Jump to content

10ThousandThings

Players
  • Content count

    247
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

    1331
  • Clan

    [PUPSI]

About 10ThousandThings

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Sheffield, UK
  1. Karma and enemy spite reporting

    Hmmm, yes, it did just occur to me that it could open the door too: 'I want my camo, why did you not compliment me? Now I'm going to be a about it'. So perhaps not worth it. It would be good if WG could find a way to implement a carrot as well as a stick, but maybe this isn't it. I should make sure I've had at least one cup of tea before attempting blue-sky thinking.
  2. Karma and enemy spite reporting

    It's hard not to agree with this point. I get that WG might be concerned about people playing the system if there were actual rewards, although that's idle speculation on my part rather than something I know they've said. Maybe something like getting one FTW camo – which have previously been given away for good behaviour, although possibly only on NA judging from the links I found* – for every ten compliments would be good (with reports not affecting progress; numbers could be tweaked). It would be something nice, but not so amazing that people potentially gaming the system would be a major problem. What do others think? Is there a problem with such a system that I've overlooked? *Source: https://worldofwarships.com/en/news/common/rules-and-rewards/
  3. chat ban

    Just in case of doubt... The people replying here are players, not WG employees. We can't check any logs! If you wish to talk to WG employees, you'll have to go through the support website, here: https://eu.wargaming.net/support/en/products/wows/ I'm not sure they'll resolve your query to your satisfaction, but they at least have the possibility of looking at logs etc. (I believe...) WG employees on the forum are identified with a red banner by their name, and they usually use red text. The forums are for discussion rather than support. EDIT: Oh, I see you said in a later post that you did make a support ticket. Ignore me then.
  4. What is the stupidest thing you did today?

    Didn't save both sets torps and use them all at once to nuke the enemy Myogi at the end of this game. If I'd have done that, I'd have almost certainly survived and the game would have ended with points in our favour. It's a useful lesson to have learned. You could also say that the enemy won because an AFK DD survived, which is annoying as (It would have also been fine if our Isokaze hadn't decided to keep shooting in the open while we were capping, but I know I could have done better so would be kidding myself if I posted this in the 'carry harder' thread. Our Kaiser and Orion both did good work too, props to them.)
  5. UK WOWS Event??

    Fairs. I should have also included something about the need to at least attempt a sensible and level-headed analysis of events when discussing these things as well. Number 4 was not really aimed at the replies to those claims, some of which made my head hurt and contributed significantly to my little outburst at the start of my post. I agree with the people pointing out the flawed logic on some of those points. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to clear up that implication. I didn't really have the inclination to specify who everything was aimed at, so sorry for the misinterpretation. Pointing out historical inaccuracies or rubbish logic is fine, taking it personally is uncalled for.
  6. UK WOWS Event??

    As a historian of the twentieth century who has taught on a first-year undergraduate module on the global history of the period, both sides of this argument are starting to make me wonder why I bother. Can we all maybe agree the following? 1) All major European powers have, at various times, committed acts which we would now call crimes against humanity. This is not to say that non-European powers have not done the same; it's just that that's not the topic under discussion 2) Most of them have pretty significant issues with addressing the 'historical memory' of these acts. Many prefer to deny or minimise them. Germany is perhaps, to some extent, an honourable exception in this regard. This is a fiendishly difficult problem to deal with and requires huge degrees of mutual respect, humility, understanding and compassion. 3) The fact that other countries have committed similar acts is not a mitigating factor (that is to say, two wrongs don't make a right). Nor does it make much sense to try and establish who was 'worse'. (As in, what productive insight do we gain by doing so? How would we even measure it?) 4) These acts were committed by historical agents, mostly the political and economic elites of the countries in question in the relevant period. No one on this forum was among these agents. It's nonsensical to attack someone for things the government of their country did in the past, just as it is nonsensical to feel personally offended/insulted at someone pointing out that your country did bad things in the past 5) This thread is in desperate need of locking.
  7. UK WOWS Event??

    The thing is, I tend to agree that the 'let's laugh at different opinions' thing is generally unhelpful (which isn't to say I won't argue against views I disagree with) and usually try to avoid it, so it's good to have it pointed out when I mess up. I guess it just grinds my gears when my countrymen act like the UK isn't a European country. Combined with being half asleep at the time (I'm in Spain for work atm and today is a public holiday, so had a nice lie-in) this led to posting without thinking. If I'd thought about it I'd have also realised – as I since have – that the incident in question took place when I was still in sixth form, 9 or 10 years ago, and that quoting one's 17-year-old self in a public forum isn't terribly bright anyway Lesson learned. And agreed about Sundays ;-)
  8. UK WOWS Event??

    That's fair, I'll concede that. In fact I did use it precisely to avoid a conversation I didn't want to have. I'd already spent more time than I wanted to listening to his views on e.g. how allowing faith groups other than his own to practise their religion openly was only going to lead to violence and terrorism, had tried sensible arguments to no avail, and honestly just wanted someone to start talking about the weather so I could relax and enjoy my Sunday lunch. IIRC it didn't even work in that limited sense, but it was worth a try... I probably shouldn't have bothered with the original post given that this context is both necessary rather too cumbersome. But hey ho, live and learn.
  9. UK WOWS Event??

    I imagine she's 'been very clear' that the UK government will walk away of WG insist on keeping the same ships and mechanics as they have on all the other servers, but that both parties have agreed computers and other stuff she doesn't understand will be necessary so what could possibly go wrong? The talks will conclude soon and she can go looking for a nice field of wheat to run through and feel extremely naughty. Several years ago... Jingoistic elderly relative: ... And it's because of Ted Heath that now we're in Europe. Me: Erm no, it's because of basic geography that we're in Europe.
  10. PSA: Create polls that are unbiased

    Here's hoping this gets pinned, even if only for a week.
  11. Too many dd

    Fair enough, that's clear then. Sorry for taking it too seriously. I guess it's easy for something to sound more serious than it's meant when all you have is the text. And tbh it appealed to the side of me that enjoys thinking through how this kind of hypothetical idea would work out in practice and debating its merits. Again, apologies for misunderstanding.
  12. Too many dd

    I do of course realise that there are cruisers in the queue. I never suggested that there weren't, only that there aren't 2.5x as many cruisers + CVs as there are DDs, and that a hard cap of 2 DDs per side probably wouldn't change that. If MM doesn't run smoothly and gets consistently clogged with more DDs (and/or BBs) than it's allowed to put into normal 12v12 battles, wouldn't it just create more of the kind of underpopulated battles, possibly with tier/class mismatches, that we currently get if someone (usually a CV) has been queuing for ages? Unless the proportion of each class joining the queue changed drastically to meet the proportions required, this would happen much more regularly than it does now. In which case, those two DDs would likely make up roughly the same proportion of the average team as they do now, only with more space to operate and possibly not even balanced against each other. Wouldn't this rather defeat the point of your idea? You're right, I did assume you would want MM to run smoothly. Hopefully the above explains why. But i guess it's possible that you don't see any of this as a problem, or think that your suggestion still solves more problems than it causes. In which case, I suppose we shall have to agree to disagree
  13. Too many dd

    Oh yes, absolutely. I just meant that I wouldn't say the current destroyer population is problematic, personally.
  14. Too many dd

    I wouldn't say the game is miserable, but i certainly agree with your fundamental point about inter-class imbalance. I still wouldn't say we have an excess of DDs though, or that there's any need to put even a soft cap on their numbers, tbh. I do d that decision truly mystifying in all honesty. I do agree about balancing out the effect of new lines, but, well... Stats still show about 2/3 as many DD games played as BB games at high tiers over the last week, and significantly more CAs than DDs too. Granted, there are slightly more than 10% more DDs than BBs at low tiers, but then there's only the one T2 BB in the game... And cruisers still outnumber DDs at low tiers. http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/20181006/eu_week/average_class.html
  15. Too many dd

    And how would you make sure enough cruisers join the queue after your proposed change, which – let's be honest – aims to give BBs more freedom of action? To run smoothly, MM needs to be able to make teams that broadly reflect the population of each class at any given moment. [e.g. the current cap on CVs at T7+ only works because CVs are unpopular at these tiers; if 25% of ships in the queue were CVs for any sustained period, it would break the MM. Presumably this is also why 4 DDs/team is going to be a soft cap.] If you take away the MM's flexibility to make teams this way (as your proposal would), you have to be sure that the proportion of the classes in the queue will reflect the proportions allowed on teams. In order to run smoothly, MM under your proposal would require the number of CVs + cruisers to be: 1) at least 2.5 times the number of destroyers 2) at least equal to the number of battleships. How do you propose to make sure this happens? You agreed with me earlier that balance is more important than the fun of any given class. This proposal seems to be all about increasing the fun for BBs who don't like to deal with destroyers (personally I quite enjoy loading HE and blasting them away), without paying sufficient attention to its impact on overall balance (of both gameplay and MM). Sorry if you feel this is a mischaracterisation, but the proposal seems to view the interaction between BBs and cruisers as the core gameplay, and DDs as a distraction from this, whereas DDs are also part of the core gameplay.* *Off topic but needs saying for the sake of completeness: As are CVs. Yes, their numbers are capped despite this, but if I understand correctly that's down to their ability to be in several places at once, which is not the case for DDs. P.S. Apologies if any of the above treats this as a more serious suggestion than you intended. But hey, the point of hypothetical suggestions is to discuss them :)
×