Zathras_Grimm

Stats can also show how good a ship is (range, concealment, torp distance and speed etc). I did explain in my previous post and that is why I said with the ship stats along with the damage stats you have a reasonable idea of the player base skill for that class or tier level. All stated in my last post.

That's because you don't explain. You rant and use your little hate tactics like calling people children, [edited], flat worms and I'm sure a number of other school ground insults you have picked up. Calling in assistance from people because explaining why you are right is getting so weary some (that's such an obvious but poor attempt). Yes, I am happy for someone to explain to me what point you were making that was different to my points; especially the time where you used stats to claim stats were not reliable (so how do you prove the stats are unreliable then; where does your source of all knowing truth come from?). Just seen Ghostbusters post. Correct, stats don't give every bit of information about ships, but the stats were introduced to show that torpedoes were not the god killing weapons that some were claiming (at any tier). So, do you refute the use of the stats for this or do you agree? If you don't agree then fine (but please don't use them in future if all of a sudden they support what you are saying). If you agree then maybe consider the fact of torpedoes being OP is not a case here and other factors could be causing the difficulties you and some others are encountering. Also if you use the stats from how the ship performs (Armament range, detection range, speed etc.), along with other game performance stats (kills, wins etc), you may not get an irrefutable picture, but I would argue you get an indication of how the particular ship is performing. If the ship is an absolute monster, but is underperforming then you can look towards a player base. If the ship is crap on stats yet it is doing well then again this gives an indication as to how the players are performing. So why is that any different to what anyone else on the forum is doing and why does it make one point of view the undisputable fact, resulting in insults if you don't agree? Again, you want to support a certain person's behaviour, go for it. We have the class (DD), we have the torpedo damage (around 19%), we have the other supporting HE AP scores and the other tier levels showing no real spike in torp performance. All being used to address the subject topic. On the other side we have the I know it is right and you are children for thinking any different. Well I am sorry if that argument doesn't sway my opinion. Richard made a point (without insults) that garnered responses; instead of asking other to be polite on his behalf, maybe XTHD could try to be polite for himself. This will sound insulting so I will apologise, I really think he is a child with the constant insults and attempts to put others down (if he is then this part of my post will not help any; if he isn't I'd ask him to look back at his posts and just read some of the comments he made (they are laughable, but still said to cause offence)).

So he didn't zig-zag knowing he was fighting a DD who would fire torps, he didn't decide to join his team knowing that he would have to hunt down the unseen enemy and he didn't use his spotter plane? Not sure the point you are making, he had 3 choices that he could have made (not even including if he had captain skills) and he didn't choose one. To me this contributed to his death more than the 'power of the torpedo'.

No, I didn't say DDs couldn't be hunted down by CAs, of course they can. I said that they shouldn't believe they can hunt down a DD without the chance of getting hurt or killed. I then said that if they choose to try and run that the DD will torp all day, so what is there to lose; go forward and stand a good chance of killing a DD or run and be bothered by a DDs torps all day. Your spotting example really isn't valid; as far as I am aware the CAs at every tier have never been able to automatically detect DDs, whether they are the counter to them or not. Their job is to hunt the DDs, not be given their prey on a plate. Of course a DD and a CA that can see each other will end up with the CA winning the majority of the time. That is why the CA has to hunt. Can't do sh*t? Of course they can, first spread of 15 torpedoes turn into them and towards where they were fired, you have the next 15% game time to find the DD before the next set of torps. If there is more than one DD use more than one CA. As stated, the stats certainly don't indicate a much higher torpedo kill rate at high tier than any other tier.

Well done? I think you will find that I was stating that stats indicated they were a different player group; you decided to tell me that stats are 'unreliable'. So are they reliable or not as sometimes you use them and then other times they are unreliable? If you changed direction as much as your use of stats I guarantee you wouldn't find torpedoes so difficult. Oh, and your constant insults to the DD population are really having effect (it really lets us know that every time you try to insult us, it's because you feel we've still gotten one up on you in some way. Sad and bitter really as no one seems to have the hate for you that you seem to have for others)

Fair point RichardNixon, although stats can help to indicate a situation. For example this is about torpedoes being OP (with the previous lower detection buff range and now the upcoming speed one) Yet stats do not show torps as the real killing factor in the game (although it doesn't mean they aren't damaging ships badly enough and just not getting the kill). It is definitely altering the gameplay people are used to in the top tiers though (or at least some feel that this is the case and some do not). I think the support thing with the stats is the real issue to me. There are 2 parties that both sit in opposite corners some say torps are bad in high level (from all class ships) and some say they aren't (from all class ships); so what do the stats support? At present there does not seem to be an indication that torpedoes are killing any more at high tiers than lower ones, but the speed change may change that. However an indication does not a fact make! So it comes down to people discussing their thoughts on the issue. Thanks for getting the topic back on a 'discussion level' (that includes me lol)

I think the problem is that everything seems to point to DDs not being as good in the statistics area. Therefore it is hard for some to understand all those that state they are the 'beasts' of the game. If there are a lot of undetectable adversaries of course it is going to be annoying; but the minute they are found their HP is woeful compared to other ships. I believe that like a cornered animal most players don't want to hunt for the hidden DDs as they could be sunk (no one wants to be sunk early in a game), but if you are not prepared to go forward and hunt the opposition then they will have fun torping you all day. You will lose ships in such a battle, AND YOU SHOULD, but in the end with torp reload rates you have just as much chance to hunt down the enemy and take them out as they do you (especially if you have a number off DDs as well). You have no chance if you run into a corner.

But that's why I gave the example that it could be that there are a higher number of players that have experience that have won them earlier, hence the different stats for 2 identical ships. Lets just say he didn't agree. But does he have to insult or rage just because he doesn't agree? Honestly, if he is a troll he is close to doing a good job, as he promotes a defensive response by most because he is so rude. I don't think he is but that probably makes it worse. I have met far better wind up merchants so his insults give me a chuckle and that is why I don't mind chatting about it, but honestly his hate for DD players is quite evident on these forums and another. Anyway, to address your comments. If the 'pure numbers' put the BBs higher then why not consider a buff for DDs? I say this with tongue in cheek but it seems many believe that because BBs are the biggest they should sit at the top of the table and it really peeves people when the smallest ship pulls the BBs shorts over its head. And it must feel like that, you are doing everything right and then pow, hit by torps! However, it's exactly the same as a bigger ship getting a citadel hit or a DD getting a detonation after getting hit once; it happens. I actually feel that the game is pretty well balanced, that is why I prefer to wait for stats to at least give an indication to possible imbalance within the game. Others are passionate as they see (or experience) what they feel is a direct imbalance and want action more immediately.

An example which others on the forum have also given there own examples with an opposite viewpoint. Why do their views get met by a tantrum? Agree to disagree. Come on, someone labelling other players that play DDs as idiots or worse. That is poor to say the least. But again I uphold your right to support his stance on other players. Edit: I honestly feel sorry for him; his blood pressure must be through the roof lol.

So how do you know the stats are unreliable? Edit: Sorry, silly me, there is no way you can prove your own arguement that stats are unreliable as you would have to use stats to do so. Otherwise it's just conjecture (big word for a child; I used a dictionary lol). So why is your conjecture any more right than anyone elses?

I do like the way you are always right Tell me how come the stats about the ARPs and normal Kongo stats are ok to use in your arguement, yet the stats that torpedoes are not killing in an OP fashion is not. No disrespect but you used stats to try and prove stats don't matter. I was about to say at least you haven't started insulting people, but I just read your last post. You do not make your point of view any stronger by being rude. Sorry it sounds like I am talking to you like a child and I really don't mean to, but at the moment you're acting like one. Edit: Your point of view is as valid as anyone elses but why be rude? All it does is make people less inclined to understand or consider it (walls of defence and all that ).

I understand this approach and to a certain degree, would agree. CAs are in the middle so to speak (what I mean is the enemy DDs need to get past friendly DDs and CAs to get to the BBs and CVs); they pretty much have all ships taking a pop at them at some point. So to have more CAs would seem fair. The problems I see are: 1. When someone comments in a game about 8 DDs, I can often state straight back 'no problem, as there are an equal number of CAs present'. So is there a real issue with DD numbers? As long as the numbers/type (gunboat/torpboat) are generally even for each side. 2. Can't see it happening but what if you get 1CV and 1 BB and 1DD (or similar)? That leaves 9 CAs; ouch I don't want to be the DD in that game if they decide to play smart. 3. Load times; ok so I would assume wait times will suffer to a small degree. 4. Historical engagement numbers of 'class of ships' aside, as this is a game, in general I wouldn't have too much of an issue if the 9 CAs scenario was realised. I would just have to play a little more careful, but I could still use my stealth. That would go completely if more than 2 CVs were present. But what about the gunboat DDs with no real stealth advantage when they use their guns or torpedoes? Maybe a minimum of 2 for the DD, BB and CVs along with the maximum limit? Now I am not saying there is anything wrong with high numbers of DDs in a game as I really have to be alert in my M'kaze if I'm facing a number of DDs (this is more challenging for me!). I also think those that say 'it's boring' are also being very 'selfish' when the game is automatically labelled boring for all; not for me thank you. What you are really saying is you don't like having to dodge and be wary all the time; well neither do I when enemy CAs and DDs are playing well. I do agree that a better balance will provide a better game for all though.

Can't remember you bringing my stats up. I think you just got annoyed because I hadn't played the tier level you were commenting on. I could understand your approach, if not the circumstances (as I was only asking questions regarding the information you and others who had played at that level had provided, and WG stats). Whether your view is supported by stats or not, they are no less valid than anyone elses. Edit: Are your stats better than mine; I have no idea. I have come across many who have given me a good whooping on this game

OK, so I will admit to making an assumption here but... doesn't it stand to reason that those who won the ARP ships will more likely fall into the seasoned players who have many ship class experience. Granted some may have quickly grinded the classes to be able to stand a chance of winning one, but I don't think it's daft to believe that most who have already won the ship are experienced players. Hence the circumstances of 2 ships that are identical having different stats. Remember when you tried to belittle me on another thread with my stats for other ships. However, you failed miserably because I am very happy to admit the Atago was a premium I bought when I first joined and most other ships I only played to the point of progressing to the next tier. Of course stats for those ships aren't great (although what my stats had to do with quoting facts from posts and the WG website I don't know(?), but I have got used to the 'my stats are better so I must know more than you!' approach used by some). I took the advise of others and left ships like the atago until I grind to that level. Fact is I then found I enjoyed DD play better.

Now to address another point. Please do not pretend it's a wild guess on your part when you state 'IJN DDs attract the weaker side of the player population'. It could be taken as a 'guess' on your part when in fact you have made your points perfectly clear in previous threads and on different sites that you believe IJN DD players 'play with their feet', 'can only use the grey bar' and are 'flat worms'. I believe you also used the phrase 'retarded', but that may have been directed personally at me. Fine, you don't like being killed by DDs; nor do I. However, I tend to think that if I am killed it will be the fact that I made a mistake, the other player was better, a combination of both or just 'one of those things'. I certainly wouldn't call a set of players weak, and then complain that they keep killing me or force me to run away into a corner of a map. Why the need for all the bitterness?

Ok, please step away from the 'I have to score a point here' and I will do the same. 1. My post was a generalisation that sometimes people will make a claim that something is wrong in the game (I even believe I gave the torpedo example). So it was not aimed at anything that you said about the ARP ships: 2. The above is supported by the fact that straight after I wrote the above, I said that when stats point to something different, the people making the claims about the game inbalance don't wish to believe them. As you were using stats to prove your point how did you come to the conclusion that my points were aimed at you? This I guess is my reply to tell you 'no I am not daft' as I was not even addressing your post. If I intend to discuss someones points I will quote their post. That is why your comeback to my post made no sense. Now, 'am I really that daft?' Come on, is there any need to try to put someone down to make your point? If what you are stating is good enough why the need to insult? Maybe it was my laughing smiley (that was actually my intention to show I was completely confused but took it lightly; bemused if you like). My bad and apologies that you took it as an attack to your post. Hopefully most will read the posts we both made and understand that my post was not aimed at yours, but was merely trying to point out a generalisation made by some.

I wouldn't bother with the Torp speed increase anyway; it's hardly a buff! The -20% reduction in torpedo range will leave the weakest DD line more vulnerable to enemy DDs who have double the firepower (or better rate of fire) in the same tier. I believe this is less than a 10% speed increase in most cases. For example the Minekaze's 7km torps will be reduced to 5.6km; well within it's visibility range. Even with max concealment I believe that will only give you a 0.2km window before the enemy spots you. God help you if they have the secondary armament Captain skill or the advanced firing skill that's getting a buff. And CA captain's who zig-zag will have far more of a chance of you entering their detection range and should hurt you bad for doing so! With my wafer thin HP levels and 'spud gun' armament, why would I lose the one thing that works in my favour, concealment? There are precious few IJN DDs that will be able to take benefit from this change (shimy comes to mind). This so called 'buff' will end up getting more IJN DDs killed than allow them to kill more. Approx 10% increase in speed lol, it should be the DDs crying foul with the artillery buffs mentioned above. I feel sorry for any DD that has to be seen to launch torpedoes. Edit: Also nice to know the 1 point AA skill my Fujin has will be reduced by 33% as well; I've just sent the guy manning those guns home on permanent shore leave!

Agree, the new Kamikaze blue looks good, and with the amount of players who will have it I shouldn't get sent to the back of the map by my team mates anymore (as my Christmas dazzle tends to hurt their eyes!).

It always amazes me how one set of players try to insult another set because they are aggrieved by an ability the other has. Of course it takes skill to stay undetected, especially with enemy DDs, Spotter aircraft, CAs (that are willing to hunt you and support their DDs), and CV aircraft. Some games where I am trying to scout for my team in an area with enemy DDs, DBs and bigger ship support it can be a nightmare That's like saying it takes no skill for a BB to sit there and fire at another ship; of course it does as most don't just sit there. It takes skill depending on where you want to hit, which are the best targets to assist your team, ensuring that you keep moving/repositioning (so as not to get torped!).

Ok, been away for a few days but let's see. Your post makes no sense . My quote was giving an example where someone says something about the game and yet the stats don't reflect the point he or she is making. The fact that you then point out the stats about 2 ships, well, it proves my point (i.e when the stats show there may need to be a change , so be it). Well, I guess that's 'Explained' then. And be happy you can wildly fire at a hidden DD and have a chance at hitting him; I have no chance in hitting a ship half way across the map that's firing at me (but I guess that's ok lol). Can't remember your third point sorry. EDIT: Ok, had a quick look. Torpedo soup and the usual complaint about not being able to shoot at a ship that's supposed to be concealed. Again I just say wait till the stats show there is a need to change the mechanics (having talked about the stats of 2 other ships I guess you would agree with that approach(?)).

What you said is irrelevent in this case, as the goal was not to counter your point of view but rather make your perceived stance on the subject an 'unrealistic/ridiculous' polar opposite to his 'very sensible' point of view. It's like quoting an unsupported fact about the game (a ship is OP), until evidence is presented (such as stats), that indicate something different. You will then get the statement 'stats aren't everything'; but on the flipside another piece of evidence (like a video) automatically represents every single game lol. When you look at both then: 1. Video shows both sides were firing a lot of torps (inc CAs). 2. Stats show the majority of torps couldn't have hit. So how are DDs OP? Because they make other ships in the game react to their actions? That is the case for all ships.

Wouldn't those utterly clueless people also sail in a straight line and be hit by more torps as well? The stats are there and do no not indicate an OP situation. Thinking of other games it seems that the Shim acts as a rocket launcher, firing from distance with a number of torps and a long reload. Not much different to a BB firing from a distance with a quick reload! The smaller (DD) ships used to be an annoyance that picked off the odd bad player and maybe score a hit with some of the better players, they also had mediocre Exp points for their efforts. Now they have a chance to get good Exp and hit good players too; why not? Every ship should have as good a chance to kill another ship in what is a game. I'm happy to wait to see what the stats say in the future, because we had these cries when the torpedo concealment and rudder change came in. Edit: The damage stats are a direct 'reflection statistic' that includes all players, to say the bad ones are being hit by AP shells but the good ones are being hit by the torpedoes as the torpedoes are OP! Well, that's just silly.

Does anyone actually have stats to answer the question of whether the DDs have become the monsters of the seas? Not a stats monster myself (as stats don't paint the whole picture), so not aware of what sites are good to get valid information from. The sites I went to showed either CV, CA or DD at the top depending on damage, win rate or kills. If one ship is far better than every other one then fair enough. If it's just the big kids on the block peeved at having their Rse handed to them every once in a while then suck it up. If I'm spotted in my IJN DD then I end up being targeted by half the ships on the map (half of them I cannot see or do anything about either).

Yay, but that's only because I'm sailing around in a Halloween Fuji or Christmas Minekaze; those kids running up and squeezing my nose whilst calling me BoBo the clown can get annoying! As a simple choice there should be a no camo tick box regarding the 'look' of the ship only (all benefits remain), to revert back to grey!

Hmm kind of hostile when my point about rate of fire backed your arguement but hey, if you want to have a grump, go for it. And if everything is so obvious why do you feel the need to explain so much in your posts lol