Jump to content

AnotherDuck

Players
  • Content Сount

    2,930
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    7510
  • Clan

    [IRQ]

About AnotherDuck

  • Rank
    Lieutenant Commander
  • Insignia
    [IRQ]

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

2,065 profile views
  1. AnotherDuck

    Proposal: punishment for low-performers

    And that one thing that causes Ranked to be far more toxic than regular Randoms. Rewarding the best player in the losing team leads to damage farming and selfish play. Most xp doesn't mean best player. So how do you suggest changing the xp system so that the actually best player gets the most xp, rather than the one who farmed the most damage? With the current system games would break down even faster if you encouraged selfish gameplay over playing for the team.
  2. AnotherDuck

    Radar ships..... Balance??

    The biggest obstacle cruisers have for dealing with DDs has always been the threat of BBs. That's why you want BB cover in a DD, to deal with the cruisers. I mean, if you're dealing with a DD threat, you want the cruisers in front of the BBs, but if you're dealing with a BB threat, you want the BBs in front of the cruisers. More BBs give a more static meta, since they're harder to kill and they have the range and power to act as a threat for a larger area. Fewer BBs mean you'll have more variation in the threats on a map, which means a more dynamic meta that's shows more and bigger differences between games.
  3. AnotherDuck

    Proposal: punishment for low-performers

    Reward playing for the team better than mostly only damage, and you'll get at least a tiny bit towards the right place. Potatoes will potato, but at least try to encourage them to be slightly less potato. Oh, you can be elitist without the groundwork to let you rise above the masses. Elitist is a mindset, not a skillset.
  4. AnotherDuck

    Radar ships..... Balance??

    In any way it's redesigned, it has to make players, and by players I mean non-CV players, appreciate the presence of CVs in the game. That's not currently the case.
  5. AnotherDuck

    Radar ships..... Balance??

    CVs are toxic to the game and should be deleted or reworked again. Radar doesn't impact good DD players much anyway. But the question depends on what kind of counter you're talking about, and when it is in the game. I'm not sure what you're referring to. Radars reduce the biggest threat against smoking up. Even if you can still get within range, the longer range you torp from the lower the chances of hitting, so it's still effective for reducing that threat. And yes, we've had the same problem since radar was introduced. Even after all this time, it hasn't changed. A Mino is probably the easiest target to blap in smoke without radar. Hit him once or twice, and he doesn't dare to do sh**, if he's still alive. I'm not arguing that radar is overpowered, so that end argument is a strawman, or irrelevant at best. But the argument is always about the amount of radars, not the balance of them. If there's a balance, then there would be a number that's enough before non-radar cruisers would be better. But that argument never shows up. It's always regardless of numbers, more radars is always better. Well, if you listen to WG's spreadsheets, radar doesn't actually impact the game significantly. Considering how radar strikes far harder against poor players than against good players, I can see some reason in it, despite their track record. That's also why I never use the above argument other than showing why it's not a good argument. I'd like to see no radar and fewer BBs per game, so cruisers don't get immediately blapped as often if they try to do something that isn't hiding or sniping. That's better for the game, IMO. The problem there is that WG panders to BBs, which is especially apparent once they limited DDs to 4 per game. It's much better for the game to have 6 DDs in a match than 5 BBs.
  6. AnotherDuck

    Radar ships..... Balance??

    When the Russian cruisers were added, I believe. Because it illustrates the impact radar had. That hasn't really changed. You're guessing what happens if certain changes are made, and those guesses go against what's actually happened. I have no idea what you said since I don't remember your name, but no, it isn't. It's a mechanic that was added onto the game as a band-aid to fix a problem. Since you admit you don't even know what the game was like without radar, you don't know the difference between what the game was built around, and what was tacked onto it. Okay, got it. You just have misplaced ideas of what balance is and propose something that doesn't actually decide games. With all of the above in mind, I'm not sure this is going to go anywhere.
  7. AnotherDuck

    Radar ships..... Balance??

    Sure, if your reload is longer than the radar duration, you can only hit once. If it isn't, you can hit twice most of the time. It doesn't take long to aim and fire at a DD in a cruiser. If you don't aim in the general direction of the DD when you start the radar, you've already screwed up, so if you miss out on a shot then, it's all on you. Those torps don't hit particularly hard, especially with torpedo protection. You can dodge or mitigate gun fire in a BB, and shells move at light speed according to your level of exaggeration.
  8. AnotherDuck

    WG should reduce Yamato's citadel

    Yes, BBs are the easiest ships to play. They allow by far the most mistakes the least punishment. DDs and cruisers can in many situations be blapped to port. For an equal result BBs have to screw up so badly that other ships would be sent to port from their next game as well. GK is probably the only ship that deserves her hard-to-hit citadel. The German BBs were the only ones designed with that in mind. Others got it on top of a balanced ship, which added to power creep. Both of those are wrong together. Sure, you can play a significant portion of the game at long range. The guns are accurate enough for that. But at long range enemies aren't nearly as likely to hit that weak spot, so you can easily get away with showing enough broadside to get all three guns firing. This is also what you do if you don't sit at a single location. It's not a fast ship, but not that slow either. At closer range bow-tanking is better. It makes you less attractive of a target, which improves survival, and you can more easily hit enemy ship weak spots for massive damage. As I've mentioned before, that can be done up to very close ranges, including brawling that doesn't go into drive-by mode. In situations where you can bow-pen the opponent while she can't bow-pen you, you're in a pretty good spot. That's the power of the Yamato overmatch.
  9. AnotherDuck

    At which tier should you no longer be a total tool?

    It depends on what you mean by "should", since there will always be tools in T10, and I don't think they should be disallowed. I would say that it's in your best interest to learn the basics and some more advanced mechanics by T6, give or take. The game starts being more punishing towards mistakes at T7, so if you haven't learned it by then, you might want to spend some more time figuring the game out.
  10. AnotherDuck

    Radar ships..... Balance??

    Pretty much. From real world cases ships are discovered anywhere from beyond the horizon to within a few km in clear weather. Then there's identifying the ship; getting distance, speed, and bearing; and a lot of other details that are a bit inexact. One thing I think could help is having percentage-based detection for radar and sonar (detects ships and torpedoes for instance 50% outside their detectability range), rather than a fixed assured acquisition range. It would still be a binary detected/concealed mechanic, but it would be more realistic without being too complicated.
  11. AnotherDuck

    WG should reduce Yamato's citadel

    There are a lot of adjustments WG has made for gameplay reasons that aren't historically accurate. Accuracy, to pick one thing. Armour and penetration mechanics are also completely made up for the game, and only takes inspiration from real physics. The ships don't move and fight in even remotely realistic ways, since different mechanics allows different options and favours different strategies. Overmatch in particular isn't anything like it would be if it was realistic. Partially as a tool for balance and differentiating ships, and partially because it's easier to program.
  12. AnotherDuck

    WG should reduce Yamato's citadel

    That means Kremlin should be nerfed, not that any other ship should be buffed. I think this would be a good solution. That would also indirectly buff Yamato, since it would be easier to citadel those ships from the bow. Well, drive-by brawling with Yamato is generally a bad idea. Bow-in tanky brawling is generally a much better idea. I'm fine with Yamato's turret traverse, and I use the legendary upgrade. You have to mail a request signed by at least three officers four days in advance to turn the turrets, and if you're lucky with the turret crew not playing gacha games on their phones, you can get the turrets turned in the right direction at least within a week. Or you can just turn the rudder and aim that way, with only a minute or so delay. Jokes aside, the one buff I'd see Yamato get is an improved citadel shape at the bow, so you don't get citadelled so easily from the front if you show what's normally a good angle. Overall, Yamato is one of the best balanced ships in the game. Few if any adjustments from the start, and still reasonably relevant.
  13. AnotherDuck

    Radar ships..... Balance??

    No, that's not good. That never needed a counter, because it was never anything that was imbalanced or overpowered. CVs remove flanking strategies without significant support. Why is flanking a problem that needs removing? Why does the game need to be more static and predictable? And it still leaves BBs border-surfing. They don't get punished for it, because they camp at the far back, where few CVs have the patience to hit ships. That's like saying, "Hey, this new OP Russian BB is a good counter against [insert problem ship here]," while failing to realise it counters everything else too. A counter isn't good if it overreaches its purpose and counters everything else equally well. But you know what is a good counter against island campers? Flanking DDs. Oh, wait, DDs are not allowed to do that. Because it's somehow bad when DDs do it, but not when CVs do it. No. Radar enables smoke camping. Sure, when radar was introduced the smoke meta was pretty bad. Radar made it worse. One part was that radar made it possible to see out of the smoke much more easily. But a more significant part is that radar zones out DDs from being able to effectively torp those smoke clouds, meaning the most significant threat against smoke camping was reduced or removed by radar. High tier games are more stale, campy, and full of lemming trains compared to lower tiers, which isn't exactly a good thing. It's good to require team play, but CVs only require ships to flock together.
  14. AnotherDuck

    Radar ships..... Balance??

    I disagree. I don't see low and mid tier games being dominated by DDs nearly that much. They're also not that hard to deal with. I mean, sure, if you're a worse player than said DD, but that's how it's supposed to be. The problem for BBs to deal with DDs is that they most of the time have to get help with spotting. With that help, the DD ceases to be a significant problem. The problem for cruisers to deal with DDs is if the DD has backup from larger ships, mainly BBs, so the cruisers can't be aggressive enough. But they can still defend well enough, since most of them are at least okay at dodging, and pretty much all of them have hydro. It was mostly added to stop the smoke meta, but it made it worse. It's a effective players you don't need radar against anyway, but not nearly as effective as the players you need something against. Radar is a failed mechanic, almost as much of a fail as the CV rework. Nah, CVs are just as bad for any other ship type. DDs, CLs, CAs, BBs. Doesn't matter. CVs are bad for the game. This assumes DDs are never spotted. A spotted DD you can just blast apart with a BB. All ships are effective against a spotted DD. Honestly, radar doesn't make that much of a difference for good players. The ones who're affected the most are the ones you can deal with without radar if you're competent enough. Missouri with 10 km radar would be even more OP. Currently has 9.5 km, I believe.
  15. AnotherDuck

    AA fire Travelling through hills & mountains

    I'm with @Fat_Maniac about that. I think it's because WG has trouble understanding how mountains work. They're just so complex. So complex, in fact, that figuring out that these solid masses of rock actually, get this, block things, seems unnatural to the average WG dev. (I have a few commas left over, so take them if you need them: ,,,,,)
×