Jump to content


  • Content Сount

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Battles

  • Clan


About Saltface

  • Rank
    Petty Officer
  • Birthday 06/19/1965
  • Insignia

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

134 profile views
  1. Saltface

    Teamkill penalty

    Take a Hermelin and enjoy a CooP (or two for that matter) Regards
  2. Saltface

    The Odd Man Out

    I have played in random about 1,500 battles - 50% with BB 50% with cruisers. I "hated" Destroyers. I could never get the grasp of them. Best way is to fight what you fear (metaphor) most is doing it. And I like being challenged. Regards, Saltface
  3. Saltface

    The Odd Man Out

    Dear All, Thank you for your prompt replies. By no means I am telling one and all to stop answering. Just a quick thank you. I started from IJN T2 Umikaze. I did 10 Co Op battles with her and 32 Random. Result, oh my, a disaster. Random was 10 out of 32. However, this is mostly due to the fact that there are seldom any ships other than DDs in Random at T2. Most of my games have been 2 vs 2 or 3 vs 3 or in good cases (lol) 7 DDs and a few odd Cruisers. Torp land. I managed to sink 21 ships with torps. But I always get deleted by gun boats. Yes, Umikaze has great torpedoes at 8 K and I can fire 4 every 20 seconds, but, her guns are next to non existent. Everytime I get face to face with a (e.g) KM V 25 I m gunned out to oblivion. I attribute this to the big difference of initial shell velocity that gives a low arc, hence, better gunnery. (750 m/sec vs 660 m/sec - this is 13.64% faster) This is significant at the close range that we engage. Not to mention 10 sec reload time for the Umikaze vs 4 sec of the T25. Torpedoes are rather ineffective vs Destroyers as both ships are agile. What I think I will do is: 1. Ignore my WR (it will fall of the cliff); 2. Try all Destroyers until T5; 3. Try the Kamikaze the Gremyashchy and the Monaghan Then I will see which line I will try to push. The idea of stealthy sneaky play is rather exciting. It is more cerebral I guess. We shall see Once again thank you all and by no means stop posting your advise Regards Saltface PS I have divisioned with @Bear_Necessities who had the courage to suffer me supporting him in my Hindenburg. I really enjoyed it. Oh by the way, I will not stop playing with my BBs.
  4. Saltface

    The Odd Man Out

    Dears, I beg to differ. I want to learn how to play Destroyers. Yes, now, with all this CV rework thing going on. And to be honest every time I tried I failed miserably. Just look at my stats. Absolute (well almost absolute) failure. Question: Which Nation and for what reason? Tips and advise as always welcome. Regards, Saltface P.S. As during the festive period my kids trolled my badly. I received a ton of loot boxes as Christmas gifts. I also got many of the researchable ones when that event took place a few months ago and WG was giving away researchable ships. So, I have a rather big (unused) collection of Destroyers moored in my port. IJN - Umicaze, Kamikaze, Hatsuharu, Asashio USN - Monaghan, Sims, Kidd SN - Gremyashchy, Okhotnik, Leningrad KM - T-61, Z39 RN - Icarus, Gallant PN - Blyskwica PA - Longjiang, Anshan, Loyang MF - Aigle, Le Terrible CW - Haida Black Jack of Destroyers. Would any of them be a good learning ship?
  5. Saltface

    Edge of Tomorrow. Live, Die, Repeat

    Dear @MistaBoo I fail to see the relevance with the topic. Hence, I respectfully decline to answer. However, even though it might come to your surprise, I think it is a little bit more than 20 questions. Now, I have the feeling I am your elder. As such I take the liberty of passing one piece of advise. What you do with it is your business. My dear fellow, for your own sake, avoid being provocative. It gives you no merit. On the contrary it weakens any valid points you might make. It also increases the number of people that dislike you. Please be advised that being disliked is not a good thing. Choice is yours. Warm regards, Saltface
  6. Saltface

    Edge of Tomorrow. Live, Die, Repeat

    Dear @MistaBoo No need. You are a grown up. Silly kids writing nonsense should not bother you. I regret to say so but it doesn't seem a positive change. Do you have any evidence for such claims? Sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. Please provide data and evidence because such claims are inflammatory and do not help the game you are trying to better. Here again I will not agree. It seems that Cap rules is one of the balanced aspects of the game. my answer is the same as @RAHJAILARI And now my dear @MistaBoo I do not wish to flame you or berate you. (the profanity that you wish to avoid in game chat you introduce in the sections of your text that I have erased, quite a contradiction) And I shall certainly not criticize you. However, I am sure you will agree, this game is evolving all the time. It changes. Some changes are big and radical some are small and inconspicuous. If I am allowed the transgression of making a parallel, and please indulge me for the extreme nature of the simile, every change that has a "Darwinian" advantage stays. The others are lost in oblivion. But please pay attention, changes are made to make the game better so that the company that runs the game enjoys a better position in the market. Your enjoyment and pleasure are not the goal. They are the means for the company that has invested their assets to increase their return on investment. So any change that makes more players come in the game and spend their money has a "Darwinian" advantage. And those changes are going to happen and they are going to stay. You see my dear friend, there is something besides the intrinsic value of a product. This is the magical "willingness to pay". And every company wants their product to have value that the customers are willing to pay for. So try to evaluate your own proposals in light of the commentary that you have received and see if they will make the game better. And please keep in mind that better means that more paying players will come into it and the existing paying players will - if not increase their spending - continue to spend. In other words, increase the willingness to pay. Warm regards, Saltface
  7. Saltface

    Player Numbers. How much are they actually down?

    Plausible explanation. As per my previous post I was lazy even to think not only to make graphs. Thank you for the remark Regards Saltface
  8. Saltface

    Player Numbers. How much are they actually down?

    @ColonelPete, Thank you. I was lazy to make graphs. Looking at your graph I d love to pin point events on the peaks and the troughs. Regards Saltface
  9. Saltface

    Player Numbers. How much are they actually down?

    According to these numbers (if they are true) we can only make a few qualitative remarks. 1. Players play the game as they played it; 2. There is a shift towards games where the CV are not powerful but rather weak. 3. Also players avoid to play DDs as DDs are the class most affected by CVs rework. However, according to the numbers given by @Culiacan_Mexico for the week ending Feb 16 and for the week ending Feb 9 so there is a discrepancy between the figures presented by @ForlornSailor 388.894 to 195.028. @Culiacan_Mexico data set shows an increase in DD games. Anyway, I collected the data from http://maplesyrup.sweet.coocan.jp/wows/ranking/index.html and compiled the following table HIGH DD LOW DD TOTAL % PLAYERS % BATTLES Battles per Player Week Ending Players (H DD) Battles (H DD) Players (L DD) Battles (L DD) Players Battles H DD L DD H DD L DD H DD L DD Total 16-Feb 8,799 260,855 6,597 180,354 15,396 441,209 57% 43% 59% 41% 29.65 27.34 28.66 9-Feb 7,304 195,028 6,102 156,472 13,406 351,500 54% 46% 55% 45% 26.70 25.64 26.22 2-Feb 12,293 355,841 6,576 176,986 18,869 532,827 65% 35% 67% 33% 28.95 26.91 28.24 26-Jan 13,134 396,052 8,167 227,333 21,301 623,385 62% 38% 64% 36% 30.15 27.84 29.27 19-Jan 13,284 376,344 7,637 205,734 20,921 582,078 63% 37% 65% 35% 28.33 26.94 27.82 12-Jan 37,254 1,649,102 25,656 857,780 62,910 2,506,882 59% 41% 66% 34% 44.27 33.43 39.85 22-Dec 12,281 364,938 5,406 146,039 17,687 510,977 69% 31% 71% 29% 29.72 27.01 28.89 15-Dec 13,022 388,894 5,660 150,841 18,682 539,735 70% 30% 72% 28% 29.86 26.65 28.89 8-Dec 11,943 337,615 4,617 120,035 16,560 457,650 72% 28% 74% 26% 28.27 26.00 27.64 1-Dec 14,129 442,036 5,739 157,890 19,868 599,926 71% 29% 74% 26% 31.29 27.51 30.20 The week ending Jan 12, 2019 has irregular values. I cant know if they are an error of the data set of due to some external factor. I left the data with no corrections but certainly this one is an outlier. What we can observe is that the number of battles per player (last three columns of the data set) is more or less stable. Last two weeks we have a drop in players playing DDs and there is a slight shift from High Tier DD play to Low Tier DD play. However the last week numbers tend to pick up. We can't know if this is a rebound or normal fluctuation at lower numbers. We need at least data from the next three weeks to draw conclusions. Any further discussion is premature and any conclusions should be taken with a grain of salt. Regards Saltface
  10. Saltface

    Audacity CV ????

    Dear All, I will agree that testing of new vessels before they are launched in the live servers is rather essential. No one would disagree that launching an unbalanced ship causes, let's say, confusion at least. Not to mention a long series of whine posting on the Forum. However, I don't really think that it is correct to mess up a paying customer's game experience, or in other words, it is wrong to use a paying customer as a guinea pig for your testing without paying customer's consent. But that is just my opinion on how you treat paying customers. Maybe, just maybe, WG has a different view. At the end the market is the final judge. Furthermore, dear @MistaBoo if I may suggest to all of us to avoid this kind of characterizations. Honestly they are not constructive and help no one of us to better enjoy the forum and the game. Dear @Tyrendian89 according to my spreadsheet is it not so important to correct someone that is obviously venting some steam because he had some very frustrating 90 seconds of game. Even I - that sink fast due to my lack of knowledge of the game - last more that 90 seconds (no pun intended). I can understand how frustrating it is. Maybe, just maybe, we could be a bit more considerate of other's frustration. Regards, Saltface P.S. According to my spreadsheet the pyramids were built by aliens.
  11. Saltface

    Kamikazi torpedo bombers

  12. Saltface


    Dear @Procrastes I just lost a star going from 12 to 11. Well, I m learning her. She is a demanding lady. LOL. I managed to go shy of 100K in one battle in Ranked. And I managed an average of 45K. She can do a lot better. But ranked is a special case. And she is cut for T9 Ranked. In Random, I only pray that Mr. CV doesn't decide to sink me. LOL She has mediocre AA and she doesn't turn. If Mr. CV comes with his torp wall, I say good bye to my team mates (if I can type fast enough) and sit back to watch the battle. I kind of like this flag but it seems we keep it as long as the Ranked Season is on. Warm Regards, Saltface P.S. Alaska, is she going to be on sale for money, gold or steel? If it is steel I can't.
  13. Saltface


    Dear All, I tried my luck in Ranked. The only two T9 Cruisers in my Port were the Roon and the Kronshtadt. I did not feel well with Musashi and Misouri that also sat in my Port. I wanted to go to ranked with a Cruiser. Maybe I am wrong here because it seems that if you sit back and farm points with those two BBs you might save a star or two. But I don't care so much about the stars at the moment. I wanted more the experience of the game. I went through the literature available on the forum and I ended up picking the Kronshtadt. She is quite interesting. And for those of you that know the author of the present from previous posts it seems that she suits the playstyle better than the other vessels. Setup Commander Hypothesis If I take in Slot 6 Main Battery Modification 3 I will enjoy -12% Reload Time and my traverse speed will be slower by 13%. Doing the math it comes out that slow traverse speed is mitigated by using my two Commander Points available for Expert Marksman Skill. Also I lose in range. From 21.1 Km of the current setup it will go down to 18.19 Km as you will lose the benefit of the Gun Fire Control System Modification 2 in Slot 6 that is 16% additional range. The Numbers Traverse Speed 180o rotation needs 35.3 sec. This translates to 5.10/sec (5.0990/sec rounded to first decimal) Slower traverse speed by 13% is equivalent to 5.10/sec * 0.87 = 4.4470/sec Adding 0.70/sec results to Traverse Speed = 5.1470/sec which is at least in numbers marginally better. Reload Time Reload Time is 18.5 sec. Reducing it by 12% yields 18.5 sec * 0.88 = 16.28 sec Add any effect of Adrenaline Rush Skill and you can send down the alley 4 salvos a minute. Main Battery Firing Range Range 21.1 Km / 1.16 = 18.19 Km which is 2.91 Km less range. Concealed First Salvo Detectability with Concealment System Modification 1 in Slot 5 Upgrade and Concealment Skill is 12.7 Km. This translates to 18.19 Km Firing Range - 12.7 Km Detectability Range = 5.49 Km that you can prepare your shot while being undetected in contrast to 8.4 Km of shooting a concealed first shot if I don't change the setup. Question Is it worth it? Thanking you all in advance Regards, Saltface
  14. Saltface

    tier 4 IJN carrier sucks right?

    Dears, I guess I am privileged. (lol) It is Since 09:00 UTC +4 Feb 12, 2019 (at least on my computer)
  15. Saltface

    Manipulation on world of warships gameplay

    Gentlemen, please, I beg your indulgence, don't feed the trolls Regards Saltface