Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About FerrowTheFox

  • Rank
    Able Seaman
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Science, space, cars, drawing

Contact Methods

  • Twitter

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. FerrowTheFox

    Opinions on an accidental friendly torp

    Weeell, sometimes theres the rare occasion where a friendly blunders into torps while just driving in a straight line from a to b and not doing any fighting himself (meaning he SHOULD have been able to notice and slow down a bit), where it COULD be argued both parties share the fault. One for torping when it wasn't safe, the other for sailing without a brain, i.e. he would have eaten torps from an enemy DD as well. All that being said I'd certainly say accidental friendly torping is pretty much always the fault of the player who launched the torps. I'd still differenciate between - bad luck / accident. When someone launches torps thinking he considered every friendly in the area, or his map awareness lapses during a chaotic phase like knife-fighting. These SHOULD not happen, but do unfortunately happen. Apologize, learn and move on. - reckless behaviour. When someone launches torps regardless of any friendlies in the area. I.e. second-row torping, launching long-range torpedos accross the entire map toward a contested cap, etc. Bonus points for blaming their victim afterwards. Just don't be that guy ^^
  2. FerrowTheFox

    Opinions on an accidental friendly torp

    As many others have already said, you and only you are responsible to launch your torps in such a way they won't cross paths with friendlies. Don`t feel too bad, all of us have accidentaly torped a teammate, ESPECIALLY while learning to use torp-heavy DDs. It happens, just apologize but make sure you learn from your mistakes. Most people are very understanding if you apologize as most have been there themselves before. I too recently turned pink for the first time in ages. We needed to stop a push and I was setting up an ambush, sending torps towards an enemy BB through a small channel between islands. The only friendly on my flank was a cruiser who himself had already killed a friendly by second-row torping our other DD. I was certain he would not rush head long into the enemy advance and thus the chances of my torps going anywhere near him where neglegible. He disagreed. Drove straight into the BB and ate one of my torps. He survived and I watched as he raced off into the rest of the enemy fleet where he committed suicide. Two things to take away from this 1. Even if you`re sure your torps won't hit friendlies who are remotely in their action radius, never underestimate the creative powers of some people. Sometimes they`re busy fighting and angling and you can't expect them to mind your torps as well. Sometimes they just yolo into the enemy. 2. Even if that guy was probably doing the latter, it`s still my fault for putting fishes in the water that were able to hurt him. And thus of course I apologized.
  3. I really like that idea. Customizing ships is always a good hook for people to invest. This could also be embedded into a whole system with the goal to get players to play each ship waaay more and possibly spend fxp. For example you could expand the current captain points system that already simulates a captain training for a certain ship. 1: Ship needs to be legendary (i.e. fully researched / upgraded) 2: Have a 19 pt. captain on the ship. This commander could become the ships dedicated captain (i.e. for 19 pts he learned the ropes, now he's gaining profieciency with her). 3: With both the ship and the captain being "legendary" you can now access the prestiegeing quest. 4: Prestiege Quest: Earn x amount of XP and achieve certain goals to unlock. For example (but not limited to): - Tier 1: Custom captain name - Tier 2: Unique ship flag and title - Tier 3: Unique permanent ship camo - Tier 4: Ability to customize ship 5: Ship customization works like @Panocek suggested. E.g. take up to 10% from any of the main stats (HP, gun reload time, torp reaload time, speed, concealment, max shell damage, max torp damage, torp speed, shell dispersion, etc.) and redistribte them to give up to 10% buff to any other stat. Maybe 10% is too much, or certain stats need other limits. So basically a captain would become so good with his ship that in the end he can tweak and tune it to his liking. However to buff one aspect you need to lower another. So hopefully everything stays balanced. That being said I still think "forgetting" the line should not be part of it.
  4. I've already expressed my disdain about this whole NTC idea on youtube, but let me repeat it here, so the devs can see it. I have NO idea who thought this is the way to go. It is stupid and definitely not wanted. I`m still a pretty new player that heasn`t even unlocked a single tier X ship yet. And let me tell you: I will NEVER EVER regrind any lines. I hate grinding. I play for fun and do the basic grind to get to ships I want. I also like playing different ships in a line at any time. I also don`t have the time to play constantly just to be able to compete. NEVER should there be buffs for people who just invest more time / money. Skill should be the only thing separating more experienced players from beginners. Not buffs that inherently make you more powerful than a novice player. To be constructive, let me give you some pointers: I would absolutely be interested in COSMETIC or PRESTIEGE (i.e. e-peen) rewards to give endgame players something new to do. Also, just scrap the whole "forgetting and regrinding" idea. Instead give unique challenges or certain requirements. There are so many things you could do! Why not make an affinity system where you gain affinity for ships / lines you like the most to unlock skins of sister ships of the line? Or prestiege emblems / titles? For example. I absolutely love my IJN DDs (even if I still suck and the current meta makes them hard to play). So say I get my Shiratsuyu to legendary status. If I keep using her for X battles or do a special challenge series I can unlock a skin that makes her look like Shigure (name / hull number). Or give me a special title like "Long Lancer" for proficiency with IJN torp boats that is displayed on the kill screen. Again: Purely COSMETIC items and NO multiple regrinding! I also have to say it baffles me how out of touch WG seems to be with their community and their own product. I mean, when CCs voiced concern about the skill gap widening even further they responded with "but the skill gap is already there everywhere" (great, so just because you`re unable to balance your game, just throw out balance alltogether?) and "but the prem consumables" (as if that would change anything). At one time they even just responded to the question with "nope". These are your hardcore die-hard players who MADE your game and get it better than anyone else! Also, maybe the reason people almost exclusively play higher tiers is because almost everywhere I look requirements read "Tier VIII-X ships". So maybe design campaigns and missions for lower tier ships as well? I do basic game design as a hobby. I invent or tweak pen and paper RPG and tabletop game systems to play with mates. I also did some modding back in the day. So, while I`m not a fancy pro game designer working in the electronic entertainment industry, I do have a basic grasp of balancing issues and game mechanics. That being said, I find myself constantly scratching my head, wondering what on earth WG is thinking. The CV rework, unbalanced premiums, powercreep and now THIS stupid idea with the NTC. Everyone here sees the problems with it! May I ask, without trying to be mean, really just curious: There ARE real game designers at WG, right? Like, people who have actually studied this? It sometimes seems more trial and error than actual methodical design. And I`m sorry if this whole post comes off as ranting, but I`m at tis point mostly irritated and alienated by the constant inability of WG to just listen to their core demographic and experienced players who have been here from the start. It this goes through I will just stop playing and find greener pastures somewhere else, there's enough games out there.
  5. FerrowTheFox

    CV Rework Discussion

    Seriously, how do they keep coming up with some of this stuff? Of course, AA crews shoot at the planes NOT attacking you. Also, this doesn't really address the problem of surface ships being at the mercy of CVs, but at the same time makes the game experience more frustrating for the CV players as well. I mean, you now lose the planes you`re not controlling and can't do anything about that. I'm not saying balancing AA or CVs as a whole is easy, but c'mon it's been how long? I came back to WoWS to take a look how it's coming along and everything is still a mess. And they keep on just pushing stuff to live servers that feels like it was the first thing that came up in a meeting and was hardly tested on PTS. But, to be constructive, just a few ideas off the top of my head: - Instead of only linking AA effects to plane HP alone, why not try other mechanics?. --> If a plane receives a hit, in addition to taking damage, there's a x% chance for it to become incapacitated (control surfaces damaged, engine shot up) or outright killed (ordnance detonation, pilot killed). Incapacitated planes lead to wider turn circles for the squad or can't use engine boost anymore. --> The more AA in a given area, the more pilots are distracted by it and thus drop accuracy suffers, leading to a wider drop area. This simple inclusion would mean CVs could still attack AA blobs but scoring fewer hits. Both these give you additional values for tweaking besides HP and AA damage. - Include servicing times according to the state of the planes. --> Damaged planes need to be repaired (x HP/sec), lost planes are replaced from the reserves. Until that video I didn't even know the servicing time for damaged and full-health planes were the same. Seriously, WTH?! Damaged should mean damaged. It would mean that even if your AA didn't kill a plane it counts for something, i.e. the time before the planes can be sortied again. - Generally speaking, add any resemblance of depth to flight deck operations on carriers. However I better make a separate post about some ideas me and wows playing friends had about those. (Not that it matters, when so many good suggestions by others have already been ignored)
  6. FerrowTheFox


    Oh right, forgot that torps were at periscope depth only in the Halloween test. Sorry, my mistake!
  7. FerrowTheFox


    Something else just hit me: Would subs be able to counter other subs? I mean they're capable of 3 dimensional movement and thus could evade torps more easily even if the submarines are slow. If they're on the surface and can't dive in time sure, but fully submerged? Would there be wire-guided torpedos ( doubt that from a UI perspective)? This presents a possible problem where we get another class that can't counter itself, but needs a dedicated hunter (at least for the most part, surfaced subs should be easy prey for everyone in principle).
  8. FerrowTheFox


    I`m not entirely sure subs are impossible to balance and / or able to be implemented in a fun to play way, however seeing the whole CV rework balance debacle and some of the 'absolutely balans' premiums, I'm very cautious. The whole Halloween event trial was actually pretty good imo, with subs being balanced around their maneuverability and time they can be submerged before oxygen supplies run out. As mentioned in here, other balance decisions like subs being unable to cap while fully submerged could be implemented as well. The biggest fear for me and many of my mates as DD mains is that it would be another job we`d have to do. DDs are already supposed to spot, cap, screen against other DDs, corral the enemy, provide smoke cover, torp BBs and all while minding the plane squadrons and radar cruisers looking for us, ideally remaining concealed and far enough in front of the fleet to be useful, but also not so far away as to be unable to head for AA cover. So, seeing how often in recent times I'm the only or one of two DDs in a match and I'm needed at different ends of the map during the battle, I really don't know how to do ASW on top of that. The only upside I see is that Subs could give the CVs a counter or at least something else to chase besides me
  9. FerrowTheFox

    Suggestion to balance carriers and destroyers

    As I've said in another thread, this might work for some DDs that basically are mini-CAs and rely on their guns, but for stealth ships like the IJN torp DDs that rely on concealed flanking and torp positioning without having other ships next to them this still means they're basically useless. Also why bring a DD at all if you can basically do the same thing with a CA that has more health pool?
  10. Yes, that's true. A half decent CV player will not only stumble upon you, but take a look at the roster and, if he doesn't have you spotted already, look for you. Even if he has other things to do, all it takes is a wider route of approach while attacking another ship to cover big swaths of the map. I mean that's basic map awareness. I do that in DDs as well. Who is on my flank and accounted for and who is not (where is that radar CA?). And who can blame them, it's just natural for them to go after you, since DDs are the weakest, most easily sunk but also highest priority target (next to other CVs). And while I agree with the overall point made by some users here that you CAN indeed play around (at least some) CVs with careful timing and more reserved play, I think for me it boils down to: is it fun? And at least at the moment I have to answer no. Again, I don't even know what my job is supposed to be now and I think that more static gameplay even from DDs is just further encouraging campfests. And relying on teamplay to stay alive is...questionable in randoms I always enjoyed DDs for the adrenaline rush of walking the thin line between good concealed positioning and quick fiery death. I loved being the eyes and ears of allies. Seeing that "I need intelligence!" request and going around the islands to provide spotting or distracting an enemy so others could shoot it. Or even the other way around with CAs getting the enemy to focus on them and me torping while they were occupied. Was I particularily good at it? No, I'm still horrible at it. But it was fun and made me want to learn to be better. But at least at the moment with concealment just not being a reliable commodity, I've lost a lot of fun playing.
  11. That is correct and that always was a viable tactic even before. Torpedo and DD screening for my allies and providing smoke is something I always did, however for torp DDs not being able to flank to the side on their own to get good torp runs diminishes our damage potential drastically. If I launch from directly in front of my supporting fleet most enemies will be angled towards us. It's perpendicular arcs that get hits and force them to make evasive maneuvers so my allied CAs and BBs can get to hit their broadsides. Not disagreeing with you, just giving my thoughts in regards to tactics any my perceived problems in 0.8
  12. I'm closely following the threads here and some people keep saying us DD captains just need to adapt to the new meta and stay close to AA support. What I don't really understand - and as a noobish player I'm seriously asking for an honest answer here - is what our roles are then supposed to be now? It used to be DDs who gathered intel and and capped. Our tools were always speed and stealth. However, if stealth is just a thing of the past because those fast planes WILL spot you; and we can't cap alone and have to go together with the slower ships, making our speed worthless, why bring a DD at all? Why not bring a CA instead? Yes some gun DDs with good AA can still be effective, but stealth ninjas are imo no longer viable. So my favoured IJN torpedo boats are pretty useless, correct me if I'm wrong. They just make no sense unless they can get into position without being spotted and they need to be able to operate alone. So what is the supposed new way to make those work? Also, how are we now supposed to respond to trouble? I used to cross the map repeatedly from cap to cap, reinforcing flanks where needed or falling back to protect the pre 0.8 CV if they called for help, but going off alone is just so risky at the moment. Again, really looking for answers how this is going to work now.
  13. FerrowTheFox

    an idea for the CV spotting problem

    As I've suggested in the CV thread, you could have the map updated with last known position markers only after the current flight returns to the deck. The CV player would see all ships he detects in real time, but the allied fleet would only get that information on the map once the planes return and the 'CV commander transmits the intel to the fleet'. If the planes are lost en route the intel is lost as well. It's not entirely historically accurate as planes should have radios as well, but let's just assume there's too much jamming to handle for the smaller tranceivers on the planes However it would also mean actually returning the planes is rewarded more.
  14. FerrowTheFox

    New CVs

    Since writing my last post I've been thinking hard how to improve this rework, since I guess a roll-back is just wishful thinking So I'll try to be more constructive and give ideas for balancing and new gameplay mechanics. Once again, I'll mostly speak from the perspective of a DD main, since that's what I am and DDs are the most affected class at the moment (next to the CVs ofc). 1: First thing and the most requested by others: FUEL. Have the planes have a limited fuel supply and thus a limited AO. This would necessitate the carriers to move around the battleflield to strike at more distant targets and thus endangering the hull more. This would lead to better risk / reward balancing. Also it could be coupled with upgrades / captain skills: Drop Tanks. Extend the AO of your planes but maybe reduce carried weapon load a bit. I'd love that! 2: Manual AA fire control for ships. As I've suggested before, have the AA fire automatically with RNG while set to 'auto' but let captains switch to manually controlling it with the mouse. This would add to less RNG frustration and limit the feeling of helplessness for the 'victims' of plane attacks. Maybe make this the special ability of all cruisers only to give them back their important support role (love you guys who help me out as a DD <3). Also as said before, maybe granting specialised AA CAs and DDs with dual-purpose main guns the option of firing their main guns at planes by selecting a third shell type (air burst) could be an option as well. 3: Next thing I want to talk about is that air superiority fights are effectively gone. Yes, you can detach some fighters, but as their action time, area and speed are too small they're not really worth it, especially for protecting faster surface ships. And protecting allies SHOULD be a prime job for CVs. So why not make CV-CV battles a part of the gemaplay again? If WG is reluctant to this because of the skill gap, I have to ask why DD / reconnaissance superiority was always a factor as well. DDs were always fighting each other in caps, marking enemy DDs for teammates and forcing them out of position and thus gaining intel superiority. Why are the new CVs exempt from this? Why not have them fight for air superiority again? Instead of rocket planes, give the CV controllable fighters to shoot at enemy bombers and thus be able to protect allied ships from strikes. This would IMO add immensely to team play and fun for CV players. 4: Reload /servicing times of planes MUST be longer and apply to the start of the match. As a torpedo DD my torps have to be loaded at the start of the game, sometimes they're not even ready when arriving at the first cap. After firing my torp sets I need to wait for them to reload (sometimes 2 minutes, depending on the DD and torp type) Planes can take off immediately and have no such cooldown (well technically they have but practically speaking there isn't). 5: The f-button exploit is REALLY a problem. So I was thinking, why not have the CV player steer the planes back to his carrier and only be able to press "f" to land the planes once in a 3 km radius or something. Yes, maybe this would add tedium for the CV captain but add an essential component to actually getting your flight OUT of an engagement. Again, as a DD I have to plan the entry AND exit route of my attack run and also have contingency plans for when things go wrong. Where does the CV have to do ANY of that? He can just go in, drop his ordnance and vanish magically. Also, I was thinking if maaaybe actually LANDING the planes could be a part of CV gameplay. Like really managing to get them back on the deck. You'd have to approach the carrier from behind, reduce speed properly and press a certain button in a designated corridor behind the CV, otherwise planes will perfom a "go around". New flights can only be launched once planes are recovered or shot down. 6: DD air detection really needs to be buffed if the class is not to just vanish completely. At the moment we can't do our job at all and actually are not really needed as planes do everything we do better, be it scouting, torping or 'corraling' the enemy. 7: Further thinking about the concealment / intel game: Why not have it so that only once planes land back at the carrier is the map updated with the last known locations of the enemy ships these planes encountered? Like the air crews reported back the gathered intel and the battle map was updated for the fleet. If no planes return, no gathered intel. This would help with the OP spotting of CVs as the fleet could only see tactical deployments a few seconds in retrospect and it would make the CV captain care about bringing back the flight instead of throwing it away. This would however separate the CV further from the active battle as he could not call for fire on air detected targets, so that is an issue I`ll admit. But we really need to get the intel game back on track with DDs being the primary eyes and ears of the fleet with planes HELPING, not being the final solution to everything. These are my suggestions thus far. I'm not saying they should ALL be implemented, nor did I ponder all the ramafications to other balancing factors. I'm just putting out some ideas how to rectify the chaos in the meta. Kind regards.
  15. FerrowTheFox

    General feedback

    While we're at it, i've never gotten a response from WG as to why we can't be allowed to take manual control of AA? Like instead of sector control, have AA fire with RNG while set to 'auto', but have a button to switch to AA guns manually and try and blast the damn planes with a mouse reticule (with the disadvantage of not being able to shoot main guns simultaneously). Also, dedicated AA ships like the Akizuki were built with 100mm dual-purpose main guns that could shoot down planes as well. There could easily be a third shell type to fire against air targets manually to set these ships apart.