Jump to content

huymog

Players
  • Content Сount

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    8531
  • Clan

    [H-M-S]

About huymog

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Birthday 12/21/1947
  • Insignia
    [H-M-S]

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Switzerland

Recent Profile Visitors

217 profile views
  1. huymog

    AI changes in coop?

    I believe there has been. I've now lost 5 times in a row at tier 2 and 3, I've not experienced anything like that before. The bots dodge most of my torpedos whereas only a couple of days ago I would hit multiple times with them. Also as the OP suggests, the bots are tactically much better than before. I think the change is for the good, 90% and higher win rates in coop as it has been up to now was not challenging enough. I will now have to relearn how the bots play - but gone are the days where it would be a fun run out to sink a few ships for therapeutic reasons.
  2. huymog

    An EASY way to fix radar problems

    I think that just preventing radar from seeing through islands would be enough of a nerf. I played my first radar ship the Chapayev a lot in the last season of ranked. The best use of radar I found was to use the radar when the spotted sign came up. Switch on the radar and find who was spotting me - almost always a destroyer - get a few rounds off and kill or drive him away. Very powerful use of radar IMHO without the nonsense of seeing through rock. Radar range should be at the detection range of the ship it is mounted on.
  3. huymog

    An EASY way to fix radar problems

    This may be true. But it would need the game designer(s) who asked for radar and sonar to be included to admit he had made a (stupid) mistake in the specification and go back to the coders to correct it, and then have to explain that to the players who are incapable of understanding that radar can not see through rocks. That is probably the more difficult process at WG. This looks like a marketing departments cover up for a poorly thought out game addition to me!
  4. huymog

    An EASY way to fix radar problems

    This is interesting. It makes me suspect (and I think I saw someone elsewhere on the forum make this point) that the programmers were never given the requirement (that is asked to program) that radar and sonar should not work through rock. This made for an easy implementation of just showing up anything within the sonar/radar circle range. Implementation of a requirement to not see through islands would require the more difficult change of integrating it into the line of sight routines. Hence their reluctance to change it. The clue is in the response "never given", it was never in WG's specification for the addition of radar and sonar into the game. I find the excuse that the players would not understand it to be an insult. Yes you can learn to live with it, but why insult those with an understanding of how things should work. And yes I know that the line of site mechanisms are not totally true to reality, but also not as obviously ridiculous as radaring through kilometres of mountain.
  5. huymog

    MM, genuinely concerned now chaps

    There is a graph shown above which shows a rapid increase in one sided battles between patch 0.5.13 and 0.6.1. Clans were introduced in 0.6.0. My suspicions. Clans significantly increased the numbers of divisions played. As players began to realise the advantages of division play particularly the top player loaded clans, the number of one sided battles increased rapidly.
  6. huymog

    MM, genuinely concerned now chaps

    I did suggest that divisions in random battles be abolished for the reason that the games no longer consist of a random group of players. I also agree that this will not happen and I too enjoy playing with clan mates when clan battles are not available. I also claimed that Divisions can be used to a players advantage, your own stats fully back up this statement. Congratulations on your numbers and hence your ability in the game, they are in a range I can not even begin to dream about. Back to your stats, you have a large number of games in total and in divisions of 3. Your overall win rate is 64.8% overall and increases to 72.3% in divisions of 3 with over 9300 battles overall and 2700+ in divisions of three. These are large numbers of games and the difference in win rate is considerable and not a statistical aberration. Your own numbers back up my statement that divisions can be used to pad win rates. Whether you play in divisions for win rate improvement or for the social aspect, only you can answer. Also, as I said earlier, players are entitled to use the rules of the game to their own advantage. What annoyed me more about your post was your disdain for players who are not as good as you at the game. Remember, if there were no potatoes, your win rate would drop. So-called potatoes are as entitled as you are to play the game, and some of us (me for example) still enjoy WOWS. Live with it - if you want challenging games all the time play clan battles or tournaments (as you probably already do). A player of your ability will still do well in those metas.
  7. huymog

    MM, genuinely concerned now chaps

    My point is that when WG introduced Divisions they introduced means to leverage an advantage which were not there before. I accept the OP's opinion that teamplay should be an integral part of the game. If people take advantage of Divisions good for them. On the other hand don't be surprised that there are players who will not like this and feel disadvantaged. Hence threads such this one where we are free to debate pros and cons of aspects of the game's MM. To the above, RNGesus will not sort this out as WG put in a mechanism which players can leverage. Personally I can live with things as they are and occasionally being in battles with players who are, as they are entitled to do, playing the system.
  8. huymog

    MM, genuinely concerned now chaps

    This comment is also worthless. If a player has come to an opinion he is a customer (potential if he has not yet bought anything) who is dissatisfied with the product and may no longer play or buy. This opinion is a fact! It is not worthless, but it may not be based on concrete evidence.
  9. huymog

    MM, genuinely concerned now chaps

    I agree with the above, but people make decisions on playing WOWs or not based on feelings not statistics (often not on facts either!!!). Wargaming have the numbers - please moderator give us the length of game numbers over time.
  10. huymog

    MM, genuinely concerned now chaps

    If you go to skill based MM, how do you measure skill as the aim of skill based MM is to maintain a 50% win rate for all players. Come to think of it that would be amazing because if the skill based MM were perfect we would have truly random battles!
  11. huymog

    MM, genuinely concerned now chaps

    I am certainly not suggesting that disabling divisions would make potatoes better players. In truly random gameplay, potatoes would remain potatoes and unicums remain unicums. As a below average player I fully accept that and am happy to realise that I am a below average player. What I am saying is that really good players are taking advantage of the division mechanism to skew the game in their favour thus amplifying the difference in stats, and more importantly increasing the number of one sided games and these are no fun for me whether I am on the winning or losing side.
  12. huymog

    MM, genuinely concerned now chaps

    I think that there is fundamental problem with allowing divisions in random games. I believe the statistics show that a player's win rate is higher when playing in a division than when playing solo. Random should be truly random - and allowing divisions breaks this rule. If players simultaneously press battle as solo players there is a significant chance they will end up in a different battle or on different sides. This is not the case if you are in a division, you are guaranteed to be in the same battle and on the same side. I suspect that the advantage of being in a division increases with the skill of the players in the division. So a division of 60% plus players playing as division seriously breaks the concept of a random game. MM should not balance games based on win rate or any other measure of how good a player is. If it did, good players win rates would drop and less successful players win rates would rise. The real problem comes from by being in a division 3 players gain an advantage over the truly random (solo) players, and distort the player statistics. Divisions were introduced to give players a chance to play together, and single clan divisions of good players are exploiting the advantage they give. The result is more one sided games. Now that we have clan battles, I suggest that divisions in random be abolished so that we return to true random play. For those that wish to play in teams, make clan battles a full time battle mode.
  13. huymog

    SBS - Special Boat Service

    Wednesday 7 March around 4pm.
  14. huymog

    SBS - Special Boat Service

    Hi Shane, I am interested in joining your clan. I am "huymog" in WoWs, have a 48% win rate on 4000+ games and have been playing clan battles regularly. At the moment I only have a Zao at T10, and am early in the grind to T10 with a Yugumo and a Donskoi. I am looking to join a clan with lower skill requirements than my previous clan, and one that can regularly put out a team in clan battles. I am retired (that adequately covers one of your requirements!) and play daily, so can be relied upon to be available for clan battles. But I do travel 2-3 months a year and can only play sporadically when away from home. Look forward to your reply, Jim
  15. I'm sorry I do not have a replay - I wish WG would implement this automatically. I have given up altering files after every upgrade to re-activate the replay. The incident I am talking about is not the first time I've lost a ship for no clear reason. That is I can see how I was killed from the battle record without having to resort to a replay. In this case it was clearly not the DD that was the prime cause of my demise. To recap: I am certain that I had over 20k of health. I was not targeted by any other ship, it was the end game and the reds only had 3 ships, the other two were well away. The DD came out of smoke, hit me with shell fire and set a fire in the stern of my Bismark. He then turned away and back into the smoke to get away from our teams CL just behind me. I turned away and 20 or so seconds later the ship was dead. The end of game report showed 2 shell hits from the DD for 538 damage and gave the DD the kill. I was not hit by any torpedoes during the whole game. There was no report or ribbon to indicate a detonation, nor was I aware of being hit - although I could have missed seeing incoming as I was not expecting it. This is not the first time something similar has happened to me, but only in the last few weeks making me believe that something has changed. I posted this one as I am sure I am reporting the incident correctly. I have been thinking what could happen. It could be that the remaining enemy BB was out of sight, the DD then spotted me and the BB fired, he was lucky, got a big hit and the fire from the DD took my last few HP and was credited with the kill. I couldn't see the BB immediately after the kill because with aiming and flight time the 20 seconds were up and the BB would have disappeared. I don't like the mechanism that BBs can disappear between salvos, but that's a topic for another thread. You are right of course, no replay no full analysis possible. Unless anyone is aware of any recent change in game mechanics which may be relevant, this topic need not go any further. I'm assuming that fires do not cause detonations, but why not, yet another thread.
×