TheNubination
-
Content Сount
498 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Battles
9671 -
Clan
[PNTHR]
Posts posted by TheNubination
-
-
OMG YES TY OP :D Finally a friend for my cap guy to keep him company.
-
9 hours ago, Saltface said:
Here are the results of your pole. Your opinion (YES Si) is shared by 6% of the people that expressed an opinion.
How did you react? You mocked everybody that did not share your opinion. (post #24) - This was the first indication that you would not carry a proper conversation.
Then you continued with irony, masked insults and even straight attacks to belittle the people that expressed the opposite opinion.
This is hardly the way to debate. For as much I could care you seem to me like a flat earther. No matter what they tell you, no matter how the observed results of the game do not corroborate your opinion, you refuse to consider that you might be wrong.
Experienced players' opinion matters because they know what they are talking about. Yet, you dismiss their opinion with ludicrous attempts to sophistry, mockery and flat out absurdity. You cannot even support your opinion with experience. You have more CV games than all other classes combined.Adding to that DDs are your class with the worst results. How could you profess that you know how ships other than CVs are played? Most probably this is the problem. You do not know how to play a DD and thus you do not give it value. For you DD has less value because you do not perform in the class. Maybe, this is the cause. You don't know what you are talking about Like every other ignoramus you don't have the knowledge (or the will) to understand you are wrong.
But, in a futile attempt to give you some food for thought I will point out the threads of how DDs are the most influential class are numerous. Contrarywise, there are no threads that talk about how influential is a BB. Here, have a look.
*edit*
Also how could any historian or even officer know more about war than a soldier doing the fighting or any football manager know more about football tactics than a player, all these questions all these new revelations. I must retire and ponder!There's a clear dissonance between established positions that
a: ) DD's win fights through team mates / BB's are the class that needs to be limited and that has the highest firepower andb: ) DD's are always better to keep in the team over BBs irrespective of numbers of each class (and cruisers) available) thus suiciding them for anything else is a bad play.
*edit* -
Why would their winrate for carriers matter? We're talking about how good they are at beating the game overall, not about how good they are among CV players. The whole point is that he is beating the game in CVs wheras he's not in some other class and the question is in regards to why. Also for someone who is so interested in exact numbers, get to work compiling all the CVs buddy. Don't you dare make educated assumptions based on samples. (No, I dont actually care)
Also I make educated guess, if you can't deal with anything that has unknowns and attack someone for attempting to do so then thats your problem. If you think it's an other number than 20-30% then feel free to share that. I have no strict idea but it's my impression over thousands of games and what Ive read in general. None of this is the own you think it is.
And you still haven't replied to the other thread, why is that? -
On 2/14/2023 at 9:11 PM, S_h_i_v_a said:A qualified opinion about this crap.
Sometimes he gets it really right. It's pretty fucked up how they incentivize something they can't fix or that many people dont want.
It might not be that cynical though, it might be that they are trying to balance out their hybrid class which most potatoes play ultra passively.
The saddest thing is the behaviour the incentivize with this, including as he says more camping, especially for the hybrid BBs which so many people are already tired of but also for all other BBs.
-
1
-
-
DD spotting power diminishes with number of DDs with that buff as arbitrary as it is would be going down from 50% for the first to 30% for the second, maybe 20% for the third, 10% for the fourth , 5% for the fifth(?). It takes a nosedive after 3, at most 4 as you can cover all sides, let alone the fact that there are islands or map edges that cover some anyway and not all sides are relevant most of the time. Early on there is also overlapping spotting from other units in the team further reducing its effectiveness with numbers. Though the need is a bit greater so the "buff" would be a bit bigger.
Also I wouldn't say it buffs the whole team either. Only affected units. So each DD can only buff for one target, if all ships target one DDs target there is no buff for the others, except for avoiding torps. On a bigger map and spread out units not even that is relevant as units aren't in range of each other. -
Nevermind I didn't quite get what you meant, Yeah I dont know maybe.
-
10 minutes ago, Verblonde said:Nah, it is four; you were right:
The first two are single-nation; the latter two are dual-nation.
I actually would have thought that having one that you can dual switch between rather than two separate ones might have been at least a little bit neat for what ever price it was. Now its just worse :P
-
19 minutes ago, Verblonde said:Aye. It wasn't *that* bad though (well, from the perspective of a DD main): most of the time, the optimal builds for US and Russian DDs differ, so the dual-nation thing isn't massively useful in this case. I just nabbed the two single-nation versions (which weren't unreasonable to get hold of) and built each optimally for their respective nations.
I think my US Ovenchicken has got a lot more use than the Russian one though...
Ah so its like 3 actual commanders with 1 that you can switch inbetween ?
-
15 minutes ago, Verblonde said:Wasn't it to do with various levels of money-extraction from the public? From memory, there were two 'one nation' versions (which I have both of), plus one or two dual-nation ones (for money; I vaguely recall one had a ridiculous price-tag, such that even my self-control managed to hold out)...?
I wasnt active then I think but wow, that's kinda crazy lame. WG gonna WG I guess
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:well tbh i was a bit shocked to see the blue WR myself on that guy... i was expecting like 45% or something.
On the other hand, ive seen unicums die first too so.. (i mean, it happens to everyone).
Alltho i would say, that him having 50% in other classes and 56% in CVs must be because of situational awareness. He must be getting into trouble, while in a CV he usually does not (naturally), and then he dies early so he cant influence the game anymore.
Now Im just talking from personal experience but I will ping / tell people to do something or someone else does it and I think we've agreed upon it, so I commit to it and when these people turn tail at the first sign of trouble so they can farm more I just don't care and yolo in and die alone. in a CV you don't have to follow a plan made by a bunch of randoms but you can support the developing situations as they come up and even force certain engagements which is kinda relaxing for me at least. There's also the aspect of mechanical skill as mentioned, which you need more off in say especially destroyers and less of in CVs that tips the scale to my argument. But your view has some merit too. He's 57.3 at randoms, it's pretty good. I haven't checked his damage stats. If they are abnormally high then you might be right, if they are average or even a bit lower then that's even more a case of him having simply a superior sense of the game since his impact then would be through the team not in addition to the team.
-
49 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:
hmm yeah, i should definetely look into map awareness, maybe i could increase my ranked WR a bit
Well [edited]it, haha you're probably better than him. I took a chance that you were somewhere less skilled than you are. But point stands still. He's good at CVs because they are a force multiplier that requires situational awareness, even though he may be bad at the game mechanically. We dont know why he has shitty WRs with other classes, but that he does makes a case for it even more.
-
1 minute ago, lafeel said:Simply put, when a stream is no longer entertaining for you to watch, then it is time to stop watching said stream.
Yeah but I think it is entertaining for some still because they get their daily dose of indignation as mentioned. But yeah, you reached yoru limit so thats all good. Wasnt criticizing you or anything
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, DFens_666 said:
Random / Ranked + CVs Random / Ranked
Surely 56% and being completely oblivious to whats happening... thats CVs for you. Every other class he is around 50% ofc.
Considering that puts him in top 1-2% of players in CVs in the world and that higher level CV play requires a good understanding of what is happening on the map the actual answer is the opposite. At that level you get your WR up by forcing players into broadsides they don't want to take or baiting them into friendly torps and by spotting where you need to spot rather than just pure damage dealing.
The guy probably has a superior sense of whats happening to YOU but he's just bad at the game otherwise, yolo's around too much or perhaps plays the game expecting others to do it the way he would in other classes, which leads to unnecessary deaths when they don't. -
4 minutes ago, lafeel said:Got too toxic for my tastes so I unfollowed him.
It's just whining now, guy has probably a decent job and other interests at this point and he doesn't care and that's all good. But it's just not very interesting to me either. I think people get their daily fix of indignation there if they still haven't moved on or something.
I don't even mind the toxicity but there's almost nothing to balance it out. Those that like him would probably counter with "there's very little to be happy about". And things are a bit silly but then move on or take breaks :P
-
Hey @Aethervoxx
How do you dislike my post but like Elazers post a few hours later when they say the same thing?
Do I find your name under the definition of Fanboy if I look it up?I mean Im cool if you just dont like me, that's more than fine, but I hope you're using your own mind to think rather than just digesting other peoples thoughts based on preferences.
-
3
-
-
On 2/17/2023 at 9:01 PM, Verblonde said:I favour whatever answer makes the Greek nationalists' heads explode - that sort of thing is always excellent value on the forum...!
Being sensible, why not: we already have more than one variation on the theme of dual-nationality captains, with the assorted Ovenchickens and (kind of) with the HSF captains, the basic coding has probably been done. Make her Russian/Pan-EU and job done.
Why the hell do we have like 4 ovenchinks btw? How did that happen? I get 2, but why 4? Are they 4 different ones or do you get to like pick your skin for each of the american/russians or do you actually get 4 commanders?
That must have been a crazy event lol.
But yeha, great topic OP, didnt know about her at all. Pretty cool.
-
1
-
-
Jingles gets more views I think, per video at least.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, 159Hunter said:I don't need a data set, you came up with the number so the burden of proof is yours to carry.
You use unfounded numbers to strengthen your case. Well, newsflash, all it does is derail it completely.
Rofl. The point was that there's a limit somewhere, I thought 2.5, as mentioned, supported by some circumstantial arguments at least, sounded reasonable.
I'm not gonna do any deep research for it.
So you like have no opinion on it? If you don't know the exact limit then it might as well be <9000 for you or what? -
24 minutes ago, 159Hunter said:Great Ad Hominem btw
You just pulled 2,5 out of your hat without providing any explanation nor a proper data set.
So if you really want to discuss: explain how you got to 2,5
Thanks I thought so too, I got a warning for it, but I think it was worth it.
So I have no idea, like, do you have a dataset that says its 2.75? I've made some compelling arguments in favour of it, such as general setups in CBs but maybe you missed that? You didn't see the relevance of that to the 2.5 comment? This is the part where I'd have to ad hominem you, jeez. But maybe we can go without it lol. By the way, I don't think its an argumentative fallacy, i.e. ad hominem to go for a quick quip on someone if you explain why you have that opinion of them.
The problem here is that there's no acknowledgement from him or some other posters of the fact that there has to be a limit here.
I don't really care if its 2.5 or 3.5 or 2 or whatever, its something we could argue about and I'm not set in stone at all. But we first have to get there, lol. I feel you yielding to the dark side.
-
13 hours ago, Sunleader said:The Problem is You dont seem to Understand it.
DDs dont Win Matches by being Powerful. They Win Matches by making their Team more Powerful and the Enemy Team less Powerful.
3 DDs and 2 BBs vs 3 BBs and 2 DDs will almost always be Won by the Team with 3 DDs.
Because the 3 DDs will Kill the Enemy 2 DDs leaving at least one but more likely two DDs on the Field.
Meaning that after the First Engagement which is Generally the DDs You end up with 2 BBs and 2 DDs vs 3 BBs alone.
These 3 BBs then are Forced to Push because the Enemy Controls the Cap. During that Push they need to constantly Evade Torpedoes and while they are Permanently Spotted the Enemy BBs can Disengage and Go Dark if they Want.
If You got a Worst Case and the DDs actually Coordinate then You on top get constantly set on Fire as one DD will Smoke and Spam HE at You while the other Spots just for them to Trade Places afterwards and repeat.
And here is why DDs are so Importand to Teams.
They are the First Ship to Die.
To do their Job they need to be out in the Front. But this means they are also most often the Ships that get Killed Early.
BBs even if its 2 vs 3 will Generally be able to Hold out for quite a While. Even if they are roughly Equally Skilled.
But 3 vs 2 on DDs is such a Decisive Advantage that the Battle will be over very Quickly if both sides are Equally Skilled. The 2 DDs would need to be massively Superior in Skill to actually do their Job without being Killed here.
Hence why You Arrive at this Conclusion of above that You then got 2 BBs and 2 DDs vs 3 BBs alone.
Would you perhaps want to rather have 4 DDs and a BB? What about 5 DDs and 0 BBs?
And why do you think that these setups are so rare, except for the occassional memes? At what point do you have enough [edited]spotting man, that's the question? Like think one step ahead, jesus. Obviously there's also cruisers at play that the fewer friendly BBs are around, going down to 0 the easier they will be obliterated and unable to destroy existing DDs. But Im trying to keep this as simple as I can, [edited]I sound like a a-s-shole. I just dont understand how this can be so hard to get. -
A moment ago you said that DDs become more important the longer the match goes on and thus the fewer players there are. Make up your mind already. Tick rates on Ranked/CB are already so much faster than on random that a late game on random is as close to the end as a relatively early game in the other two matchups .
Earlier in other threads its been commented on how general understanding is that DDs win engagements based on their teams efforts and not on their own. Now its all about the individual DD vs DD gunfights. So apparently 2 DDs with 3 BBs are going to lose vs 3 DDs and 2 BBs now. Sure. I know in what position I'd always rather be. Anyway have the last word, I dont care. -
8 hours ago, El2aZeR said:Because as the match goes on vision control becomes more and more important. By trading a DD for a BB especially in the early game you're ironically putting your team at a firepower disadvantage since BBs and cruisers can only play to their full potential if vision is provided to them (and likewise DDs are at their full potential when they have support). While you may have lowered the overall firepower of the enemy team, because they now have superior vision control they'll be able to put out damage more efficiently than your team if they can e.g. attack from behind cover or vanish between salvos.
You're also typically giving the enemy the cap advantage which eventually forces your team to push or lose by points. Generally the defending side is once again at an advantage and thus can trade damage more efficiently than the attacker even if the attacker has the numerical advantage.
So while trading your DD for a heavy hitter and thus in theory reducing enemy firpower significantly might sound like a good idea at first, in practice it actually achieves the opposite effect in the majority of scenarios.
You're just smart enough to understand very complex matters but slightly too stupid to understand them in relation to cascading events. Generally you ignore points that don't benefit your argument while creating narratives to support your end result. (Including specifically: "There is enough spotting DDs left" - could also be CVs /Radar cruisers and the argument that BBs are limited for a reason in CBs.) You'd do great in modern academia where experiments are tailored to fit the preconceived results. Im just not going to engage with you, let the negrates begin. The honest analysis would be that there is a point at which the DDs value as a spotter is less than that of a BB and its firepower. By all balancing measures and team set-ups throughout the ages this would generally be somewhere at 2.5 DDs for every map depending on map and team. This we could argue about, but since you'll just be grasping at straws in this thread too I'd rather not.
Maybe its just that I am bad at explaining them, so I could be retarded too.
-
3 hours ago, Sunleader said:Same as a Submarine Shotgunning a DD or Cruiser and then getting killed himself due to being Spammed with Depth Charge Airstrike.
No its not Worth it.
Its Something that should only be done as a Last Resort to take an Enemy with You when You are Outplaced.
Why not?
3 hours ago, Saltface said:When someone opens a thread on this forum asking for advise on how to play destroyers, the first thing we tell them is "Don't die". We stress it as much as we can. We try to explain that, in battle, the value of a destroyer increases exponentially over time. The longer you stay afloat, the more you can influence the battle.
So, the answer is a clear No. Never trade your DD. As the battle progresses and the ships thin out your DD becomes a very valuable asset. Late game is when David becomes Goliath. I can tell you that everytime a team loses their DDs early in game, most probably they will also lose the match.Is this an absolute? No. There are cases, marginal cases and very rare, that a trade can have some value. But this is the exception that validates the rule.
So, on this one my answer is a clear No.
How isn't that true for a battleship?
Yes, in a situation with a DD vs a BB the BB has a hard time. But the chance to get to that position I'd argue is much more likely if you have more BBs in your team to begin with than DDs. Which is why we see limitations on BBs (and CVs) in CBs first and foremost. The goal of the DD is to reduce the number of capital ships. Essentially as long as one (or at most two) remain, the rest are superfluous. I await anything of substance to actually counter this, but I welcome ye ol shitposts too.
-
12 minutes ago, KillStealBoss said:when any notification pops up you have a "X" to dimiss it or 3 dots for option. Then little window pops up and you disable the notifications. I did that, but now I can't find the way to enable them back, in notofication settings there are only forum and WGC. So either someone knows how or a reinstall.
lol. So its not so easy eh ;)
I mean its probably googleable but there you go, I appreciate the humility though. Still its not my issue, I seem to get it now and then. Its probably what you/someone said about spotting.
WG needs to change plane spotting
in General Discussion
Posted
He is "top 1-2% of players in CVs". Maybe I should've said when he's in a CV. Because what we're comparing here is why he's bad at everything else, so his overall performance in games vs other players is what's interesting? I didn't write "he's top 1-2% of CV players. Now that we've cleared this up, does my argument make more sense to you or not? More improtantly, do you feel that being in the top 5% or even top 10% completely disregarding hidden stats and assuming we're talking about just CVs doesn't make him among the best players? Does any of this, just like in the other thread invalidate the argument? You're not even arguing the point, thats the sad point. You're just arguing details that are barely relevant.
Do I need data to make an assumption on how many people are missing? Do you think im very far off? Or are you again just not capable of dealing with unknowns? I've asked you this three times and it's the last reply you'll get from me unless you answer it. Are you just going to ignore unknowns as you did in the other thread and assume they don't exist or factor in at all or what?