Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About 10ThousandThings

Profile Information

  • Location
    Sheffield, UK

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. 10ThousandThings

    AA mod 2 (slot 3) in 0.8.7. Worthwhile?

    So if I've understood the explaination in the news piece correctly, the AA changes in 0.8.7 mean that flak bursts spawn in a smaller aura/band/whatever than before (long range + part of mid range, instead of long range + all of mid range). Since 0.8.0 I've been running AA mod 2 in slot 3 (+2 flak bursts per salvo) on a number of cruisers and a few DDs whose AA seemed to warrant it (as a rule of thumb, those with flak bursts in both long and mid range auras, and 6 or fewer bursts per salvo base). Idk if that's necessarily optimal anyway, but it seemed so with the flood of CVs at the start of the year and I've not been online enough to think about changing it for several months, until a few weeks ago. Given the now decreased utility, I'm thinking of replacing it with the slot 3 aiming systems mod. Definitely on the DDs as I keep AA turned off most of the time anyway but possibly also on the cruisers. Wondered what the forum's thoughts are?
  2. 10ThousandThings

    London Port... Modern or Historical?

    Same, since getting a PC that could handle anything other than Ocean. I quite like Sarushima Base too. I still really want a Scapa Flow port – beyond an actual naval base it would just be just bleak, beautiful Orcadian scenery, and very little noise beyond the sea birds. To clarify: actual naval base in contrast to London, not in contrast to Hawaii
  3. 10ThousandThings

    Do you want submarines in the game?

    Have often said 'I guess why not, if they are balanced, fun to play, and there are satisfactory counterplay options'. From what I'm seeing, the suggested implementation fails on all three counts*, so absolutely not. *I'll admit there might be some people out there who think that the suggested 'homing' mechanisms will be fun to play, but I don't find it satisfying in the long run if it's not at least sorta challenging
  4. 10ThousandThings

    Grind grind grindiggedy grind: French DDs Pt 1 continued

    So what I'm understanding is that the missions are still available for those who got the ships out of the boxes last patch but didn't quite manage to finish the missions and still want to (nice for them), but grinding the tech tree ships in order to complete missions before they run out probably isn't worth it and certainly isn't possible for someone without unbelievable amounts of free time (so don't bother trying). Is that about the size of it? What's the big deal here?
  5. 10ThousandThings

    Calm down dear, It's only a U boat......

    Maybe there actually is something to be said for separate game modes for different ships – and restricting some ships to only one or two – as a permay feature. E.g. 'fleet engagement' as copy-paste of current random battles set-up, 'convoy defence/attack' or whatever involving subs and maybe surface raiders on the attacking team, a separate mode for smaller vessels like MTBs, gunboats, sloops, Corvettes and frigates, so that's at least 3 new in-game classes straight off the bat. A WG employee should feel free to DM me for details of the bank account they can pay the royalties into Ofc one would need to set rewards so that it's worth people's time to play e.g. surface vessels in modes which include subs. Yes I know, not going to happen because fragmenting the playerbase etc. I also know someone is going to say 'no CV mode please' but as drastically as I think WG have screwed up the implementation of carriers, I do also think that AA is such a big part of ships' functionality and already such a widely used balancing factor, they should stay in said 'fleet engagments'. Just aimless musings more than 'I demand WG do this right now', for the sake of clarity.
  6. 10ThousandThings

    Submarines with acoustic torpedoes. Bad idea or good?

    Silly idea, I can't see how you can possibly balance it. I can see how the idea that they might be good against subs comes about – maybe playing with depth will make it too easy for them to dodge normal torpedoes – but it wouldn't make much sense for them to not home in on surface vessels if they exist. Really, *if* subs end up finding it too difficult to kill each other without introducing an impossible-to-balance mechanic, that should be a bullet-proof argument against introducing them in the first place
  7. This rings very true for me, and I see lots of people saying similar things. I just wonder whether we're really the majority on this, and whether the majority of the playerbase who don't invest time in visiting forums etc actually do want the new content more...? Not saying you're wrong, far from it, just speculating about WG's motives based on comments from players on other platforms like Facebook.
  8. Overall I'm happy with the game. I enjoy playing it a lot (or I wouldn't play it), I think the basic gameplay is fun. Of course I enjoy it more when I feel I've played well and less when I haven't, but that's the nature of it and it's on me to stop playing at times when I'm not having an enjoyable run. There's a lot for me still to do, having started only 2 years ago and not always been hugely active. For that reason, I don't give two hoots about the Research Bureau now it's not giving straightforward buffs for regrinding (or for just sinking lots of FXP into it). There is a 'but' or several, however. – I remain disappointed that WG decided to use the live server for testing the CV rework, when everyone who played on the test server told them it needed a lot of work. I really hope they will have learned from that for subs. I really hope they take their time on that, but I'm afraid I imagine that they have a 'subs on live server come what may' patch number in mind, and that it's probably sooner than most of us would be comfortable with. – I am exceedingly irritated about the IFHE changes. I don't know that I'll play any T6-7 CLs which use HE after they go through. I don't know for sure that I'm ready to be in T9 battles but am going to crash-grind Helena in advance. I guess we'll see how it goes. Sorry if you see me screwing up in it. I will stop if it really isn't working. It sucks because that's a ship I was really psyched about playing eventually, and I love the Dallas and I suppose La Gal is alright even though I struggle to make it work. – The constant events are a bit much. The schedule felt more chilled 12-15 months ago, and healthier. I would be happy with a couple of patches without a special resource to be gathering. – Premium ships seem to be getting released faster and faster and again, I don't understand the rush. – The constant focus on high-tier premiums is tiresome – I really hope WG are thinking about ways to continue monetising the game sustainably in the future, in ways that aren't just more and more new lines and increasingly wacky premiums. Because on day they're going to have to, and it pays to plan ahead. – Balancing by gimmicks annoys me oh so much. It should be possible to do more with more parameters – even really basic things like ballistics and gun rotation and manoeuvrability – beyond 'give them a crazy or cheesy ammo or consumable selection', I feel. Maybe I'm atypical in this. On streams and Facebook, there are a lot of people under every darn announcement and in every darn chat demanding to know when X ship is going to make it into the game and why missions aren't designed with their personal circumstances in mind. Yeah, maybe the forum's concerns are not representative of those of the playerbase as a whole... Still, I don't want to leave it on a whiney note. This is a very enjoyable game, I like the new maps, I love the complexity (compared to anything I've played before), I love feeling that there's still so much of a learning curve ahead of me. I'm interested in the history of the period, and learning to play better while indulging that interest is just good fun.
  9. 10ThousandThings

    Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

    A random thought which has just occurred to me, and which I'll be *interested* to see WG's eventual concept for: I wonder how mounting signals and flags will work on a submerged sub? Edit: has also just occurred to me that maybe I would know if I'd played the Halloween event. Oops.
  10. 10ThousandThings

    Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

    On this note, this seems as good a place as any to apologise in advance if anyone sees me making an idiot of myself in my brand new Helena over the next couple of weeks. I'd prefer to stick to T6 for longer, but want that grind done before the IFHE changes as much as possible. I promise I won't continue if it's going disastrously. It's one of the ships I've been most looking forward to playing, with its history and sheer firepower, but hey ho I guess Cleveland has those too (I really will wait a while before starting to play her though).
  11. First, I'm going to reaffirm my undying love for Shenyang. Current captain goes PT LS SE, a couple of more advanced ones having been transferred to Fushun and Jianwei. But more recently? As strange as it might sound, Aoba (currently PT EM DE CE; trying to work out what I think the next skill should be). Not had a single battle that I recall that hasn't been fun, even the losses. The improvement over Furutaka re range and reload are a joy. I really enjoy the pace it plays at, the handling, the ballistics, and I don't think there's a more attractive line than the IJN CAs. I don't think I'm shining in it atm, but it feels like I'm more consistent in it than in my Dallas, which also deserves a mention here tbh (PT EM SI IFHE; getting close to CE) but can be a bit feast-or-famine. Hopefully both will improve as I get more battles under my belt!
  12. 10ThousandThings

    Community hate and racism against CVs

    Usually I come here for a break from the relentless stupidity of Twitter (I wish I was joking), but OP has really outdone it this time. Look, there's hyperbole, and then there's comparing salt in a multiplayer game to millions of humans being denied civil rights, arbitrarily interned, and later gassed and worked and starved to death, there's massive and wilful trivialisation of genocide. 'Stupid' and 'offensive' don't come close to covering it. That's not a 'stylistic element'; at the very best it's a case of absolutely astounding historical illiteracy of which anyone should be ashamed. There are serious points to discuss here, but I don't think they can be discussed until OP has gone away and rephrased them in a way that can be taken seriously. (For starters: CVs and CV players aren't a race or an ethnicity or any similar category, for crying out loud).
  13. 10ThousandThings

    Submarines: the next step.

    Well said. I wasn't around during the Kami R and Grand Naval Battles event (just had my 2-year store voucher), and even I've noticed the pace of things has got much faster. It does feel like too much; I'd like to be left alone to just play and improve quietly. But I'm an unrepentant introvert who doesn't need lots of bells and whistles and shiny stuff for something to be interesting – and the core concept for WOWS is interesting, imo – and maybe that makes me different from WG's target audience.
  14. 10ThousandThings

    Submarines: the next step.

    I can see this point – but I am baffled that they haven't given serious thought to keeping it engaging for people who already have everything, without having infinite ships to add, earlier in their games' life. Again, maybe a bit of thought to quality over quantity, and to the long term, would have led to very different outcomes now...
  15. 10ThousandThings

    Submarines: the next step.

    I've been away from the game for a while and have no silver ships above T7, so I've honestly not paid that much attention, but the NTC does sound rubbish. I see what you mean, in that it shows they're thinking of the long term, but hopefully they find a more sustainable and positive approach.