• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles



About dasCKD

  • Rank
  • Birthday
  • Portal profile dasCKD

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Drowning in salt.
  • Portal profile dasCKD

Recent Profile Visitors

757 profile views
  1. That really doesn't address the problem. The weakness of tier 5-8 cruisers (with exceptions) combined with the uptiering makes the cruiser grind a miserable experience that turns players off trying to grind to the top of the line or grinding any other cruiser lines and, I would wager, is a part of why cruisers are so rare in matchmaking today. Cruiser survivability in those tiers have to be thoroughly looked at, the overmatching mechanic in particular needs an fixing at least for cruisers without smoke screens.
  2. So if I understand correctly, OP fails to perform adequately in the game and criticizes the game instead of self-reflecting and realizing that OP's ability is at fault. I suppose there is some hope in that at least OP realizes that their current performance is inadequate instead of being one of those players who thinks that 40k average damage in a tier X battleship is 'fine'.
  3. It a level of skill to recognize that a tactic is a good one, and more skill to execute and utilize components of the game requires more yet. A game that has any level of skill progression will ultimately create a game client. All he's complaining about is people being mean to people to do things that are objectively poor for the relevant ship such as using the Khabarovsk as a torpedo destroyer. Admittedly the option of being able to do stupid things like that is a problem in the first place, but acting like only those with the knowledge and the skills to utilize it is at fault is just poor form.
  4. I think we should have a map that starts in an archipelago where both teams spawns inside of a gigantic crater. The game starts in high tide and then slowly recedes as the tide goes down, leaving any large ship that is too close to the map border stranded on a coral reef which makes them an easy target for enemy guns.
  5. An entire team of randoms all doing something stupid all at once is perfectly normal and natural. The impossible would have been to carry that team regardless.
  6. This might just be me, but once I had my last tier X ship I kind of dropped off the game until something new comes out like an event. Half of the gameplay, arguably more, in WoWS is the grind and the credits don't build up nearly as quickly as it does when I'm grinding.
  7. There is a lot to be said about team damage. War Gaming has made it clear that they would like to make it so that players are careful about what they do so they won't remove team damage altogether, but its persistence means that it's easy for oblivious players to seriously hurt their team's chances of winning by accidentally killing or severely damaging allies that are, statistically, superior to them and a higher benefit to their team alive. It's worse once the team damager incurs a pink status that removed not one but two players from the team roster, potentially with no enemy input. The enemy won't necessary be happy either, being robbed of the damage and kills they potentially could have received. Admittedly, War Gaming has done many things to deal with team damage. It is one of the few things in the game that was ubiquitously well received by the community. The mechanic that hurts the person who has damaged their team and turned pink means that at least the worst offenders can only ruin the situation for their team in the worst way so many times. Even so, having a game ruined at all at no fault to the player whose game is being ruined is not good for the game. I therefore would like to suggest a mechanic that reflects ALL of the damage being caused by the team damager onto their own ship, as a percentage function of the damage that they would have done to the allied ship if they were an enemy ship. This has several benefits over the current system. Firstly, in fully punishes the griefers who hold back the damage they do to allied ships to slip underneath the current system's threshold. Secondly, it means that newer players will be receiving damage to their own unit from an action that is psychologically much simpler to comprehend, causing damage to themselves rather than the more abstract (albeit only slightly so) damaging the team's chances at winning. Thirdly, it means that those who really have done nothing wrong won't be punished for their actions.
  8. They should have a mechanic that transfer all of the 'unneeded' credits automatically to my account, along with 'unneeded' doubloons.
  9. They're both pretty terrible, but the Izumo is probably better just for the fact that her guns are a little better behaved. Be warned though, that thing is carrier bait. Not that the FDG isn't when you're up against Taihos and Essexes.
  10. The Fiji is probably the most powerful tier 7 cruiser in the game, even factoring in the Flint and the Belfast whilst the Minotaur is a formidable tier X cruiser. There is also no cruiser tree in the game as good at ripping destroyers to pieces as the British. It's really quite evident that the British are more than powerful enough without high explosives.
  11. No, her turning radius is perfectly adequate for a ship her length. The main issue I have with the ship is that she's a ship you'd want to get into destroyer brawls often, but you can't keep that if you keep bleeding health. A heal will fix that.
  12. I think the Akizuki should get a heal.
  13. Give her Zao accuracy and Hindenburg RoF :D
  14. Destroyer DFAA and DFAA in general is too powerful when it comes to DPM buff, but the Kidd is hardly the biggest offender. Quite frankly, the Kidd looks like a pretty well balanced for a tier 8 premium in most respects and I would have gotten her, if not for my pathological hatred for tier 8 destroyers. A affliction mostly derived from my time grinding the Kagero and Z-23.