Ishiro32

The difference wasn't so big in the last patch. That's why I think this argument is rather toothless.

Sure, sure. Only EU CVs were really dedicated stat padders and alll CV skippers in asia, russia and US just decided it is not honorable and stoped playing. Difference in performance was caused most likely by Torptitz and that's all. You mentioning AAA reminds me that I had a topic to write, at least that was useful from your post. Also I must say, for someone who said so many things how carriers do not require any skill and how you would love them to be more difficult, I have never seen you writing anything constructive about it. I did not see any proposition comming from you. I also never seen you talking about specific gameplay issues. You are always very broad and vague at the same you tend to generalise a lot and you have wild imagination regarding players from that "CV cabbal" of yours.

Pierwsze gry na rankach za mna. Moja masochistyczna przygoda sie zaczela. Bede gral tylko Rangerem 2/0/2 i zobacze na jaka range mnie ten okret zaprowadzi.

So it is really about how you thought there will be wipe even though it was told multiple times that there will be no wipe? You know what? This is pure waste of everyones time and support was in full right to ignore your case, because there is no case. They might have been nicer towards you and do it as an additional request. But then they would be doing something extra, something you are not entilted to. You are fully resposible for your actions as a customer and you have no sympathy from me.

This is starting to get a bit silly. Do we need to have full class warfare between carriers and battleships? There are good carrier players, there are bad carrier players, there are nice carrier players, there are mean carrier players. There are good battleship players, there are bad battleship players, there are nice battleship players, there are mean battleship players. Simple as that. Some people are not fit for discussion, some are very emotional in them, some just want to have attention. Still, there is no need to further antagonise each other, at the end of the day we all want fun game for everyone. Reasonable people will always find a common ground.

You are completely wrong, but I won't tell you why. First I need to get response from my internet lawyer.

No to pora wrócić do Rangera! Przez chwile w tym filmiku mówie o skretach o 90 stopni w patchu 0.4.0. Akurat tak sie sklada ze mam jeszcze filmik dokladnie pokazujacy co sie dalo robic. No i w sumie na filmiku chyba widać mod na ktorym pod samolotem widac do kogo on nalezy i jakiego typu jest. np. pod moimi jest Ranger (T)Lex(S) oznacza to że jest to ulepszony samolot rangera a jednoczesnie stockowy lexi. Nie jest to jakieś niesamowicie przydatne, ale jak kogoś interesuje to http://forum.worldofwarships.eu/index.php?/topic/30197-mod-visible-planes-names-cv-mod/page__p__538195#entry538195

After change from CBT to OBT and seeing how much WG cared about that, I can't say I am shocked. The only thing I will say is that at least I expected some kind of deals in the shop. Occasion to buy something nice, cheap and maybe buy premium acc for a month or two. Ranked games are minor thing for me. Will play them, but I don't expect myself getting really excited about ranks or anything like that. Vision of organised play is why I still invest time into this game. Oh well. WG doesn't look like it care so neither will I. Simple as that.

Well, it clearly didn't work as intended. Giving people special offer which is more expensive than normaly while is indeed special, but not in the good way special.

I don't remember using animu pictures as a substitue for argument. Well, everyone has their own quirks, mine are animu pictures, you can accept them or not, but discussion is discussion. Reaction faces are reaction faces while words are words. If you don't like pictures then ignore them, I try to keep them small so they don't mess with the graphic layout of discussion.Go for it. Create your own topic and play carriers more to generate intresting data. Especially considering we are in 0.4.1 and stuff changed a bit. Also getting past tier VI and going even higher will make what you are writing a bit more credible, so healthier discussion for all.

Well forum was doing that since I remember. You didn't get used to it by now? @Luckyio Go back to playing it and go past the tutorial mode, create your own topic and we will have fun there, I will be sure to monitor your progres. As I have said multiple times I am really intrested in people performance to see how the game fares for people with different backgrouds. I have said almost all CV players disregard low tiers as waste of time, so basing your whole carrier hate on it is kinda pointless and no one will take you seriously with that. At the same time suplementing that argument with streams where you mainly talk about performance and not gameplay is just not enough to make a strong case in a discussion.

@Luckyio If I remember correctly your first post towards me was telling me that I am stat padded, seal clubber and I should be ashamed of myself, so I have no idea when you were treating me as someone intrested in quality of the game. As for your "one cv game per day", if you remember correctly I was rather supportive of you and just wanted you to play slightly more, as simply tier IV gameplay is not representative of the gameplay of the class. Tier IV and V were always treated by the CVs as throw away tiers, to such an extend that some of them simply free exp them. Considering what you write about Cleveland, you have never met fully AAA spec Cleveland and considering your low number of games on that tier I am not really shocked. Also about tier IV and tier VI crusiers. Hosho even in the old MM was not being dragged to the against Clevelands unless you divisioned with someone from at least tier V. Unless you show me proof I will simply say that you lie. I don't care enough to search for it, but there were topics about MM and how it works and tier IV CVs had special MM. Also with all my experience on tier IV CVs I have never met ship on tier VI, neither in OBT nor in CBT. Overall what you are writing as painful/hillarious to read and you still misuse quotes. Like here Unless you have direct posts that say you "suck" or me or sharana saying that you "misrepresent" you have really no right to claim such things. I remember those threads and what we have told you is what I have written above, low tiers are treated by all CV skippers as training tools and are not representative of the whole gameplay. I even showed you how tier IV looked at it's worst with my 2 APM Hosho gameplay and I also probably said what I am saying for at least 3 months that tier IV and V gameplay is too boring, even by new players standard and require overhaul. @AnuSuaraj It's pretty obvious that high tier scores are caused by the Torptiz domination. Anything you are saying right now is more or less just an insult to the currect CV players. Why would only EU players not feel "ashamed" of playing class they like? This is just silly.

Winrate for most classes will be below 50% on average. Especially with mirrored CV. As for DD avg damage. Thing about DDs is that they are often first ones to die, for example because CV has spotted them. Because their performance can be sometimes 0 damage then it's just dragging their avg down. DDs are very inconsistent in their performance on all tiers. At the same time on high tiers they are not really all that effective. As for the CVs OP easy to play. As I have said. They were overperforming and it's true that getting good results was easy. That does not mean that class is easy to perform great. Look at US stats, current EU stats are the caused by Torptiz and US stats are showing that after 0.4.1 most CVs are performing on the level of BBs while Essex and Midway are slightly over the top and will probably require some adjusting. Results of tier V - VIII am sure got hit enough by the nerf bat, still not enough data to tell. Performance might cloud judgment of mechanical requirments for class. Because DDs are UP they are considered hard, because CVs were OP they were considered easy.

See here is where we think differently. Just because something is performing bad doesn't mean it's mechanically hard to play.

Overall Userext fact is that DDs are not difficult and they do not require huge ammount of skill to pull off. They do feel like that because they are inefficient and weak outside of low tiers. Low tier IJN DD are and were considered biggest seal clubbers in game. I have seen people who had 4 kills and I know for the fact that they were always dropping on the white path just like that and in my book they were weak. High tier DDs are in that strange limbo where only most dedicated players get them as WG seems to not be sure what to do with high tier DDs. Those players like the concept of class enough to try to overcome relatieve low strength. Those dedicated players will be good, because well... they are dedicated and they constantly need to improve just to be average. At the same time % of those DDs will be pretty close to the % of really good and dedicated players of other classes. At the same time when CVs were over performing hard and IJN were so easy to get great results, a lot of people were content with their performance even though in reality their skills were lacking. CVs are actually very hard to do a perfect game without mistakes. I was analysing a lot of my replays and my performance is full of holes and mistakes even on low tiers and I do consider myself rather good CV skipper. People think CVs do not require skill, because of stats and their over performance. It was so easy to get good results then how this class could be hard? This is clouded judgment. Why do you think I was talking down CV skippers who were complaining after the patch. Game needs to be hard. People need to fail to improve. But you don't achieve that by adding RNG or Luck. You are salty towards CVs and CV players and it is joly good read. Don't worry CVs will not die, there is a dedicated playerbase for them regardless of their state. Trust me, during CBT we received quite an abuse and If stuff like wide spread did not force people to quit, not a lot will. Well giving CVs pointless RNG would actually force me to quit this class, but I doubt WG would do something so silly.

What about torps then? Please explain how RNG would make using torps require more skill. Also muskets were inaccurate, but also any mistake made by the gunner was multiplied. Gun was not more difficult to shoot because it was random and luck based, but because even small things caused huge difference in result. You can not infuence true random. Modern weapons are completely different thing and comparing skill of shooting two of them is kinda stupid and saying that musketeer was more skilled than today's rifelman just because he had worse weapon is also silly. DDs are underpowered. Musket is worse weapon than rifle. Amazing, what that has to do with RNG and skill required to master them? There is no MINIMIZE random. You can only manage risk connected with random generetaion based on the situation. Random by the definition is not infuenced by the user.

@Userext I can't believe I have to explain concept of RNG to anyone with two opposing thumbs, but oh well. Stabilising a gun is a process of aiming when player is actively performing adjustments taking into account known fixed game mechanics. After gun is shot then random number is generated. (RNG) then this random number is thrown into the calculations which will net you some kind of result. Player has no impact on the number beeing generated hence the random in the name. There is a concept of risk managment in games like Blood Bowl which are heavy on dice roll, but in terms of WoWs and shooting a gun, there is nothing like that. Frankly RNG to guns was introduced mostly because no one would be able to hit anything otherwise or they would have to introduce so many helping tools that it would end up being pointless. Honestly you are mixing a lot of things together and I will forward earlier question to you also, please tell me how lack of RNG for BB guns would result in less skill needed to perform or how adding RNG elements to CV would make playing them more competetive.

How does fact that some ships don't have rng and others have even impact what he wrote. Really. Please explain this, because I am baffled by what you have written. Please go on and tell how in your head adding rng to a class (CV) would make it more skill depended. Or describe how if we would just delete RNG from other classes (BB) would make them much easier to pick up by anyone.

There is wrong placement for CVs and movement of main ship is quite essential for any carrier player worth a dime. CV requires much more active play than any other class. Thing is it is not really felt on the low tier with slow planes and low number of active squadrons. Why carrier gameplay is less prefered? You and people like you said it yourself couple of time already. Majority of people came to this game to play surface ships and most of people here have WoT background. Also your knowledge on game theory is abysmal. I did not have time yesterday to write about it, but thankfully Syrchalis explained it couple posts earlier so I don't have to make wall of text about it. I mean your whole argument that carriers are easiest because they don't have rng and other classes are hard because they are affected by rng is... heh... I just wanted to highlight this, because this really has improved my mood for at least couple of hours. So much salt here.

No niestety w przypadku lotniskowców to ulepszenie torpedowcow to podstawa. Ogolnie nie zmuszaj sie do polowania na lotniskowce, szczegolnie kiedy grasz IJN kontra USN. Twoim zadaniem jest zbijanie innych okretow. Lotniskowce amerykanskie ciezko sie zbija jezeli maja jakakolwek oslone. A Atlanta... no coz. Samoloty tier V, kontra wysepcjalizowany pogromca sil powietrznych z tier VII. Nie dziwie sie. Ogolnie to nie powinno byc az tak problematyczne farmienie tier VI IJN, wiec sadze ze albo zle dobierasz cele albo reczny zrzut sprawia Ci problemy po patchu 0.4.1. Nie mialem okazji grania jeszcze IJN, ale ostatnio wrocilem troche do gry i wrocilem do Rangera. Odczuwalne sa te zmiany i trudniej sie gra. Notabene chyba mam nawet sensowny repke z moich pierwszych gier po tej 2-3 tygodniowej przerwie, wiec na dniach powinienem dodac komentarz do niej i uploaduje ja.

Are you still so angry about carriers that you have to try to turn every topic into "carriers OP" even after hefty nerf? Create your own topic and we will have this discussion there and I am sure it will be very intresting and lively.

What this game needs is organised play. Whole game concept is based around team oriented combined fleet warfare. You really need clan wars or something like that for this game to really show true colors.

I am not excited. There is no much benefit in having high rank when everyone can see your all stats anyway and honestly I think this game thrives in the big fleet vs big fleet combat. I would love to play for example 24 vs 24 game. That would feel epic, though a lot of PC would melt. I will be playing rank though. Which ship? I have decided to disregard common sense and I will be playing Ranger. My personal dislike towards Hiryuu is much stronger than need for high rank.

Language barrier is just the excuse. I was avid LoL and Dota1 player and best games I have had in those were when team did not have to write anything on the chat. On random if people know their roles and know the game then everything just flows. There were situations where I have had better understanding of each other in a team of randoms than playing with my friends on voice chat. Do you honestly think people in NA write long discussions on chat regarding tactics? Ha! Someone said that different language is creating distrust, but I don't think it's true either. I would argue that distrust is hatched from the MM and fact that you have no guarantee that your team will be on your skill level, but then again the same is applied to the other servers. Torptiz is most likely the cause. Increased number of BBs and decreased number of escort CA will have impact on CV damage. There are simply more occasions to do damage. I do wonder though If recent very negative atmosphere towards carriers and carrier players impacted the number of new carrier players. Does anyone know if other servers also had this very hostile environment for carrier discussion after 0.4.0?

It sounds like it's taking too much attention though. carrier gameplay is very RTS-lite. There are situations where you need to have full control over two places on the map at the same time, forcing player to stay on screen for long time doesn't sound good.