Culiacan_Mexico
-
Content Сount
2,844 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Battles
14993
Everything posted by Culiacan_Mexico
-
New players and HIGH TIER PREMIUMS
Culiacan_Mexico replied to The_Great_SCH's topic in General Discussion
When I was new and absolutely horrible at this, I moved from PvE to PvP... more experience and silver for the same level of poor play. The system is designed to 'force' players into PvP.... regardless of skill or ability. -
New players and HIGH TIER PREMIUMS
Culiacan_Mexico replied to The_Great_SCH's topic in General Discussion
You have a point, but... Two year ago when I was moving through low tier I ran into skilled players, and while it made my life difficult, it did show me possibilities for improving my play. Can the same be said about unskilled players in high tier games? -
New players and HIGH TIER PREMIUMS
Culiacan_Mexico replied to The_Great_SCH's topic in General Discussion
In my opinion 'COOP' is broken. Cooperation is rarely needed and rarely rewarded, plus rewards in general at higher tiers benefit average players moving to PvP. -
New players and HIGH TIER PREMIUMS
Culiacan_Mexico replied to The_Great_SCH's topic in General Discussion
They are allowed to play as they choose... with in reason (Team killing excluded). i just wonder if they ever thought if they were... "... so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should." Dr. Ian Malcom -
New players and HIGH TIER PREMIUMS
Culiacan_Mexico replied to The_Great_SCH's topic in General Discussion
Both XP and credits are poor in mid-high tier games in COOP, unless you do well. Playing poorly in PvP is going to work out better than playing poorly in COOP, plus... other than the very basics COOP doesn't teach you very much with regards to PvP. -
Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"
Culiacan_Mexico replied to Deamon93's topic in General Discussion
-
I think some have achieved Rank 1 in a little over 100 games, while other have take over a 1,000. Reaching Rank 1 is an accomplishment, but how each reach it can very widely between very skilled to just dogged persistence. In randoms you probably want the very skilled player on your team, while the dogged persistent one... perhaps not so much. Full disclose: I am at Rank 12 after playing in two ranked seasons. I could be biased.
-
I did not say everything done in German to deal with past actions is, (well done as I think best), but this is Germany trying to addressing the issue. Not ignoring it.
-
Really? I live in Germany, and that is not what I see.
-
KIDD's p2w AA stronger than any other DD ingame
Culiacan_Mexico replied to Murro_the_One's topic in General Discussion
As a primary DD player... I agree. -
I wonder why there are so many Russian/Soviet ships in game?
-
KIDD's p2w AA stronger than any other DD ingame
Culiacan_Mexico replied to Murro_the_One's topic in General Discussion
How about something in between? Aircraft squadrons have levels of disruption (0-100) based on 'factors', so that a fresh squadron striking a lone ship will be mostly organized, but one flying through a fleet of ships (AA) will be mostly disrupted. Perhaps certain nations could start with higher organization as a balancing tool? -
Surely MM should take Rank into Account?!
Culiacan_Mexico replied to Sicknote1's topic in General Discussion
I don't believe your 'rank' is a good indicator of overall skill. I could be wrong. -
Surely MM should take Rank into Account?!
Culiacan_Mexico replied to Sicknote1's topic in General Discussion
Hardly. As has been pointed out by others, MM distribution of radar ships and DD types between teams is not optimal. -
Low Victory rate? Here's a reason
Culiacan_Mexico replied to General_Hawka's topic in General Discussion
Are you sure Main battery Hit Rate is the core issue you have with this ship? Your stats show MBH somewhat lower than server average, but nothing dramatic. It is your low survival rate that seems to truly stands out, which most likely is causing your overall damage to be fairly low. When I look at you DDs, I see very low survival and damage rates. Positioning is a major key to playing DDs, but it is also important in BBs. Is it possible this is your core issue? Battles WR Dmg Sh☠ Srv MBH Dunkerque 249 43.78% 29,606 0.5 14% 26% Server Average 52.28% 46,132 0.8 33% 28% -
If detonations are needed, why can I choose to install a flag and be totally immune to them? I can not do this with fires, flooding, HE or AP damage. I don't understand WG logic with regards to this mechanism.
-
Q: Are you planning on removing or reworking detonations? Because they suck big time SOURCE A: (Sub_Octavain) No, and we don't think they suck. As this topic was widely raised, we conducted several inquiries, even monitoring "rage quits" (and session time) connection with detonations. And...there is nothing to back up the theory it hurts the players. From the game design PoV, they are also needed. Plus, we added more visual candy for this epic win (or fail) event. Sorry, but they will stay :( From the game design PoV, they are also needed. I don't know why.
-
If radar was the answer to the smoke meta, then why did it get worse? Total Battles (Two months) BB Higher Tier 5512713 41.8% 5 per side CA Higher Tier 4669080 35.4% 4.2 per side CV Higher Tier 354144 2.7% DD Higher Tier 2640621 20% 2.4 per side http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20171021/eu_2month/average_class.html You wrote: ...a DD dieing within the first 2 mins loses games much more than not having this one cap. The match lasts 20 mins a lot can happen there. But if within 3 mins u lose 2 of 3 DD f.e. while the others still have 3 or 4 then u are fucked... The numbers of DDs played have fallen dramatically in the last 18 months do to nerfs implemented towards DD both directly and indirectly by WG. Radar was one of those DD nerfs. How many DDs do I want per game? One just me, but would that be healthy for the game?
-
As a 'fix' to the smoke meta, radar is a failure. At high tier DDs represent only 20% of the ships played. If WG is fine with this level, then there isn't an issue, but if they are not, then shouldn't they look at the changes they have made to the game that are 'anti-DD' in nature? Just an addon: ...Ppl should play those "OP Radar Cruiser"... I don't think in the past Shimas were OP, but the had a negative effect on game play. I think the current 'radar sees through land mass' has the same effect. Others I am sure disagree.
-
Non-sequitur.
-
Isn't radar an anti-DD tool?
-
Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"
Culiacan_Mexico replied to Deamon93's topic in General Discussion
So, you are saying buy early? -
6.12 marks the end of World of Warships
Culiacan_Mexico replied to Charger76's topic in General Discussion
I wouldn't mind seeing short duration smoke, but more charges... just for that reason.- 233 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- smoke
- concealment
- (and 3 more)
-
6.12 marks the end of World of Warships
Culiacan_Mexico replied to Charger76's topic in General Discussion
Now that is an interesting opinion. I would have thought most who play this game paid considerable attention to their own stealth, unless they only played a few select ships. Does that mean a BB player who specs for stealth is abusing it? How do you abuse game features when you use them as the developer intended? WG designed a game where some ships are balanced based on the use of offensive smoke. so the problem isn't smoke, but game design; with the Farragut a clear example. WG claims no ship was ever balanced based on stealth fire, they do not make that claim about offensive smoke. --------------------------------------------------------------- Changes in Ship Detection Mechanics Firing out of Smoke Screen has always been standard tactics of destroyers and light cruisers equipped with a Smoke Generator. However, Smoke Screen as a means of attack wasn't intended for heavy cruisers and battleships. -
If WG removed it (from non-premium ships) it would be admitting a mistake; a rather large game design/balancing mistake, but I don't believe they see it as a mistake. Altering it might happen sometime in the future.