Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


1 Follower

About HMS_Kilinowski

  • Rank
    Senior Chief Petty Officer
  • Insignia

Recent Profile Visitors

433 profile views
  1. HMS_Kilinowski

    Warships today?

    it seems that Warships.today now has gone offline permanently. We could see aggregate statistics vanishing on EU- and NA-server in the past. Now everything's gone. Too bad. I really liked some of the unique features of the site. So long, Warships.today, and thanks for the service.
  2. HMS_Kilinowski

    CVs and Operations

    With all the Aobas popping defAA I always had some problems getting hits on the early groups and lost lots of planes in the past. They were helpful when the enemy CVs appear. A good DD player who moves to the A line in time so he is there when the CVs spawn will pretty much do the same and torp the CVs before they start most of their planes.
  3. HMS_Kilinowski

    [ERGEBNISSE] Event: Lasst die Flaggen wehen

    Das sind dann auch eher die Leute die ohne Camo rumfahren. Die Motivation ist da imo eine andere. Die spielen just for fun, wieviel die ihre Gefechte beeinflussen ist denen schnuppe. Mit Flaggenlotterien wird man die nicht erreichen. Das muss man differenzieren. Wir haben eine lange Clan Battle-Saison hinter uns, wo maximale Beflaggung quasi Pflicht ist. Da haben sich bei vielen Spielern die Vorräte erschöpft. Aktuell ist also haushalten angesagt. Überhaupt, als grundsätzliche Anregung, war's die letzten Monate recht heftig mit Events. Bei meinem Clan gibt's schon leichte Ausfallerscheinungen. Wäre imo absolut okay, wenn WG einen Gang zurück schaltet. Es ist ja super, dass man Schiffe und Kohle und Stahl und schlag mich tot gewinnen kann. Aktive Spieler wollen auch gerne mitnehmen was geht. Es ist halt nur seit dem Indianapolis Marathon ziemlich durch die Decke gegangen. Was hatten wir alles: Indy-Marathon, CB-Season "Sleeping Giants", Ranked Season 10, Ranked Sprint 1, Ranked Sprint 2, Royal Navy-Event, CB-Sprint Season, Supply Lines, Halloween Event, Ranked Sprint 3, Ranked Sprint 4, Snowflakes, PEF-Event, CB Season "North" und nun wieder Ranked Season 11, alles innerhalb eines guten halben Jahres. Das Spiel als solches ist unterhaltsam genug. Weniger ist mehr. Uns wird schon nicht langweilig.
  4. HMS_Kilinowski

    Großer Kurfürst Secondary Build

    Quite possible. That's why I hypothesize. Nobody can currently see where the game is going. They reworked CVs but obviously WG misread the symptoms. They thought the problem was CVs being too complicated and hard to master yet very rewarding when players did. That was merely one side of the story. For all other players it was an uneven fight as CV players got a high skill ceiling whereas AA-builds are pretty independent of player skills. A bad player in an AA-ship can shred planes, while even the best players with weak AA could not do much better, e.g. avoid being crosstorped. The bigger caliber still means you can pen at a small angle where the smaller sized shells of the Monti would bounce. Not a decisive advantage, I admit. The other thing is, she still is extremely tanky. Whenever I put a variety of BBs into a training room to test a new ship, the GK lasts longer than all other ships. Even at ranges and angels where you would think a citadel hit is sure to happen, nothing. Anyway what you state is not an argument of how to build a GK, it is an argument of "should you get the GK at all?" Montana is very prevalent in Clan Battles. You don't see GK that much and I don't remember many CB where the GK was used to its strengths. Although you will see anecdotal evidence of its effectiveness, the big picture is that GK is less effective than all other BBs in the current meta.
  5. HMS_Kilinowski

    Großer Kurfürst Secondary Build

    However the current change in the meta might change that. Yes, we still got HE-spam, but with update 0.8.0 we got CVs revived and in the same turn CE got nerfed. It's safe to assume most GK players will have taken the concealment module and use a camo. Then the current concealment is 14.3 km. If I remember correctly, it was 13.6km - 13.7 km before. So 600m-700m difference. CE still is a viable choice but the nerf shifts other options. Without CE you got 15.9 km concealment range. So CE lowers your detection by 1.6km, where it lowered your detection by 2.2km - 2.3km prior to patch 0.8.0. That makes other builds look more attractive. Situations where concealment makes the difference now are less likely. The 0.8.0 meta may change a couple of things, some due to the CE nerf, some due to the new CV prevalence, some due to a combination of both: - More CVs mean you are spotted more often anyway, so CE is not the big ticket anymore to pop up out of nowhere. - Enemy cruisers are also spotted more often and earlier due to CVs and CE nerf. They might hang back more and overall play more cautious, having less chance to HE-spam. - Cruiser players will react to the CV threat and some of them will change their builds, using more AA mods and BFT instead of DE, lowering their fire chance. - Changing your BB build yourself towards AA is now much more attractive, even more so as it synergizes with secondaries. With BFT and AFT you can have good AA while going for a secondaries build. - The concealment nerf affects all cruisers and BBs on your team, some of which will not use CE anymore. So if you don't have CE you are not the only one being spotted early and you don't risk being a priority target that much. - If other team mates focus more on AA, you don't want to be a ship with weak AA, being the CV's punching bag. One could sum it up saying, it's more reasonable to go with the flow. That doesn't mean a full secondaries build is now the best option, but a hybrid build could be the current optimum. I don't know if that's true, it's a hypothesis and we need to wait for a new equilibrium to evolve. I would imagine a build SI, FP and AFT. Then there is the option to add BFT and either EM or JOAT. Or go more into the survival direction with BoS and JOAT. Or you go for manSec and invest the last point into DCCA for a minor increase in AA. There are downsides, too. If all your teammates are more visible, being concealed becomes more valuable. But all together that CE nerf did what WG intended. It makes CE less of a compulsory skill and opens up your options.
  6. HMS_Kilinowski

    Giulio Cesare to be changed to T6.

    Still, in horse racing bets, if you win, you get a predetermined payout. The bookie will not tell you afterwards: "In hindsight we felt the horse you bet on was underrated, so unfortunately we have to lower your payout now." - unless of course your bookie is part of a mafia organization, if you catch my drift.
  7. HMS_Kilinowski

    Giulio Cesare to be changed to T6.

    Indeed iChase addressed a lot of issues that arise from that re-tier. Credibility is only the consequence WG has to face but the causes are even more. For players who just wanted that specific ship, nothing will change. They liked the GC because they wanted an italian BB and it still is. For players who wanted an OPish ship, that may change. WG specifically advertised their very expensive Christmas Boxes with ships that were deemed OP and no longer available. We all remember that advertisment banner on top of the wiki pages. What ships were depicted there to persuade us to buy those crates? Kamikaze, Missouri, Giulio, Belfast, Kutuzow ... you name it. There was no picture of a Krasny Krym, Huanghe or other "lemons". That obviously was for a reason and the reason was to say "buy these crates and we might give you an OP ship that we officially took out of the game cause it was too powerful". Now that ship may not be that powerful anymore to the point where players might feel they would not have invested money in this ship, had they known about this change before. In my opinion this is yet another case of wilful deceit as there is no external effect changing the specifics of this purchase but the change is made by the seller and intentionally against a prominently advertised property of the product. As with CVs, owners of GC should be offered to opt out and get a compensation in doubloons. But then again WG finally would need to offer more ships for doubloons. I would probably keep my GC and as I got it in a free crate, I personally don't feel cheated in any way. Still the GC for me was much more valuable in T5 than it is gonna be at T6. It would have been my primary ship for any future T5 ranked sprint or other T5 event. My other T5 ships don't work well in the ranked meta.
  8. HMS_Kilinowski

    Großer Kurfürst Secondary Build

    As you said: "now". The statement was correct for the pre 0.8.0 meta. Now a lot of things changed. Personally I am never happy when a game is radically changed, precisely for what happens here. Every player seeking advice on a topic will search forums and other ressources and find answers that are no longer true but cannot be flagged as outdated. That makes it hard for the community to share high quality information. It's also quite unfortunate as a lot of contributions are arbitrarily devaluted. If you think about Little White Mouse's reviews, how much work and time went into writing them. If things change, on WG's side their employees get paid for changing official information and wiki entries. Community contributors however see a lot of their effort destroyed in an instant. It's also a problem for players as the free respecs only last for a short duration, while the impact of the meta has not yet fully revealed. So I couldn't make an educated guess, what and efficient GK build now should look like.
  9. HMS_Kilinowski

    Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

    I am not familiar with the details of ship building history. Still not every T10 steel ship or T9-freemium ship needs to be a BB or CA, just because Kronshtadt and Stalingrad have started that hype. Lots of players are waiting for a good T10-DD. I personally would rather see a japanese light cruiser for T10, something like a refined Mogami with high 155m guns, a heal and Shima torps. A ship that can kite in mid range while having the means to support DDs on caps and get out alive. The concept of the Azuma, loved by testers as it may be, feels more french to me than japanese. So if the ijn line gets its T10-ship and that's gonna be it for a long time, I would have hoped for something more paradigmatic. Maybe they are holding Alaska back to buff it to T10 and make it fill the "soon"-slot in the arsenal. There never was a picture of the Azuma in that slot and maybe they were vague for that very reason, that they did not know which should go where. So they make a switcheroo and now it's T9-Azuma for 1M FXP and Alaska buffed to T10 for 28k steel.
  10. HMS_Kilinowski

    Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

    Frankly, I had my doubts if the concept of Azuma would be competitive at T10. It seemed and still seems too weakly armored to tank and too sluggish to kite. The T10 meta didn't need a cruiser being played from even further back as a super-Henri. I was hoping they would give it some better armor or maneuverability and buff it in T10. The even bigger confusion however is, what does WG intend to be that new steel ship announced in the arsenal? Is that still supposed to be tha Azuma, now at T9? Do they want to give players an option to spend their steel between the 14k steel for Black and the 28k steel for Stalingrad? A T9-steel ship should be less flawed. Do they intend to come up with a new T10-ship at short notice? Inlikely.
  11. HMS_Kilinowski

    Low level SEAL CLUBBERS

    There is a misunderstanding. I did not judge Allufewig's playstyle. I know nothing about him and it's not necessary. I just felt the phrase "life is hard" was cynically apologetic in a way to dismiss any will to reflect on the consequences of a person's behavior. I certainly don't see it a crucial point of the discussion. Again, the quoted person was not target of a lengthy dissection. He may work in a soup kitchen for the homeless as far as I care. I just didn't appreciate talking about something bad happening and then someone comes with a comment like "**** happens" or "life is hard". So let me finish this saying that I am not talking about him, even in the following remarks, which are general in nature. If anyone feels concerned, I will answer, but that answer is based on that person identifying himself with that category, not me confirming that identity. First to comment on the last sentence of your previous paragraph: If low tier games are fun against skilles tiers, one can always team up with others and do some training room battles, like they do in the twitch stream. You know these things like secondaries-only games or T2 torp soup games and whatever you could not do in randoms. Let's face it low tier games don't give much ressources and eliteXP is wasted anyway. So might as well go into training room and compensate it with a T9-premium game later. That's a bit like complaining you cannot drill holes with a hammer. Each purpose in WoWs has its tool. If all ships were generic in playstyle, what would be the point of having so many different ships. There are ships that will be best in bow-tanking and others are better in mobile play. Why is it a problem that certain plays are safe? If every action was reasonable, if no bad or good play existed and nothing could be punished or rewarded, what's the point of trying to play smart? WoWs would be like an ordinary game of dice for kids. A Mino is not designed to be played in a front running tanking role. If you want to do that, you will find the Hindenburg better suited. That's a strength of upper tiers. So if you take a "brave" or risky action that does not work for the chosen ship, it is consistent that it gets punished. T6-8 are also not different in that respect. Take a risky action in a Nürnberg or Pensacola or Gallisonnaire. Does it not get punished hard? Don't you risk instant deletion? And don't lowtier BBs bow-tank, too? Well they don't but they'd better. High tier BBs take some skill, too. You can easily see the difference between players using this tactic well and some camping players without a plan. You bow-tank, yes, but like a Sumo-Wrestler you gotta put pressure on the enemy and move into the spots the other team leaves until they got nowhere to go. The simple truth is that in T10 games ships depend on each other. The DD is spotting and shielding off the CA. The CA uses his guns to kill the enemy DD and protect his own DD. The BB protects the CA. If every player shoots what his team mate is afraid of and not what he himself is afraid of, you got a good team.
  12. HMS_Kilinowski

    Low level SEAL CLUBBERS

    Obviously we all don't get a nervous breakdown every time we see cruel things happening. That was not my claim. And yes we need some distance to cope with these things. I also don't put seal clubbing on a level with that list you presented. But there is a lot of difference between a person causing something bad to another person intentionally and another person observing that or maybe helping. Both persons may comment that with "life is hard". The first is a suspect cynically taunting the victim, the second is a rather warning comment. Again the point was there are other players, new players that want to learn the game step-by-step. They do, what we as community expect them to do, they don't jump into high tier games but take it slow. Doing so they express their will to not be confronted with the higher challenges. The game even prevents them to a certain degree from skipping the beginners lessons. They are interested in the game. As their understanding of game mechanics progresses, they may become good players and a constructive part of the community. Then come the seasoned players and exploit their advantages in knowledge, ships, captains, flags and whatnot to a point the rookies don't stand a chance. As I said, I have even read taunting chats. Do you really have to type "bye bye" to a player with 10 battles in BBs when you hit him with your torps after playing 1000 battles in Umikaze? To me it's a bit like going back to primary school, answering all question the teacher asks the class and then turning to your class and say "I rule". I see a certain percentage of games in lower tiers as quite normal. I want to clarify that cause some players will feel accused of unsportsmanship for playing a few games in T1-4. When you have a ship in port, you want to use it occasionally. And of course every player will start in low tiers and work his way up, so it will take some time to even have mid tier games. I assume even long-time players will have a couple of dozens of games on low-tier ships they like. But when I see players after thousands of battles having half their games in T4 and lower, I doubt their motivation is sound. You don't play 3000 games in Black Swan cause the gameplay is so superior to anything that comes afterwards. If that was just to bolster one's ego or pad stats, that could be a private matter. But if it spoils the fun of rookies and makes them abandon the game, that is a permanent damage to the community and it affects us. It affects how long the game will have enough players to be profitable, it affects if at any time of the night enough players are around to ensure a fair matchmaking. The implications are various and my sentiment is that is quite a price to pay just for a few weak minded players satisfying their needs for cheap affirmation.
  13. Oh boy, had we both had this this talk earlier, what fruitful collaboration would have emerged. Feel free to involve my brain in any future scheme.
  14. Probably that's how it is. It's a bit inconsistent though. The whole point of players being refunded their premium CVs is that WG accepts the reason they are maybe not fun to play anymore and not worth having spent real money to their buyers. For buyers of a perma camo for a tech-tree ship that argument would be the same.
  15. Yeah as far as I understand, that's correct. But if you can refund the even-tiered CVs in the arsenal, what's the point of not refunding the camos? Do they put it in the inventory?