Andrewbassg

Just don't play for the win. Enjoy the sites the pew pew......and that's it. Subs alone are soo retarded that... anything else is impossible. On the other hand that's exactly what Weegee wants. They don't want people who know how to play. They want the dumb. That's what about the last two years was all along.. They want to kill off the 'thinking man's action game narrative.

LOl,

Well not exactly but kinda.... 1920. will meet... 1960. https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/310 Also..... Yep.

https://blog.worldofwarships.com/blog/311 So....I wanted to break it down, but I just lost interest along the way. What is wrong with this people....

Btw dis one is good one :)

Yes. Those are quite modern looking designs fitting for T9 - T10. But the upper ones are not. They look like T4-6 ships i mean for good reason coz that's what they actually are. Up until now they kinda cared about this aspect, but it seems that not anymore..

I know. My point was that it should have been T8. They could have gone nuts from there Which is what they usually do..

Yes. But the preceding Admiral class ( Hood) is T7. And the design looks like 1920. Which is. And gonna face Des Moines, Wooster's Nevsky's and Petro's I don't see the... logic.

Oh...... 1912-1957. And the sisters were all Bofors not just the pew-pew ack-ack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sverige-class_coastal_defence_ship Otherwise at this point...

It looks like T4. Not even T6. Also what is that conning tower? Looks like cut in half...

Loolz......... what are the odds.....

Yeah.... I keep getting the absolute noobs on my team. Like Dd's dying in the first minute, all three of em......In Ranked......

Tho both teams were kinda ......greens.

Erm......incearca engleza. Use google tr if problems. Also use the search function for operations/scenarios.. They were thoroughly neglected. Otherwise " I'll buy all t6-7 premiums for scenarios, but I would like missions for them like for temporary battles. There are many missions for randoms or ranked but not for operations? Why Wows it is very very complicated?|

Hello there. So a couple of things: it is not clear how much time the visual clue will remain in place. Also it is ensured that it would be visible under all conditions? Sunglare , reflections, yadda yadda. And I think that only the pinged vessel should see the clue, to others minimap, perhaps. On the othe hand that visual clue should be when the sub launches torps, not when pings. Also, in my view, the direction of the guided torp mechanic being taken is generally speaking, wrong. It should be a short ranged last resort weapon coupled with reload limitations. The subs main weaponry should be the unguided torps not the other way around. Then about removing depletion, subs have already gotten a LOT of increase to their Hp pool, while also decreasing the efficiency of ASW weaponry. Erm....where is this heading? And there should be a marked correlation between risk-reward meaning that longer ranged ASW should be less efficient compared to close quarter launched ones. Also the issue of forward ASW's compete inefficiency is still not looked at. While visually enticing the only thing provides is a washing of the launching ship. So either make it double ended https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leahy-class_cruiser or make it at least semi efficient. About the map, it is not clear what tier will use it. By the looks it seems T5-6-7? As for superships in CB..... I think your hand is already full on that. Tho I think it is way to early Otherwise... art dep hard carry. .

No:) I'm not interested in theory crafting. Tier disparity is part of this game's reality. Why should Cv's be exempt from it? Coz they are ....special"? Otherwise... is fun :) Again, ditto. And positioning is part of GG so ...: Bait da monke is a valid tactic :). Of course they are:). Is their strike capabilities hindered by geography? Can they choose their targets regardless of tactical situation and again geography?. There you go. Game theory is game theory, regardless of the medium. Except in cases when people, for various reason, can't pinpoint, ergo rationalize, what is wrong And you are assuming that the devs have de facto control over the direction of the game and that didn't change in time. Yo.... I like challenges. But the motivation is clean. Also I don't know "you" you could very well be a.... dev :) :) I used to have a pirate patch. Still I'm a cruiser main so ...:) Of course it does :). It has nothing to do with fairness. Not even with "fairness". Tho it is about experience and individual decision making. Which is literally what I said. Which is the basis of PvP.. Game design is all about creating possibilities of interactions. Good game design offers multiple ways of interaction without creating 'unjustifiable frustration. Reread what I wrote and what you wrote. It is a textbook justification/explanation.:) If the povs are radically different, the chance for miscommunication will exponentially grow. Nope. I can see some justifications, however they are not valid. in the end is a cost/benefit analysis and they just don't make any sense. If there would be buyable items then ....it would make a sort of sense. However there aren't.

Coz of laziness reasons, it is tied to DCP. Otherwise I see the legitimacy of the concept tho, not the implementation. it should be short ranged, ~5-6-7 km a sort of last resort weapon. Also over the top sells like candy, so...

Oh...more fun. Erm....nope. Coz ya know, Alaska is in the same slot as Neptune. So....nope. It is part of the imbalanced-balanced nature of this game. Ditto as above. However, it was skillbased and that difference in skill rightfully translated into increased battle influence, vs what we have now. Don't confound the inability to balance things out with valid and reasonable arguments/explanations. Dis one is tricky, read it until you get it. As tit for tat.:) Oh......but we can discuss the demerits of giving the only strategic class in a tactical shooter, to a random idiot in the game. Right? Which was the basis of the Cv rework. Right? And we also can discuss the demerits of not reducing the strategic role played by the class itself. Right?.Yeeeah.... Btw your assertion that Cv's are a support class is... right and also no. More no, but later. Yo, no.1) No player has any power to decide what is or happening in the game. Period. So that makes it an argument from authority.2) their inability to recognize and address ( its three years now) valid and legitimate issues is quite fair game.3) if the arguments are valid.... then they are not false 4) What you call "truth" is actually narrative. Narratives made the world burn, quite a few times, so we all should pay attention, if there is a valid component or not. Then. it comes down to motivation. ...to make money. :) Tho that is not wrong per se. :) Yo......I'm not doing it for "winning". I'm educating. Tho sometimes I do enjoy the process.:) Sorry, I'm human:). You mean..... pointing nose to whom and when, also when not? Yo....... Nope. You see, that's the problem with seeing this game. as a board or chess game. it is thoroughly false and misleading. because assumes always looking at the "big picture", instead of understanding that this game is a PvP tactical shooter. The biggest difference is, that in the former one player controls many elements (therefore sacrifice is a valid tactic) and in the latter one player controls one element ( and therefore is not). One can decide upon that, but is a personal decision, not a game design decision. Otherwise yes it should be if the cost is willingly assumed. Period. Giving that possibility, removes the responsibility. Ur welcome :) Ermm....more nope. You see this is a PvP tactical shooter. Cv's are not a support class they are a strategic class. But, given that there is no strategy in a pvP tactical shooter, they are best played as a support class. But, again, given the fact that this is a PvP tactical shooter, it is not a requirement to play them as such and still can be played as a PvP tactical unit. So....nope. And that's the problem which is still not understood. Yo.....no. the problem with Cv's is that they create a double jeopardy. Direct by their actions and indirect by their spotting. And that's why they have all sorts of artificial and quite dishonest mechanics to protect them, in a frikkin PvP tactical shooter game, coz otherwise it would create a imbalance. This is the worst kind of reasoning, the circular reasoning. Otherwise, nobody asked for specific units to be created, that was Wedgie, so they and other people could point towards them and say" looks its working". When ofc it doesn't. Like I said, it should be a personal choice to invest or not into it. with obviously respecting some.... historicity. Well, it fits the whole narrative, so...not really.

Arguably RTS Cv's had a legitimacy which current ones lacks, to put it very mildly. Yo you mean that we can't discuss nor criticize the mindlessness and retardness of their decisions? lolz......learn to argue mate.... You mean.... just dodge? Yo......lolz.... Oh....nope. I mean if we define effective as providing some very nice fireworks then yes. However If we define as being capable of preventing strikes by planes....lolz. Coz.... ya know that's literally what AA means and its reason to exist. Then its just plain old B.S

Don't forget Pu....hkhmm....Peter the Great. I mean the real Kirov.

Well you should...... and there is more...

April the....7th?

Well..... I have no intention to go bankrupt over 100K coal. I kinda struggle with that on NA ( newer account). So If I get it for that amount is ok. If not......I will get the coal the old fashion way. I have DM with permacamo, Salem, Alaska so.... no real hurry.

Looking at the offers...... I put 50 mil for the coal. If I get it I will get the Tulsa.

Ummmm......... you wanna swap the biases? Erm... just imagine the next "special" consumable installed on Chi....hkmm.....pan asian dd's, a little hacker, who opens a laptop and when in range gain intel to the red... erm... opposing ships position. Or some propaganda masts on the upcoming BB line, which "converts" units either temporary or permanently. All TM of course :) And the very special "Great Leap Forward" which instantly teleports Chung Mu to a chosen position on the map, Tho it would be interesting to see the Cv cap's reactions, lmao... Not to mention the next Naval Legends video featuring the Type053