-
Content Сount
4,996 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Battles
21881 -
Clan
[OM]
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Everything posted by ghostbuster_
-
Sink the wows-stats (XVM for warships)
ghostbuster_ replied to MADcompany's topic in General Discussion
i wouldnt seek for them. if i have both in good position for shooting i would focus on the good one. but i wouldnt keep shooting at him if i got better target.- 306 replies
-
- wows-stats
- XVM
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with:
-
Sink the wows-stats (XVM for warships)
ghostbuster_ replied to MADcompany's topic in General Discussion
nonsence...- 306 replies
-
- wows-stats
- XVM
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with:
-
Okey seriously im pink after 1 accident
ghostbuster_ replied to Shizzlesticksz's topic in General Discussion
ok i got it you did it not on purpose but it was a stupid mistake and if there were such a punishment system you would look around twice. got it? -
Okey seriously im pink after 1 accident
ghostbuster_ replied to Shizzlesticksz's topic in General Discussion
yeah it can be also nice. sometimes ramming people can cause him to show broadside to enemy. but secondaries is 100% RNG. it wouldnt make sence to give punishement because he had less luck. but shelling people, torping people, ramming people are not RNG. and everyone must be careful before thay shoot or lauch topedos. 1 month is too harsh. but if he repeats that multiple times than maybe. im on crusade against moron torp spammers. i see everyday people launching torpedos at max range or max range+ . they dont care if there are friendly ships or not. its is simple, do not lauc torpedos from 2. line. if you want to torp go at the front line ant torp. -
Okey seriously im pink after 1 accident
ghostbuster_ replied to Shizzlesticksz's topic in General Discussion
yes, it is for makeing people more aware of their position. if you got banned from that CA for 24 hours, im sure you would be much more careful next time. -
Okey seriously im pink after 1 accident
ghostbuster_ replied to Shizzlesticksz's topic in General Discussion
yeah before you torp look around. even i saw that dd coming from replay at the beginning of the video. after that situations people have to get banned from that ship for 24 hours. for example you should get banned from that ship, you were playing, for 24 hours because of killing a teammate. -
îm not saying they shouldnt play. they can play. we are talking about [edited], trolls, [edited]. so those people should play on an other platform first. if they gain skill they can get in a higher skill platform.
-
Sink the wows-stats (XVM for warships)
ghostbuster_ replied to MADcompany's topic in General Discussion
XVM is a good thing. you can see to whom you can trust in that battle. for example if there is a tripitz with an average damage of 16k. let him be and cover some other necessary ships.- 306 replies
-
- wows-stats
- XVM
-
(and 3 more)
Tagged with:
-
[edited]
-
[edited]
-
team battles. its also nonsence. they are limited between 8 and 11. it doesnt make any sence. ok they did it due to plaer number on server. but make it whole day avaible and let people just wait for battle. i am doing everything to win battles but im the one who should leave? (i guess you want to hang out with [edited]only) how about forcing people to play co-op until a skill level? it would also be a solution for educating people. for example, wg can find out a min. main battery hit ratio, min exp, min survival ratio and min damage for all sips. so when a player starts to play this game. he has to play co-op first and he must get that min. average damage-exp, min survival ratio and min main battery hit ratio. after then he can join to random battles. that would make us have more educated players in randoms. there are tons of solutions for getting rid of that morons. btw after hearing that shimakaze example you are still defending those? and it was only one example. i get too many of them everyday.
-
wasnt i also in those battles? ^^
-
IJN DD fail torpedoes - When WG listens to bad BB players instead of good ones
ghostbuster_ replied to G01ngToxicCommand0's topic in Archive
well it depends. 8km+ shima wrecks benson. shima shell arc is perfect. and alfa damage is also high. dont underestimate shima guns. btw it doesnt mean that you shouldnt fire your guns to bbs or cas just because you are a torpedo boat. if you have the oppotunity, shoot them and set them on fire. i saw shima players who dont shoot their guns even thou they are in smoke. dont be afraid to use your guns.- 133 replies
-
- BB whiners
- torpedo detection range
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
I remember wrecking moskva from front with my yammy many times. A full hp moskva. After 3 salvos it is history.
-
What is determining a “good player?” (he/she)
ghostbuster_ replied to Ferry_25's topic in General Discussion
i guess, you do that mistakes much more than aerroon does ;) -
IJN DD fail torpedoes - When WG listens to bad BB players instead of good ones
ghostbuster_ replied to G01ngToxicCommand0's topic in Archive
so i should believe you instead of WG staff?- 133 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- BB whiners
- torpedo detection range
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
IJN DD fail torpedoes - When WG listens to bad BB players instead of good ones
ghostbuster_ replied to G01ngToxicCommand0's topic in Archive
well watch that damn video i posted there and then make comment. they said there why wg changed the shimakaze torpedos.- 133 replies
-
- BB whiners
- torpedo detection range
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
IJN DD fail torpedoes - When WG listens to bad BB players instead of good ones
ghostbuster_ replied to G01ngToxicCommand0's topic in Archive
the change was not because of bad BB players. WG changed the torpedos because of bad IJP DD players (long range torp spammers). so if you are looking for a guilty one, you should target the bad IJP DD players not the bb players. edit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2VYuUXulK0 Q&A section watch this and you are gonna know why wg changed the torpedos- 133 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- BB whiners
- torpedo detection range
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Insulting and swearing in chat is ok now, says WG
ghostbuster_ replied to the_dude33's topic in Archive
for language it is harsh. but being bot! we see bots all around but nothing is done for those things. there cant be any other excuse. 160 battles in a day and 9k average damage? it is definitely a bot! they also sail around and do nothing. what proof does your support need to do something about them? -
japonlarla oynarken karsi tarafa yan tarafini gostermemen cok onemli. zirhini mumkun oldugunca acilitutmalisin. benim tavsiyem fusoyu acman yonunde olur. en iyi savas gemilerinden birisi benim gözümde.
-
no they dont have that right. if it wasnt a team game, they would have the full right. but sadly it is a team game and he gasps the other 11 peoples efforts and the time they gave to this game. so no they dont have right. and it is really funny to defend that [edited]. i had a game yesterday with my roon. we were 3 ships left: me cv and a shima. the enemy had 4 ships left. cv, almost dead shima hich used his torpedos 15-20 sec ago, almost dead tirpitz, which were showing his broadside to me and an other ca which were running away. so, there were small difference between team points. i had half of my hp. so what happened? cv mentioned that he is gonna spot shima. i said ok. it was an easy kill. i was raping that tirpitz already. but suddenly i heard torpedo alarm. our [edited] shimakaze torped me. he was trying to torp that tirpitz but i was on way and i was already killing him. so i had to turn to dodge but i took one torpedo. flooting and i lost rudder. than tirpitz finished me. so we were definitely going to win this battle but one [edited] tier x sailing [edited] ruined all of it. and after he torped me he also wrote in chat "go and eat [edited] you puppy" wtf!? i wish i had right to say that [edited] name here but if i do that i become guilty.(nonsence). so you are basicly defending [edited]like that and thats why you are being funny. edit: that shima had nearly 200 exp and he was the second from the bottom. that shima and the last one... those people are sailing top tiers. just epic [edited]. oh btw that tirpitz was nearly 14-15 km away from him!
-
What is determining a “good player?” (he/she)
ghostbuster_ replied to Ferry_25's topic in General Discussion
well i dont know your gameplay. so i cant tell you where you do something wrong. but if you watch those guys i told you, you should be able to find your mistakes. -
Okey seriously im pink after 1 accident
ghostbuster_ replied to Shizzlesticksz's topic in General Discussion
today a [edited] shimakaze torped me but he didnt get pink. he should definitely get one. -
again : "the reason is to orient themselfs to high tier battles. if someone got high tier ships, they must be able to do some basics of this game. they have to know what to do in specific situations. if there were such small sanctions, people would try to get better. they would show some effort. at least they would try to understand some damn basics like not going down to middle on the map two brothers at the beggining of the battle." because if they dont do some basics they disrespect to other peoples efforts. people want to win and they want to show some effort for it. but a [edited]sometimes many [edited]at the same time decide to go down the middle and die in the first 2 mins. (going down to middle on two brothers is just an example for you to understand what i mean.) so by doing that they give an advantage to enemy team for victory. they dont have any right to do that. if this game wasnt a team game, everyone could do whatever they want. but its a team game and you have a responsibility against other players in your team.
-
''Passive'' play by mid to high tier battleships is the meta?
ghostbuster_ replied to thestaggy's topic in Battleships
we were on the new high tier map with dozens of islands. we were in a div with 3 CAs and trying to engage the enemy. but our 2 montanas were at A1 instead of supporting us. there were not only hugging the borer, there were hugging the corner! and why? because of the enemy shimakaze. people are just [edited].
