Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About Hobbes_95

  • Rank
    Leading Rate
  • Insignia
  1. Hobbes_95

    Poll to change irrevocable ranks

    If there were to be another irrevocable rank, it should be at 6-8. Placing it at a league barrier is a very bad idea, because players should drop out again if they are not good enough. Also, there definitely shouldn't be an irrevocable rank anywhere in the top league, because it would lead to players that have reached that rank to take the game less serioulsy, thereby ruining lots of other peoples games. Actually I would embrace another irrevocable rank somewhere from 6 to 8, not too easy to reach from 12, and still enough stars away from the first league.
  2. Hobbes_95

    brainstorming premium/elite captains

    Did you ever want to take out a techtree ship that you did not have a trained commander for? Do you think there would be more regular ships in each game if the captain retraining was more forgiving for regular ships? I for one like most ships in the russian DD branch, and as most people who play them will know, they are not that much fun until you have a 10 point captain. And there are many people who don't want or can't grind high level captains for every ship they like. I have two ideas that I think are worth discussing, but please don't mix them up, because I don't think they would work very well at the same time. I will also try to keep it short, so here we go: 1) Premium capabilities of techtree ships with elite status and premium camo What I really miss with ships I have bought the premium camouflage for is actually playing them. This is because, for example with Tashkent, the Captain has moved on to the Udaloi, and I don't want to grind up a new high level captain for every ship I keep. I know there are players doing this, but I strongly believe they are not the majority. The actual proposal is basically, that you could assign commanders to elite'd techtree ships with premium camo like you do with premium ships. This would open up the possibility to go back to ships you liked if you've already moved on in the techtree. I mainly see one problem with this approach, and that is, that it is invading one of premium ships main aspects that is captain retraining. So it would need a balancing downside. I see 3 possibilities here: - captain assigned to an elite premium camo (epc) ship doesn't earn any xp [stronger downside] - captains in retraining assigned to epc ships don't earn any xp [weaker downside, personal favourite] - captains in retraining cannot be assigned to epc ships [also weaker downside] Of course none of this applies if you "fully" assign the captain to that ship, like normal. Feel free to discuss if you like the overall idea and which downside you would believe to be best, and also if you think the price for premium camos would have to be raised. 2) Actual premium captains I think this second proposal could be slightly more controversial. My idea would be to introduce premium captains that could be assigned to any ship (of the same nation) without retraining. They would have to be bought with doubloons. Also there would have to be a hard cap on earnable skill points, maybe set at a certain amount of skill points from the beginning. In my opinion this hardcap would have to be at 10 points, just enough to be able to pick any skills and be somewhat competitive at higher tiers, and at the same time not overly powerful at lower tiers. Pro: - you can take out any ship without first painfully grinding your captain - you could use them for the lower tiers when starting a new line Contra: - quite a gift to sealclubbers, might distort low tier balance a little If you have an idea for what these premium captains might cost, feel free to share it!
  3. Hobbes_95

    Belfast/Premiums & Ranked

    Well, my point was not exactly that I would prefer a BB heavy meta, just that in my opinion that is or will be the main difference to last season. In Tier 8 ranked mainly BBs (espescially Bismarck) and DDs (Benson) shone, and if you, like me, could only choose from Lexington, Tashkent and Hipper, you were kind of screwed. So for this season I hoped I would have some of the better ships in my port, but with so many Belfasts that you dont see and Shiratsuyus that torp you to death (had a game with 5 dds on both teams yesterday, 3 of the enemies were shiratsuyus, i was in my Scharnhorst, guess what happened), BBs just dont seem to be a good choice. Neither are the DDs I have (no Shiratsuyu, Sims or Mahan in my port), and every time I picked my Leningrad or Akatsuki i got denied by Belfasts, I dont think I hit a single torp and I couldnt get fires on BBs either (bad luck ). Maybe I will try Leningrad again, if the Belfasts deny the cap anyways a sniper dd might actually have a niche to fit, and equipped with DE and Fire Signals i SHOULD be able to get more fires than I did, but maybe Im just not in RNGesus's favor. Something else I noticed was that very many people play Myokos, and at most 20% of them are the Tech tree version. And its actually a fine choice in my opinion, better than BBs against Belfasts and DDs in almost every way. Of course Belfast is technically more useful, but Myoko works very well, especially equipped with Defensive AA. Unlike with DDs you are usually out of Radar range, and unlike BBs you are better at dodging incoming fire, and you can even torp the smoke from maybe 9km away. Also you are able, unlike DDs to survive an angry radar smoke at medium close range. All in all, this will be remembered as the Cruisers ranked season.
  4. Hobbes_95

    Belfast/Premiums & Ranked

    I tried to play scharnhorst in ranked yesterday, total disaster, doesnt seem to be BBs ranked season, unlike lasts. The only ships I felt i had any impact with were my Saipan (duh) and my Myoko, which is my only Tier VII cruiser (apart from Yorck, but nobody takes that one to ranked when you have some ARP Myoko to choose instead). That being said, I never had big problems with Belfasts in randoms, but in ranked it sure is a beast, an invisible beast rapidly firing HE nukes, no fun playing DDs or BBs against that!
  5. Hobbes_95

    Elimination Thread 4: Tier VIII

    Akizuki: 21 Kagero: 20 Benson: 21 Benson/Lo Yang (Def. AA): 14 Lo Yang (Mk. 15 mod. 0): 20 Lo Yang (Mk 31): 20 Z-23: 20 Mogami (155mm): 18 Mogami (203mm): 17 Atago: 25 New Orleans: 11 Chapayev: 20 Mikhail Kutuzov: 22 Admiral Hipper / Prinz Eugen: 20 - 3 = 17 Edinburgh: 21 Amagi: 20 North Carolina: 20 Tirpitz: 20 Bismark: 20 Shokaku (2/2/2): 20 Shokaku (3/1/2): 20 Lexington (1/1/1): 17 Lexington (2/0/2): 11 Lexington (0/1/3): 17 Ru Tier 8 DD +1 I basically had the luck as a new player to pick a lot of lines with Tier 8 ships that are considered not great (Russian DDs, German CAs, US CVs). So in this thread I do not have a lot of great things to say, because I share lots of these opinions. I already stated my reason for not liking Lexington, and I really tried (and failed to) like the Hipper. It feels so weak, especially compared to Atago, which packs more punch, has a higher Fire Chance, RoF, heal and better stealth and Torpedoes, its really not a competition. I already upvoted that one, That leaves me with the Tashkent, and heres the thing, once i got DE and AFT (pre 6.0) I really started to like it, or better the Ru DD line as a whole. I only got fed up with it later for being useless in Ranked, but its a strong ship in random battles if you have (or had) the right captain skills, and you dont have to fill the actual DD role all too much. EDIT: Also unified Prinz Eugen and Admiral Hipper because they are practically identical
  6. Hobbes_95

    Elimination Thread 4: Tier VIII

    Akizuki: 21 Kagero: 20 Benson: 21 Benson/Lo Yang (Def. AA): 17 Lo Yang (Mk. 15 mod. 0): 20 Lo Yang (Mk 32): 20 Z-23: 20 Mogami (155mm): 17 Mogami (203mm): 17 Atago: 22 + 1 = 23 Only good Tier 8 Ship I have played so far. The others are Tashkent, Hipper and Lexington. New Orleans: 17 Chapayev: 20 Mikhail Kutuzov: 21 Admiral Hipper: 20 Prinz Eugen: 20 Edinburgh: 20 Amagi: 20 North Carolina: 20 Alabama ST: 20 Tirpitz: 20 Bismark: 20 Shokaku (2/2/2): 20 Shokaku (3/1/2): 20 Lexington (1/1/1): 17 Lexington (2/0/2): 17 Lexington (0/1/3): 20 - 3 = 17 I upvoted this on the Ranger, where I always liked to play against Hiryus, because they were most often the easiest to handle without the fighter. I expected it to get even better with no Tier 8 eqivalent of Saipan around and more pleople playing Strike Lexi for those sweet 1000 pound bombs. Well, it didnt, even more AS sky cancer and Shokakus fighters proved to be really pesky compared to Hiryus.
  7. Hobbes_95

    How many games do you have in your favourite ship?

    my most played ship is saipan, but only because i have had it for quite some time now and continuously come back to it, being a premium and all
  8. Hobbes_95

    So, what are you bringing to ranked?

    For me its Saipan and Scharnhorst for sure. On the maybe side of things I have Myoko, Akatsuki, Leningrad, Gneisenau and Hiryu (because not yet fully upgraded). Why are so many people talking about Tier 8 as well? My choice there would be... only Takao.
  9. Hobbes_95

    Elimination thread 3: Tier VII *Winner!*

    He probably meant its up to preference at this point, unless you can say for certain which of the 3 remaining ships is better (if you want performance from a purely objective standpoint, look at a statistics page). I will go with Scharnhorst though, partly because its the only one of those I own, and I think it is really strong. My downvote goes to Belfast, because those are the least scary, but that might also be the majority of players playing the ship. Anyways, you could argue that a more accessible ship is "better": Blyskawica: 37 Belfast: 30 - 3 = 27 Scharnhorst: 40 + 1 = 41
  10. Hobbes_95

    Will WG adress poor CV economy in new patch ?

    Well, I tried offering an explanation, and I do believe it to be a part of the truth. WG themselves did say that CV earnings are not worse than those of the other classes, and if you decide to believe that, you got to make theories as th where those credits go. I believe they go to all those AS players out there who are just happy clicking at planes and getting a few plane kills, ruining someone elses day. On the other hand WGs statement could mean that you might get the same amount of rewards as other classes if you "played more active", as in getting cap points, potential damage and so on, but of course that's BS in a CV. I am interested what other players think about this. Is there a stats page that shows average earnings of a ship?
  11. Hobbes_95

    carriers players rigging battles.

    Didn't read all of the thread, this is meant as an answer directly to the OP: No good CV would ever agree to a NAP, except they are in a Strike CV and their enemy is in an AS CV, in which case the AS player would certainly not agree, and the reason is simple. Even if you manage to do a lot of damage against ships, your earnings will be slim compared to how much other classes would earn for the same type of damage, because in CV rewards plane kills play a huge rule (since September update it got upscaled a lot because fighter clickers complained about meager rewards). Secondly, there are many games in which even an unopposed CV will have a hard time doing loads of damage, especially at higher Tiers where more people know how to dodge, use repair and AA effectively, or simply no good targets presenting themselves. Farming Campaigns like in Closed Beta days happen very rarely.
  12. Hobbes_95

    Will WG adress poor CV economy in new patch ?

    In WGs opinion the CV economy is balanced, and I can tell you why. Basically I believe that on average over all CV games CVs make the same amount of credits as other ships, however the distribution is very distorted, because in a CV if you want to have much XP and Credits in a game it is not enough to deal a lot of damage, but you also need a lot of plane kills. In all other classes you could say that the best players that deal the most damage, get the most potential damage and get the most capping points, will earn a hell of a lot more than the worse players of those particular ships. However, in CVs the worst players mostly tend to play Air Superiority Setups and often get a lot of plane kills, even though their actual skill and influence over the battle might be not so great. They get rewarded nonetheless, and that is the reason the Credits distribution is different for CVs, you just can't rely on damage done alone, and your maximum earnings fall short of other classes, because the mechanics include an imbalance between players who primarily go for damage and those who prefer clicking at planes. If you want to have a good game with good earnings in a CV, you have to do real damage (distributed to a number of not too low tier ships) AND shoot down at least 15-20 planes.
  13. Hobbes_95


  14. Hobbes_95

    World of Warships - Clans

    very insightful
  15. Hobbes_95

    What Were Your Greatest Gaming Achievements Today ?

    Apparently it is still possible... ...to get to the top of the [winning] team in a [high tier] CV. These are the post battle results of my Strike Essex game I just had, at Tier 10, against another fully upgraded Essex using the Stock loadout. The high earning is mainly due to Gamescom camouflage, Zulu flag and Prmium account, look at the last picture to see the 'actual' earnings. I do believe this was a very good game for me, but normally best winner in a Tier 10 game has more than 1600 Base xp, right? Well, I won't complain, because those numbers are significantly harder to reach in a CV nowadays, and I am grateful for reaching the top rank in this ship every once in a while.