Jump to content

TheJezna

Beta Tester
  • Content Сount

    789
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1620

1 Follower

About TheJezna

  • Rank
    Officer Cadet
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. TheJezna

    The players of this game

    Recently came back after being away for a longish time, and while the gameplay has changed quite a bit in some fields (and not at all in others) the players just haven't changed one bit. Anytime things don't go well for a team there's always those people who knows exactly what everyone else should be doing and the fact that they're not doing it is the reason the team is losing. If it were decent advice given in a friendly or even neutral tone I'd be ok, but it's always shitty advice given in a condescending or foul manner Just tonight I had two occurrences of this: The first game I was in my Fletcher. Things were looking pretty grim, we had me, a Minotaur and a Bismarck left, the enemy had a Gearing, a Yugomu, a Des Moines and a Montana and held two caps to our one. The Gearing had radar location which had me pinned down and both the DD's were defending their caps. Our Minotaur captain of course knew the solution, I was a "pussy [edited][edited]" as he put it for not rushing in, and I was even worse when I, once I tried to go in and encountered both enemy DD's refrained from shooting so that I had a chance to drop from detection again. A while later I was in my Tashkent in a 10 DD game where the enemy's DD's clearly outmatched ours, including a Shima, a Gearing, a Khaba, a Z-46 and something else, we had 2 Tashkents, a Fletcher, a Yugomo and something else I can't recall. Of course, all the BB players had the brilliant idea that the Tashkents needed to push the caps and provide spotting. I politely pointed out that some of the Russian DD's don't really fill the same role as other DD's and that going aggresively into caps with 9,1 km concealment and no smoke would be pretty much suicide that was rewarded with more profanity, noob labeling (like I said, a bit rusty, but I have been playing this game since closed beta) and 2 reports. I normally don't really care, but for some reason, the toxicity in this game seems among the worst and I just needed to vent a bit.
  2. TheJezna

    Update 0.6.3 Feedback - Balance changes

    Haven't been playing for over a year and just popped in to see how things are, and yay, things seems to be going where they were headed back then; of course the game turns static when you kill DD's, on higher tiers, nothing can go anywhere without stealth since they'll be blown away by BB's camping the back. It's been the same since Beta, ppl been complaining about the bad, op DD's while whenever they got nerfed (just about every patch) the game got more stale and uninteresting.
  3. TheJezna

    Does everyone get these "offers"

    Not that convinced, the offer I got to buy premium for gold came 10 minutes after buying gold..
  4. TheJezna

    Any idea why Tirpitz has increased in price?

    Upside of course being that going on our regular september shopping trip to London will be much cheaper this year!
  5. TheJezna

    Does everyone get these "offers"

    Yea, got offered to buy 180 days premium for like 11k gold... Nothing for free here though
  6. TheJezna

    large amounts of bots in PvE

    When I got my little brother to join the Closed Beta he actually played for 6 weeks before even realizing he was playing vs bots. He kept telling me how good he was and that he almost never lost a match and how he would just sail up in the face of a BB and drop it with a full torp spread without breaking a sweat. First time we were to play together it dawned upon him.. He said he was wondering why he was getting so few XP..
  7. TheJezna

    How long until we get the British FLEET?

    How certain are you that the armor models in game is based on real numbers? I mean, you could make an armor model with compartments and completely pull the numbers out of... whatever orifice preferred. Not saying this is absolutely the case, just that it would be quite easy to say you spent this many hours collecting and analyzing real world data and no player would have any possible way of calling it. I mean, heck, I can pretty much guarantee that not every armor value in the game is a correct representation of reality simply out of balance reasons, and because the game is to simplistic to simulate real damage. And even where they did base in game stuff on reality, such as removing mains guns to fit mote AA on later destroyer upgrades for example it was a bad enough in game mechanic that they had to change it to less realism. And in all honesty, if getting historic details correct is what's taking time I'm sure a majority of the player base would be quite happy to forgo a bit of realism to get RN (and other lines) out faster. Sure, realism is nice where appropriate, but this is far from a simulator and thus other factors are much more important. And, speaking about realism: Where is the realism in having a game with two fantasy lines (the SN/RU lines) and one, soon two from a fleet which spent almost the entirety of WW2 in port because they where so outmatched by a fleet that is represented in game by two ships?
  8. TheJezna

    INDIANAPOLIS - The Biggest Disappointment

    Biggest drawback IMO is it's tall profile, combined with some large flat areas in the wrong spots, making it much less survivable than the armor value indicates since it's both easy to hit and easy to citadel. That said, it in almost every way an upgrade to the Pensacola, which of course in turn means very little unless you enjoy the US CA playstyle. It's been said over and over, US Cruiser gameplay changes drastically when moving from the Cleveland to the higher tiers (as does IJN, albeit earlier in the tree) and high tier play has nothing of the high paced frenzy of the Omaha but needs a much more careful and deliberate approach. It should also be noted that from a pure power vs other similar ships perspective, the IJN Heavy cruisers are generally straight up better, the US ships however are superior support ships, especially now with radar. This however touches on one somewhat problematic aspect of the Indianapolis: Yes, it has Radar, unique at it's tier. However, for all reasons apart from the radar the ship performs best at long range, having accurate very powerful guns while also being unable to take a beating up front. The guns are slow firing, meaning that even if you go close, the ship is not ideal for fighting those DD's spotted. This makes the radar much more of a defensive feature than a tool for offensively hunting destroyers.
  9. TheJezna

    Faster torp or gun reload on the Fletcher?

    They're not just useful vs DD's, that, if anything is a myth. The Gearing has among the highest HE DPM in the game and not using that is really missing one of it's greatest benefits. The Fletcher (and Benson of course) is not as potent, but it's still capable of inflicting massive damage with guns. The Fletcher and Benson are only beaten by the Gearing and Khabarowsk, beating all other DD's in HE damage by a large margin, but does so even with AP. The Fletcher has a potential 162k DPM with HE while the Udaloi only has 115. The IJN DD's lag behind massively with 108k max HE DPM for the Shima and 84k for the Kagero Yes, it's very difficult to hit things at long ranges, but you also need to consider that the Fletcher has the potential for the closest invisi-fire range in the game. And at around 10 km I find hitting BB's and even most CA's pretty easy. And yes, you lack the speed and ability to race around dodging the fire from the entire enemy fleet like the SN DD's can, but as said, you can invisifire, utilize smoke, make sure to engage isolated targets etc. On top of this, you get great torpedoes and you are able to tear up any other DD in close combat. That said, yes, you should still go with the Torp reload IMO. The slight increase in ROF only gives a few thousand more DPM and is simply not close to being as useful as the torpedo reload. The Fletcher in particular is the pinnacle of USN Hybrid DD's and is among the most versatile ships in the game, this potential should be maximized.
  10. TheJezna

    Best Gunboat?

    Yea at lower tiers you can do that kind of stuff, which is akin to some of the more thrilling depictions of real life DD actions of the era. Unfortunately WG has designed the game to take another direction at higher tiers, where it's just suicide to get that close to anything other than another DD
  11. TheJezna

    Invisible smoke firing - in or out?

    Very true, was arguing this long ago. If the modal spotted/invisible mechanic in the game would be replaced with a dynamic system where ships could be gradually more or less visible depending on range, size, weather, smoke (both artificial and from gunnery) and by implementing a more realistic and difficult gunnery model, Destroyers would have survivability much more like in reality. It would also make a small target at high speed very difficult to hit with large caliber artillery at close range which would encourage DD's to aggressively go for close range attacks, especially vs BB's. I think something like that would make the game more enjoyable for everyone and make game balance better. Now, rather than trying to push cruisers into support duties by giving them magical radar and sonar, they would just be good at fighting DD's out of the box. And BB's no longer would have to play around torpedoes suddenly appearing out of nowhere, rather they would have to frantically try to hit attacking DD's before they get to close to hit.
  12. quoted post removed [edited]
  13. TheJezna

    Radar Consumable

    DDs never "ruled supreme" for most of the game USN DD's haven't been viable as anything else than a gimmick. For a while they got pretty good and pretty balanced in most ways. Soviet DD's, lacking that versatility was usually a bit less powerful, still playable though. Then there's the IJN DDs, who were indeed powerful when unchecked. However, in the last weeks before radars it seemed USN DDs were getting more common on high tiers which is excellent for limiting IJN DD power. The radars however misses the mark and hurt US DDs way more than IJN ones. Sure, you can shoot underpowered torps from your Gearing every 2.5 minutes at long range, hoping to hit stuff, or invest in maximizing your mortar range to sit at invisifire range desperately trying to hit something, neither being a real option. It doesn't matter by the way that radars are uncommon, the risk of being spotted with no possibility to hide eliminates every play but the above two. Thus this change removes the most effective counter to IJN DDs, while doing much less to those DDs themselves, totally failing to solve the problem while making the game worse and less dynamic at the same time.
  14. TheJezna

    Crossing the T working as intended

    A lot of good points have already been made. Crossing the T, or even more preferably, crossing in the middle of the enemy line was an early age of sail or earlier tactic perfected in the "Ships of the Line" (guess why they were called that) that was the peak of sailing Man-o-War development. Ships were most heavily armed and armored to the sides, thus could bring most guns to bear from the side and would do most damage hitting the stern or bow. Managing to maneuver your line to cross the enemies would allow each of your ships in due order to fire both their broadsides into the stern/bow. One thing that has always held true when it comes to navies and naval commanders is that they are keen on tradition and not always the quickest to embrace change. Thus, the linear thinking of naval tactics stuck around, even once it started to make less sense, as seen, even into WWII in some cases. By the late 19:th and early to mid 20:th century the benefits of and possibilities to "cross the T" diminished. The final nail was how air replaced gunnery as the decisive delivery of firepower which made a traditional line astern formation more of a drawback than anything else. The envisioned massive fleet engagements that naval commanders had in mind and had drilled their men in executing was at this time very rare and the Battleships vs Battleships battles was very few and rarely decided by Battleship gunnery. In the European theatre Germany could never contend with the Royal Navy and in the Pacific the IJN kept their Battleships out of action for that final massive confrontation that never happened, and the US battleships basically only performed carrier escort missions or shore bombardments. So, the line astern formations, and the maneuvers and tactics associated was really an anachronism by the late 19:th century, kept being practiced and occasionally executed not primarily out of the old reasons, rather from a combination of tradition, facilitating communication and battle awareness for the commander etc before radios, radars etc became common. By the time of WWII there was very few reasons to maintain this doctrine, but it did take some time before all naval commanders understood. Modern naval doctrine contains no notion of linear formations, rather it revolves around the concept of battle space and where the two main deciding factors in task force formation are defense against missiles and defense against submarines, both aiming to eliminate the risk of either of those weapon systems making contact with the carrier or landing ship.
  15. TheJezna

    British DD on its way in

    Well, looking at the ships in game it's rather the time period from about 1895 up until the end of WWII, in some cases a couple of years more. So it would be quite a surprise if they wouldn't be able to find some pretty decent ships in the navy that was by far the world's largest throughout most of the time period the game portraits. One thing that does become apparent once starting to look at other navies than the ones already in game is that there are many ships that will not translate well into the game. RN Destroyers are a prime example, but it goes for all RN ships to some extent. They just didn't have 6x5" mini cruisers with 10+ torpedo tubes. This doesn't mean they were bad though, only that the game doesn't factor some things that was critical to ship design decisions in reality. British ships in general and destroyers in particular were renowned for their excellent seaworthiness and endurance; since a main concern for the Empire was that force had to be projected far and wide, it was more important to build ships that could get anywhere in the world and take action in any condition than to have the largest number of guns or the biggest shells. This payed off in numerous actions where foul conditions simply forced any smaller enemy ship to retire, whereas the RN destroyers carried on. It also had positive effects on morale over long deployments, not losing ships to breakdowns at critical times etc. Another thing that invalidates a lot of destroyers from the game is the fact that destroyers are the smallest ships included. In reality, many engagements involved forces where destroyers were the largest, fastest and most heavily armed ships on the scene, and if there was a cruiser it was akin to a capital ship. A 34 kts destroyer with 3x102 mm guns may not seem that scary, but if you are in a Corvette that tops out at 24 kts and has 1x76 mm and 2x40 mm guns and a couple of machine guns as your main armament that destroyer is pretty much your worst nightmare. No submarines also of course limits the roles destroyers can take on in game. If the smallest thing you are going to encounter is another destroyer you'll want as many hard hitting and fast firing guns as possible combined with extreme maneuverability and armor to boot. Never mind that everyone on board will get seasick if the wind get's over 3 m/s, half the crew have pneumonia from having to sleep in ice cold, water logged bunks for three months or are malnourished since the stove broke down 4 weeks ago, none of those things make a difference in game anyways. "What, subs can sail right under us since we are to large and making to much noise to use our sonars effectively and our depth charges are crap?" Don't worry, there are no subs in the game. Food and medical supplies running out since our 6 machine-gun 5" shells require so large magazines? Lolwut? Not saying I have a solution for this, just pointing out that the game's focus on a rather limited aspect of what wartime naval action is about also makes many ship capabilities unnecessary and thus many ships less valuable than in reality.
×