. - Then we have the other effect of a CV being able to spot the vast majority of enemy ships while staying outside of any of their AA. This will be a huge factor in any form of competitive gameplay, i.e. if we think of CVs in Clan Battles, KotS or Ranked. - All destroyers are in a particular tough spot right now. Not only is their AA just not up to the task of defeating a full squadron of same tier planes, their generally short AA range makes it easy for a CV to keep them spotted by dipping in and out of their range if he really wants to make their life misterable. - Additionally, the concept of distributing damage evenly on all planes present in a squadron creates a snowball effect that makes CVs even more powerful. The more planes there are in a squadron, the lower the chance that you will lose planes, but once you start losing planes, you'll lose them in quick succession. This means that a full squadron of planes will almost always get an attack through, fairly much regardless of how strong the AA is (I'm exagerrating slightly here for emphasis, but it's really hard to get that kind of AA from any single ship). If the squadrons would lose planes in a continuous manner, they would thin out earlier, but also not vanish as abruptly as they do now if a CV player was caugh in a lot of AA all of a sudden. The effect would be that plane regeneration would be a lot more important to CV players, encouriging more careful instead of being able to basically attack anything with a full squad and be sure to lose none or only very few planes in the process. - Back to DDs, there isn't really anything they can actively do to avoid being spotted by CV planes or to defend themselves from attacks. Their AA is, as previously mentionend, just not up to the task and while they are able to dodge torpedoes and dive bombers most of the time, they can't really do anything much against attack aircraft with rockets. CV attack aircraft can fairly reliably damage a DD with rockets, inflicting some 3-5k damage per salvo at T10. The CV can do 3 -4 attacks, which would already be upwards of 50% of a DD's HP pool, press F and come back only a few seconds later with a full new squad. I fully appreciate that these attack aircraft are semi-intended as a self defense mechanism for CVs, but at the same time, the rather opressive spotting that CVs can provide in combination with this kind of effectiveness means that a DD has not much choice other than to stick close to friendly ships and hope that the CV finds a more interesting target. Also, thanks to Radio Location working from planes, a CV has no problem whatsoever to find any and all enemy ships within a minute or two. - Talking about sectors, they are not really intuitive to use. The idea sounds interesting, but having to dig into a submenu while in a fight isn't an optimal solution. I'd prefer if sector control was done via hotkeys (left, center, right) instead. However, considering how quickly planes can shift their attack vector and how long it takes for some ships to change their sector reinforcement, I do think there is a need to work a bit more on how this is supposed to work. - Making long range AA entirely avoidable increases the almost omnipresent spotting problematic further. If there is no or next to no cost for a CV to keep enemy ships spotted, then the AA does not serve it's purpose already, particularly when we're keeping competitive gameplay in mind, where information is even more a key for everything. Additionally, I really feel that this new way how AA works isn't anywhere near good enough. It's a system almost completely outside of player influence (other than captain perks, modules, sectors, def aa) inside a rework that by itself already removed a few teamplay aspects of CVs, compared to the old RTS system (fighters, torp spotting). The interaction between planes and AA is entirely a PvE concept now and I'd really want more ways to interact with other players as a CV. Not only would / should it feel more meaningful (skillful) to get in a successful attack, it would also mean that surface ships would have a more options than just pray and try to dodge.
  11. Takru

    Alabama ST for everybody

    Kitakami ST
  12. Takru

    Ranked Battles & Arms Race

    Sadly, ranked is now the only safespace without CVs. Ranked as such would be good, I don't mind T9 either. Arms race on the other hand should remain a seperate mode. Some of the buffs are ludicrously strong (health and concealment), the others are nice to have but not actually important or worth getting. The way the buffs are distributed makes the battles rather predictable and boring. Once you lose a single ship in your 6 ship lineup, you're at such a disadvantage that you will rarely win, especially not if there are health bonuses involved. The team that managed to sink an enemy first without losing a ship in return will be able to pick up more buffs, which by themself already grant points btw, thus stack the odds ever more in favour of the team that got lucky. For me it's even less competitive than normal ranked mode. If there wasn't steel up for grabs, I'd not touch it at all, quite frankly.
  13. Takru

    Ranked Battles & Arms Race

    I would like to play arms race, but not in Ranked Battles. I played a bit and hadn't any fun at all. Arms race mode makes it too arcady, it just flat out removes what little competitive aspect ranked had to being with. Why on earth someone thought bringing Arms Race to this mode would be a good idea I'll never understand. I don't mind changing team size to 6 instead of 7 but Arms Race... Also, can I politely raise my doubts about Trident being in this map pool? I'm playing Jutland there and can shoot across half the map basically... If I bring myself to play this, it's not because I like it, it's because you're bribing me with steel and I suspect that it'll be the case for a lot of other people, too.
  14. Takru

    Detectability Penalty Change in 0.8.0

    Having played now with the "old" gun bloom mechanic, I can say with certainty that I absolutely hate it. I want the "bug" back.
  15. Takru

    Detectability Penalty Change in 0.8.0

    Apparently. You're to provide suitable couches.