Jump to content

AdmiralDing3Ling

Players
  • Content Сount

    198
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    3438
  • Clan

    [OSWEG]

About AdmiralDing3Ling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. AdmiralDing3Ling

    Ships for T9 ranked

    Missouri easely. If I somehow want to play DDs Id take out my Fletcher. As both Buffalo and Seattle are useless I wont be playing cruisers, atleast not unless Alaska is released before that.
  2. AdmiralDing3Ling

    Unofficial CV rework feedback thread Delta

    I take it you didnt read the last bit by OP then
  3. AdmiralDing3Ling

    Unofficial CV rework feedback thread Delta

    Ill give you feedback. Completely idiotic to remove half of the techtree, the most bizarre nonsensical decision WG has ever come up with. It makes no sense and the reason given can be applied to all ships. Secondly the whole gameplay in the "rework" has solved nothing and is even worse than it was before. The only balance difference from the CVs we have now to the ones in the rework is that fighters have been removed. So now CVs have no resistance at all, its just a damage farming class with no other purpose. Infact its even worse than that since you can now also attack multiple times with one squad, which means you can set perma floods constantly. But there was never any question about why this was done was there, it was only, 100% only so you could implement CVs on consoles.. All in all, I dont like CV gameplay as it is now, because of the unbalance and the glitchy and hard to use interface. But this new thing is way way way worse. The old system couldve just been fixed and improved, it didnt need reworking. I am extremely extremely negative to all of this. But hey thats just me.
  4. AdmiralDing3Ling

    [EXCERPT] WGFest 2018 - RUBBs and RNCVs

    How can they introduce a full line where only one ship in the entire techtree actualy existed. That is a complete joke
  5. AdmiralDing3Ling

    Harugumo! NERF IT!

    As someone who isnt biased because I dont have the Harugumo. I see no issues with it at all. I have no problems killing it in either DDs, CAs, CLs or even BBs. Heck they can barely hurt most BBs. But I can agree that it is broken, in the sense that it is too min/maxed. And I can agree that the current HE spamming IFHE meta is really hurting the gameplay. But you cant nerf the guns because youll make it unplayable instead. Harugumo will and is already getting shat on by Gearings and Darings because of how sluggish it is you can easely outmanouvre it and outpace its turrettraverse. And if you cant outgun it you can just torp it to death when shes sitting in a smokecloud tunnelvisioning into the dakkarain. So, you cant buff it because youll make it OP. You cant nerf it because youll make it unplayable. And you cant leave it as it is if you want to deal with the dakkarain meta that is currently in the game.
  6. AdmiralDing3Ling

    Something that has been bothering me

    You would think so wouldnt you. But look at these pictures, compare them and tell me that something isnt off. Its even more clear on the USS Mahan. Also I dont quiet agree on "could have been" ships being less detailed. Plenty of fictional ships have a lot of detail. Such as the RN BBs, Monarch, Lion and Conqueror. Same with some german cruisers, Yorck and Roon for instance, even Hindenburg.
  7. AdmiralDing3Ling

    Something that has been bothering me

    Some people might sigh at this post but there is something that has been bothering me for a long time, and its starting to bother me even more now that I know about it. To put it shortly, a lot of ships, and especially the early made shipmodels like in the US techtree look strange. They are too short and some sit too high in the water. Examples of this is Arizona, Colorado, the newly added West Virginia (which Im sure is a remodeled Colorado), New Mexico. But also destroyers like Farragut, Mahan and Benson. Also Queen Elizabeth and Warspite also look too tall and too short compared to reallife pictures of these ships. A very good example of this is the space between the rearmost funnel of the Mahan and the rear superstructure. That space is supposed to be a lot wider than it is in the game. It makes the whole ship look weird and squished. Also while were on the subject of updating shipmodels. I wouldnt mind giving Friedrich der Grosse and Grosser Kurfurst a bit of love. Those models are very undetailed and dated. They look very bland and boring compared to for example Bismarck. Aaaand last but not least, windows. A lot of ships and usually also early modeled ships like for example a lot of japanese DDs have none seethrou windows on the bridge. Where as all newly added ships have clear windows. A good example of this is if you compare Iowa to Missouri. Iowa has none seethrou windows while Missouri has clear windows. Yepp I care
  8. AdmiralDing3Ling

    More heavy cruisers needed?

    Minotaur is difficult to play because its basicly a floating citadel. Dont think the guns is the reason why it has a low average damage tbh. Worcester has longer range, stronger hull and more consumables.
  9. AdmiralDing3Ling

    More heavy cruisers needed?

    Why not change the IFHE skill so that it removes both AP and HE shells when you pick it and gives you a shell similar to Minotaurs with no firechance. Lightcruisers raw pen damage is enough to do good damage without the fires and if you want the fires you can always simply not take IFHE.
  10. AdmiralDing3Ling

    Match Making suck! and this is what I think about it!

    First of all that picture is atleast a year old. Second of all Ive never in my 3000 games had to wait over a minute for a single battle. So I feel for you if WG is against you.
  11. AdmiralDing3Ling

    Match Making suck! and this is what I think about it!

    Funny when queues are pretty much instant every time you click battle. You know 3 or maybe even 2 brackets is enough. Just to separate the insanly bad players. Youd still only have to wait maybe a minute or two.
  12. AdmiralDing3Ling

    Match Making suck! and this is what I think about it!

    If theyre not in the same bracket they will obviously not be put on the same team nor on the opponents team.
  13. AdmiralDing3Ling

    Match Making suck! and this is what I think about it!

    I would also gladly welcome some sort of skillbased matchmaking. It would hopefully remove all the "bots" in high tiers with no camos and no flags who sail directly into a suicide which you see with a higher frequency now than ever before. An idea of how you could do that would be to use a bracket system such as the one in clanbattles or another example in Starcraft 2. I would also rather base this on average xp or personal rating other than winrate as you can severly inflate your winrate by playing OP ships in low tiers. You wouldnt need that many brackets either, maybe 3 or 4 different leagues you would progress into after you gain a certain amount of PR. This would both make random battles far more fun to play as you have something to work towards and at the same time maybe be less frustrated by losing because of your teammates blindly suiciding. The only downside as far as I can see is that queue times would be longer, especially in higher brackets. Althou I would glady wait a few minutes if it means a good fair battle instead of what we have now. Also as an avid CB player. CB games are way way better balanced and not even remotely as often steamrolls. Infact steamrolls are very rare.
  14. AdmiralDing3Ling

    Miss dream

    I fully believe she said that. I just dont believe shes correct. 100k damage in my Alabama or Massa dont earn remotely as much as a 100k damage on my Musashi. 100k damage in Musashi is usualy around 800k to 1 million where as a normal tier 8 is more like 500k.
  15. AdmiralDing3Ling

    Miss dream

    If the difference was as huge as you stated then it should be clearly visible in just a few games in each ship. If there even is a difference (which I highly doubt) its so extremely miniscule that its not relevant. However, 1k on a DD is worth as much as 10k on a BB, roughly as its percentage based. You do tend to do more damage to cruisers and DDs in the Missouri because of its radar and blapping potentional. This means youll mostly earn more in the Missouri than the Musashi per damage. Doesnt mean the Missouri has a different modifier thou, only means you shoot at different targets. Honestly I think credit earnings are the same on all ships in the same tier, with premiums having a higher percentage but the same between all premiums in the same tier. I highly doubt that WG is specifially setting different numbers on different ships. All in all, I run the same flags and camos on both my Musashi and my Missouri. I play them both when I need money and I havent noticed a difference in the credit earning potential. Therefor I dont think people who dont have Missouri should spend thousands on getting it just because it "earns bazillion credits", it does, but so does Musashi.
×