AkosJaccik

Players
  • Content count

    247
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    8242

1 Follower

About AkosJaccik

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Birthday
  • Portal profile AkosJaccik

Recent Profile Visitors

66 profile views
  1. True. Basically what I wrote somewhere above is the same: "It's not a big deal for western Europe", so of couse there isn't a "very vocal disagreement". (Here, in the east, I bet you most people, while they would probably figure it out, didn't even see the rising sun flag with the rays once yet, let alone be vocal about it.) And I reside not even that far east, I'd be curious about the opinions of someone from for example the Baltic states. Or some poles about Katyn. It's also an interesting issue that apart from the west not having a direct experience with the SU, the Soviet Union won the war, they sent delegates to Nürnberg, and basically the entire historical-cultural narrative of blame is wrapped around the axis. Do note that I am not saying anything silly like "the west denies war crimes of the soviets" or that they show no empathy, I'm just thinking that they are not "educated" (probably not the best english word for that) to care, and that's completely fine. But if it's justified that "Maybe the soviet flag is controversial somewhere else, but here noone really cares, it's not in the public speaking", then saying the same about the japanese flag is also understandable.
  2. I have to agree. Maybe some workaround could be implementing a possibility in the game options for these flags or symbols to be switchable, and putting a line in the EULA (which noone reads anyways) about it as some form of legal shield. This would be weird and somewhat petty maybe, but it would be at least hard(?) to nitpick. Whatever the hell offends you or your country - you can fine-tune it and be done with it, and it's your responsibility. WG could wash their hands. It won't happen though, as the "oh god, these are communists!"-part of their customer-base is relatively small and/or quiet (and why wouldn't they be?), so the situation is far too cozy for them to do anything other than pointing at mods. ...but yes, over here flying the hammer and sickle, or having a red star on the Murmansk is legally the same as having a Bismarck with a huge frickin' swastika painted on the bow.
  3. Indeed that's the case. Generally speaking "totalitarian symbols" are forbidden, but the 335. § of the Penal Code lists them in particular too: those are the swastika, the SS-runes, the hammer and sickle, the red star and the arrow-cross (basically the coat of arms of the hung. nazis). The second paragraph states that depicting these isn't against the law if it is for educational, historical, art, scientific purposes or for public information like news. None of the above seem to fit a game made for profit. Sadly enough, this is also a tool for politics, for example a few months ago the government started to screw with the Heineken beer factory for using the red star. It was no problem for years and years, but then economic interests happened... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ It's very interesting to talk about western europeans about this, because for them soviet symbols tend not to be "a big deal", and I understand that as for me in turn, the rising sun flag isn't a "big deal", but as Eastern Europe has a... hm. a bit of a rugged history with the SU, it's "somewhat" a rougher issue. I'm certain it's the same in Asia for a very good reason. (More precisely for me in particular symbols in general are "not a big deal", the people under them however...) The isse is in tl;dr: Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi.
  4. My "problem" (obviously not a problem, but I don't know a better english word for that) is the usual inconsistency, they have exactly zero issue with slapping the hammer-and-sickle onto the red ships regardless of the laws of many countries. Neat thing would be if we are either concerned just about everyone's laws (at least, if not their feelings), or noone's. But of course, I know full well the reasoning, so it's whatever really. The solution is one mod away.
  5. "WG dev team seams to IGNORE that Soviet Union was SAVED by the Greeks -as Pravda mentioned in 1941- because delayed Barbarrosa campaign by SIX months!" - well, that's new! ...to put it this way.
  6. I'm just in for the dakka!
  7. Oddly enough, I feel similarly about the emblem on the turret. The paintjob is "meh", but I mean, this is a game where Ocean Soul is a thing, so whatever. But that huge bling-bling on the turret, uh. It's like she is the "tuning car" of a 20 yr old village boy, with cheap, tasteless body parts and the usual "No fear" sticker. I mean, come on, if the same exact thing would be an anime ship, people would be on the ceiling.
  8. When they first introduced this achievement, I thought that 50% is borderline impossible. ...turns out it all depends on your team.
  9. Huh. I guess that explains this...
  10. That's a fair point. I can live with that of course, I brought this up more like an example for the lack of consistency and clear vision, which seems to be a tendency continuing, looking at - first thing that came into my mind - the shenanigans with RN BBs, or looking at the current arguments about the smoke changes.
  11. Excuse my little offtopic addition. Last night I talked with my friend about what we know about the dispersion mechanics in WoWs. To do so, I researched a lot of sources, including a transcript of a podcast with S_O, where he states besides other things: "Vertical dispersion is not shown in the client, not secret but would be too much information for the average player." Alright. So, we do have in the client for example the initial speed of the shells, but this means barely anything, as other factors that would determine armor penetration and/or targeting (Krupp value, drag coefficient etc., Yorck AP says hi) are not. We do have in the client for example the max. horizontal dispersion, but this alone means barely anything, as other factors that would determine shell grouping at various distances (distance where the "break point" in the linear function appears, sigma values, vertical dispersion etc.) are not. Because these "...would be too much information for the average player." I sense the same pattern as with almost anything else: lack of consistency. I understand the need to "keep it simple", I also understand(?) if there are game mechanics that are sort-of kept in secret (no, frankly, I do not understand it), but part of the "skill" should be "knowledge", and it's availability is severely lacking. In my book an info panel about ships should be a "little bit" more than five sentences about them. God forbid people would start reading even twenty sentences about the history, and maybe they would even analyze diagrams, anything can happen in this crazy world. Admittedly, the armor viewer was a grand leap in the right direction, I just don't get it why don't they finish the job. Would not everyone care about "this level of understanding of the game?" Big deal, there are people who are not interested in the manual drops for CVs - it's not about "frightening away" people, it's about giving more info optionally for those who seek it. And that's about mechanics those are already in the game. I just can't see the structure anymore.
  12. :D Ah, yes. That was probably the point of no return for the financial group, when they realized that "Holy sh*t, this works like a charm!" As such, I am more than ready(?) for many many more instances of this: "See, what you want is actually in the tech tree, but due to arbitrary reasons which is good for the game because we say so, we had to "balance" it a bit. ...disregard the fact that the actual, historical ship which we put behind paywall works just as good, if not better, than the one we are defending right now."
  13. I think there are deeper problems lingering here. That BBs can bully cruisers, it's not necessarily and inherently wrong, the problem is, barely anything can bully back. WG seems to favour the dakka-dakka gunship destroyer play, neutering torp DD-s, and what remains still, gets radared and hydro'd to oblivion, and CVs are a semi-extinct race. And when something still works as they should, then topics come to life like "AP bombs (and CVs in general) are OP", or "Kamikaze is OP" etc. Basically cruisers are dealing with battleships because at this point they have to, but in a perfect world, they should get away with it if they are not good at it. But that would require the other classes being represent and capable.
  14. Since blind shooting is already a thing into smoke, this would make it even easier. Since the debuff would come from target selection, all you need to do is target with the crosshair as you would normally do, but before shooting drop the target acquisition with 'X'. This would result in a "normal", untargeted, not-debuffed salvo to a visible target.
  15. Gentlemen, ad hominems are not necessarily the best way to overcome differences or help advancing the game in a better direction. Plus, in a way, both arguments are valid.